Sistema de comercio de emisiones de la UE aviación

Sistema de comercio de emisiones de la UE aviación

Centrum forex nagpur
Opciones Binarias   Robot   Ex4
Calculadora de stock options


Mejor indicador de divisas Diseño del sistema de trading c ++ Opciones trading clases san francisco Binary_options_australia_regulated_monopoly Estrategias de opciones de índices comerciales Binary_options_no_deposit_bonus_december_2012_lsat

Bruselas, 7 de marzo de 2011 Preguntas & amp; Respuestas sobre las emisiones históricas de la aviación y la inclusión de la aviación en el sistema de comercio de derechos de emisión de la UE (EU ETS) ¿Por qué son importantes las emisiones históricas de la aviación para la inclusión de la aviación en el RCDE de la UE? Las emisiones históricas de la aviación son la base para calcular el tope de las emisiones de la aviación aplicadas cuando el sector está incluido en el RCDE a partir de enero de 2012. La decisión de hoy de la Comisión Europea publica la media de las emisiones anuales para los años 2004, Todos los vuelos que estarían cubiertos por el ETS de la UE llevado a cabo por las compañías aéreas hacia y desde los aeropuertos europeos. Sobre la base de estas emisiones históricas anuales de la aviación para el período 2004-2006, el número de licencias de aviación que se crearán en 2012 asciende a 212.892.052 toneladas (97% de las emisiones históricas de la aviación). Y el número de licencias de aviación que se crearán cada año a partir de 2013 asciende a 208.502.525 toneladas (95% de las emisiones históricas de la aviación). ¿Cómo se calcularon las emisiones históricas de la aviación? La Comisión ha contado con la asistencia de Eurocontrol, la organización europea para la seguridad de la navegación aérea. Los datos completos del tráfico aéreo contenidos en las bases de datos de Eurocontrol procedentes de la Oficina Central de Cargas de Ruta (CRCO) y de la Unidad Central de Gestión de Flujos (CFMU) se consideraron los mejores datos disponibles para el cálculo de las emisiones históricas. Éstos proporcionan entre otras cosas un cálculo de la longitud real de la ruta para cada vuelo individual. Las emisiones se calcularon después de cada vuelo utilizando la metodología ANCAT 3 (Reducción de las molestias causadas por el transporte aéreo) y la metodología CASE (cálculo de emisiones por equivalencia selectiva). Además de los datos de Eurocontrol, la Comisión también utilizó información sobre el consumo real de combustible de casi 30 operadores de aeronaves de diferentes tipos y tamaños. Estos datos corresponden a tipos de aeronaves que fueron responsables del 93% de las emisiones en los años de base. En tercer lugar, se realizaron cálculos adicionales para tener en cuenta el consumo de combustible asociado con el uso de las unidades auxiliares de potencia (APU). APU son pequeños motores que se utilizan para proporcionar iluminación y aire acondicionado cuando la aeronave está estacionaria en los aeropuertos. Se utilizan cuando la aeronave no está conectada a la fuente de tierra de energía eléctrica y servicios de ventilación. El enfoque adoptado fue el primero en determinar el consumo medio de combustible APU para diferentes tipos de aeronaves. Los factores de emisión individuales del consumo de combustible de APU se extrapolaron para calcular las emisiones totales de APU aplicando un proceso que tuvo en cuenta la cuota real de quemado de combustible para los vuelos bajo el ETS de cada tipo de aeronave y el uso de energía terrestre en aeropuertos. Las emisiones correspondientes al consumo total de combustible APU resultante se incluyeron en las emisiones históricas de la aviación para cada uno de los años 2004, 2005 y 2006. ¿Por qué se eligió el período 2004-2006 como base de referencia para las emisiones de la aviación? El período base 2004-2006 se define en la legislación sobre la inclusión de la aviación en el RCDE de la UE. El período de referencia para la asignación de la aviación en el marco del RCCDE es diferente de la línea de base de 1990 para el compromiso global de reducción de la UE, ya que tiene en cuenta el importante crecimiento de la aviación en los últimos 15 años. ¿Por qué ha habido un retraso en la publicación de las emisiones históricas de la aviación? Esta decisión se ha adoptado más tarde de lo previsto inicialmente para pasar más tiempo recopilando datos sobre las emisiones históricas. Se realizaron estudios adicionales para aumentar la precisión de las estimaciones de las emisiones históricas de la aviación, en particular en relación con el combustible utilizado por las unidades auxiliares de potencia (APU). Junto con el apoyo de Eurocontrol y la contribución del sector de la aviación, se desarrolló una metodología para evaluar la APU y se estimó la consulta de combustible por APU. Esta cifra se añadió entonces a las emisiones de CO 2 en vuelo. Las etapas posteriores previstas en la aplicación de la Directiva son determinar las asignaciones gratuitas a los explotadores de aeronaves y el volumen de derechos de emisión que vayan a subastarse. ¿Cómo se calcularán las asignaciones por operador de aeronave? El 82% de los derechos de emisión se concederá gratuitamente a los explotadores de aeronaves y el 15% de los derechos de emisión de CO2 se asignarán mediante subasta. El 3% restante se destinará a una reserva especial para su distribución posterior a las compañías aéreas de rápido crecimiento y los nuevos operadores al mercado. Las asignaciones gratuitas se asignarán mediante un proceso de evaluación comparativa que mide la actividad de cada operador en 2010 en términos del número de pasajeros y de carga que transportan y de la distancia total recorrida. El punto de referencia debería publicarse antes del 30 de septiembre de 2011. Los Estados miembros han acordado que todos los ingresos procedentes de la subasta deberían utilizarse para hacer frente al cambio climático, incluso en el sector del transporte. ¿El tope de las emisiones de la aviación se verá afectado por la nube de cenizas volcánicas de Islandia en 2010? Los acontecimientos del volcán islandés en 2010 no tendrán ningún efecto sobre el tamaño total del límite de emisiones para la aviación en virtud del RCCDE o el número total de derechos de emisión que se asignarán de forma gratuita a los explotadores de aeronaves. No hemos visto datos que sugieran que el impacto de la nube de cenizas tendrá un impacto material en la distribución de derechos de emisión gratuitos entre los operadores de aeronaves. La redistribución podría ocurrir si algunas aerolíneas tuvieran que cancelar una mayor proporción de vuelos y luego otras, mientras que la gran mayoría de los operadores se vieron afectados por las restricciones de vuelo resultantes de la nube de cenizas volcánicas. De hecho, todas las estimaciones que hemos visto confirman que los impactos distributivos son muy pequeños. Para que el regulador modifique o adapte el año de referencia de 2010 para la asignación de derechos de emisión gratuitos a los operadores de aeronaves, se requeriría un cambio en la legislación primaria de la UE. La adopción de esa legislación suele tardar dos años y no hay planes para iniciar este proceso. ¿Qué líneas aéreas y rutas se verán afectadas por el ETS de la UE? El ETS de la UE cubrirá a cualquier operador de aeronaves, ya sea de la UE o de otros países, que realice vuelos internacionales en rutas hacia, desde o entre los aeropuertos de la UE. Por lo tanto, todas las compañías aéreas recibirán el mismo trato. Los aviones muy ligeros no serán cubiertos. Los vuelos militares, policiales, aduaneros y de rescate, los vuelos en las empresas estatales y gubernamentales y los vuelos de entrenamiento o prueba también estarán exentos. Con el fin de reducir los costes administrativos, cada operador será administrado por un solo Estado miembro en relación con las emisiones procedentes del total de sus vuelos hacia, desde y dentro de la UE. La lista de operadores de aeronaves que pueden estar cubiertos por el sistema incluye más de 4000 operadores. La lista se ha creado con el apoyo de Eurocontrol y se basó en información de vuelo real; Se actualizó por última vez en febrero de 2011 para tener en cuenta todos los cambios ocurridos en 2010. La aviación es un negocio internacional - ¿por qué no llevar a cabo el comercio de emisiones a nivel mundial? La UE es el principal defensor de la acción mundial para reducir los impactos climáticos de la aviación. Los Estados no han podido llegar a un acuerdo sobre un sistema mundial común a través de la Convención Marco de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Cambio Climático (UNFCCC) ni de la Organización de Aviación Civil Internacional (OACI). En la Resolución sobre el cambio climático adoptada en su más reciente Asamblea en octubre de 2010, los Estados de la OACI pidieron que se siguieran estudiando la viabilidad de una medida basada en el mercado mundial. La Resolución también reconoció que los Estados pueden tomar medidas antes de 2020. El ETS de la UE ofrece un buen modelo para aplicar medidas basadas en el mercado a la aviación. El desarrollo de otros programas nacionales que abarquen la aviación internacional, compatibles con el RCCDE, es una forma pragmática de aplicar la acción mundial. ¿Qué pasa con el litigio por parte de algunas aerolíneas estadounidenses contra la Directiva de la UE? Aunque varias compañías aéreas apoyan la acción de la UE para abordar los impactos del cambio climático de la aviación, un desafío a la Directiva de la UE ha sido lanzado por varias aerolíneas estadounidenses. Esto ha sido remitido al Tribunal Europeo de Justicia, y la Comisión Europea, el Parlamento Europeo, el Consejo y varios Estados miembros han presentado observaciones, además de otras organizaciones que intervienen en el caso. Las líneas aéreas implicadas cumplen plenamente los requisitos de la Directiva hasta que se resuelva este desafío. ¿Cuál será el efecto en las emisiones de la aviación? El impacto medioambiental de la inclusión de la aviación en el RCDE de la UE será significativo porque las emisiones de la aviación, que actualmente están creciendo rápidamente, quedarán por debajo de su nivel medio en 2004-2006. Para el año 2020 se estima que un total de 183 millones de toneladas de CO 2 se ahorrarán anualmente en los vuelos cubiertos, lo que representa una reducción del 46% en comparación con las operaciones normales. Esto equivale, por ejemplo, a dos veces las emisiones anuales de gas de efecto invernadero de Austria de todas las fuentes. Es probable que algunas de estas reducciones sean hechas por las propias líneas aéreas. Sin embargo, la participación en el sistema de la UE también les dará otras opciones: comprar subsidios adicionales en el mercado, es decir, pagar a otros participantes para reducir sus emisiones o invertir en proyectos de ahorro de emisiones realizados bajo los mecanismos flexibles del Protocolo de Kyoto. Proporcionar a la aviación con estas opciones no reduce el impacto ambiental de la propuesta ya que el impacto climático de las reducciones de emisiones es el mismo independientemente del lugar donde se hagan. ¿Aumentarán los precios de los boletos? Incluir la aviación en la UE El RCCDE no afectará ni regulará directamente los billetes de transporte aéreo. Sin embargo, los operadores de aeronaves pueden tener que invertir en aviones más eficientes o comprar derechos de emisión en el mercado además de los asignados a ellos. El impacto en los precios de los billetes probablemente será menor. Suponiendo que las compañías aéreas repercutan plenamente estos costes adicionales para los clientes, para el año 2020 el precio del billete para un vuelo de ida y vuelta dentro de la UE podría aumentar entre 1,8 y 9 euros. Debido a su mayor impacto ambiental, los viajes de larga distancia podrían aumentar un poco más dependiendo de la duración del trayecto. Por ejemplo, un vuelo de regreso a Nueva York a precios actuales del carbono de alrededor de 15 € podría costar un adicional de 12 €. Sin embargo, en cualquier caso se espera que los aumentos de los precios de los billetes sean significativamente inferiores a los costes adicionales que las compañías aéreas han repercutido en los consumidores debido a los aumentos mundiales de los precios del petróleo en los últimos años. La inclusión de la aviación en el régimen de comercio de la UE también tendrá un impacto menor en los precios que si se lograra la misma mejora medioambiental mediante otras medidas, como un impuesto sobre los combustibles o una tasa de emisiones. ¿Qué tan grande es la contribución de la aviación de la UE al cambio climático? Las emisiones directas de la aviación representan alrededor del 3% de las emisiones totales de gases de efecto invernadero (GEI) de la UE. La gran mayoría de estas emisiones proviene de vuelos internacionales, es decir, vuelos entre dos Estados miembros o entre un Estado miembro y un país no perteneciente a la UE. Esta cifra no incluye los efectos indirectos del calentamiento, como los de las emisiones de NOx, las estelas de rueda y los efectos de las nubes cirrus. Por lo tanto, se estima que el impacto global es mayor. El Grupo Intergubernamental de Expertos sobre el Cambio Climático (IPCC) ha estimado que el impacto total de la aviación es alrededor de 2 a 4 veces superior al efecto de sus últimas emisiones de CO 2. Los resultados recientes de la investigación de la UE indican que esta relación puede ser algo más pequeña (alrededor de 2 veces). Ninguna de estas estimaciones tiene en cuenta los efectos inciertos pero potencialmente muy significativos de los cirros. Las emisiones de la UE de la aviación internacional están aumentando rápidamente - duplicándose desde 1990 - ya que los viajes aéreos se hacen más baratos sin que se aborden sus costes medioambientales. Por ejemplo, alguien que vuela de Londres a Nueva York y de vuelta genera aproximadamente el mismo nivel de emisiones que la persona promedio en la UE hace por el calentamiento de su casa durante un año entero. Se prevé que las emisiones seguirán creciendo en el futuro previsible. Las emisiones procedentes de la aviación son superiores a las de determinados sectores cubiertos por el RCCDE, por ejemplo las refinerías y la producción de acero. Cuando la aviación se une al ETS de la UE, se prevé que sea el segundo sector en términos de emisiones, superado sólo por la generación de electricidad. ¿Cuáles son los siguientes pasos? Las aerolíneas han estado supervisando sus emisiones durante 2010 y están obligadas a verificar e informar estas emisiones a sus Estados miembros administrantes a más tardar el 31 de marzo de 2011. Para esa misma fecha, las compañías aéreas también podrán solicitar asignaciones gratuitas de derechos de emisión sobre la base de sus actividades. 2010. Sobre la base de la información presentada por los Estados miembros, la Comisión Europea calculará el punto de referencia que definirá el número de concesiones gratuitas que recibirán los operadores de aeronaves. Esta decisión de referencia se publicará a más tardar el 30 de septiembre de 2011. A finales de septiembre, la Comisión publicará asimismo el límite de emisiones y los porcentajes de derechos de emisión: subastados; Dado de forma gratuita; Y asignados a la reserva especial. ¿Dónde puedo encontrar más información? Aviación y cambio climático: Esquema de Comercio de Emisiones de la Unión Europea (ETS) Vea las instrucciones paso a paso que guían a los operadores a través de la determinación de su necesidad de cumplir con el Esquema de Comercio de Emisiones de la UE y los pasos necesarios para presentar el plan anual de control de emisiones requerido así como el plan opcional de benchmarking de emisiones. Información general sobre la inclusión de la actividad de aviación en el régimen de comercio de derechos de emisión de la Unión Europea. Ver recursos adicionales relacionados con el Esquema de Comercio de Emisiones de la UE. Últimas noticias de EU-ETS La NBAA se unió a otras Asociaciones de Aviación la semana pasada para agradecer al Secretario de Transporte de los Estados Unidos, Anthony Foxx, por sus esfuerzos en la Asamblea de la Organización de Aviación Civil Internacional (OACI por sus siglas en inglés) Ayudando a alcanzar un acuerdo histórico sobre emisiones mundiales. Ese acuerdo reforzó que la tecnología, las operaciones y las medidas de infraestructura, que reducen las emisiones y benefician al público volador ya la economía de los Estados Unidos, deben seguir siendo el enfoque primordial de nuestros esfuerzos. El acuerdo también confirmó que una medida acordada a nivel mundial y basada en el mercado podría servir como un "fregadero" si la industria global no fuera capaz de lograr un crecimiento neutral de carbono a partir de 2020. Los grupos también instaron a Foxx a usar sus buenos oficios y las negociaciones específicas Autoridad identificada en la Ley de Prohibición del Esquema de Comercio de Emisiones de la Unión Europea de 2012 (ETS Prohibition Act) para presionar a sus homólogos europeos para que continúen la estancia en la aplicación extraterritorial del ETS y para quedarse pendientes de los plazos mientras la legislación necesitara extender el " Clock†™ está siendo considerado. "Lea la carta completa a Foxx. En una audiencia de la aviación, Bolen reitera sus preocupaciones sobre los cambios en la apnea del sueño, EU-ETS 12 de diciembre de 2013 Una audiencia del comité de la casa que se centró en la planificación de la aviación también brindó una oportunidad bienvenida para el presidente y CEO de NBAA, En dos asuntos con serias ramificaciones potenciales para la comunidad de aviación general. En un testimonio escrito presentado ante el Comité de Transporte de la Cámara de Representantes, Subcomité de Aviación del Comité de Infraestructura sobre "El Estado de Aviación Estadounidense", Bolen señaló la alarma de la industria sobre el nuevo plan de la FAA para encargar la detección obstructiva de la apnea del sueño para algunos pilotos antes de recibir un certificado médico. También destacó la preocupación constante por el Sistema de Comercio de Emisiones de la Unión Europea (EU-ETS). Lea más sobre el testimonio de Bolen. La UE avanza en la suspensión del ETS 1 de abril de 2013 La Unión Europea sigue avanzando en su propuesta para "detener el reloj" Para la aplicación de su régimen de comercio de derechos de emisión (EU-ETS) en los operadores no comunitarios, con una votación final sobre la moratoria prevista en las próximas tres semanas. Pero para los operadores cuyos viajes los llevan de un punto a otro dentro de Europa, el reloj no se detendrá. La implementación de la EU-ETS se llevará a cabo como estaba programado para el 30 de abril. La moratoria de un año fue sugerida en un anuncio sorpresivo de la Comisaria de Clima de la UE, Connie Hedegaard, en noviembre pasado. Citando los progresos realizados por la OACI en su trabajo hacia un sistema mundial de medidas basadas en el mercado destinadas a reducir la producción de carbono de la industria aeronáutica, Hedegaard prometió reevaluar la moratoria después de la Asamblea trienal de la OACI en octubre. Escuche la edición de esta semana del podcast del plan de vuelo NBAA o lea más sobre el estado del EU-ETS. El Presidente firma en la Ley Ley de Prohibición del EU-ETS 3 de diciembre de 2012 El Presidente Obama firmó el 27 de noviembre la ley S. 1956 - la Ley de Prohibición del Esquema de Comercio de Emisiones de la Unión Europea (EU ETS). La ley pone en marcha un proceso mediante el cual el Secretario de Transporte puede prohibir a los operadores de aeronaves civiles estadounidenses participar en el ETS de la UE. También se requiere el requisito de que las autoridades gubernamentales tomen las medidas necesarias para mantener a los operadores estadounidenses inofensivos de la imposición del impuesto ambiental unilateralmente impuesto. Si bien la ley no tiene un efecto inmediato, la aprobación de la ley es un acontecimiento bienvenido tras el reciente anuncio de la Comisión Europea de una suspensión temporal y condicional de la ley ETS para ciertas operaciones. Aprende más . ¿Qué significan los últimos cambios en el EU-ETS para los miembros de NBAA? 19 de noviembre de 2012 Los acontecimientos en Washington, DC y Bruselas la semana pasada han tenido un impacto significativo en el Esquema de Comercio de Emisiones de la Unión Europea (EU-ETS) al aplicarse a la aviación. Aunque ciertamente no es una combinación de uno-dos por nocaut para el programa de reducción de gases de efecto invernadero adoptado por los 27 países miembros de la UE, los eventos de la semana pasada son una indicación no sólo de la resistencia internacional al programa, sino de una nueva voluntad de compromiso dentro de la Los niveles más altos de la propia Unión Europea. Por encima de todo eso está la pregunta: ¿Qué significan estos desarrollos para los miembros de la NBAA cuyo negocio es volar a Europa? Aprende lo que significa para los miembros de NBAA. El Senador Isakson pide a DOT presentar una queja formal sobre EU-ETS 11 de junio de 2012 En respuesta al testimonio de Ray LaHood, enviado el 6 de junio ante una audiencia del Senado sobre el impacto del Esquema de Comercio de Emisiones de la Unión Europea sobre operadores en los Estados Unidos , El senador Johnny Isakson (R-GA) pidió a LaHood que presentara una queja ante la Organización de Aviación Civil Internacional, y pediría al consejo que interviniera al respecto. "Yo animaría firmemente a la Administración a presentar una queja formal del artículo 84 contra la UE sobre esta cuestión en la Organización de Aviación Civil Internacional (OACI)", escribió Isakson. "Creo que encontraría un apoyo bipartidista significativo para la queja en la Cámara y el Senado". Lea más acerca de la solicitud de Isakson. Bolen informa al Comité del Senado 6 de junio de 2012 El Presidente y CEO de la Asociación Nacional de Aviación de Negocios (NBAA), Ed Bolen, declaró hoy ante un comité del Senado que el Esquema de Comercio de Emisiones de la Unión Europea (EU-ETS) Una gran industria americana para el tratamiento discriminatorio. " Bolen dijo a los miembros del Comité de Comercio, Ciencia y Transporte del Senado que "tan mal como las líneas aéreas comerciales son tratadas, la aviación no comercial es tratada aún peor". Lea más sobre el testimonio de Bolen El Senador John Thune (R-SD) pidió recientemente a los legisladores que consideren su proyecto de ley bipartidista que impediría que los operadores de aeronaves estadounidenses que viajen desde y hacia la Unión Europea se vean obligados a cumplir con la ley UE de comercio de emisiones (EU-ETS), diciendo que la medida causaría dificultades económicas significativas para las empresas. "Muy sencillamente, la imposición unilateral de tal esquema en los Estados Unidos y otros condados es arbitraria, injusta y una violación del derecho internacional", dijo Thune. "Además, se está llevando a cabo sin garantías para las mejoras ambientales ya un costo enorme para la industria de la aviación y los mandantes que servimos". Lea más sobre la propuesta. Los operadores luchan con la complejidad del cumplimiento del EU-ETS 19 de marzo de 2012 Decir que el esquema de comercio de emisiones de la Unión Europea (EU-ETS) es muy impopular fuera de la UE tal vez sería un eufemismo. Sin embargo, los miembros de NBAA están trabajando a través de los detalles de cumplimiento y encontrando que, en muchos casos, el proceso es muy difícil. En ninguna parte es más cierto que en el establecimiento de una cuenta de registro de carbono. "Los operadores están entrando en un proceso totalmente nuevo y extranjero de abrir una cuenta de registro de carbono", dijo Adam Hartley, supervisor de un equipo de servicios reguladores de Universal Weather and Aviation. En el podcast del Plan de Vuelo de NBAA de esta semana, aprenda más sobre la creación de una cuenta de registro de carbono y los recursos de cumplimiento de NBAA EU-ETS. Archivos de noticias del EU-ETS Qué está implicado en el esquema de comercio de las emisiones de la UE y qué significa para los miembros de NBAA Como es ampliamente conocido en la comunidad de aviación de negocios, los aviones de la aviación general representan el 0,6 por ciento de las emisiones de carbono en los Estados Unidos y el 0,2 por ciento del total de las emisiones globales de gases de efecto invernadero. El récord de mejora continua de la industria se debe a un enfoque continuo en el desarrollo de motores, aviones y procedimientos operativos que reducen las emisiones. Si bien el historial de progreso continuo en las emisiones de carbono de la industria es loable, los legisladores en los Estados Unidos y en todo el mundo siguen examinando detenidamente las emisiones de la aviación como parte de una revisión general de todas las emisiones de carbono provenientes del transporte. Este escrutinio continuo ha sido impulsado y sostenido por reiteradas peticiones de limitaciones o reducciones en las emisiones de carbono. Desde su creación, la Unión Europea (UE) ha estado considerando opciones para un programa ambiental aplicable a la aviación. Los responsables políticos de la UE se han asentado y se están moviendo hacia la implantación de un plan para la aviación conocido como el Esquema de Comercio de Emisiones (ETS). El ETS incorporaría todos los vuelos de las aeronaves elegibles que lleguen o salgan de los aeropuertos de la UE en el RCCDE. El operador de aeronaves de ala fija o de ala rotatoria de más de 5.700 kg (12.566 libras) que vuelan hacia, desde o dentro de los países de la UE (o sus posesiones territoriales) será incluido en el ETS de la UE a partir de 2012 (con requisitos de cumplimiento que deben cumplirse antes de La fecha de 2012). Hay una exención para las operaciones comerciales de aeronaves que tienen menos de 243 vuelos por período durante tres períodos consecutivos de cuatro meses o vuelos de aviones comerciales con emisiones anuales totales inferiores a 10.000 toneladas métricas por año. NBAA cree que la administración ambiental es un imperativo, pero también que se deben perseguir políticas razonables y equilibradas que apoyen los dos objetivos gemelos de la industria de promover la movilidad y el crecimiento de la aviación de negocios al tiempo que minimiza su huella ambiental. La Asociación ha trabajado diligentemente con la Asociación Europea de Aviación Empresarial (EBAA), el Consejo de Aviación Internacional de Negocios (IBAC) y los reguladores europeos para ayudar a conformar las normas para que sean lo más viables posible para la aviación de negocios y las modificaciones que los reguladores europeos han hecho Su propuesta original de ETS refleja los esfuerzos de promoción de la industria. Mientras que NBAA, EBAA, IBAC y otros en la industria seguirán abogando por la aviación comercial en ETS y otras políticas de emisiones, la expectativa es que el programa ETS de la UE podría aplicarse a todos los miembros de NBAA que realicen vuelos a Europa antes de 2012, (La nueva Administración y el Congreso han comenzado a considerar un programa estadounidense que puede aplicarse a las operaciones de la aviación y podrían afectar la aplicación del ETS de la UE en los vuelos de miembros de la NBAA radicados en Estados Unidos). Si la comunidad europea considera que tal ley es una alternativa adecuada al ETS de la UE para los operadores estadounidenses, es posible que estos operadores no necesiten cumplir con el ETS de la UE. Sin embargo, hasta que se haya hecho esa declaración, los operadores deberían esperar cumplir los requisitos de la UE. enlaces relacionados En un esfuerzo por abordar la pequeña pero rápida contribución de la aviación al cambio climático, la UE ha decidido imponer un límite a las emisiones de CO2 para todos los aviones que llegan o salen de los aeropuertos de la UE. A las aerolíneas se les permitiría comprar y vender créditos de contaminación. En el mercado de carbono de la UE & # 39; (Sistema de Comercio de Emisiones). La aviación internacional contribuye al cambio climático a través de diferentes emisiones de las aeronaves (dióxido de carbono y emisiones de vapor de agua, estelas de vapor o smog de aviación, indirectamente óxidos de nitrógeno). Aunque la industria del transporte aéreo ha mejorado la tecnología y la eficiencia de las aeronaves, las reducciones de emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero logradas gracias a estas inversiones no han sido suficientes para compensar el rápido crecimiento del tráfico aéreo mundial (50% en la última década). Desde 1990, las emisiones de CO2 de la aviación & ndash; Que están directamente relacionados con la cantidad de combustible consumido & ndash; Han aumentado en un 87% y ahora representan alrededor del 3,5% de las actividades humanas totales. Contribución al cambio climático. El Grupo Intergubernamental de Expertos sobre el Cambio Climático (IPCC) ha estimado que esta proporción crecerá hasta el 5% para 2050 & ndash; Socavando los esfuerzos realizados por otros sectores industriales para cumplir los compromisos de Kyoto de Kyoto. Hasta la fecha, el sector de la aviación no había tenido que hacer mucho para hacer frente al cambio climático. De hecho, el Protocolo de Kyoto excluye la aviación internacional y simplemente pide a los países que trabajen para reducir las emisiones en este sector a través de la Organización de Aviación Civil Internacional (OACI). Aunque la OACI había respaldado inicialmente la idea de un sistema de comercio de derechos de emisión para cumplir los objetivos de reducción de las emisiones de CO2, parecía que las perspectivas de un acuerdo global global parecían lejanas y, dada esta situación, la Comisión decidió emprender acciones unilaterales (EurActiv 01/10/07). Se examinaron varias opciones de política, incluidos los impuestos de aviación. Tales como un impuesto de combustible & ndash; Como queroseno está actualmente exento de impuestos & ndash; Pero esto habría requerido una decisión unánime en el Consejo de Ministros y se opuso fuertemente por la industria de la aviación. En una comunicación de septiembre de 2005. La Comisión concluyó finalmente que la introducción de la aviación en el sistema de comercio de derechos de emisión de gases de efecto invernadero (EU-ETS) sería la forma más rentable de reducir el impacto de la aviación en el cambio climático (EurActiv 1/08/05). Posteriormente, el Consejo y el Parlamento aprobaron el enfoque, pero aún no han aprobado la propuesta formal presentada por la Comisión el 20 de diciembre de 2006 (EurActiv 20/12/06). Peter Liese (PPE-DE, Alemania) será el ponente del Parlamento. Los temas más controvertidos en el debate sobre la inclusión de la aviación en el RCDE de la UE fueron: La fecha de inicio y la inclusión o no de vuelos internacionales en el régimen El plan inicial de la Comisión tenía por objeto incluir los vuelos internacionales en el régimen, pero propuso su exención hasta 2012, mientras que los vuelos intra-UE se habrían incluido en el régimen en 2011. La mayoría de los Estados miembros y los eurodiputados, sin embargo, rechazaron este enfoque en dos etapas, diciendo que no sólo distorsionaría la competencia entre compañías aéreas de la UE y no de la UE, sino que también reduciría el impacto ambiental del plan. Muchos también quisieron que el esquema comenzara ya en 2010, mientras que otros empujaron para un plazo más último. Un compromiso . Alcanzado el 26 de junio entre representantes del Parlamento Europeo y la Presidencia eslovena de la UE, fijó finalmente una fecha del 1 de enero de 2012 para todos los vuelos. Tanto dentro de la UE como internacionales que llegan o salen del bloque. Los Estados Unidos han dejado claro que tomarían represalias con sanciones comerciales si la UE intenta obligar a las compañías aéreas extranjeras a cumplir con su sistema de comercio de emisiones, cualquiera que sea el calendario. A finales de septiembre de 2007 logró convencer a la Asamblea General de la OACI de que adoptara una resolución que obligaría a los países que aplican medidas basadas en el mercado, como el comercio de derechos de emisión, a obtener primero el consentimiento de cada tercer país Que opera en su espacio aéreo, lo que impediría que la UE prosiga con sus planes. Pero la UE registró una reserva formal sobre este punto, haciéndola legalmente inaplicable (EurActiv 01/10/07). La Comisión había propuesto un tope a nivel de la UE al 100% de las emisiones medias de la aviación registradas por el sector de las líneas aéreas entre 2004 y 2006. Inicialmente, al menos el 90% de estos permisos de contaminación se entregarían gratuitamente a las compañías aéreas, A partir de 2013. Las líneas aéreas también podrían comprar permisos de otros sectores, como la generación de energía, que ya están cubiertos por el EU-ETS, para tener en cuenta los actuales altos niveles de crecimiento del sector de la aviación (EurActiv 20 / 12/06). Sin embargo, las discusiones revelaron grandes desacuerdos sobre estas cuestiones, y el Comité de Medio Ambiente del Parlamento votó específicamente para que la cantidad total de certificados de emisión se limitara a sólo el 75% de las emisiones promedio en 2004-2006, con al menos un 50% de subasta. Según el comité, un nivel más bajo de subasta permitiría a las aerolíneas obtener ganancias inesperadas & # 39; Mediante la transmisión de costes inexistentes a los viajeros aéreos (EurActiv 03/10/07). Por otra parte, el Comité de Transportes del Parlamento Europeo aprobó un informe en el que se propugnaba un límite máximo del 10% de las emisiones medias desde 2007-2009, para tener en cuenta los fuertes niveles de crecimiento del sector, en particular en los nuevos Estados miembros . También argumentó que las compañías aéreas recibirían el 80% de esta cuota de forma gratuita (EurActiv 13/09/07). Por otra parte, el Consejo ha declarado que las compañías aéreas deben ser libres para mantener las emisiones al mismo nivel que la media de 2004-2006, mientras que el 90% de los permisos de contaminación se distribuirán gratuitamente (EurActiv 20/12/07). Bajo el compromiso final alcanzado en junio y respaldado por el Parlamento el 9 de julio. El número de permisos de contaminación asignados a las líneas aéreas estaría limitado al 97% de los gases de efecto invernadero promedio emitidos en 2004-2006. Este límite se reduciría entonces al 95% para el período 2013-2020. Inicialmente, sólo el 15% de los derechos de emisión serían subastados. Cómo tomar en cuenta otros gases de efecto invernadero El Grupo Intergubernamental de Expertos sobre el Cambio Climático (IPCC) ha estimado que el impacto total de la aviación en el cambio climático es actualmente alrededor de 2 a 4 veces mayor que el que proviene de las emisiones de CO2 solo, Emisiones de óxidos de nitrógeno (NOx) y vapor de agua en sus senderos de condensación. Si bien la Comisión ha optado por dejar estas formas de contaminación atmosférica fuera de su Directiva sobre aviación y ETS, el Parlamento ha pedido repetidamente a la Comisión que presente otros instrumentos de política en paralelo al ETS, Para abordar los impactos no relacionados con el CO2 de la aviación. A first reading vote in Parliament notably proposed multiplying the cost of all CO2 permits bought by airlines by two unless the Commission develops legislation to address additional climate impacts caused by Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) emissions from aircraft (EurActiv 14/11/07 ). While the proposal was rejected, the Commission has now pledged, as part of a new package on "Greening Transport" presented on 8 July, to put forward a "proposal to address nitrous oxide emissions from aviation" before the end of its mandate in November 2009 (EurActiv 09/07/08 ). Other Parliament reports also endorse the idea of increased taxation, in the form of kerosene taxes or the elimination of current tax exemptions which give airlines an unfair advantage over other modes of transport. Airlines however are firmly against such alternative measures, which they say would divert funds necessary for renewing fleet and optimising operations in view of reducing fuel consumption and, in turn, CO2 gases. The Commission’s Head of Unit for clean air and transport Marianne Klingbeil stressed that "including aviation in the ETS is not the worst thing that could happen to the industry" but added that the EU would continue to push for a global agreement that would minimise the competitive disadvantage for European airlines. She denies that airlines were being treated any more unfavourably than other sectors, pointing to legislation currently under preparation to limit emissions from cars and ships. The aviation sector has some of the fastest growth rates today, "and this attracts attention", she said, adding: "You ask: does aviation deserve the attention? But does the steel sector deserve it? Does Europe deserve more and more CO2 emissions? The more coming from one sector, the more other sectors already under the ETS have to pay for it. Is this a fair deal?" Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas defended the inclusion of all intra and extra EU flights in the scheme, insisting that his plan is in line with international rules. He said: "I expect that United States airlines or other airlines will not challenge legally something that they know they are not going to win." However, US officials stressed that the inclusion of non-EU airlines in the scheme without their consent would be illegal and President of the Air Transport Association of America James May said it was "sure to spawn a legal challenge" as it contravened the Chicago Convention. Carl Burleson, environment director of the US Federal Aviation Administration added that the move amounted to forcing foreign airlines to subsidise the EU aviation industry. A spokesman from the US Mission in Brussels further said the EU's unilateral action would "undercut rather than support international efforts to implement system improvement to manage the impact of aviation emissions". A study commissioned by the airline industry finds that the current proposal would slash airlines' profits by more than €40 billion from 2011 to 2022 "jeopardising the long-term viability of the European aviation industry" (EurActiv 06/06/07 ). They say the baseline on which caps are to be calculated (2004-2006) is too far removed from the trading period (2011-2022) and will leave 17 years of growth unaccounted for, forcing the industry to buy massive amounts of credits even if these are given away for free in the beginning. AirFrance Chairman and CEO, Mr. Spinetta, who has welcomed the ETS as "the most environmentally sound way of reducing the impact of air transport on climatic change, without compromising the economic growth of this sector and the vital role it plays in the global economy", underlined that the devil lies in the detail: "The success of the ETS will very much depend on the choice of its technical characteristics. A 'closed' market, on which trading schemes would be negotiated exclusively within a single industrial sector, is not adapted to the context of the air transport sector. This sector, currently undergoing growth and already having recourse to the latest available technological developments, is unable to reduce its CO2 output alone. It is and will long continue to be fully dependent on one single energy source, kerosene." Giovanni Bisignani, Director General of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) . stressed that emissions trading must be just one of a package of solutions for reducing CO2 emissions: "Europe has the power to reduce aviation CO2 emissions 12% by implementing the Single European Sky. We have 34 air traffic control centres in Europe but only one in the USA for a similar traffic and land size. This leads to inefficiencies, delays, and too much time in the air." "It will be a burden and it might be a heavy burden," Association of European Airlines (AEA) spokeswoman Francoise Humbert said about the scheme. "We operate in a very competitive sector, and we cannot afford to offload the costs on passengers," ella dijo. AEA Secretary General Ulrich Schulte-Strathaus, nevertheless welcomed the amendment of the "more extreme elements of the original proposal…the postponement of the controversial inclusion of flights between the EU and the rest of the world into the proposed scheme." The European Regions Airline Association (ERA) criticised the legislation as it would place an additional €7 billion burden on the industry. "It is a mark of the failure of the legislative process that this legislation has been adopted without a thorough assessment of its economic and social impact: this is not responsible law-making," said ERA Director General Mike Ambrose. Olivier Jankovec, Director General of Airport Council International Europe (ACI Europe) . said the Emissions Trading Scheme was the right approach but lamented that the compromise deal had been "agreed without any serious impact assessment" and left "an open door to litigation from third countries." Chris Davies MEP, Liberal Democrat spokesman on climate change in the Parliament . accused the Commission of window-dressing: "A cynical industry sees this as a PR exercise to deflect criticism while doing nothing effective to curb the headlong growth in air travel…The aviation sector should be required to pay fuel taxes and VAT just as other means of transport," he commented. The UK's Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) says that giving airlines emissions credits at no cost will give them "a cheap flight": "If the airlines are simply given the credits they will pass on costs to passengers, leaving the industry to pocket up to £2.7 billion in windfall profits," it stated in a study published in December 2006. In a separate study, global conservation organisation WWF estimated that EU airlines would make up to €3.5billion per year from inclusion in the ETS (EurActiv 19/12/06 ). The European Federation for Transport and Environment (T&E) said the proposal was "too weak" and would only lead to emission reductions of 3% - less than one year's growth of the aviation sector's emissions. Jos Dings, director of T&E, added: "It is stunning that the aviation industry can talk about 'fairness' with a straight face. Not only does the industry stand to get double the permits of other sectors, the fuel tax exemption enjoyed by the sector is worth another €35 billion alone, not to mention the lack of VAT on tickets and the €20 billion European taxpayers have paid out in rescue aid to airlines." Friends of the Earth Aviation Campaigner Richard Dyer agreed that the compromise reached was so weak "it will have little impact on the rocketing growth in carbon dioxide pollution from flying". 20 Dec. 2006 . Commission presented draft legislation aimed at including aviation in the Emissions Trading Scheme. 26 June 2008 . MEPs and the EU's Slovenian Presidency reached a deal on the details of plans to include aviation in the EU's Emissions Trading Scheme as of 2012. 8 July 2008 . European Parliament backed compromise deal, paving the way for entry into force of the legislation. 24 Oct. 2008 . EU justice ministers approved a compromise deal on including aviation activities in the EU ETS. 7 March 2011 . Commission decision on historical aviation emissions establishing a scheme for GHG emission allowance trading within the EU. 1 Jan. 2012 . Target date for aviation sector to start trading CO2. 1 Jan. 2013 . Revised EU-ETS due to come into force, covering not only power-intensive industries, but also aviation. European Union Political Groups Brussels/Strasbourg, 8 July 2008 Emissions trading: Commission welcomes EP vote on including aviation in EU ETS The European Commission welcomes the European Parliament's second reading vote today in favour of including aviation in the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). The vote confirms the agreement reached between the Parliament and the Council last month. Under the new directive greenhouse gas emissions from flights to, from and within the EU will be included in the EU ETS from 2012. All airlines will be covered whatever their nationality. Like the industrial companies already covered by the EU ETS, airlines will be able to sell surplus allowances if they reduce their emissions and will need to buy additional allowances if their emissions grow. Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said: "Greenhouse gas emissions from international air transport are increasing faster than from any other sector in the EU, and this growth threatens to undermine our overall progress in cutting emissions. This agreement will enable the aviation sector to make a fair contribution to Europe's climate change targets as many other sectors are already doing. It is a significant step forward which underlines to our partners once again the EU's commitment to implementing the concrete measures needed to reduce emissions. It also augurs well for agreement later this year on the Commission's January 2008 climate and energy package." The directive is part of a comprehensive approach to addressing aviation emissions, which also includes more research into greener technologies (IP/05/1192 ) and improvements in air traffic management through the creation of a 'Single European Sky' (IP/08/1002 ). A proposal to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions from aircraft is included in the Commission's work programme for this year. The agreement reached between Parliament and Council endorses the key elements of the Commission's original proposal from December 2006 (see IP/06/1862 and MEMO/06/506 ). As well as some technical improvements, there are some key changes from the Commission's original proposal: Aviation will be included in the EU ETS from 2012; a proposed one-year introductory phase for intra-EU flights starting in 2011 has been dropped Emissions from aviation will be capped at 97% of their average 2004-2006 level in 2012. This will decrease to 95% from 2013, although this percentage may be reviewed as part of the general review of the Emissions Trading Directive Airlines will receive 85% of their emission allowances for free in 2012. This percentage may be reduced from 2013 as part of the general review of the Emissions Trading Directive. An exemption has been introduced for commercial air operators with very low traffic levels on routes to, from or within the EU or with low annual emissions (less than 10 000 tonnes CO 2 a year). This means many operators from developing countries with only limited air traffic links with the EU will be exempt. This will not have a significant effect on the emissions covered by the EU ETS. A special reserve of free allowances has been added for new entrants or very fast-growing airlines. The reserve does not increase the overall cap on allowances and therefore does not affect the environmental impact of the system. Airlines that are growing will be able to benefit from the reserve up to a limit of one million allowances. A new mechanism has been introduced to ensure consistent and robust enforcement throughout the EU. As a last resort, Member States could ask for an operator to be banned from operating in the EU if it persistently fails to comply with the system and other enforcement measures have proven ineffective. The Council is expected to give formal approval to the directive at one of its next meetings. Once formally adopted, the directive will be published in the Official Journal and will enter into force the same day. Member States will then have 12 months to transpose it into national legislation. Emissions from domestic flights are covered by the Kyoto Protocol's targets for limiting or reducing national emissions, but international aviation is not. Moreover, historically jet fuel for international flights has been tax-exempt. Emissions from aviation currently account for about 3% of total EU greenhouse gas emissions, but they are increasing fast – by 87% since 1990. Someone flying from London to New York and back, for example, generates roughly the same amount of emissions as the average person in the EU does by heating their home for a whole year. On current trends, aviation emissions are likely to more than double from present levels by 2020. This rapid growth contrasts with the success of many other sectors of the economy in reducing emissions. The March 2007 European Council committed the EU to cutting its emissions by at least 20% of 1990 levels by 2020, and by up to 30% provided other developed countries commit to comparable reductions. The Commission's January 2008 package of climate and energy proposals, now under discussion in the European Parliament and Council, puts in place key measures to deliver on these commitments, to improve the EU's energy security and to strengthen competitiveness (see IP/08/80 ). DG ENV climate change website: Transportation EU Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS) The EU Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS) is a mandatory scheme, requiring annual reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and other data for regulatory compliance. Our teams provide a complete service offering two levels of verification – baseline verification and annual verification – to ensure you are compliant. To give you a headstart on reporting commitments, we undertake a document review in the last two quarters of the year to establish the extent of your compliance. We take a look at your approved monitoring plan and reporting guidelines to make sure they are as efficient as possible and encompassing all current requirements. We can also identify opportunities for improvement and review the relevant data so that it is ready for verification in the following quarter. The split verification process allows for an early check of your internal systems and an early warning of opportunities for improvement. It allows you to submit your reports in a timely manner. The interim data you receive will assist with your market-related decisions and allow you time to resolve any issues with the competent authority. We operate with the appropriate accreditation to offer you reliable and accurate verification services worldwide. With offices and EU ETS trained staff across Europe, you can be assured of working with your local team with extensive knowledge of local legislation and reporting requirements. Call our expert team today and make EU ETS regulations compliance easier for you. Downloads Brochures | PDF 731.87 KB The Incorporation of Aviation into the EU´s Emissions Trading System Excerpt Contenido 2 The EU Emissions Trading System 2.1 Summarising ET: General Concepts of the Policy Instrument 2.2 Contents and Concepts of EU-Emissions Trading System 2.2.1 Selected background of EU-agreements on the EU-ET Scheme 2.2.2 Profiling present moulding concepts of the European Union ’s ET System 2.3 Incorporating Aviation into the EU ETS: Contents and Stage of Affairs 2.3.1 Incorporating aviation into EU ETS: Impact and selected content 2.3.2 Incorporating aviation into EU ETS: Stage of affairs 3 Issues related to the Introduction of Aviation into the EU ETS 3.1 Problems in Implementing EU-wide Aviation into the EU ETS 3.2 Problems in Implementation: Divergences in an UN-wide context 4 EU-ET: Values and Deficits in Proceeding Problems from Aviation 4.1 Values and Potentials of the EU ETS in a Special Regard to Aviation 4.2 Deficits and Criticism to the EU ETS in Proceeding Problems from Aviation 5 Intermediate Result: Evaluation of Deficits and Values 6 Future Proposals to the Inclusion of Aviation into the EU ETS List of Abbreviations 1. Introducción This Policy Paper is emerged from the context of the Master course: “Protecting the Environment in the European Union” at the Westfälische Wilhelms­Universität Münster under the coordination of Dr. Jörg Waldmann. Within the scope of this course the presentation results from the commissioned group works, divided into thematic clusters - supplemented by active discussions - have acuminated the view on contents and concepts of this issued EU Policy. In doing so, it was a major aim to analyse political instruments within the EU, used to accesses various fields of environmental problems. Congruously in this Policy Paper, a specific instrument of EU Environmental Policy is chosen to be analysed and finally evaluated by its performances and capabilities as operational policy instrument. In the course of the seminar, the preservative subject area of Climate Policy has crystallised as an emerged and large-scaled subject to EU Environmental Policy. EU Climate Policy contacts nearly every field in European environmental adoption. Facing the latest scientific prognoses and reviewing European as well as common global environmental activity - the abatement of Climate Change appears to be one of the most superordinated aims. Hence, this policy topic especially defies an exemplary investigation on how EU policy-making proceeds, to protect environment in anent to a current issue. At present, the EU Emissions Trade System / -Scheme (EU ETS) as one of the most expansive pillars to the Union’s Climate Policy and concurrently the most comprehensive global ETS, is ought to be completed within its second (of three) phases of development. The integration of EU-wide aviation into the system of EU ET proceeding since 2003 is a main part to the future enterprise in expanding EU Climate Policy. Within this step of integration the EU has declared its ambition to take a pioneering task in combating global Climate Change until 2020. During the current decade, critical scientists appraise the realisation of those aims as an impossible scenario for near future (Hahn 2006 / Brockhagen 2004). Not less, within this EU-wide expansion plans the EU ETS is ought to cover and regulate a mobile pollution sector, which has grown eminently during the last decade and as so far has enjoyed special status to national politics. The fact that the EU ETS is discussed to be a proto-type of global concepts of Emissions Trading regimes additionally increases the importance of its analysis and evaluation (e.g. Ellerman 2008: p.2). EU organs have consequently communicated the environmental need for action in controlling aviation in numerous declarations since 1996 (e.g. Brockhagen 2004). The EU Commission, Parliament and Council in conjunction consistently accent the problem by showing the raising rates of civil air traffic (e.g. CEC 2005 ; CEC 2006). The recent releases document, that EU-wide 793 Million starting passengers had been listed in 2007 - a raise by 7,3 % compared to 2006 (Stockmann / Janßen 2009: p.6). In 2007 (p.1) the EP asserted, that aviation is the fastest growing source of CO2 emissions in Europe. Even during the global financial crisis in 2008 inner EU civil traffic has temporary decreased by only a rate of 3,2 % in comparison with 2007. The highest growth is related to budget flights (Hahn 2006: p.6). Overall, the EU is a mayor actor in global aviation: 25 % in global traffic is covered by inner European flights [1] (Wolf 2007: p.293). Against the background of this large-scaled and raisinging environmental problem, it is inalienable to EU Politics, to constantly adjust and control the capabilities and potentials of the European ETS, to (a) run and insure its successful implementation and (b) to help reaching practical results in protecting of the environment in the EU. Therefore, in three major steps the following question is approached: How effective can the policy arrangement of EU ETS be, to contain environmental problems from aviation? For this aim, in the first part of this Policy Paper the question is responded: What are contents and the concepts of the EU ETS - in a special regard to aviation? Coherently, the second part of this paper raises the question of values and deficits of the EU ETS - on the one hand arising from lessons that have been already learned - on the other hand to emerge future problems: What difficulties and potentials are to be state for the integration of aviation into the EU ETS? The third and concluding part of this paper evaluates and finally proposes how to proceed and to optimise the incorporation of aviation into the EU ETS - leaded by the question of: How could components of the EU ETS be modified to achieve better results in terms of initialising, proceeding, and ensuring this planed policy scheme? 2 The EU Emissions Trading System 2.1 Summarising ET: General Concepts of the Policy Instrument Generally, Emissions Trading to be commonly understood as a policy tool, applied in current political reality is the most important market-based approach to administrative regulation of international Climate Change, used in line with the Kyoto Protocol (e. g. Kjærseth / Wettestad 2008: p. 275). Unlike direct command and control approaches, pollutions of industrial operators are regulated by the help of market-based governance arrangements. As such, Emissions Trading in special is deemed as a feasible Climate Policy tool to contexts of international implementations (Kosobud 2000: p.3). The theoretical basic approach to ET was first drafted by an economical abstract from Ronald Coase. In 1960 the economist was searching for a method to optimise industrial pollution. As a precondition, Coase asserted that pollutions are costs and burden, which industries pass on to society. He concluded that pollution - as a societal problem - would be minimised, if it would be no longer at no charge to pollutants, but rather be emerged as part of procurement calculations in total economical costs (Coase 1960: p. 3-44). Comparable to Coases approach, most operationalised ETS are assembled by the “cap-and-trade” principle (PEW Centre on Global Climate Change 2009: p.1). In the process according to this approach, governments set legal limit-ceilings (Tietenberg 1985: p.3), the “caps” on the amount of emissions of pollutant groups that can be emitted. Such “caps” in terms of existing ETS are the sum of all allowed emissions from all included facilities. In terms of the existing EU ETS, industrial companies or other groups are addressed by issued emissions permits and are required to hold an equivalent number of those allowances which represent the right to emit a specific value. While the logic of the Coase Theorem is founded on continuously disburse and narrowed allowances for pollution - current worldwide existing Emissions Trading Systems are giving emissions allowances which are reviewed as propor­tionally high. Still todays operationalised ET Schemes give most allowances for free. For instance in the EU ETS, allowances are set in line with pollution limits that is based on past pollution levels (a.k.a. the method of Grandfathering). In the case of the aviation sector at the limit of what was emit in the year of 2005. Nevertheless, the middle-term aim of ET - like in standards of the EU ETS - is to lower the emissions “caps” in line with defined time periods (e. g. Centre of American Progress 2008: para. 3). In theory, the goal of cap-setting only can be fulfilled by adequate ceiling levels. If cap-levels are set adequately, it is expected that companies, which pollute continuously intensive or intend to increase their emissions have to buy credits from industries that pollute less; in ideal case, from those operators who began to minimise their emissions as a result from the cost compression of the ET. Comprehending this theoretical effect it appears to be obvious, that the transfer of allowances is referred to as a “trade”: In fact, under these circumstances the buyer is paying a charge for polluting, while the seller is being rewarded for having reduced emissions by more than it was defined by the given cap. Thus, following the approach at first, those who can reduce emissions most cheaply will do so. Consequently, it can be expected that for some emitters, implementing new low-emitting technologies are less expensive. To operationalise a free market-based certification exchange amongst emitters, allowances are traded on Stock Exchange. Aside this, certifications that are needed above the defined caps can in most cases also be bought from the appropriate national governments. Resulting revenues from the ET that are paid to governments are transferred into environmental funds and ET associated climate programmes. In conclusion, is expected that the impact of ET is driven by the forces of supply and demand in markets. Consequently, the developments of prices result from supply, demand and from market expectations to capacities of emissions of a sector. In theory like in line with most current credos of the EU's Climate Policy strategy, this method is expected to a) stimulate best practice and cost efficiency, b) optimise economical behaviour within market- based incentive structures and c) advance desirable societal goals in common welfare in terms of environmental protection by a scheme of pollution control. At present, the EU ETS is out to cover nearly every EU-wide pollutive industry. while for example prominent ET arrangements like US-Americans or Japanese systems exist more “local” [2] - national bounded and more fragmentary - addressing specific regions and environmental hazardous branches (Stavin 2000: p.49 et. seqq.). 2.2 The EU-Emissions Trading System: Contents and Concepts 2.2.1 Selected background of EU-agreements on the EU-ET Scheme “The EU ETS is the most comprehensive multi-national ETS worldwide and was the first to be introduced in 2005" (EU 2007: para. 15). To first contextualise the agreement about the introduction of the EU ETS in 2005, it is to be pointed out that decisions were based on forgone stagnation in process EU Climate Policy in emissions abatement. Since the beginning of the 1990s, the EU Commission failed in the undertaking of initiatives to introduce carbon and energy taxes [3]. In this context, the agreement on EU Emissions Trading appears to be a policy-outcome traced back on a forgone European request for alternative Climate Policy instruments. Most conspicuously, fiscal ambitions were started about one decade before the established market-based governance scheme of EU ET came into agreement. For the CEC and the EC, ET appeared as a strategy to remediate failures in a Climate Policy that were at first tried to be achieved by direct interventional command and control approaches. An important advantage for the implementation of the EU ET- in contrast to fiscal proposals is based on the simple fact, that it required only a simple majority to be passed in the EC (Luhmann / Brouns 2005: p.15 ; Convery 2009: p. 393 et seqq.). Consequently, in the first contemplation ET might be regarded as an alternative political strategy. In the process Emissions Trade-levels increase over time. This attribute makes EU ET integration additionally appear in a mode of what Lenschow and Reiter (2008: 179 et seqq.) characterise as of creeping integration: They identify creeping political processes as a frequently utilised option to process environmental policy integration on the level of the EU. Recapitulating the content of requirements under which Emissions Trading was passed, altogether it can be hardly underestimated, that this policy instrument includes possibilities to be applied under the prerequisite of (a) international (EU) treaties - (b) still leaving compatible elbowroom to national governments and industrial operators, at least at the beginning of trading emissions in the EU. 2.2.2 Profiling present moulding concepts of the European Union ’s ET System As most scientists, Frank Convery (2009) considers the present developments of the ETS as a extensive improvement for EU Climate Policy. He concludes that after failing an EU Taxation System, nevertheless the decision to pass an ETS was not inevitable to the Member States. Warrantable, he advises to present progresses in structuring the EU ETS as first promising developments. As a matter of fact at present, the EU ETS currently covers more than 10,000 installations with a net heat excess of 20 megawatt (MW) per day in the industrial sectors which are responsible for a half of the EU's emissions of CO2 and 40% of its total Green House Gas (GHG) emissions (Wagner 2004: p.12). Under the EU ETS, large emitters of carbon dioxide within the EU have to monitor and annually report their CO2 emissions. Additionally these polluters are obliged every year to return an amount of emission allowances, so called European Union Allowances (EUAs) to the government that is equivalent to their CO2 emissions in that year. In order to neutralise annual irregularities in CO2 emission levels, emission allowances for operators subject to the EU ETS are given out for a sequence of several years at once. Each such sequence of years is formed as a trading period. The first ETS “trail" 4 trading period expired in December 2007; has covered all EU ETS emissions since January 2005. With its terminations, the first phase of EU allowances became invalid. Since January 2008, the second trading period is under way which will last until December 2012. In January 2008, the European Commission proposed a number of changes to the scheme, including centralized allocation, which means no more national allocation plans by an EU authority, a turn to auctioning a greater share (60+ %) of permits rather than allocating freely, and inclusion of other greenhouse gases, such as nitrous oxide and fluorocarbons (Europe Press Release 2005). These changes are still in a draft stage; the mentioned amendments are only likely to become effective from January 2013 onwards, i.e. in the third trading period under the EU ETS. In addition, the proposed caps for the third trading period foresee an overall reduction of greenhouse gases for the sector of 21% in 2020 compared to 2005 emissions. [4] 2.3 Incorporating Aviation into EU ETS: Content and Stage of Affairs 2.3.1 Incorporating Aviation into EU ETS: Impact and selected Content A core element of the implementation of the EU ETS is the involvement of all major pollutive sectors during the course of its development (e. g. EP 2008: para. 10). As a basic element to this aim, in 2003 the EC has decided to involve the aviation sector into the provisions of the EU ETS. In comparison to other pollutive sectors EU-wide - such as global aviation is supposed to extensively low emissions control. Examples for working instruments in emissions regulation next to the EU ETS are the Dutch Kerosene Tax - covering its few domestic flights (e. g. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency 2005: p. 12) and pilot-projects on emissions depended landing and take-off charges at the major German airports of Frankfurt and München ( EP 2007: p.3). Consequently, unlike other pollutive sectors the plan to regulate aviation meets eligibilities of few structures in executive, practical and administrative control. Already from the start, the EU ETS is not to be seen as an additive junior policy arrangement in emissions control of aviation. Within the EU ETS the first covering international emissions control on this sector is getting initialised in general. This backlog in demand makes it even more obvious, why this project of ET incorporation is named a main planning pillar to its second trading period (e. g. EP / CEC 2007: para. 1). The Commission’s proposal of 2006 to include the aviation sector in the EU ETS has been finally agreed between the EP and the CEC and was passed in January 2008 by Directive 101/CEC/2008. 2.3.2 Incorporating Aviation into EU ETS: Stage of Affairs and Graduation Following the EU declarations, from 2011 inner European aviation emissions are expected to be included into the scheme, trans-European flights are expected to be involved from 2012. The actual formal agreements, legislates this expansions to be realised until February 2010. Consequently, the integration of aviation, in fact is estimated to be included in the limits of the third EU-ET period until 2020. Consequently, the EU ETS is planned to be practiced by the end of the term of the Kyoto Protocol. An ET cap ceiling was agreed by the end of 2008 and is planned to as a basis to regulate aviation operation in the upcoming decade. As a first proposal in June 2008, the EP and Council reached an informal deal of auctioning 15% of total emissions allowances (CEC / EP 2008 Art. 3d 1.) Art. 3d 2. “From (. ) 2013, 15 % (. ) shall be auctioned’. MEPs from the CEC- ENVI Committee pushed for aviation pollution permits to be capped at 90% of the average-level of GHGs emissions, emitted during the period of 2004-2006. The Member States were demanding to set the cap at the level of 100% of the underlying average basis. A compromise was made by 95% as a basis for the trading period from 2013 to 2020, unless no new agreements are negotiatated (CEC / EP 2008: Art. 3c ; EP 2008: para. 4d ; CEC / EP 2008: para. 10). Weinreich (2009: p. 5) points out that there is currently neither a legal nor an administrative basis to this European legislation until commissioned national monitoring plans are elaborated as framework conditions to control aviation. Nevertheless, the assigned comitology committee of the CEC has already elaborated basical parameters. Next to Member States, the EU plans the airlines themselves to be responsible for controlling their emissions: Aircraft operators have the most direct control over (. ) aircrafts (. ) and should therefore be responsible for complying with the obligations'’" (EC / EP 2009 para. 15). The planned decisions about this implementation legally accord to national public expenditure and are therefore given as a matter of national sovereignty. Hence, the implementation depends on the principle of subsidiary of Member States to the EU. According to the information of the DEHSt (Deutsche Emissionshandelsstelle) at present, about 300 German aircraft operators are engaged to design monitoring plans [5] . If aircraft operators fail to comply with the requirements of the Directive, Member States should act in solidarity: The administering Member States are expected to request the Commission to decide on the imposition of an operating ban on aircraft operators at the Community level - concerned as a last resort. “Revenues generated from the auctioning of allowances, (. ) required by overriding budgetary principles of the Member States, such as unity revenues generated from auctioning should be used in particular to contributions to the Global Energy Efficiency and Energy Fund and measure to avoid deforestation and facilitate adaptation in developing countries and on the development of low-emission transport (CEC / EP 2008: para. 22). [1] Stockmann / Hafner (2007: p.6) report that “(. ) total flights from, to and inner Europe cover [about] more than 50 % in [total] global emissions [2] This formulation is to be understood in a global context - the EU ETS in most regards, is a local limited trading system amongst others; such as US American and Japanese ETSs. [3] To pass EU-wide taxation in the EC absolute majorities are needed. The proposals were vetoed by Member States that suspected EU taxation to provoke accessive cuts in national core sovereignty. [4] While the first Emissions Trading phase (2005-2007) of the EU ETS is widely regarded as a pilot phase for “learning by doing”, the second trading phase (2008-2012) is commonly seen as the start of Emissions Trading in earnest. [5] E-Mail response from the DEHSt. EU-ETS Reporting Resource Center Universal Global Regulatory Services About EU-ETS (and who's affected) In Spring 2009, the European Union announced plans to expand the scope of its Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) to include aviation. In simple terms, EU-ETS is a mandatory regulation requiring all non-commercial operators who travel into, out of, and between EU Member States to monitor their CO 2 flight emissions starting 1 January 2010. However, in a proposal passed on April 30, 2014, the Directive has been temporarily amended to exempt any operator who emits less than 1000 tons of CO 2 under the full scope (in, out, and within the EU). This amendment applies to the 2013-2020 reporting years. Recent updates Registering for EU-ETS Before reporting for EU-ETS, you will need to register with the European Commission (EC) to be assigned a Member State which administrates your program. Follow these steps below. Step 1: Apply for/confirm your EU Member State What is an EU Member State and how does it relate to your operation? A Member State of the European Union is any one of the sovereign states that have acceded to the European Union (EU). All operators are assigned a specific EU Member State as their regulatory authority within EU-ETS. When will you be required to apply for/confirm a Member State? Within 8 weeks after your first applicable trip to an EU-ETS participating country. EU Member States: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia (as of July 1, 2013), Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom EFTA (European Free Trade Agreement) Countries: Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway EU Outlying Territories: Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique, Reunion, The Azores, Madeira, The Canary Islands, Aland Islands, Saint Martin (French), Akrotiri and Dhekelia What do you need to do? Identify if you have already been assigned a Member State If your flight department has not yet taken any action in regard to EU-ETS, your first step is to identify if you have already be assigned to an EU Member State. Your assigned Member State has a Competent Authority to which you will regularly report emissions. Operator List 8 | European Commission's Web site (updated March 2015) Complete history of Operator Lists and Prior Compliance Lists released by the European Commission The following lists are provided for historical reference only. To identify your current Member State assignment, please refer to the latest version list(s) provided above. Notes: Prior Compliance lists show those NEW operators who have been assigned a member state. Operator Lists are comprehensive lists of all operators and their member state assignment. Are you already on the list above? If you've already identified your Member State, contact its competent authority to get details about its specific monitoring plans submission process. Not on the list? If you cannot identify your aircraft on any Member State list, you must submit a Fleet List form to the European Commission to be assigned to Member State. To do this: Access the EU-ETS fleet list form | DOC file format Tips to complete: check the second box, "Representing the below legal person"; Name of Natural or Legal Person (Your Company Operator Name); leave Operator Code blank. Print, sign, scan to PDF, and e-mail this file as an attachment to [email protected] and [email protected] . Next steps The European Commission will publish an updated Operator List each February on its Web site. Prior to February, the Commission publishes a Prior Compliance List at irregular intervals which specifies new operators being added to the upcoming official Operator List. Check back here for the latest version. Until your company's name is shown in writing on the Operator List, you are not held accountable to any Member State's deadlines. Do not submit your monitoring plans until you have been designated to a Member State. Step 2: Submit your monitoring plans to EU Member State What monitoring plans must I submit? Once you have received confirmation of the EU Member State to which you are assigned (see Step 1), you are required to submit the following: Annual emission-monitoring plan (required) Data-flow chart (required; Emission-monitoring-plan-process flow chart) Tonne-Kilometre monitoring plan (optional) Deadline? You must do this within 8 weeks of being assigned a Member State. What do you need to do? Contact your EU Member State for procedure and set a timeline for submission Your Member State will advise you on process for submitting your plan for approval. Complete the required annual emissions monitoring plan and data flow chart Additional assistance in creation of monitoring plans is available through Universal Global Regulatory Service. Contáctenos para más información. A monitoring plan submission fee applies (varies by Member State). Beginning with your first applicable trip to an EU-ETS participating country, you should begin monitoring and recording your EU-ETS required data. See next section for details. Complete the optional Tonne-Kilometre monitoring plan Why is this important? The Tonne-Kilometre monitoring plan is required to register for the EU-ETS optional benchmarking scheme. If you have frequent operations to, from, and between EU Member States, Universal® recommends that you take part in the benchmarking scheme. This will allow you to receive carbon credits as free allowances for your annual emissions from 2012–2020. The initial optional benchmarking period for 2010 has closed. The next benchmark period will be for operations in the calendar year 2014 (except operators assigned to Croatia which will allow benchmarking for operations in 2012). A one-time Member State submission fee applies (varies by Member State) Third-party verification is required for your Tonne-Kilometre report. If you have few annual flights impacted by EU-ETS legislation, consider performing a cost-benefit analysis to determine if submitting the Tonne-Kilometre plan is right for your operation. The individual allocation for each operator is proportional to the (reported and verified) Tonne-Kilometres that were flown over the course of the benchmarking year. Submit plans per the process outlined by your EU Member State As process varies from country to country, please contact your Member State for more information. Next steps Once you submit your plans, a reviewer from your EU Member State's environmental authority will contact you to confirm receipt. The reviewer will provide feedback on your submitted plan and advise of any required changes. EU-ETS Monitoring and Reporting After you have registered with the European Commission (EC) and have been assigned a Member State which administrates your program, you are ready to begin your annual emissions monitoring and reporting. Follow these steps below. Deadline? Annual aviation-emissions monitoring begins 1 January each calendar year for EU-ETS. Your report must be submitted to your Member State's regulatory authority no later than 31 March of each calendar year. Carbon credits to offset CO 2 emissions are due by April 30th of the reporting year. What do you need to do? Begin tracking your required annual emissions data. Identify affected trips based on arrival/destination ICAOs that fall within Member States/territories, and capture required datasets for your annual aviation-emissions reporting. See reporting template below. Calculate your emissions data. You have two options for the calculation of annual emissions. You can use either estimated fuel consumption using an EC-approved tool or you can use actual fuel consumption. Universal recommends using the European Commission's small emitters tool for estimated fuel consumption for any operator who qualifies. Before downloading this tool, please read through the guidance on small emitter thresholds. You do not need to download this tool if you subscribe to Universal's EU-ETS Emissions Reporting Portal. as this tool is already integrated with the portal. For operators that choose to use actual fuel consumption, there are two calculation options available. For the Method A calculation option, use this CO 2 emission calculator. For the Method B calculation option, use this CO 2 emission calculator. Compile your annual emissions report. Complete the below template to store calculated CO 2 emissions data for validation and annual reporting: Submit to your Member State. Once you have received your completed report, submit it to your Member State no later than 31 March. Note: Your Member State should have already provided you instructions for submission. If not, you should contact Universal Global Regulatory Services or your Member State for instructions. Next steps: Once you have submitted your annual emissions report, you should receive a confirmation of receipt and approval from your Member State. 2014-2015 EU-ETS Roadmap to Success for aviation-emissions reporting Stay on top of these milestones to ensure your compliance with EU-ETS. Activities to complete Operators over 1,000 T/CO 2 Threshold (Full Scope) must purchase and surrender Carbon Allowances equal to their Intra-EU emissions Operators over 1,000 T/CO 2 Threshold (Full Scope) must submit Annual Emissions Report to Member State Determine if you fall above or below the 1000 ton threshold for the 2013-2014 reporting years. If you are below the 1000 tons per year, you are exempt from submitting a report December 2014 - January 2015 If you are above the 1000 ton threshold, begin compiling applicable EUROCONTROL invoices (from either third-party providers or from your in-house accounting group) Create a QA assessment validating your internal process (which demonstrates your EU-ETS processes are valid for producing accurate data) Login to Universal's EU-ETS Emissions Reporting Portal and validate Operator Information and Flight Data History Submit your amended monitoring plan to Competent Authority (if applicable) Submit your report to Competent Authority Begin monitoring process for the new calendar year Before March 31, 2014 Purchase carbon credits needed to offset carbon output for 2013-2014 years. Submit to Competent Authority via your Registry Account Before April 30, 2014 Fuel Consumption Calculation Methods Method A If using Method A, the initial reference point for determining the fuel consumption for the flight would be the measurement of fuel in the aircraft tank(s) immediately after the fuel uplift of fuel for the flight. After landing at the destination, the final reference point for calculating the fuel consumption for the flight would be the measurement of fuel in the aircraft tank(s) immediately after the uplift of fuel for the next flight. The fuel tank measurement after the fuel uplift for the next flight is the sum of the uplift plus what was remaining in the tank(s) after the flight. So the fuel consumption is the difference in the tank readings plus the fuel uplift for the next flight. Method B If using Method B, the fuel tank reading reference points are different in that they are taken at block on at the end of flight rather than at the end of fuel uplifts. Need some help? Universal has the answers and solutions to help ensure your EU-ETS compliance. Contáctenos For information on aviation-emissions reporting and any compliance issue, call our Regulatory Services Team: N. America +1 (800) 231-5600 ext. 3300 · Worldwide +1 (713) 944-1622 ext. 3300 &dupdo; 2016 Universal Weather and Aviation, Inc. ETS and the airlines: the EU’s looming enforcement nightmare The framers of the EU ’s Directive containing its Emissions Trading System (ETS) for aviation were well aware it would generate controversy. Tiene. Almost every major nation has vociferously opposed it; even Russia. China and the US are for once wholeheartedly united in their opposition. China and India have banned their airlines from participating in the ETS and similar legislation has passed both houses in the USA. A 26 country “Coalition of the Unwilling” has formally agreed a series of retaliatory measures should EU states impose sanctions for non-compliance. The outcome could be bloody and very costly to airlines and economies alike, the last thing the industry needs at this time. The real crunch comes when enforcement of the ETS is attempted. Individual EU member states must be the ones to fine and even, as directed by the Commission, suspend services by foreign airlines. This means each EU state and its airlines risks being picked off by retaliation from the offending country. The first of a two part report, this article reviews the practical implications in implementing the EU's penalties for non-compliance with its controversial ETS rules. Part II will look at the ironies of the EU's focus on following the tabloid herd, while failing to get its own house in order. Considered unilateral and discriminatory by many foreign governments and airlines alike, the EU’s controversial ETS is shaping to prove a massive headache for member governments once it comes to applying sanctions for non-compliance. But, in Apr-2012, Connie Hedegaard, the EU’s climate action commissioner, came out fighting: “Why all the fuss about aviation. Why has Europe passed its own laws to make airlines reduce their CO2 emissions. And why don't we have international rules for an international sector? It’s right to ask these questions.” The answers though may be less palatable all round, once foreign states have their right of reply. The UK is in the frontline to impose ETS penalties – and for probable retaliation With its careless attitude towards aviation, the UK is poised to become the frontline as resistance to the EU ETS consolidates. The way the non-compliance punishment system works is that responsibility for enforcement against individual airlines falls on the country where the particular airline has the largest number of services. For many major airlines, that means the UK. But if the UK government is silly enough to go ahead full steam on its own, it could quickly find its own airports and airlines seriously isolated as the implementation – inevitably – provokes retaliation by disgruntled foreign governments. As the months pass, the Apr-2013 deadline for full punitive action grows closer. There is no shortage of recalcitrant foreign governments, so there is likely to be mounting excitement as the months pass. The EU has steadfastly (well, most of the time) maintained that it will not give an inch. But there are other immovable objects about to come into contact with that rock-like posture. The issue is not so much about the need to reduce emissions. There are few airlines or governments who do not support this goal. The fact is that most governments consider the ETS an unacceptable unilateral imposition of EU dogma. This transcends merely the payment of emissions charges; the ETS raises dangerous issues of nationalist pride, more technically described as sovereignty. Those are fertile breeding grounds for intransigence and conflict. A recent paper from a leading aviation law professor at prestigious Leiden University[1] has reviewed the merits of the EU’s Directive and the mechanics and feasibility of the possible enforcement provisions where airlines fail to comply. The paper concludes that the “legal foundations of this Directive are made on thin ice” and, if it does infringe international law, “it is difficult to see how it can be enforced.” To the extent that the Directive is perceived to infringe the rights of non-EU states, then “those non-EU States may be tempted to enforce their rights in order to remedy the perceived injustice.” From the way things look at the moment, that temptation may become irresistible. As Professor Pablo Mendes De Leon. the author of the paper, observes, “the number and intensity of the reactions (by the Coalition of the Unwilling) are unprecedented in the history of international civil aviation.” No mere obfuscation is likely to provide a way out of this head-on collision. ETS day is 01-Apr-2013. Who will be the April Fools? The gloves will really come off after April Fools Day 2013, when all airlines are required to submit their final emission certificates and pay up – or else. In the meantime, there are several monitoring milestones the airlines are expected to comply with. In reality the process is already under way. As the first step, starting in Jan-2012, all airlines operating in EU airspace have been required to submit data on their carbon emissions occurring since the beginning of 2011. By mid-2012, there had been “systematic non-reporting” of emissions by 10 airlines based in India and China, according to the European Commission ’s website on 15-May-2012. There is little likelihood that this will have changed (although things have gone quiet in the meantime). This followed a specific announcement to the Commission by eight Chinese and two Indian airlines that they refused “to submit their traffic data to the authorities of their administering States, upon which the EU Commission has given them a leniency period until 15-Jun-2012; if not the EU Commission announced that enforcement actions would be started.”[2] . Enforcement actions may have been “started”, but so far it has only been talk. Altogether some 26 countries, including most of the EU’s main aviation partners, have openly opposed the ETS’ imposition, some more strongly than others. But the common message is that “we will not comply”. The UK’s regulations are the most strenuous, ready to punish all 'offenders' The EU’s Directive requires member states to introduce legislation with ‘effective, proportionate and dissuasive measures’[3] for recalcitrant states. As Professor De Leon notes, “the UK…has to monitor, verify and supervise by far the largest number of operators.” And it is the UK which ”has enacted the most stringent, detailed and schematic measures” to force unwilling airlines to comply. The following summary is adapted from his paper. The UK’s Punishment Timetable GBP 1500 and GBP 150 following the service of a notice (max. GBP 13,500) Then, as there is no practical international enforcement process, there is a further step in case of non-compliance: “Publication of names of operators; Detention of aircraft; and Operating bans”. This is in response to the Commission’s name and shame requirements under the Directive. Although it would appear that there are already sufficient grounds for the UK to have taken action against some states already, this has apparently not happened. Nor, seemingly, has the EU Commission taken steps to force the UK to act. Will the EU be forced to back down? Can it afford not to? Despite protestations, there is obviously an awareness in the corridors of bureaucracy in Brussels that head-on confrontation is unacceptable – to the Union and to its constituent members. The US, Europe ’s major trading partner, is adamant in its opposition. Both houses of Congress are, for once, united in that respect too. Following passage through the US Senate in Sep-2012 of bill S. 1956, the “European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition Act,” the process of reconciling the exact wording with the earlier House of Representatives bill is now under way. Both bills require the Secretary of Transportation to prevent all US airlines (including business jet operators), from participating in the ETS. They also encourage the search for a solution through ICAO . And with varying legal or administrative means, the other government members of the Coalition of the Unwilling are each lining up with near-identical positions. Each EU state will be in the firing line for retaliation The weak link in the EU’s defences is that the crunch of the ETS implementation will of course not be borne by the EU itself, but by the national administrations which are duty bound to punish recalcitrant airlines – and indirectly, their governments[4]. So, whatever the Commission says or does, it will not have the last word, at least in the short term. If its member states fail to enforce against third parties, then the EU will have to punish its own members for non-compliance. So, rather than forming an impenetrable barrier of nations, each member state is being set up to be isolated – and to suffer retaliation from very unhappy aviation partners. There is of course no way that these responses will be confined to air services – already China has threatened to boycott Airbus purchases[5] – although an obvious first step in case of unilateral suspension of service for non-compliance is to reciprocate and suspend service by the EU nation’s airlines. Scenario: The German government fines Air China (Germany is responsible as the largest recipient of the carrier’s services[6] ), and the Commission tries to terminate the Chinese flag carrier’s operating authority and detain its aircraft. In retaliation, Lufthansa and all other German carriers are excluded from Chinese airspace! Or, in the UK, as a similar process rolls out with Delta. Unido. US Airways, American Airlines and Air Canada (and perhaps their respective metal neutral codeshares on European airline partners), where will British Airways ’ and Virgin Atlantic ’s hearts lie? Incensed foreign governments whose sovereignty is attacked in this way can hardly be expected to play by Marquis of Queensbury rules.[7] The gloves will quickly come off and any form of retaliation becomes possible – for example, boycotting European retail enterprises in the foreign country. There is no need to stop at the specific state which has acted against them either; it makes sense to retaliate against all EU states. And the EU’s own international aviation policy goals are immediately at risk For the EU too, there is a high level need to adopt a more conciliatory tone. Despite Ms Hedegaard’s obdurate confidence about achievement of a solution, underneath the water this European duck’s legs are paddling furiously. There is simply too much at stake for European governments and their airlines to risk a confrontation with major air trading countries – especially not if it wishes to enhance those relations and gain further access. These are tough enough times for Europe’s airlines without a most unwelcome sideshow. For example, according to the Commission’s report of a media conference held by Commission Vice President Siim Kallas on 27-Sep-2012 it is the Commission’s goal to gain better access to business opportunities for the EU aviation industry in new markets. He even published a timetable: “20-21 Dec. 2012: EU transport ministers meeting to discuss the Commission's proposed external aviation policy package. “By early 2013: Commission expects green light from EU member states to obtain mandates to start negotiations with foreign countries, including China, India, Russia and the Gulf states.”[8] This – not coincidentally – reflects the surge of European traffic heading towards these destinations, as conditions at home promise to languish for some time to come. Yet most of these targets are the very same ones that have been most strident in their opposition to the ETS – and are promising to have their airlines fined and possibly impounded by the would-be partners in the EU. The discussions should be more interesting than usual. Almost in the same breath, when confronted by questions at the announcement, Mr Kallas optimistically “denied.…that the running battle with China, India and the United States over the EU’s Emissions Trading System would harm long-term trade and business dealings, saying those issues are expected to be worked out within the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO).”[9] He and Ms Hedegaard may be having some long dinners to sort out these niceties. Aircraft leasing companies – point and counterpoint Once the juggernaut begins to roll, there is also a host of other industry player who become affected – and likely to respond accordingly. According to industry sources, aircraft leasing companies which have aircraft placed with airlines that risk punitive action for non-compliance have advised their lessees that covenants may be breached, sparking default. But this too raises a hall of mirrors. If the lessors place “defaulting” countries’ airlines at risk because of the prospect of an EU government impounding the aircraft, then will they need also to anticipate the threat of retaliation against the aircraft of the impounding EU government’s airlines? The potential repercussive effects are surely too extensive to allow this chain to begin. These ETS scenarios may be farcical – but it is neither funny nor easily resolved Then, for example, there is the small matter of the hundreds of millions of dollars being collected by some airlines as part of the EU’s requirement. If the deadline for imposition of ETS charges is delayed, it will probably not be long before consumers or competition authorities, or both, become interested in what is happening with the money being collected from them under this heading. A detailed look at the various levels of added charges being made by foreign airlines flying into Europe do not always show a clear correlation with the EU’s requirements. As the EU opens this Pandora’s box, what seemed initially to be a relatively simple confrontation between ideologies and states is becoming a tangled mess in which – even if compromise can be reached – innumerable issues will be raised in coming months. The potential for conflict between EU states and third parties is obvious. Perhaps even more challenging in practice will be the problems raised internally, as the Commission attempts to pressure member states to suspend foreign airline operating rights – and punish them if they fail to do so. For example, the Commission does not have the legal authority to exclude a foreign airline from any member state's airspace, so must direct the states involved to take such action. That will be when things really start to get interesting. It was reported recently that UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, had no knowledge of the aviation ETS issues. He does now. As other EU government leaders are awakened to the risks, the conflict will almost certainly become a matter for direct resolution at the highest EU levels. There, anything is possible; especially while Mr Cameron is again prevaricating about the UK’s membership of the EU. [1] “Enforcement of the EU ETS: The EU’s Convulsive Efforts to Export its Environmental Values”: Pablo Mendes DE LEON, Professor of Air and Space Law at Leiden University and President of the European Air Law Association (EALA); Air and Space Law, issue 4/5 of 37 th year [2] Mendes de Leon paper [3] Article 16(1) of EU Directive 2003/87 [4] Judging by many responses to eg recent cargo price fixing cartel proceedings in several jurisdictions, a string of delaying legal/diplomatic responses can be expected too, as states claim sovereign immunity for their state-owned flag carriers. [5] And, despite high level talks which appeared to avoid this outcome, many suppliers complain that they cannot get Chinese airline delivery date commitments for Airbus aircraft. [6] As of Aug-2012, Air China has the most flights to Germany among Chinese carriers, with 56 services per week including from Beijing to Frankfurt. Munich and Dusseldorf and from Shanghai to Frankfurt . [7] A code of rules accepted in boxing which restricts how actions must be limited [8] “EU looks East for air travel growth opportunities.” EU website, Published 27-Sep-2012. Emphasis added [9] “EU looks East for air travel growth opportunities; published 27 September 2012” Want more analysis like this? CAPA Membership gives you access to all news and analysis on the site, along with access to many areas of our comprehensive databases and toolsets. Find out more and take a free trial. You may also be interested in the following articles. A380 airport usage: Dubai is most popular, Heathrow has the highest number of foreign airlines The A380 continues to be intertwined with London Heathrow. Malaysia Airlines has cut both its European and A380 scheduled network to just twice daily Heathrow A380 services. Emirates will introduce a sixth daily A380 flight to Heathrow and British Airways is evaluating taking second-hand A380s. London Heathrow is not the busiest A380 airport: that title goes to Dubai, home of Emirates, which operates more A380s than any other airline. London Heathrow stands out among major A380 airports, as only 30% of its A380 flights are flown by a local airline (British Airways). At Bangkok, Sydney and Melbourne foreign airlines also have more A380 flights than local operators. At Seoul Incheon, 82% of A380 flights are flown by local airlines. Of the 15 largest airports with A380 operations, all but three – Los Angeles, New York JFK and Hong Kong – are the hub of an A380 operator. Qantas flies the world's longest A380 route (to Dallas) and Emirates the shortest (to Kuwait City). China Southern and Qatar have the shortest average sector lengths, which are half those of Malaysia and Qantas, which have the longest. easyJet: how the pricing model is being challenged as Ryanair moves into its territory Since autumn 2015 easyJet has been running a UK TV advertisement celebrating its first 20 years. Ending with the line "Europe still from £29.99", it echoes the LCC's debut advertisement in 1995 offering GBP29 tickets from London Luton to Edinburgh or Glasgow, "the same as a pair of jeans". It is a powerful testament to easyJet's business model that 20 years on it can still offer GBP29 tickets. Moreover, it has become one of Europe's most profitable airlines. The ad throws the spotlight on the development of easyJet's average prices (total revenue per passenger) since the 1990s and their divergence from Ryanair's average prices since that period. Both LCCs had a major impact on legacy airlines in the late 1990s/early 2000s, when BA's UK/Europe network suffered a heavy fall in average revenue per passenger, and then after the global financial crisis, since when prices on the Lufthansa Group's Europe network have not recovered. For several years easyJet's discount from Lufthansa has been narrowing, while Ryanair's discount from easyJet has been widening. With both LCCs now aiming at similar strategic territory, easyJet seems to face the bigger challenge in growing its revenue per seat. EU ETS ‘Stop-the-Clock’ Scope Extended Till 2016 The European governing institutions have hammered out a compromise deal to prolong the “stop-the-clock” provision on the European Union Emissions Trading System (ETS) for aviation to cover only flights operated within the European Economic Area till the end of 2016. This will ease international opposition to the system and give the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) time to devise a global mechanism to curb aviation emissions. But Europe's airlines are not ecstatic about the deal, which for now is still informal, asserting that limiting the European Union ETS to intra-European flights results in competitive distortions. They also question why they have to pay for offsetting their emissions, thereby enriching governments' treasuries, while the same governments are blocking the implementation of the Single European Sky (SES), which could save up to 18 million metric tons of carbon-dioxide emissions per year (see article below). The draft agreement does not include a legal obligation for EU member states to invest ETS auction revenues in research and technology projects on climate change; it only requires the countries to inform the European Commission (EC) on the allocation of the revenues. This has been a very contentious issue in the negotiations among the European Parliament (EP), Council of the EU and EC. The council, which represents member states, is reluctant to have any prescriptions on earmarking, whereas EP representatives demand greater environmental stringency regarding ETS revenue spending. Airlines share the EP's view. “Airlines are only able to contribute their fair share if the regulatory environment enables them to do so, for example via earmarking of auctioning revenues for the sustainability of European air transport,” says Athar Husain Khan, CEO of the Association of European Airlines (AEA). The AEA supports the overall draft compromise package that was agreed to by negotiators from the EP, council and EC on March 4 because the “decision to reduce the scope temporarily takes into account the achievements already made at the ICAO level,” it says. The association, which promotes the interests of Europe's network carriers, recognizes that the agreement is not perfect, and it regrets that the “stop-the-clock” provision was not extended until 2020, when the global market-based measure (MBM) is due to come into force. “The last thing we want as an airline industry is to be caught in the same mess [in 2017] that we have been caught in in 2013,” says Husain Khan. “Legal clarity, legal certainty, planning and operational stability are key for the airlines. For AEA it is therefore essential that ICAO delivers a global MBM in 2016,” he adds. ICAO working groups met in Washington early this month to kick-start discussions on establishing a global MBM. The new EU ETS will cover emissions from all flights—no matter the nationality of the operator—till the end of 2016 between airports in the European Economic Area (EEA), which includes the EU's 28 members plus Iceland, Norway and Lichtenstein. Flights to and from the EEA's outermost regions will be exempt during the four-year period. These include: Spain's Canary Islands; the French overseas territories of French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Reunion and Saint Martin; and the Portuguese archipelagos of the Azores and Madeira. Flights between airports in the EEA and Switzerland also fall outside the scope of the revised EU ETS. The initial one-year stop-the-clock measure, covering emissions on flights operated in 2012, included operations between airports in the EEA and Switzerland because the EC reasoned the country was part of “closely connected areas with a shared commitment to tackle climate change.” The Swiss government has always protested this view. There will be an extraordinary two-year compliance cycle for 2013 and 2014 aviation emissions, which must be reported by March 31, 2015 (in two emissions reports), with allowances to be surrendered by April 30, 2015. To speed up the process and quickly give airlines a legal framework, the new aviation ETS will be an EU regulation with binding legal force throughout the bloc as soon as it is passed, probably next month. Unlike the current EU ETS legislation, which is a directive, it will not require transposition into national law of all member states. All options are left open for the EU to react to the developments of the ICAO assembly in September 2016 and to readjust the scope of the EU ETS from 2017 on. The compromise solution envisions a “snap-back” to the original ETS in 2017 if ICAO fails to deliver credible progress toward a global deal that would begin in 2020. Following pressure from the EP's negotiators, this ICAO MBM would “reduce greenhouse-gas emissions from aviation”—rather than achieve “carbon-neutral growth”—and be non-discriminatory, treating all airlines equally, regardless of their country of origin. The Council endorsed the compromise package March 7, the EP's Environment (ENVI) committee will vote on it March 19, and it will be submitted for a plenary vote on April 3. The ENVI vote could prove to be a bottleneck. ENVI negotiator and committee chairman Matthias Groote labels the deal “an acceptable compromise,” though he notes that “we do not yet know whether we will get a majority in parliament.” In addition, he points out that “there is also the question of timing: if we don't agree by April, we will automatically fall back upon the previous legislation.” In other words: international flights departing from or landing at an EEA airport would be fully included within the ETS scope starting May 1. Europe's airlines have differing opinions on the compromise solution. The AEA calls on the EP to formally adopt the trilateral agreement but the European Low-Fares Airline Association (Elfaa) urges the EP to reject what it calls the “unworthy compromise” because an intra-EEA ETS is environmentally ineffective. Elfaa Secretary General John Hanlon notes that since “80 percent of EU aviation emissions of CO2 result from long-distance flights, this necessarily requires the inclusion of all flights departing from and arriving at EU airports.” Meanwhile, the International Air Carrier Association (IACA), representing 28 leisure airlines, argues that the stop-the-clock provision discriminates among airlines. “The effects of CO2 are worldwide. Whilst the rest of world is working toward an ICAO solution, Europe has chosen to hurt its own interests in order not to lose face,” says IACA Director General Sylviane Lust. IACA and its regional-airline counterpart, the European Regions Airline Association, want a suspension of the EU ETS for all flights, pending a satisfactory conclusion to ICAO's work. A return to the full-scope ETS is a no-go internationally. And scrapping the ETS till 2020 was simply not a negotiable option for the EC and EP. Inclusion of international aviation in EU Emissions Trading System postponed by one year Following a decision last week by the EU to postpone the inclusion of international flights in the Emissions Trading System (ETS), the EEA Joint Committee decided by written procedure on 30 April 2013 to extend the scope of this decision to the European Economic Area. The Emissions Trading System (ETS) Directive was revised in 2009 such as to include emissions from the aviation sector in the ETS as of 1 January 2012. This means that aircraft operators operating in the EU (i.e. flights between EU Member States, EFTA States and Croatia - hereafter referred to as the EU - and flights to and from the EU) would have to surrender emission allowances for their related 2012 emissions by 30 April 2013. In order to support progress towards a global market based mechanism to reduce emissions in the aviation sector within the framework of the International Civil Aviation Organisation, the EU in November 2012 decided to postpone the inclusion in the ETS of flights to and from the EU by one year. Flights between EU Member States, the EFTA States and Croatia would nevertheless remain included in the ETS. The decision to postpone the inclusion of international flights was adopted on 24 April, just before the deadline under the ETS Directive for aircraft operators to surrender emission allowances for their 2012 emissions. For this derogation to also apply in the EEA EFTA States, this decision had to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement by 30 April 2013. Consequently, the EEA Joint Committee agreed to incorporate the derogation into the EEA Agreement by written procedure on 30 April, with its Decision entering into force the same day. The text of the EEA Joint Committee Decision No 50/2013 of 30 April 2013 . Abstract The cost of providing air transportation for passengers and cargo to, from, and within the European Union was scheduled to increase in 2012 due to the EU Emission Trading Scheme. The European Union (EU) has legislated that aircraft landing or taking off from EU airports are subjected to the Emission Trading System (ETS) and are levied a charge for the estimated amount of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) generated during the entire flight. Since direct measurement of CO 2 emitted during flight is not practical, the EU carbon emissions are estimated using the amount of fuel consumed. CO 2 is a greenhouse gas associated with detrimental environmental impacts. Transportation in the US contributed 31% of CO 2 emissions and 26% of greenhouse gas emissions in 2010. According to the International Air Transport Association (IATA), aviation is responsible for 2% of global CO 2 emissions, and currently represents a growing percentage. Reducing fuel consumption is the most effective way to reduce CO 2 emissions, but operational changes, design changes, and use of alternative fuels are also effective. While ETS charges are controversial, the purpose of this paper is to discuss ETS and illustrate its inclusion in aviation financial considerations. This paper introduces aviation carbon ETS, discusses the impact of ETS on airlines, and presents a methodology to quantify the cost differences in fuel and EU ETS charges incurred by introducing a stop for flights into and out of the EU. Recommended Citation Johnson, Mary E. and Gonzalez, Alan (2013) "Effects of a Carbon Emissions Trading System on Aviation Financial Decisions," Journal of Aviation Technology and Engineering . Vol. 2: Iss. 2, Article 3. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/2159-6670.1073 The European Low Fares Airline Association says it will file a lawsuit against the European Commission’s proposed one-year suspension of the Emissions Trading System's (ETS) application to airlines if the measure is approved. “We can’t launch a legal challenge until the proposal is adopted and enacted so the clock will start ticking for us from the date that the European Parliament and Council adopt it,” said John Hanlon, secretary-general of ELFAA. “The format of the challenge will be to take action against any state that enacts the derogation.” A European Parliament plenary vote is expected to back the derogation – or relaxation of the law – in April. The EU Council of Ministers, representing the 27 member states, will probably indicate its agreement before that. The Commission declined to comment on the possibility of legal action. Intra-European airlines penalised The EU’s temporary halt to the ETS was intended to allow time for the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to devise a global alternative . But in the meantime, international airlines which bitterly attacked the cap and trade scheme at every turn will be exempted from it, while intra-European airlines, which had supported it, will not. “It is a perverse situation when the ETS’s only allies in airline world are being driven to take the EU to court,” Hanlon told EurActiv. “But this is a distortive derogation that breaches competition law and breaches the EU’s principle of ‘reasonable expectation ’.” One European short-haul airline lost €20 million in carbon allowances last year alone and this was “just the tip of the iceberg,” Hanlon said. Even so, “our main grievance is that the scheme’s environmental effectiveness will be shot by this,” él dijo. ELFAA cites Eurocontrol figures which indicate that only between 12.5% and 18% of emissions from flights to and from European destinations occur within EU airspace, depending on whether territorial waters are counted. The derogation is thus aimed in the wrong direction, it says. The European Commission puts the intra-European emissions figure at 30% and reiterates that the best way of reducing the aviation industry’s global CO 2 output remains a global market-based measure, despite a current impasse in the ICAO talks . “We need more progress from all parties,” said Isaac Valero, spokesman for EU Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard. “The EU is engaging constructively and has put all its cards on the table. Now we need more from the US, China and India if we are to get an ambitious deal by September.” Unexpected crunch point One unexpected crunch point could come on 31 March, the deadline for all airlines to supply notice to the Commission of their 2012 emissions. Many airlines – particularly those in the United States that contend they are covered by a US prohibition – are reportedly ill-prepared to do so. As a whole, the aviation industry continues to fiercely resist market-based measures as anything more than a stopgap, advocating instead a formula of technological and operational improvements – plus the wider use of biofuels – to reduce emissions. But this will not satisfy the EU, or ELFAA, which represents low-priced European carriers such as Ryanair, easyJet and Vueling. “What we need is a new short-medium-haul aircraft that’s holistically engineered but that’s some way off,” Hanlon said. “Fuel efficiency, air traffic management reform and technological enhancements on their own will not deliver emissions reductions in the next 10-15 years. That is why we need an MBM.” An ICAO high-level advisory group has been meeting this week to finesse proposals for such a scheme that can be put to a triannual ICAO Council in September, but hopes that this will be ready in time to achieve consensus are losing altitude. In private, Commission officials say that they would accept an interim approach that applies the ETS on outbound flights but exempts incoming flights, if they can be shown to account for their emissions within a separate regional or national scheme. But ICAO has failed to persuade its members to adopt equivalent schemes to the EU’s ETS since being tasked with implementing emissions trading in 2001. Pressure by France, UK and Germany Brussels sources say that the Commission’s decision to suspend the ETS to give ICAO another 12 months followed pressure from Germany, the UK and France after lobbying by major long-haul players in the aviation industry. One source in Europe’s short-haul sector tacitly agreed with this analysis which, he said, “really confirms that it’s a political, commercially motivated move that is not without victims and penalising effect.” “Seeking to maintain it on those captive is a really hostile decision and the cost will be born by EU citizens whose travel will be more expensive than anyone else’s,” Añadió. In Europe, the UK is already ranked 138 th (out of 140) for airline price competitiveness. largely because it also has the world’s second highest tax rate on tickets and airport charges. However, the Commission remains stony-faced on the issue of corporate pressure. “Suspension of the ETS followed progress at ICAO and, as officially announced, there is no double message in there,” Valero said. Fondo In an effort to tackle aviation's modest but fast-growing contribution to climate change, the European Commission issued a legislative proposal in December 2006 to bring it into the EU's Emission Trading System (ETS). It originally applied to industries and utilities but took effect for airlines on 1 January 2012. It involved imposing a cap on carbon dioxide emissions for all planes arriving or departing from EU airports, while allowing airlines to buy and sell 'pollution credits' on the bloc's carbon market, and so reward low carbon-emitting aviation. Non-EU governments and airlines have battled the EU, threatening trade wars and retaliation for European airlines flying to other countries. Timeline 31 March 2013: Deadline for global airlines to notify the European Commission of their CO2 emossions for 2012 30 April 2013: Deadline for global airlines to surrender their carbon allowances to the EU's ETS or face legal action June 2013: ICAO Council meeting September 2013: Triannual ICAO assembly meeting at which an alternative market-based measure could be agreed The impact of the EU's emissions trading system on aviation Chanathip Pharino, Pongsak Hoontrakul Special to The Nation March 16, 2012 12:00 am Emissions from air travel contribute to global warming by altering the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Aviation is a fast-growing industry and therefore a fast-growing contributor to carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. CO2 emissions from aviation account for approximately 3 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions. The Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change says this could rise to 5 per cent and possibly 15 per cent by 2050.[i] Clearly, the aviation industry's future growth will be accompanied by increasing emissions unless it takes significant steps to upgrade operational efficiency. The EU's Emissions Trading System is an incentive-based system for reducing, in a cost-effective manner, the level of greenhouse gases emitted by industries. It aims to encourage industries to limit their environmental impact - or else compensate for that impact by purchasing carbon reduction credits. At the start of this year, the EU Emissions Trading System was expanded to include aviation. The regulation covers all domestic and international flights that arrive at or depart from EU airports, regardless of whether or not the airlines are based in the EU. The system operates on a "cap and trade" principle. A cap is imposed on total CO2 emissions allowed from all flights; the amount of the cap is set according to the EU's emissions reduction targets. Each airline is given a set number of allowances covering part of the emissions from its flights each year. The airline must monitor and report its emissions levels during the year, and the figures must be verified by an independent, accredited verifier. At the end of each year, the airline is required to surrender to the authorities the number of allowances equal to its emissions. If actual emissions are lower than its allowances, the airline can sell those extra allowances to other airlines or companies. If the airline expects to exceed its emissions allowances, it can either reduce emissions or buy additional allowances from other companies. Aircraft operators that do not comply with the EU regulation face a penalty of 100 euros per missing allowance on top of the obligation to procure and surrender the missing allowances. It has been a major challenge for the world's airline operators to commit to their responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions. The EU regulation on aviation faces strong and wide opposition. In February, two dozen countries that oppose the regulation agreed to coordinate retaliatory trade measures against the EU. The costs for emissions allowances could affect an airline's competitiveness. Since air transportation is a global business and CO2 emission is a global problem, a sector-wide approach to emissions trading - i.e. setting a global cap for aviation instead of just the EU's cap - would be more viable. All airlines around the world should operate within the same system. Global participation would mean compulsory sharing of environmental responsibility and competition on a level playing field, instead of leaving airlines that fly outside the EU to operate under a different system and therefore at different costs. To be sustainable, the aviation industry has to balance the benefits and costs among environmental, social and economic factors. An emissions trading system is one of many possible strategies to create incentives to reduce greenhouse gases by putting a price on emissions. There are many other ways to reduce emissions from the aviation industry, including technical efficiency improvements such as in vehicle fuels; operational efficiency improvements such as aircraft weight reductions and weight limits on luggage; use of alternative fuels with lower CO2 emissions; energy efficiency in flight service and operation; and reduction of demand for air travel by promoting alternatives such as video conferencing. There is significant potential to improve the eco-efficiency of the airline business across all its operations, not only emissions from flying. A plan could be established to reduce the carbon footprint of the entire supply chain of the aviation industry. The starting point could be the airline companies themselves. Each airline could be required to set its environmental targets and approaches to reduce emissions. For example, an airline could commit to becoming carbon-neutral within a defined timeline. In order to achieve its targets, an airline would need to upgrade its technology and business operating efficiency while reducing emissions throughout its supply chain. This could result in an effective distribution of real costs as the prices of passenger air tickets would be adjusted. It is likely that airlines will increasingly compete for passengers by using more efficient, eco-friendly strategies and informing the public about the environmental impact of their operations. This would provide long-term sustainability for continuing improvements in the industry. However, any strategy would only work if the entire sector develops a consensus on clear, simple standards and rules, and if compliance can be monitored and enforced throughout the aviation industry worldwide. It remains to be seen whether or not the controversy over the EU emissions regulation will lead to a trade war. What positions should airlines in Thailand, Asean and elsewhere take? We may get some answers during the "Green Travel and Aviation" session at the Sasin Bangkok Forum. Chanathip Pharino is an assistant professor at the Faculty of Engineering, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok. Pongsak Hoontrakul is a senior research fellow at Sasin Graduate Institute of Business Administration, Chulalongkorn University. For more details: http://www.SasinBangkokForum.org. European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS) Opposition Rising to European Emissions Trading Scheme October 31, 2011 With European policymakers pushing for implementation of a plan for new taxes on aircraft carbon emissions in just two months, opposition in the U.S. and in other countries is growing more vocal. Calling the measure a “tax grab by the European Union,” Rep. John Mica (R-7-FL), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, brought to the floor of the full house HR 2594, the “European Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition Act of 2011,” which prohibits the ne proposal, called the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS), from applying to those flying commercial or general aviation aircraft into Europe. Mica’s measure passed overwhelmingly on October 24, and was sent to the Senate. The vote came after Mica and a bipartisan Congressional delegation visited the Montreal headquarters of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), where the Florida congressman said, “This ill-conceived EU aviation tax scheme is a violation of international law.” Mica’s colleague, Aviation Subcommittee Chairman Tom Petri (R-WI) agreed, telling ICAO representatives: “We are asking all nations to oppose this tax by the European Union in favor of a positive outcome which can be achieved by working with ICAO and the international community.” It was a move long advocated by general aviation interests. “We applaud the House of Representatives for passing this important measure, which sends a strong, unified signal to EU regulators that their planned Emissions Trading Scheme is unacceptable," NBAA President and CEO Ed Bolen said. "Global aviation standards are overseen by the International Civil Aviation Organization, and any new standards should be decided by ICAO.” The EU-ETS will tax civil aviation operations that operate in or over Europe based on the aircraft’s emissions and the length of the flight. But, as Steve Brown, NBAA’s Senior Vice President for Operations and Administration, pointed out, the tax would cover much more than just the portion of those flight operations actually undertaken in European airspace. “A flight that originated in the United States and was going to land in Europe – say, Paris or London – would have to pay a carbon tax, an environmental charge, for its emissions,” Brown explained. “That would cover the entire length of the flight, even though it may have operated in European airspace for only ten percent of the flight duration. It would still have to pay the tax for the whole flight.” The cost could amount to thousands of dollars per flight, Brown said. A lawsuit by the U.S. airlines is pending before the European Union Court of Justice, Brown continued. ICAO could take action based on the filing of a formal complaint that the EU-ETS violates international treaties. He also pointed out that 25 other nations have voiced their opposition to the EU-ETS. Among them: Canada, India, Japan, Korea, the United Arab Emirates, China, Mexico and the Russian Federation. “Russia is saying, if the EU-ETS goes into effect, it will retaliate by increasing dramatically the en route fees it charges European airlines to operate in Russian airspace,” Brown said. “If they don’t call it off, we will retaliate,” Prashant Sukul, joint secretary of India’s ministry of civil aviation, was quoted as telling the industry publication Aviation Week . Officials in China have also indicated they will retaliate against a unilateral EU decision. But those dire warnings have so far failed to sway members of the European Court of Justice. Juliane Kokott, the court’s Advocate General, advised justices that EU-ETS is indeed compatible with international law. A final decision is expected by the court early next year, but the EU court generally follows advice rendered by the Advocate General. The European Union itself is not bound by the Chicago Convention on Civil Aviation, the 1944 international accord which eventually led to the creation of ICAO, though all of the EU member states are. With all of this in mind, operators currently participating in monitoring, reporting and verification activities should continue providing the required data to their assigned EU member state until a final decision on the future of the ETS is made. Helpful Links NBAA Flight Plan Podcast "The European Emissions Trading Scheme: What's the Status?" Trip Support Worried about the mandatory monitoring requirements? Effective April 3, 2014 European Parliament Continues "Stop the Clock" and Exempts International Flights from EU ETS until 2016 On April 3, the European Parliament voted in favor of the compromise agreement to extend "Stop the Clock" until 2016 during the plenary session in Brussels. This change in legislation will limit the application of EU ETS to flights within the EU only and applies from 2013 to 2016. The main features of the new EU ETS regulation include: From 2013 to 2020, non-commercial aircraft operators emitting less than 1,000 tCO2 (considering both intra- AND extra-European flights) per year are to be exempt from EU ETS. *Colt Note: Aircraft operators should notify their Member State to prove their position in this exemption in order to ensure compliance. Aircraft operators emitting over 1,000 tCO2 only need to report emissions from intra-European flights, i.e. flights operated between airports located in the EEA. Deadlines for reporting and surrendering of 2013 emissions have been pushed back to 31 March and 30 April 2015 respectively. The number of free carbon allowances and the number of allowances to be auctioned will be adjusted proportionally to fit the new scope. Free carbon allowances will be allocated to each aircraft operator four months after the new regulation enters into force. EU ETS will be revised again after the 2016 ICAO Assembly. It will potentially switch back to full scope from 2017 onwards, if there is no significant progress towards a global market-based measure for international aviation emissions. Each Member State will provide further details and guidance to aircraft operators. Although this amendment has been approved by Parliament, it still has to be formally adopted by EU Member States in the European council. The meeting of the Council of Ministers is scheduled for 14 April 2014. Once adopted, it will be entered into force on the date of its publication in the Official Journal of the EU. This is forecasted to be the end of April. Offences and Penalties The Aviation Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme Regulations 2009 and The Aviation Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme Regulations 2010 include the following Civil Penalties. Reino Unido Failure to submit or re-submit an application for an emissions plan. Regulation 24 '2009 Regulations' Regulation 33 '2010 Regulations' For a failure before 1 January 2012 - £500; and £50 for each day that the application or resubmission of an application is late following the service of a notice… up to a maximum of £4,500. For a failure on or after 1 January 2012 - £1,500; and £150 for each day that the application or resubmission of an application is late following the service of a notice… up to a maximum of £13,500. Failure to monitor aviation emissions Regulation 34 '2010 Regulations' For a failure before 1 January 2012 - £500; and £50 for each day that the application or resubmission of an application is late following the service of a notice… up to a maximum of £4,500. For a failure on or after 1 January 2012 - £1,500; and £150 for each day that the application or resubmission of an application is late following the service of a notice… up to a maximum of £13,500. Failure to report aviation emissions Regulation 35 '2010 Regulations' For a failure before 1 January 2012 - £1,250; and £125 for each day that the application or resubmission of an application is late following the service of a notice… up to a maximum of £11,250. For a failure on or after 1 January 2012 - £3,750; and £375 for each day that the application or resubmission of an application is late following the service of a notice… up to a maximum of £33,750. Making false or misleading statements Regulation 36 '2010 Regulations' £1,000 where a UK operator makes a statement which is false or misleading in a material particular in a report submitted under regulation 12. £1,000 where a UK operator makes a statement which is false or misleading in a material particular in an application under regulation 16. £1,000 where a UK operator makes a statement which is false or misleading in a material particular in a report submitted under regulation 21. Failure to comply with the requirements of the Monitoring and Reporting Decision Regulation 28 '2009 Regulations' For a failure before 1 January 2012 - £500; and £50 for each day that the application or resubmission of an application is late following the service of a notice… up to a maximum of £4,500. For a failure on or after 1 January 2012 - £1,500; and £150 for each day that the application or resubmission of an application is late following the service of a notice… up to a maximum of £13,500. Failure to comply with emissions plan conditions Regulation 37 '2010 Regulations' For a failure before 1 January 2012 - £500; and £50 for each day that the application or resubmission of an application is late following the service of a notice under regulation 30 (1) up to a maximum of £4,500. For a failure on or after 1 January 2012 - £1,500; and £150 for each day that the application or resubmission of an application is late following the service of a notice under regulation 30(1) up to a maximum of £13,500. Failure to surrender sufficient allowances Regulation 38 '2010 Regulations' The sterling equivalent of 100 Euros for each allowance or project credit that the aircraft operator failed to surrender. Failure to comply with information notices Regulation 39 '2010 Regulations' For a failure before 1 January 2012 - £500; and £50 for each day that the application or resubmission of an application is late following the service of a notice… up to a maximum of £4,500. For a failure on or after 1 January 2012 - £1,500; and £150 for each day that the application or resubmission of an application is late following the service of a notice… up to a maximum of £13,500. Failure to provide assistance and advice Regulation 40 '2010 Regulations' £50,000 where an aerodrome operator fails to provide reasonable assistance and advice, contrary to regulation 47. Failure to comply with a direction relating to an operating ban Regulation 41 '2010 Regulations' £50,000 where a person fails to comply with a direction, contrary to regulation 51(4). This table is for illustrative purposes only. It should be read in conjunction with the Regulations. Full details of the Civil Penalties for EU ETS Aviation can be found in Part 5 of The Aviation Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme Regulations 2009 and Part 8 of The Aviation Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme Regulations 2010. Recursos Who are the member states? Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique, Reunion, The Azores, Madeira, The Canary Islands, Aland Islands, Saint Martin (French), Akrotiri and Dhekelia Member States Registry Links Colt recommended carbon traders La página no se puede encontrar La página que está buscando podría haber sido eliminada, su nombre cambiado o no está disponible temporalmente. Por favor intenta lo siguiente: Asegúrese de que la dirección del sitio Web que se muestra en la barra de direcciones de su navegador esté escrita y formateada correctamente. Si ha accedido a esta página haciendo clic en un vínculo, póngase en contacto con el administrador del sitio Web para avisarles de que el enlace no está formateado correctamente. Haga clic en el botón Atrás para probar otro enlace. HTTP Error 404 - Archivo o directorio no encontrado. Servicios de Internet Information Server (IIS) Información técnica (para personal de apoyo) Vaya a Servicios de soporte técnico de Microsoft y realice una búsqueda de título de las palabras HTTP y 404. Abra la Ayuda de IIS. Que es accesible en el Administrador de IIS (inetmgr), y la búsqueda de temas titulados Web Site Setup. Tareas Administrativas Comunes. Y Acerca de los mensajes de error personalizados. EP vote on including aviation in EU Emissions Trading System - guide 08 July 2008 by eub2 -- last modified 08 July 2008 The European Parliament voted at second reading in favour of including aviation in the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). The vote confirms the agreement reached between the Parliament and the Council last month. Under the new directive greenhouse gas emissions from flights to, from and within the EU will be included in the EU ETS from 2012. All airlines will be covered whatever their nationality. Like the industrial companies already covered by the EU ETS, airlines will be able to sell surplus allowances if they reduce their emissions and will need to buy additional allowances if their emissions grow. The directive is part of a comprehensive approach to addressing aviation emissions, which also includes more research into greener technologies and improvements in air traffic management through the creation of a 'Single European Sky'. A proposal to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions from aircraft is included in the Commission's work programme for this year. The agreement reached between Parliament and Council endorses the key elements of the Commission's original proposal from December 2006. As well as some technical improvements, there are some key changes from the Commission's original proposal: Aviation will be included in the EU ETS from 2012; a proposed one-year introductory phase for intra-EU flights starting in 2011 has been dropped Emissions from aviation will be capped at 97% of their average 2004-2006 level in 2012. This will decrease to 95% from 2013, although this percentage may be reviewed as part of the general review of the Emissions Trading Directive Airlines will receive 85% of their emission allowances for free in 2012. This percentage may be reduced from 2013 as part of the general review of the Emissions Trading Directive. An exemption has been introduced for commercial air operators with very low traffic levels on routes to, from or within the EU or with low annual emissions (less than 10 000 tonnes CO 2 a year). This means many operators from developing countries with only limited air traffic links with the EU will be exempt. This will not have a significant effect on the emissions covered by the EU ETS. A special reserve of free allowances has been added for new entrants or very fast-growing airlines. The reserve does not increase the overall cap on allowances and therefore does not affect the environmental impact of the system. Airlines that are growing will be able to benefit from the reserve up to a limit of one million allowances. A new mechanism has been introduced to ensure consistent and robust enforcement throughout the EU. As a last resort, Member States could ask for an operator to be banned from operating in the EU if it persistently fails to comply with the system and other enforcement measures have proven ineffective. The Council is expected to give formal approval to the directive at one of its next meetings. Once formally adopted, the directive will be published in the Official Journal and will enter into force the same day. Member States will then have 12 months to transpose it into national legislation. Emissions from domestic flights are covered by the Kyoto Protocol's targets for limiting or reducing national emissions, but international aviation is not. Moreover, historically jet fuel for international flights has been tax-exempt. Emissions from aviation currently account for about 3% of total EU greenhouse gas emissions, but they are increasing fast – by 87% since 1990. Someone flying from London to New York and back, for example, generates roughly the same amount of emissions as the average person in the EU does by heating their home for a whole year. On current trends, aviation emissions are likely to more than double from present levels by 2020. This rapid growth contrasts with the success of many other sectors of the economy in reducing emissions. The March 2007 European Council committed the EU to cutting its emissions by at least 20% of 1990 levels by 2020, and by up to 30% provided other developed countries commit to comparable reductions. The Commission's January 2008 package of climate and energy proposals, now under discussion in the European Parliament and Council, puts in place key measures to deliver on these commitments, to improve the EU's energy security and to strengthen competitiveness (see IP/08/80 ). Source: European Commission Historic aviation emissions and the inclusion of aviation in the EU's Emission Trading System (EU ETS) - guide 08 March 2011 by eub2 -- last modified 08 March 2011 The European Commission on 8 March took an important step in preparing for the full inclusion of aviation in the EU's emissions trading system (EU ETS) from 1 January next year. The European Commission has decided on the historical aviation emissions which will be used to calculate the number of aviation allowances to be available from 2012. Why are historic aviation emissions important for aviation's inclusion in the EU ETS? Historic aviation emissions are the basis for calculating the cap on aviation emissions applied when the sector is included in the EU ETS from January 2012. Today's decision by the European Commission publishes the mean average of the annual emissions for the years 2004, 2005 and 2006 of all flights that would be covered by the EU ETS performed by air carriers to and from European airports. Based on this average annual historical aviation emissions for the period 2004-2006, the number of aviation allowances to be created in 2012 amounts to 212,892,052 tonnes (97% of historic aviation emissions), and the number of aviation allowances to be created each year from 2013 onwards amounts to 208,502,525 tonnes (95% of historic aviation emissions). How were historic aviation emissions calculated? The Commission has been assisted by Eurocontrol – the European organisation for the safety of air navigation. The comprehensive air traffic data contained in Eurocontrol's databases from the Central Route Charges Office (CRCO) and the Central Flow Management Unit (CFMU) were considered the best available data for calculation of the historic emissions. These provide among other things a calculation of the actual route length for each individual flight. Emissions were then calculated on a flight-by-flight basis using the ANCAT 3 (Abatement of Nuisances Caused by Air Transport) methodology and the CASE (Calculation of Emissions by Selective Equivalence) methodology. In addition to Eurocontrol's data, the Commission also used information on actual fuel consumption from almost 30 aircraft operators of different types and sizes. This data was for aircraft types that were responsible for 93% of emissions in the base years. Thirdly, additional calculations were carried out to account for fuel consumption associated with the use of the auxiliary power units (APUs). APUs are small engines that are used to provide lighting and air conditioning when the aircraft is stationary at airports. They are used when the aircraft is not connected to ground source electrical power and ventilation services. The approach taken was first to determine the average APU fuel consumption for different aircraft types. The individual emission factors of APU fuel consumption were then extrapolated to calculate total APU emissions applying a process which took into account the actual share of fuel burn for the flights under the EU ETS of each aircraft type and the use of ground power in airports. The emissions corresponding to the resulting total APU fuel consumption were included in the historical aviation emissions for each of the years 2004, 2005 and 2006. Why was the 2004-2006 period chosen as a baseline for aviation emissions? The 2004-06 baseline period is defined in the legislation on the inclusion of aviation in the EU ETS. The baseline period for aviation allocation under the EU ETS is different from the 1990 baseline for the EU's overall reduction commitment as it takes into account the significant growth in aviation over the last 15 years. Why has there been a delay in publishing historic aviation emissions? This decision has been adopted later than originally foreseen in order to spend more time collating data on the historic emissions. Additional studies were done to increase the accuracy of the estimations of historic aviation emissions, in particular in relation to the fuel used by auxiliary power units (APU). Together with the support from Eurocontrol and contribution from aviation sector, a methodology to assess the APU was developed and the fuel consultation by APU was estimated. This figure was then added to the flight based CO2 emissions. The subsequent steps foreseen in the implementation of the Directive are to determine free allocations to aircraft operators and the volume of allowances to be auctioned. How will allocations per aircraft operator be calculated? 82% of the allowances will be given for free to aircraft operators and 15% of the CO2 allowances are allocated by auctioning. The remaining 3% will be allocated to a special reserve for later distribution to fast growing airlines and new entrants into the market. The free allowances will be allocated by a benchmarking process which measures the activity of each operator in 2010 in terms of the number of passengers and freight that they carry and the total distance travelled. The benchmark should be published by 30 September 2011. Member states have agreed that all revenues from auctioning should be used to tackle climate change including in the transport sector. Will the cap on aviation emissions be affected by the Icelandic volcanic ash cloud in 2010? The events from the Icelandic volcano in 2010 will have no effect whatsoever on the total size of the emissions cap for aviation under the EU ETS or the total number of allowances that will be allocated free of charge to aircraft operators. We have not seen data to suggest that the impact of the ash cloud will have a material impact on the distribution of free allowances between aircraft operators. Redistribution might occur if certain airlines had to cancel a greater proportion of flights then others, while the vast majority of operators have been impacted by the flight restrictions resulting from the volcanic ash cloud. Indeed all the estimations that we have seen confirm that distributional impacts are very small. For the regulator to change or adapt the 2010 benchmarking year for the allocation of free allowances to aircraft operators, it would require a change in primary EU legislation. Adopting such legislation usually takes 2 years and there are no plans to start this process. Which airlines and routes will be affected by the EU ETS? The EU ETS will cover any aircraft operator, whether EU- or foreign-based, operating international flights on routes to, from or between EU airports. All airlines will thus be treated equally. Very light aircraft will not be covered. Military, police, customs and rescue flights, flights on state and government business, and training or testing flights will also be exempted. To reduce administrative costs, each operator will be administered by a single Member State regarding emissions from the total of its flights to, from and within the EU. The list of aircraft operators that may be covered by the system includes over 4000 operators. The list has been created with the support of Eurocontrol and was based on actual flight information; it was last updated in February 2011 to take account of all changes that happened in 2010. Aviation is an international business – why not conduct emissions trading at global level? The EU is the strongest advocate for global action to reduce climate impacts of aviation. States have not been able to agree on a common global system through either the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) or the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO). In the Resolution on climate change adopted at its most recent Assembly in October 2010, states in ICAO called for further work to explore the feasibility of a global market-based measure. The Resolution also recognized that states may take action prior to 2020. The EU ETS provides a good model for applying market-based measures to aviation. Development of other national programmes covering international aviation, compatible with the EU ETS, are a pragmatic way in which global action can be implemented. What about the litigation by some US airlines against the EU Directive? While a number of airlines support action by the EU to address the climate change impacts from aviation, a challenge to the EU Directive has been launched by a number of US airlines. This has been referred to the European Court of Justice, and the European Commission, European Parliament, Council and a number of Member States have submitted observations, in addition to other organisations intervening in the case. The airlines involved are complying with the Directive's requirements in full pending the resolution of this challenge. What will the effect be on aviation emissions? The environmental impact of including aviation in the EU ETS will be significant because aviation emissions, which are currently growing rapidly, will be capped at below their average level in 2004-2006. By 2020 it is estimated that a total of 183 million tonnes of CO2 will be saved per year on the flights covered, a 46% reduction compared with business as usual. This is equivalent, for instance, to twice Austria's annual greenhouse gas emissions from all sources. Some of these reductions are likely to be made by airlines themselves. However, participation in the EU system will also give them other options: buying additional allowances on the market – i.e. paying other participants to reduce their emissions - or investing in emission-saving projects carried out under the Kyoto Protocol's flexible mechanisms. Providing aviation with these options does not reduce the environmental impact of the proposal since the climate impact of emission reductions is the same regardless of where they are made. Will ticket prices increase? Including aviation in the EU ETS will not directly affect or regulate air transport tickets. However, aircraft operators may have to invest in more efficient planes or buy emission allowances in the market in addition to those allocated to them. The impact on ticket prices will probably be minor. Assuming airlines fully pass on these extra costs to customers, by 2020 the ticket price for a return flight within the EU could rise by between €1.8 and €9. Due to their higher environmental impact, long-haul trips could increase by somewhat more depending on the journey length. For example a return flight to New York at current carbon prices of around €15 might cost an additional €12. However, ticket price increases are in any case expected to be significantly lower than the extra costs airlines have passed on to consumers due to world oil price rises in recent years. Including aviation in the EU ETS will also have a smaller impact on prices than if the same environmental improvement were to be achieved through other measures such as a fuel tax or an emissions charge. How big is EU aviation's contribution to climate change? Direct emissions from aviation account for about 3% of the EU's total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The large majority of these emissions comes from international flights, i.e. flights between two Member States or between a Member State and a non-EU country. This figure does not include indirect warming effects, such as those from NOx emissions, contrails and cirrus cloud effects. The overall impact is therefore estimated to be higher. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has estimated that aviation's total impact is about 2 to 4 times higher than the effect of its past CO2 emissions alone. Recent EU research results indicate that this ratio may be somewhat smaller (around 2 times). None of these estimates take into account the uncertain but potentially very significant effects of cirrus clouds. EU emissions from international aviation are increasing fast – doubling since 1990 – as air travel becomes cheaper without its environmental costs being addressed. For example, someone flying from London to New York and back generates roughly the same level of emissions as the average person in the EU does by heating their home for a whole year. Emissions are forecast to continue growing for the foreseeable future. Emissions from aviation are higher than from certain entire sectors covered by the EU ETS, for example refineries and steel production. When aviation joins the EU ETS it is forecast to be the second largest sector in terms of emissions, second only to electricity generation. What are the next steps? Airlines have been monitoring their emissions during 2010, and are required to verify and report these emissions to their administering Member States by 31 March 2011. By that same date, airlines may also apply for free allocations of emissions allowances on the basis of their activities in 2010. Based on information submitted by the Member States, the European Commission will calculate the benchmark that will define how many free allowances aircraft operators will receive. This benchmark decision will be published by 30 September 2011. By end September the Commission will also publish the emissions cap and the percentages of allowances to be: auctioned; given for free; and allocated to the special reserve. Source: European Commission Emissions Trading Battle Expands Beyond EU The fight between Europe and the U.S. over aircraft hushkits a decade ago is one of the epic battles in aviation regulation, but it may pale in comparison to what is about to unfold over European Union plans to include non-EU carriers in its emissions trading system. The airline industry and governments outside the European Union have been mobilizing to stave off the inclusion of aviation in the EU ETS starting in January. A pivotal moment came last week, when a European Union judge advocate sided with the EU in a challenge brought by the U.S. Air Transport Association (ATA) over concerns the ETS legislation was extraterritorial and violated internal law. In the non-binding ruling that the European Court of Justice (ECJ) generally follows, the judge, Juliane Kokott, argues that “the inclusion of international aviation in the EU emissions trading scheme is compatible with the provisions and principles of international law invoked.” One key passage of the ruling is her view that “the principles of customary international law and international agreements relied on do not give rise to any legal objections, not even insofar as the EU emissions trading scheme extends to sections of flights that take place outside the airspace of member states of the European Union.” Kokott's opinion is sweeping in its rejection of the ATA case and at one point appears to call into question the entire foundation of international aviation agreements in stating that the claimant airlines and airline associations cannot, as a rule, rely on international agreements and customary international law. Technically, the EU is not signatory to the Chicago Convention, but all its member states are. That creates the legal ambiguity that may enable the ECJ to rule that the ETS is in compliance with EU law, when it is not at member-state level. The ATA initially filed its case with the U.K. courts, which then went to the ECJ for its view on certain elements of the case. The advocate general's opinion informs the court, which has to decide unanimously and then provides its input to the U.K. court for its verdict. “I am glad to see that the advocate general's opinion concludes that EU directive is fully compatible with international law,” says EU Commissioner for Climate Action Connie Hedegaard. “The EU reaffirms its wish to engage constructively with third countries during the implementation of this legislation.” The advocate's ruling will do little to quiet the controversy, though. And the ATA, in a statement following the opinion, says it is “disappointed that Advocate General Kokott does not believe that the European Union is bound by the Chicago Convention, the treaty governing aviation, and that the unilateral application of the EU ETS to international aviation otherwise does not violate law.” It is still holding out hope that the final verdict will differ, however. Tony Tyler, director general and CEO of the International Air Transport Association. which backed the ATA case, says, “while the advocate general of the [European court] believes that Europe is within its rights to move forward with this extra-territorial measure, that opinion is not shared in the international community. We support and need positive economic measures as part of our strategy to manage aviation's emissions. Emissions trading is one possibility. But it must be a global scheme under the leadership of [the International Civil Aviation Organization] ICAO. The principles for such a scheme were agreed in 2010 and ICAO is committed to delivering a global framework by 2013. Rather than risking a further escalation of tensions among states, I encourage Europe to support a successful, global and effective solution through ICAO.” Countries outside of the EU are threatening retaliatory measures, indicating that the battle is being fought on both legal and political levels. India says it will reopen bilateral air service agreements with European countries and retaliate if the European Commission does not step back from its plans to introduce the ETS at the start of next year. “If they don't call it off, we will retaliate,” Prashant Sukul, joint secretary of India's ministry of civil aviation, tells Aviation Week. The burden to fight the EU legislation now shifts from industry to governments, says an industry official. Krishna R. Urs, U.S. deputy assistant secretary of state for transportation affairs, says, “We maintain our strong legal and policy objections to the inclusion of flights by non-EU carriers in the EU-ETS. We, along with several other states, intend to continue to press our European partners to exclude non-EU air carriers from the EU ETS and instead work with us in the International Civil Aviation Organization to take additional positive steps to address this goal.” Sukul asserts that “people [in other countries] have ideas about retaliatory measures and they will act their way. If Russia doubles the overflight charges, European airlines will be out of business. They could no longer fly east of Europe.” Sukul stresses that the EU ETS will create major market distortions and “penalize the consumer at the end of the day” while putting “further stress on airlines, which are an easy target.” He points out that while European officials have been trying to make their case, they have not listened to industry concerns in other regions. “But it is a different call now, having to deal with 25 countries and more coming,” he says. China and Russia have suggested they will take unilateral actions to fight the EU policy. Echoing Sukul, the industry official notes that Russia could curtail overflight rights for European airlines flying to Asia. On the eve of the advocate general's ruling, representatives from 21 countries from North and South America, Asia and Africa—including the U.S. Japan, India, Russia, China, Argentina and the United Arab Emirates—called on ICAO to continue its efforts to reduce airlines' greenhouse gas emissions in a joint declaration signed in New Delhi on Sept. 30. The declaration opposes the EU ETS as inconsistent with international law, including the Chicago Convention. It also urges ICAO to develop a “meaningful aircraft CO2 standard with a possible implementation date of 2013. While the declaration acknowledges that growing aviation greenhouse gas emissions are a concern, it focuses on advances in fuel efficiency and stresses the need for comprehensive air traffic management reform along with advances in biofuels and other technological solutions. The 21 countries ask the EU to refrain from applying the ETS to non-EU carries and urge it to “work collaboratively with the rest of the international community to address aviation emissions.” Environmental lobby groups say the ruling “is an encouraging development.” However, the situation also is forcing EU airlines to balance their competitive concerns with fears of running afoul of their governing regulator. Ulrich Schulte-Strathaus, secretary general of the Association of European Airlines, says in a statement: “AEA supports the European Union's commitment to reduce the impact of all sectors, including air transport, on climate change. However, instead of taking the lead and paving the way toward a global solution, the European Union's environmental strategy is alienating key partners.” Manufacturers are affected, as well. For instance, China is blocking a Hong Kong Airlines Airbus A380 order as a result of the dispute. Industry officials are also worried by negotiations between the EC environment directorate and other governments about “equivalent measures” that they fear could lead to market distortions and put European carriers at a disadvantage. Under the legislation to include aviation in the ETS, the charging system would be set aside for airlines operating out of countries that regulate the carriers' CO2 output. India's Sukul also says that such schemes “make the whole thing even dicier” because “it is they who judge if your measure is equivalent.” That “opens up the door for more discrimination.” Another industry official warns that if there is a patchwork of ETS-like systems, the industry will struggle to achieve its ultimate goal of a global approach to controlling CO2 output. What will complicate issues is that there is little time for the differences to be ironed out. Schulte-Strathaus notes that “with just 87 days to go, the ETS clock is ticking very loudly and the chorus of third-country indignation is deafening. We have deep concerns that the European air transport industry will be caught in the crossfire as key trade partners retaliate against the inclusion of international aviation in the EU ETS.” While there is not sufficient time for the EU to adapt its ETS legislation to mollify critics, industry officials are hoping the EC will set aside implementation of the rules to avoid a global battle, despite last week's court backing. This would mirror the EC's reversal earlier this year, first proposing to relax restrictions on liquids in carry-on bags and then withdrawing the proposal. The Italian government late last month advised the EU that “consideration should be given to the possibility of postponing the starting date for the system.” But it is not clear such a maneuver is possible this time. The group of opponents plans to meet again at the end of November, most likely in Moscow, to decide on further steps, if no compromise is found by then. Those steps will almost certainly include the first concrete retaliatory measures—one month before the ETS is implemented. Exacerbating the anxiety among European airlines is the timing of the additional costs they now face. While some allowances will come free, others have to be bought, and passing on those costs will not be easy, given the difficult economic conditions in Europe. British Airways and Flybe. for instance, are warning of weak demand as Europe's economic recovery stalls. Emissions trading in aviation The Emissions Directive was amended in 2008 to include aviation in the Community’s Emissions Trading System (Directive 2008/101/EU). The emission trading scheme applies to EU internal flights, as well as to aircraft entering and leaving EU airspace. Emission trading in aviation is intended to promote a reduction in the greenhouse gases caused by aviation cost-effectively and economically. As with general emissions trading, emission trading in aviation is based on emissions allowances within the emissions exchange system. 85 per cent of the aviation emission allowances are given to aircraft operators free of charge, on the basis of an EU-wide comparison. A deciding factor in the distribution of free emission allowances are the aircraft’s tonne-kilometres. The remaining 15 per cent of the aviation emission allowances are auctioned. The amendment to Emission Trading Directive has been implemented nationally by an Act on Aviation Emission Trading (34/2008). The aviation emission trading is a semi-open system. This means that airlines may use emission allowances that have been purchased from sectors other than aviation in order to meet their obligations, but other sectors are not allowed to use emission allowances from aviation in order to meet their own obligations. The first emissions trading period for air traffic began on 1 January 2011, running through to 31 December 2012. The next emission trading period will be consistent with that of facilities and plants, beginning on 1 January 2013 and extending to 31 December 2020. Statutory tasks in Finland are undertaken by Finnish Transport Safety Agency (Trafi) and the Energy Agency, which mostly takes charge of issues related to the Emissions Trading Register. The Finnish Transport Safety Agency is responsible for the distribution, monitoring and reporting of allocable emission rights. In turn, the Energy Authority is responsible for the recording and administration of emission trading rights, as well as entering the proceeds from auctions as income for the government. EU set to charge international airlines for carbon emissions Europe's most senior court is expected to rule on Wednesday that airlines based outside the continent should have to pay for their carbon emissions on flights to or from EU member states, in a crucial test of climate change regulation. At stake are millions of tonnes in carbon dioxide emissions from aeroplanes, as airlines at present have little or no incentive to cut their greenhouse gases. The signs are that the EU will be cleared to impose a system of carbon trading on all passenger flights taking off or landing in member states. In a preliminary ruling in October. the court backed the EU's plans. But whatever the 13 judges in Luxembourg decide on Wednesday, it is unlikely to be the end of the story as the long-running legal battle will open up on new fronts. Already legislators in the US are attempting to make it illegal for their airlines to comply with EU rules on carbon, and it is understood that China is issuing similar guidance, in a serious escalation of hostilities. The hard-fought battle pits the US and Chinese governments as well as numerous international airlines against EU legislators, who have insisted that airlines must pay for their share of the potential damage from climate change. The US and Chinese governments have threatened a trade war over the issue, and airlines have protested that if the EU rules are allowed to go ahead, they will be landed with billions of dollars of new costs in the next few years. But the amount is likely to be small, according to analysts. Research carried out this year by the analyst company Thomson Reuters Point Carbon put the probable total cost to all airlines at about €1.1bn next year. but that was based on a carbon price of €12 per tonne – whereas prices have plunged to just over half of that in recent weeks. As a result, the true cost is likely to be much lower. "The battle has been extraordinarily fierce, given the real implications of emissions trading, which are not really that big," said Andreas Arvanitakis, associate director of Point Carbon. "It's a minute incremental cost compared to the costs of jet fuel. This is certainly not a game-changer for aviation." Airlines will also be treated equally on each route, in order to make competition between them fair. On 6 October, an advocate general – a senior legal adviser appointed by the Court of Justice of the European Union – issued a formal recommendation to the court supporting the legality of the EU law. The 13-judge grand chamber has been deliberating the case since the advocate general's opinion was released. Arvanitakis warned that if the judges ruled against the EU, it would be a "serious blow to political support" for the EU's emissions trading system. "If this entire sector is taken out, it would open the window for doubters within the EU to ask where this is going," he said. Under the EU's proposals, all airlines operating flights taking off or landing in member states would be subjected to its emissions trading scheme – the system introduced in 2005 by which carbon-intensive industries are issued with permits to produce carbon dioxide. Cleaner companies can trade these permits with laggards, giving them an increasing incentive to cut carbon. The US, China and numerous airlines argue that the system is in effect a tax on aviation, which would be banned by longstanding international agreement. However, the EU counters that the system is not a tax but represents fair regulation in order to tackle climate change. Airlines based within the EU will already be subject to the carbon trading rules from next year. As a result of the system, passenger ticket prices are likely be pushed up, though some airlines may choose to absorb some of the costs. Carbon prices within the European Union have fallen sharply as the euro crisis has taken hold, and are now close to their record lows. Airlines also argue that the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) is preparing its own system of carbon trading, which could be operating from 2013. However, EU officials are doubtful that this would come up to the same standards as its scheme and could be open to manipulation by the airlines. Campaigners said the move to have ICAO bring in a scheme was merely a delaying tactic, and pointed out that ICAO has been talking about such a scheme for more than five years, without any concrete result as yet, with no guarantee of a future outcome. Bill Hemmings, programme manager at Brussels-based campaigning group Transport and Environment. said: "Let's allow the judges to decide whether it is legal or not [for the EU to draw aviation within emissions trading], but it is certainly not unfair. All airlines are being treated equally when they come into and leave Europe and that is fair." He said studies of the cumulative effect of civil aviation since its inception showed it was responsible for about 4.9% of carbon and equivalents in the atmosphere. As that amount is growing, while emissions must be cut to avoid dangerous global warming, aviation would be an increasing part of the problem, he said. The EU is also looking at ways to regulate the carbon output of international shipping. Proposals to curb greenhouse gas emissions from aviation and shipping have been under discussion since the negotiations leading up to the Kyoto protocol in 1997, and in recent years have focused on a levy on shipping. But that proposal was knocked back yet again at this month's UN climate negotiations in Durban, South Africa. Emissions from international aviation and maritime transport are excluded from the Kyoto protocol and the 2009 Copenhagen accord, and there is no guarantee they will be included in any new international climate agreement to come into force from 2020. If aviation is included in the EU emissions trading scheme, it will be the first time carbon emissions from the sector have been regulated. Topics A Battle for the Skies: Applying the European Emissions Trading System to International Aviation Jacques Hartmann University of Dundee The European Union (EU) has long been in a diplomatic row with its main trading partners. The row concerns the EU’s decision to include foreign aircraft emissions within its Emissions Trading System (ETS). Several States have objected to the inclusion as a violation of their sovereignty. The importance of the quarrel can hardly be overestimated: it is the first real clash concerning unilateral measures to combat climate change. By including foreign aircraft emissions within the ETS, the EU has taken unilateral action to prevent international environmental harm. The EU’s action has given rise to some fundamental questions concerning legislative jurisdiction. Moreover, as the impact of climate change becomes more severe, climate change may serve as a pretext for all kinds of protectionist policies. The current quarrel is therefore also one of principle. This article analyses the jurisdictional basis for extending the ETS to extraterritorial flights and the reactions of third States. In doing so, the article reveals fundamental limits in international rules concerning the allocation of competencies between States, especially in relation to the protection of the environment. The article considers these shortcomings in the context of the present case and suggests a new approach to the traditional principles of sovereignty and legislative jurisdiction. Number of Pages in PDF File: 25 Keywords: Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, Legislative Jurisdiction, Environmental Protection, EU Emissions Trading System Date posted: March 16, 2013 Suggested Citation Hartmann, Jacques, A Battle for the Skies: Applying the European Emissions Trading System to International Aviation. Nordic Journal of International Law, Vol. 82, No. 2, 2013, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2233924 Información del contacto The url you requested is wrong or corrupt We are sorry but the request could not be understood by the server due to malformed syntax. This is probably because the url you requested in invalid. Please inform the owner of the page where you found the url that it is malformed. If you continue to have problems, please contact [email protected] and in your email include the URL and the address of the site where you found it. Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) for Aviation - Directive 2008/101/EC. November 2008, the European Parliament approved directive 2008/101/EC including Aviation in the European Union Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS). According to the above directive and the following Decision 2009/339/EC all the aircraft operators that fly from and to an EU member state airport are obligated to monitors, report and verify their CO2 emissions. From 2012 onwards, airlines operating in EU are required to buy and can sell allowances to release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The Member State responsible defines an emission cap for each individual operator who had applied for it, following a benchmark fixed by the European Commission. That benchmark depends on the travelled tn/km during 2010. Operators exceeding their quotas are allowed to buy unused credits form those doing better at cutting their emissions, helping to reach the EU targets under the Kyoto Protocol. The «cap-and-trade» system is a market mechanism for reducing emissions. The cap limits the total amount of emissions and the trade economically rewards the «greeners» over the «polluters». From 1st of January 2010 each aircraft operator shall report (Annual Emission Report) the emissions from the aircrafts which he operates during each calendar year. This report must be verified every year before 31st of March by an accredited Verification Body, as Swiss Approval International affiliate network and submitted to the competent authority. Producers and Consumers affected Aircraft operator flights departing from and/or arriving in an airport situated in the European Union. There are some specific exclusions like military and police flights, flights related to search and rescue, fire-fighting flights, humanitarian flights and emergency medical service flights, training flights, etc. After international negotiation, EU decided that only emissions from flights between airports in the European Economic Area (EEA, covering the 28 EU Member States plus Norway and Iceland) would continue to be covered. For the aviation operators remaining in the EU ETS every year before 31st of March the Annual Emission Report should be verified by an accredited Verification Body, as ECOCERT ltd. In April 2013 the EU decided to temporarily suspend enforcement of the EU ETS requirements for flights from or to non EEA countries and fully exempted for 2013, while continuing to apply the legislation to flights within and between ΕΕΑ countries in Europe. Furthermore, from 1st of January 2014, flights to and from countries outside the EEA would benefit from a general exemption for the proportion of emissions that take place outside EEA airspace. Only the emissions from the proportion of a flight taking place within EEA airspace would be covered. The EU took this initiative to allow time for the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to develop by 2016 a global market-based mechanism (MBM) addressing international aviation emission and apply it by 2020. Until then, countries or groups of countries, such as the EU, can implement interim measures. With our expertise on CO2 emissions monitoring and verification starting in the pre-compliance phase, Swiss Approval International affiliate network, can perform pre-verification of your monitoring systems. This includes: Strategic and Risk Analysis of your monitoring system (nature, scope and complexity of the system, management systems, inherent risk and control measures) Verification of the data collected according to your monitoring system (spot-check of single planes and/or routes) The above mentioned services will allow you to: Assess and improve your Monitoring Plan, giving you a greater chance of getting it approved by the Competent Authority on time. Gain experience and strengthen your negotiating position for final monitoring and verification requirements Avoid monitoring problems during the actual monitoring period and win precious time during the final verification phase. Airline industry backs global emissions trading scheme -IAG * EU attempts to regulate aviation emissions caused outcry * U.N. body meant to agree on plan next year * China set to declare backing for market-based deal By Julia Fioretti BRUSSELS, June 17 The boss of International Airlines Group on Wednesday said the industry would prefer a global emissions trading scheme to tackle aviation pollution, although other "interesting" options were also under consideration. Emissions from European flights are already covered by the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), but an EU law, meant to take effect from 2012, that extended the arrangement to intercontinental aviation emissions caused outcry. That forced the EU to retreat and U.N. body the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) took on the task of coming up with a global alternative. Its deadline is a meeting planned for late 2016. "The industry has a clear preference for a global emissions trading scheme, but I think some of the suggestions that are being introduced are interesting and should be examined," Willie Walsh, the chief executive of British Airways and Iberia's parent IAG, told a press conference. "We've moved on significantly from where we were a couple of years ago when there were separate states and they would not participate and we've also moved on from where people felt ICAO would be unable to reach an agreement." He said the industry was not divided on the issue, but that governments were. In 2012, nations such as Russia, China and Saudi Arabia accused the European Union of infringing national sovereignty and threatened a trade war. Planemakers such as Airbus also put pressure on the European Union, saying multibillion-dollar orders for aircraft were at risk. A joint pledge between China and the European Union, expected to be signed off later this month in Brussels, calls for "a timely agreement in ICAO on a global market-based measure in 2016". But environmental campaigners are concerned about how "market-based" will be defined and that the result will be less effective than including aviation in the EU ETS, a cap and trade system that limits the level of pollution allowed and forces emitters to buy permits to cover emissions up to that level. Allowance prices are weak on the ETS at around 7.50 euros per tonne, but are expected to strengthen as a series of reforms are enacted. Any deal allowing airlines to use international carbon offsets could mean they avoid having to cut pollution as the carbon reductions would be achieved elsewhere, campaigners say. (Writing by Barbara Lewis, editing by David Evans) UN aviation emissions deal strikes harsh blow to EU trading scheme UN deal sets emissions reduction scheme in motion, but EU trading scheme crushed in series of vitriolic negotiations Souce: Flickr / Vyacheslav Bondaruk The UN’s aviation body voted on a resolution today that lays the foundations of a market based mechanism (MBM) to curb emissions, at the same time as laying waste to the EU’s own emissions trading scheme. After a heated debate in Montreal yesterday, ICAO resolved on a text that instructs states to develop a global market based mechanism to be brought to the next General Assembly, which will take place in 2016. This was finally approved today after a week of intense negotiations. which observers have called “unprecedented” within ICAO. Many consider this a positive step forward: the issue of how to implement an MBM has been one of the central points of contention since the Kyoto Protocol instructed the UN aviation body to come up with a way to regulate the emissions of the industry back in 1997. Despite on-going discussions and long term efforts by the EU to broker an environmentally effective deal, there are countries on the other side of the debate that have shown scant willingness to compromise. The resolution states that, if an agreement on a global MBM is decided upon at the next Assembly, it must be implemented by 2020 – the year after which any growth within the industry must be carbon neutral. It is a deadline which puts added pressure on ICAO to reach an agreement by 2016. Annie Petsonk from EDF, speaking from Montreal, emphasises that in many ways this is a step forward for the agency. She tells RTCC, “They’ve set upon a timetable for the negotiation of it. They’re gone quite a way with developing a set of principles of it. We think all those things are very significant. “Are they a giant leap? No, because it’s just initiating talks and we’ve seen talks be initiated in ICAO before, but these have a time-bound deadline of the next ICAO assembly and there’s been quite a lot of technical work done, so they have a good foundation on which to proceed.” For some, this deadline of 2016 isn’t soon enough. Emissions from aviation are responsible for 4.9% of manmade climate change, and these are growing faster than any other mode of transport. If unmitigated, these emissions are projected to double or even triple by 2050. A recent paper by David Lee from Manchester Metropolitan University showed that implementing a market based mechanism quickly was the best way to minimise global warming. Jean Leston, Transport Policy Manager at WWF-UK, tells RTCC: “There is nothing in this resolution that guarantees an MBM. All we’ve got is a decision to develop one over the next three years and then that has to go to Assembly for agreement in 2016.” Bill Hemmings, aviation manager at Transport & Environment, said, ““The EU put its faith in the ICAO process, and because of unacceptable weakening and delay, this faith has now been shattered. The science is crystal clear – we can no longer afford to procrastinate if we want to reverse the effects of man-made climate change.” Negotiations began on Thursday last week, but when countries failed to reach a consensus they were pushed forward to recommence last Wednesday, after a weekend of informal bilateral conversations. Those speaking to RTCC from the sidelines of the negotiations in Montreal highlight that it has not been an easy week. Emotions have been running high, with the EU in particular taking a beating from countries that are opposed to its regional emissions trading scheme (ETS) proposal. The final agreement was a considerable blow to the EU’s regional scheme, reducing it to the bare minimum, and going beyond the compromise that the EU had already put on the table last month. Under the new resolution, the EU may only impose its ETS on flights that both depart and land from within its own airspace. If it wants to trade the emissions emitted over its own airspace by aircrafts that have come from outside of the EU, it may now only do so with the consent of the other country. “Certainly yesterday morning saw scenes here I don’t think ICAO has ever seen before,” says Leston. “There was just an incredible outpouring of dislike of the EU ETS, very aggressive interventions from a lot of states, and an almost overwhelming antipathy towards the ETS. You could really smell blood in the room.” Petsonk adds: “There is clearly an effort to try to push back on a state’s ability to implement a national and regional MBM, and we regarded that as half a step back.” Leston says that, although this is a blow to the EU, she believes that it will have much to contribute as the global MBM is developed. She says, “We’ve seen the environmental leader brought down by the pack, but I think once the dust has settled the EU still has a lot to offer in international negotiations. “This is the only system that’s up and running, and proves that cap-and-trade can work. In the next three years there’s going to be a lot of work to design and develop an MBM, and the EU experience is going to be vital in helping to deliver an MBM.” Another reservation to the final text was the concern shown for “common but differentiated responsibilities” shown within the resolution, which excludes states with less than a 1% share of total civil international aviation activities – a principle enshrined within the UNFCCC, but excluded from the Chicago Convention, which established the modern aviation industry. Excluding these countries would ultimately make an aviation deal less effective, as it would exempt all but around 20 of the world’s countries from taking part in the global trading scheme. The large scale disagreement over the issue of equity bodes ill for negotiations between developed and developing states at the upcoming UN climate talks in both Warsaw this November and Paris in 2015, for which the ICAO discussions are an important precursor. Leston told RTCC, “I think we would have really liked to see more progress on the ground here in Montreal, going forwards into the COP in Warsaw through to Paris, because a positive outcome from ICAO would have been a really positive force for the good going into the UNFCCC climate talks. “The fact that we’ve had such a tiny step forward and we’ve seen so much division between developing and developed countries over highly politicised issues such as common but differentiated responsibilities really does not bode well for the future climate talks. “International negotiations really must move beyond entrenched positions if we’re ever to solve climate change. The more states act out of self-interest and seek not to take action, the more trouble we’re headed for in the future.” Artículos Relacionados: The European Union’s emission trading scheme (EU ETS) has hit a brick wall erected by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). In an October 4 resolution. the ICAO denied a country (or in this case, a region) the right to unilaterally include another country’s airline in its ETS. Instead, the ICAO committed to agree, in 2016, to a global emissions trading mechanism that would take effect in 2020. There is no guarantee, however, that such a system will be introduced, and that it would be as environmentally beneficial as an all-inclusive EU ETS. Source: Dave Keeshan This is widely perceived as a political defeat of the EU, which had offered to exclude from its scheme any emissions released outside of EU airspace, but to include all emissions within it. In doing so, the EU had hoped to reach an international deal, particularly with the United States and China, which have opposed inclusion of their airlines in the EU ETS. The EU has justified the inclusion of foreign airlines in its ETS on the basis of the 1947 Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation, which allows for each country’s sovereignty of its own airspace. Although the consequences of the ICAO resolution are unclear, the decision is poised to make enforcement of the EU ETS in the aviation sector much more difficult. For the EU to amend the existing ETS to exclude foreign airlines, it would need approval from the European Parliament as well as from EU member states. A complete exclusion of foreign airlines is somewhat unlikely, given that this could endanger the competitiveness of domestic carriers and ultimately prevent overall inclusion of the aviation sector in the ETS. Members of parliament across the political spectrum have opposed the resulting weakening of EU climate policy. In response to the ICAO resolution, the European Commission proposed on October 16 to amend the EU ETS so that, effective in 2014, the scheme covers only those segments of flights that occur within European regional airspace. The change would apply until the planned global emissions trading mechanism enters into force, presumably in 2020. Some European carriers will likely not be happy with this compromise either. In particular, a higher share of the flights of smaller regional airlines will face the burden of permitting costs than those of larger competitors that operate intercontinentally. Emissions from EU aviation increased 87 percent between 1990 and 2006 alone, and they are projected to reach more than double the 2006 level by 2020, threatening to cancel out a substantial part of the emission reductions achieved in other sectors. Given the importance of the EU ETS as Europe’s key transnational tool to meet its climate policy commitments, it is of vital importance to include the aviation sector in the scheme. At the same time, the European Commission must advance in its efforts to take emission allowances off the market in order to boost their prices and create incentives to curb emissions, both in the air and on the ground. GE-1:EU emissions trading system (EU ETS) Policy Description The EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) is a cornerstone of the European Union's policy to mitigate climate change and its key tool for reducing industrial greenhouse gas emissions cost-effectively. The EU-ETS officially began on January 1, 2005 and consists of a “warm-up” phase (phase I) from 2005-2007 and then successive periods, with the second phase (phase II) from 2008-2012 set to coincide with the Kyoto compliance period and the third phase from 2013-2020. The EU ETS sets a cap on total direct GHG emissions for its participants (mostly energy generation and heavy industry in participating countries). Descripción The EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) is a cornerstone of the European Union's policy to combat climate change and its key tool for reducing industrial greenhouse gas emissions cost-effectively [1]. The EU-ETS officially began on January 1, 2005 with a “warm-up” phase (phase I) from 2005-2007. The second phase (phase II) from 2008-2012 was set to coincide with the Kyoto compliance period [2] and phase III runs from 2013 to 2020. The EU ETS sets a cap on total direct GHG emissions for its participants (mostly energy generation and heavy industry in participating countries (*1)(*2). Phases I and II (2005-2012) Individual participants in phase I and II get a number of emission allowances for free and can buy additional allowances if they need more, assuming other participants have spare allowances to sell. The price of the allowances is aimed at influencing participants' decision to invest in emission reduction measures or to buy allowances when they are faced with a shortage of allowances compared to their actual emissions. In phases I and II, each country determines the total amount of allowances available for its national participants, but allowances can be traded internationally (i.e. there is no national cap on emissions). The EU ETS phase I and II covers CO2 emissions from some 11,000 installations (see Target Group). Nitrous oxide emissions from certain processes are also covered. Between them, the installations currently in the scheme account for almost half of the EU's CO2 emissions and around 40% of its total greenhouse gas emissions. Phase III (2013-2020) The system for allocating emission allowances in the current phase of the EU ETS (phase III) has changed significantly compared to the two previous two phases (2005-2012). Emission allowances will be distributed according to fully harmonised and EU-wide rules, meaning that the same rules will apply across all EU Member States. A centralised EU-wide cap on emissions was introduced to ensure a more consistent approach across the EU, rather than country specific caps. The EU-wide cap is set at 2.04 billion tonnes of CO2 in 2013 and will reduce by 1.74% each year, delivering an overall reduction of 21% below 2005 levels by 2020 [10]. For the power sector, allowances are primarily auctioned meaning that the majority of allowances under the EU Emissions Trading System will not be allocated for free. Sectors that are considered to be at risk of carbon leakage will receive 100% of their allowances for free. Sectors that are not considered at rik of carbon leakage will receive 80% of their allocation for free in 2013, declining annually to 30% in 2020 and 0% (i.e. full auctioning) in 2027. The scheme has been expanded in Phase III to include petrochemicals, ammonia, and aluminum sectors; nitrous oxide emissions from acid production; and PFC emissions from the aluminum sector. Aviation emissions were also included in 2012, both for flights within Europe and those flying in and out of Europe. However, due to strong opposition from other countries, inclusion of the latter emissions has been suspended. A decision is expected in late September 2013 [8] A few of the final product benchmarks for post 2012 EU ETS are included in the list below. For the full list see [9]. Note that this is based on a carbon leakage status for these products for the year 2013 and 2014 and that the full definitions and included processes can be found in the full list [9]. · Coke: 0,286 allowances / tonne · Hot metal: 1,328 allowances / tonne · Aluminium: 1,514 allowances / tonne · Grey cement clinker: 0,766 allowances / tonne · White cement clinker: 0,987 allowances / tonne Información sobre políticas Amplíe esta sección para obtener información sobre las características clave de la política, como su fecha de introducción, categorización, principal objetivo (s) y vínculos con otras políticas. Objective To reduce GHG emissions in Europe at lowest cost (through trading) Grupo objetivo Until 2013: Refining: iron & steel, ceramics, pulp & paper and combustion installations (power plants as well as in industry) above a threshold size. As of 2012 also aviation, as of 2013 also non-ferrous metals, chemicals, installations for carbon capture and storage (*6). Driver of energy consumption or emissions affected by policy: Total GHG emissions. Implementation Information Expand this section for information on targets, monitoring, verification and enforcement regimes, and implementation requirements and tools. Coverage 48%-50% of national GHG emissions over the period 2008-2011. In 2011 Germany had more than 1650 ETS participants registered. Quantitative Target? sí Target: Up to the year 2012 Germany must achieve emissions reductions of 17 million tonnes of CO2 to meet the Kyoto goal. Of these 17 million tonnes, 10 million tonnes of CO2 must be reduced by the energy sector and industry. [5] Progress Monitored? sí Verification Required? sí Enforced? sí Sanctions:  Penalty: €100/t CO2 not surrendered + make up shortfall  Possibly revoking of permit to emit Requirements on the Target Group Obtain an emission permit for GHG emissions (subject to approved monitoring protocol) Annual monitoring and reporting of emissions according to harmonised rules Surrender each year enough allowances to cover the emissions of the previous year Support by Government Government has set up various programs to achieve actual emission reductions, see policy linkages . Implementation Toolbox Virtual post office for secure and legally binding digital communication on EU-ETS matters between DEHSt and ETS participants Electronic interface for the application data transfers’ Free software for the preparation of allocation applications (Form Management System, a server based application) Helpdesk Manual on emission monitoring (Umweltbundesamt), sample monitoring plan and Industry specific examples of monitoring plan. List of accredited verifiers Guidelines for the compilation of CO2 emission reports Complexity of Implementation Government In phase 1 and 2 National Allocation Plans (NAPs) had to be developed, BaU scenarios and improvement potential for a large variety of industry had to be judged on their accuracy, and competitiveness issues had to be taken into account in allocations Further arrangements for new entrants reserves and possible auctions had to be made, etc. In phase 3 (from 2013) National Implementation Measures (NIMs) must be developed in which the individual application for free allowances by industries must be checked (taking into account competitiveness issues, performance criteria etc.) and auctions need to be arranged (in case the choice is made to organise this nationally). Grupo objetivo Operators have to develop explicit scenarios of production and emissions, develop benchmarks, submit a monitoring protocol and -optionally- participate in auctions. In phase 3 in addition industries have to complete the tool that was developed for the NIMs with detailed sub-installation data in order to calculate free allowances. Impacts, Costs & Benefits Expand this section to find information on policy effectiveness and efficiency. Estimated effect on energy consumption or emissions ­- Total emissions of the approximately 1630 EU ETS installations in 2010 were 454 MT CO2, which was approximately 6% higher than in 2009. The 2010 emissions were still below 2008 levels, so that emissions in the second trading period in total have reduced. [3] - In 2009, the EU ETS participants have emitted 9.4 per cent fewer CO2 emissions compared to the previous year. The emissions trading sector affirms the overall trend announced by the Federal Environment Agency (UBA) in early March 2010, according to which the financial and economic crisis has led to the steepest decline in climate gas emissions in 60 years. The greatest share in reduction within the emissions trading industry can also be traced to declines in production resulting from the economic downturn in 2009. [4] Estimated costs/benefits for industry ­From 2013 energy-intensive industries continue to receive a free allocation on the basis of EU-wide benchmarks. The free allocation for industrial plants is reduced from year to year: from a maximum of 80% in 2013 to 30% in 2020 - always on the basis of results obtained by product-specific benchmarks. 2027 at the latest, industry should not receive any more free allocation. In the 3rd Trading period to 2020, exemptions are applied to sectors that are affected by carbon leakage, which will continue to receive 100% free allocation of allowances. [7] Estimated cost for government The German Law to implement the EU ETS (TEHG) specifies that participating companies must pay cost-covering fees for services by the DEHSt, making the administration of the EU ETS cost neutral for the German government. [6] References & Footnotes Referencias [1] European Commission, Climate Action, European Union Emissions Trading System: http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/ets/index_en.htm [2] Pew Center, THE EUROPEAN UNION EMISSIONS TRADING SCHEME (EU-ETS) INSIGHTS AND OPPORTUNITIES, March 2009: http://www.pewclimate.org/docUploads/EU-ETS%20White%20Paper.pdf [3] DeHSt, Emissionshandel setzt Anreize für Klimaschutz, 018/2011, http://www.dehst.de/SharedDocs/Pressemitteilungen/DE/2011-018_CO2-Ausstoss-2010.html [4] UBA, Press information 022/2010, http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/uba-info-presse/2010/pd10-022_emissionshandel_9_4_prozent_weniger_co2-emissionen_im_jahr_2009.htm [5] BMU Press release No. 087/04, Berlin, 31.03.2004, http://www.bmu.de/english/press_releases/archive/15th_legislative_period/pm/pdf/5735.pdf [6] DEHSt, Gesetz zur Umsetzung der Richtlinie 2003/87/EG über ein System für den Handel mit Treibhausgasemissionszertifikaten in der Gemeinschaft. [7] Umweltbundesamt: Daten zur Umwelt: http://www.umweltbundesamt-daten-zur-umwelt.de/umweltdaten/public/theme.do?nodeIdent=3155 [8] European Commission (2012). Press Release. “Stopping the clock of ETS and aviation emissions following last week's International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) Council”. Available at http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-854_en.htm [9] European Commission (2011). Decision of 27.4.2011: determining transitional Union-wide rules for the harmonized free allocation of emission allowances pursuant to Article 10a of Directive 2003/87/EC. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:130:0001:0045:EN:PDF Footnotes (*1) Emissions from sources owned or operated by a reporting installation: combustion, process emissions and fugitive losses. (*2) Currently 27 EU Member States + Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein. (*3) For industry and heating sectors, allowances will be allocated for free based on (greenhouse gas performance-based) benchmarks. Benchmarks reflect the average performance of the 10% most efficient installations in a sector or subsector in the EU in the years 2007-200. Installations that meet the benchmarks will in principle receive all allowances they need. Installations that do not meet the benchmark will have a shortage of allowances and the option to either lower their emissions (e.g. through engaging in abatement) or to purchase additional allowances to cover their excess emissions. For further information on benchmarks, see http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/ets/benchmarking/faq_en.htm (*4) This includes measures to further strengthen systems for monitoring, reporting, verification and accreditation in support of the EU Emissions Trading System. (*5) Note on AGencies responsible: Overall responsibility is the Federal Environment Agency (UmweltBundesAmt - UBA). (*6) See Annex I of the original Directive (2003) and Annex I of the revised Directive (2009). (*7) Further information available on website of DEHSt. Other Useful Resources The European Commission has an online database containing information about emissions, allocations and transfers for every installation in the EU. The database is updated regularly with information from each country’s national registry. A fact-sheet on the background of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme provided by the EU Commission. China issues new EU-ETS aviation emissions warning Last updated on 04/04/2013, 8:06 am & # 8211; A round-up of the day’s top climate change stories – Tweet @RTCCnewswire and use #RTCCLive hashtag – Contact the team at [email protected] China: A spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry has said the country welcome the EU’s suspension of international flights from inclusion in its carbon trading platform. “China welcomes the EU’s decision to suspend the enforcement of the ETS [Emissions Trading System], but does not accept the practice of applying the system to foreign flights within Europe. China expects the EU to take a constructive attitude and work with other parties to settle differences properly,” said Hong Lei. Talks on a new global system continue through the UN’s aviation body, International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). A two day ICAO conference on climate change next month will address how to cut emissions from the sector. The body’s General Assembly in September, which is held every three years, is the last chance to put a global deal in place before the EU deadline passes it starts including international flights in the ETS. (Xinhua ) China, Russia, the USA and India led opposition to the EU’s aviation plans (Source: Creative Commons/Julian Herzog) USA: President Obama has praised his administration’s progress on climate change so far in the face of stiff Republican opposition. Speaking at a fund raiser last night, hosted by billionaire and Keystone XL opponent Tom Steyer, Obama said: “Despite a very aggressive agenda on the other side to block action, we’ve been able to double fuel-efficiency standards on cars, we’ve been able to take mercury out of our air, we have been able to reduce carbon emissions in this country.” (Reuters ) India: An Indian government funded study has rubbished claims from Brazilian researchers that hydropower dams are responsible for 19% of all greenhouse gas emissions in India. The counter study by the National Institute of Oceanography found methane emissions to be negligible. (Times of India ) USA: Last summer’s drought hit US corn harvests so severely some ethanol producers decided they were better off closing. According to Grist, 1 in 10 ethanol producers have shut down as a result of the drought. Yesterday, researchers claimed US biofuels policy would increase greenhouse gas emissions as a result of forests being cleared to meet the demand for energy crops. (Grist ) Artículos Relacionados: Los New York Times Carbon Emission Fees for Flights Upheld By NICOLA CLARK December 21, 2011 PARIS — The European Union ’s highest court on Wednesday endorsed the bloc’s plan to begin charging the world’s biggest airlines for their greenhouse gas emissions starting Jan. 1. The move sets the stage for a potentially costly trade war with the United States, China and other countries. A group of United States airlines had argued that forcing them to participate in the potentially costly emissions-trading system infringed on national sovereignty and conflicted with existing international aviation treaties. But in a final ruling, the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg affirmed an opinion issued in October by its advocate general, who had rejected that claim. “The court confirms the validity of the directive that integrates aviation activities in the system for trading emissions quotas,” the ruling said. It added that the plan “infringes neither the principles of customary international law at issue, nor the Open Skies agreement ” concluded with the United States in 2007. The court’s decision comes amid increasing pressure from some of the biggest trading partners of the 27-member bloc to suspend or amend application of the legislation to expressly exclude non-European Union countries — at least initially. Failing that, several governments have vowed to take their own legal action or retaliate with countervailing trade measures. Although airlines for now will receive most of the permits they will need free, the European Union estimates that ticket prices could rise by as much as 12 euros ($15.65) on some long-haul flights to cover the cost of the additional permits required. Airlines for America, an industry lobby group and one of the plaintiffs in the case, said that its members would be required to pay more than $3.1 billion to the European Union from 2012 to 2020. It said its members would comply with the system under protest but would also review options for pursuing the case in Britain’s High Court, which had referred the original complaint to the European court in 2009. “The court did not fully address legal issues raised and has established a damaging and questionable precedent,” the airline group said in a statement. In a letter dated Dec. 16, Hillary Clinton, the United States secretary of state, and Ray LaHood, the secretary of transportation, said Washington would be “compelled to take appropriate action” if Brussels proceeded, though the letter did not specify what form that might take. In a statement on Wednesday, Krishna R. Urs, the State Department’s deputy assistant secretary for transportation affairs, expressed Washington’s disappointment but did not broach the subject of retaliation. “We continue to have strong legal and policy objections to the inclusion of flights by non-E.U. air carriers” in the system, Mr. Urs said. “We do not view the court’s decision as resolving these objections.” He added: “The path the E.U. has chosen is hampering progress towards a multilateral solution that is more likely to bear fruit in terms of concrete progress in limiting greenhouse gas emissions from aviation.” The court’s decision, and the pressure from Washington, leave American airlines in an uncertain legal limbo, particularly following a bill approved this year by the House that would bar them from participating in the European system. A similar bill was introduced this month in the Senate but was not expected to be brought to a vote until after the new year. The European Union plans to charge the world's biggest airlines for greenhouse gas emissions. Dave Thompson / Press Association, via Associated Press Images China has also made known its displeasure with the European directive. This year it threatened to suspend purchases of jets made by the European manufacturer Airbus if Chinese airlines were included. A group of Chinese carriers has also threatened to bring a lawsuit, possibly in Germany, where the authorities will oversee the application of the system to several Chinese airlines. Experts say the Chinese could argue that the European law violates the Kyoto climate agreement by requiring airlines from developing nations, which are exempt from emissions cuts under the treaty, to bear the same burdens as carriers from wealthier nations. Algeria has already begun a case in France contesting the system, according to the Arab Air Carriers Organization, an industry group that includes the country’s main carrier, Air Algérie. Exempting foreign airlines, however, would anger European carriers that would still be required to participate. “European airlines and the European economy must not get caught in the political crossfire or be put at a competitive disadvantage,” Mike Ambrose, director general of the European Regions Airline Association, said. “If these tensions erupt into full-scale trade conflict, there will be no winners — least of all the environment.” The European initiative involves folding aviation into the six-year-old emissions trading system, in which polluters can buy and sell a limited quantity of permits, each representing a ton of carbon dioxide. The legislation requires that airlines account for their emissions for the entirety of any flight that takes off from — or lands at — any airport in the bloc. The goal, European officials have said, is to speed up the adoption of greener technologies at a time when air traffic, which represents about 3 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions, is growing much faster than gains in efficiency. Governments and airlines have been in negotiations for more than a decade over the creation of a global cap-and-trade system under the auspices of the International Civil Aviation Organization, an arm of the United Nations. The organization’s 190 member states passed a resolution in 2010 committing the group to devising a market-based solution, though without a fixed timetable. Impatient with the pace of those talks, the European Commission moved ahead with its own plan, which was passed two years ago with the support of national governments and the European Parliament. At an I.C.A.O. meeting last month, 26 member states, including China, Russia and the United States, formally showed their dissatisfaction with the European system — a sign that they could push for a formal dispute procedure at the organization. European officials have said repeatedly that they would prefer a multilateral solution and are prepared to amend their cap-and-trade system if and when the I.C.A.O. reaches a global aviation emissions agreement. The ruling clears the way for the European system to take effect next month. However, airlines will not have to hand over the first batches of emissions permits until the spring of 2013 to compensate for flights made in 2012. That could leave room for a compromise to be negotiated over the next year. The emissions rules apply from the moment an aircraft begins to taxi from the gate, either en route to or from a European airport, and they cover emissions for the flight from start to finish — not just the portion that occurs in European airspace. According to Airlines for America, on a typical flight from San Francisco to Heathrow Airport in London, 29 percent of the total emissions take place in United States airspace. A further 37 percent occurs in Canadian airspace and 25 percent over the high seas. Less than 9 percent of the emissions from such a flight would actually take place in European Union airspace. In its ruling, the court noted that the European directive did not apply “as such” to aircraft flying over the high seas or over the territory of the member states of the European Union or third countries. “It is only if the operators of such aircraft choose to operate a commercial air route arriving at or departing from an airport situated in the E.U. that they are subject to the emissions trading scheme,” the court said. James Kanter contributed reporting from Brussels. Azeta Infotec srl EU ETS - EMISSIONS TRADING SYSTEM Learing objectives To provide knowledge and tools to auditors of aviation emission verification performed at aircraft operators in application of Kyoto Protocol to Civil Aviation activities. References EU ETS Regulations, Directives and Guidelines; ISO 14065; EN 45011. Content Detailed presentation of the European Regulations, Directives and Guidelines to performe monitoring planning, verification activity of Airlines Operators and reporting to Civil Aviation Authority of emission data in compliance of EU Emissions Trading System requirements. A risk based approach for verification activity is part of training course. The necessary basic concepts about engine behaviour, aircraft fuel consumption, flight routes, air traffic control and procedures are also presented in order to provide the necessary knowledge to auditors appointed for carrying out audits on the quality assurance management of ETS of Airline Operators. Who should attend Auditors eager to provide verification services to aircraft operators in compliance of EU ETS requirements. Prerequisites Knowledge or/and experience in auditing techniques (even for energy/industrial sector). Nr of attendees min 4 - max 12 Duration 3 days Exam Verification of learning The EU’s Emissions Trading System includes all flights to, from and within Europe as eligible for regulation – something that has faced strong opposition from the US and China. With Airbus’s orders from China falling, this pressure has grown from within Europe. Cameron Hepburn argues that for reasons of economic principle, legality and practicality, the EU should stand its ground. The inclusion of aviation in the EU Emissions Trading System since 1 January 2012 has faced strong opposition from other nations, particularly the US and China. So far, the EU has held firm in its collective commitment to include all domestic and international flights to and from Europe, regardless of the nationality of airlines, in the cap on greenhouse gas emissions. But could the announcement by Airbus that it will soon have to revise down production targets due to the suspension of orders from China lead to a weakening of resolve within the EU? Credit: Patrick Cardinal (Creative Commons BY NC ND) There is some sign that this may already be happening. Following a meeting on 11 September 2012 between Airbus executives and representatives from the governments of Spain, France, Germany, and the UK (where Airbus makes its planes), the UK Minister for Business and Enterprise, Michael Fallon MP, said that there was no doubt that the Chinese threat to cancel orders represents a “clear and present danger to its [Airbus’s] order list.” At the meeting, the ministers agreed to push for a global solution to aviation emissions pricing when the United Nations International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) meets in September 2013. But this does not fit with the EU’s plan that airlines should pay by April 2013 for their 2012 emissions. The ICAO route would require a delay or temporary exemption for non-EU carriers. Indeed, the German Minister for Aerospace, Peter Hintze, has since publically said that he thinks that the deadline for charges for aviation emissions in 2012 should be delayed until September 2013. So, is now the time for the EU to relax its stance on aviation emissions within the EU Emissions Trading System? Let us begin by reminding ourselves of the details of the EU Emissions Trading System and its context. Since 2010, airlines have been required by EU law to measure and report emissions from flights to and from the EU. From 1 January 2012, airlines have not only had to report details of their emissions, but also to pay for them by acquiring and surrendering allowances eligible under the EU Emissions Trading System. The deadline for surrendering allowances is April 2013. The law will impose a cap on total emissions from the aviation industry. In 2012, emissions will be capped at 97% of 2005 emissions levels and from 2013 onwards at 95%. The underlying principles are analytically sound: emissions from aviation need to be reduced, emissions trading can deliver that result at minimal cost, and it is sensible to enact policy that covers domestic and foreign airlines equally. Nevertheless, the Indian and Chinese governments have banned their airlines from participating in the EU Emissions Trading System and the US Senate is considering a similar move in relation to its airlines. China has reinforced its protest by delaying its purchases from Airbus, suspending an order for 35 large planes, although it also recently signed a deal. worth $3.5 billion, for 50 planes during a two-day visit by German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Countries that oppose the inclusion of non-EU airlines in the Emissions Trading System have argued that the EU had stepped outside its legal jurisdiction by charging for emissions for an entire flight, rather than for just that part of the flight within European airspace. The EU disagrees and recently won the legal argument at the European Court of Justice. The opposing nations, who number 17 including China, India, the US, Russia, and Japan, have since met in Washington where they committed to work on a voluntary scheme with ICAO. So what is all the fuss about? Does the EU Emissions Trading System impose a heavy cost penalty on participating airlines? Or will increased costs to passengers result in much lower demand for air travel? It would appear that the answer is “no” to both questions. Like other high-emitting sectors of the economy, airlines will be granted free permits for about two-thirds of their expected emissions between 2013 and 2020, and will thus only need to purchase a third of their allowances. These costs will be largely or entirely passed through to the passengers, including the opportunity costs associated with surrendering allowances that have been given to airlines for free. Recent analysis by researchers at MIT and the Institute for Transport Economics at Muenster University has shown that this could lead to windfall profits for airlines in the US. A report by Vivid Economics for the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) in 2007 came to similar conclusions about windfalls for international airlines as a whole. The European Commission stresses that the additional cost to passengers will be small. In a recent column for the UK’s Guardian newspaper, the Commissioner for Climate Action, Connie Hedegaard, argued that the additional cost of an airline ticket from London to New York would be less that £2 per passenger, which she believes passengers will barely notice. While slightly higher ticket prices would be expected to lead to reductions in demand and hence profits, analysis suggests that this is not a large effect, and that some of airlines might make extra profits because of the ability to pass on more than the full cost to passengers. In short, the inclusion of aviation in the EU Emissions Trading System will not put airlines out of business, and could in fact boost profits for some. Concerns about the impact on short-term profits therefore seem to be an unlikely reason for opposition from airlines. A more likely explanation is that airlines have a speculative but deep-rooted fear that being included within the EU Emissions Trading System now is the thin edge of a wedge that will eventually damage their long-run interests. What does the EU do about the current opposition? As a trading bloc, the EU has real economic clout. In a forthcoming paper. Dieter Helm, Giovanni Ruta, and I argue that trade-related threats of this sort against the EU are unlikely to be credible. The Chinese orders from Airbus are only worth several billion euros — a small proportion of the company’s income. By comparison, in 2011, the EU imported €292.1bn ($381.4 billion) of goods from China, and EU retaliation against Chinese threats could do serious harm, particularly when China’s economy appears to be weakening and it is about to experience the most important political transition of the decade. The simple point is that a trade war is not in anyone’s interests, and economic logic suggests that the EU should simply ignore such threats. Even if the ‘coalition of the unwilling’ were able to throw enough economic and political weight around to convince the EU to consider softening its position, it is not clear how a change to the aviation emissions directive could be carried out, and at least not quickly. All 27 EU Member States adopted legislation in 2008 and appear to still support the directive. EU legal mechanisms are notoriously slow and offer little wriggle room once a directive has been adopted. So, anything beyond minor tinkering with the application of the directive seems unlikely. Hence for reasons of economic principle, legality and practicality, the EU should stand its ground. This article first appeared on voxEU . Please read our comments policy before commenting . Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of EUROPP – European Politics and Policy, nor of the London School of Economics. Shortened URL for this post: http://bit.ly/SEsFbm Cameron Hepburn – LSE Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change Dr Cameron Hepburn is a Senior Research Fellow at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the LSE. He holds Fellowships at the LSE and Oxford University. He is actively involved in public policy as a member of the DECC Secretary of State’s Economics Advisory Group, the DEFRA Academic Panel and as a founder of Vivid Economics. He contributed two background research papers to the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change. EU considers charging emissions fees Within a decade, aircraft operators flying in the airspace of the 25-state European Union (EU) will likely have to start paying for carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from their engines. The long-awaited final report from Dutch consultants CE Delft was published on July 29, and it has advised the European Commission’s environmental directorate (which commissionedthe report) that it would be both feasible and legal to implement emissions trading for all operators, regardless of their nationality or type of operation. If the EC accepts emissions trading as the way forward, as it is expected to do by year-end, the system could apply to aviation by 2010. It will certainly want to achieve this by 2012, which is a key date in the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, which the EU states have endorsed. The EU has already applied emissions trading to several other industries. Some possible good news for business and general aviation operators came in CE Delft’s recommendation to exclude from emissions trading all VFR movements and flights by aircraft weighing less than 8,618 kilograms (19,000 pounds). The weight cut-off would excuse aircraft such as the Hawker 400XP and Citation Encore, but it would include other popular business jets, such as the Learjet 40. This could prove to be an important consideration for operators shopping for new aircraft, and especially for executive charter operators. Emissions Trading Plans The EC’s expected acceptance of emissions trading as a means of reducing aviation’s output of greenhouse gases appears to confirm that it will not impose direct taxes on aircraft fuel. At a May 13 and 14 meeting EU finance ministers decided to abandon the fuel tax project. Controversially, the EU governments instead proposed to levy a new airline passenger tax to raise aid funds for developing world countries. However, this proposal has since been mired in profound disagreement and at subsequent July meetings of the EU finance ministers it appeared to be put on hold indefinitely. In July the UK assumed the rotating presidency of the EU for a six-month term. Prime Minister Tony Blair has highlighted action on climate change as one of his key goals for the EC, specifically pointing to emissions trading as a plan he would like to advance. EC officials will now digest CE Delft’s recommendations with a view to deciding whether to opt for emissions trading and which method to use. The 200-page CE Delft report (which can be found in the environment section of the EC Web site, www.europa.eu.int/index_en.html ) outlines several different modes of emissions trading. It appears to favor a system whereby aircraft operators would bid in an auction for the emissions permits that they require. Another system would allocate emissions permits to operators, who would then buy or sell them depending on their needs. In assessing the possible cost impact of emissions trading, CE Delft assumed emissions charges at rates of between €10 and €30 ($12 to $36) per metric ton (tonne) of CO2. It was estimated that a typical airliner would produce about eight tonnes of CO2 on a 259-nm short-haul flight between Amsterdam and Paris, almost 16 tonnes for the 757-nm sector between Munich, Germany, and Palma de Mallorca in Spain, and 157 tonnes for a 3,500-nm transatlantic flight between London and New York. On this basis, depending on which emissions trading system might eventually be implemented, the additional cost to the operator for the round-trip, short-haul city pairs would be between €23 ($27) and €481 ($577). For the medium-haul flight the increase would range between €46 and €948 ($55 to $1,137) and up to €1,638 ($1,965) for the transatlantic flight. The consultants calculated that–depending on the degree to which airlines would directly pass on emissions costs to their passengers–average ticket prices might rise by up to €9 ($10) per flight. The EU finance ministers had previously considered plans to tax either airline passengers or the airlines themselves for fuel consumption. This would have resulted in taxes on tickets of €10 ($12) for a one-way journey within the EU or €30 ($36) for a flight from inside the EU to a destination outside the EU. Alternatively, the plan could have imposed a tax on jet-A fuel of €330 ($396) per 1,000 liters (equivalent to almost 13 cents per U.S. gallon). Both sets of fuel tax proposals were staunchly opposed by the airline lobby, which appears to favor emissions trading as the lesser of two evils. The carriers were also vociferous in their objections to the planned development aid tax. To have opted for direct fuel taxes would have brought the EU into conflict with the terms of the International Civil Aviation Organization’s 1944 Chicago Convention, which excludes commercial operations from fuel taxation. However, the legal advice in the CE Delft report is that ICAO cannot prevent the EU from unilaterally imposing emissions trading, even on non-EU operators flying into EU airspace. According to CE Delft, while the EU’s total greenhouse gas emissions fell by 5.5 percent between 1990 and 2003, CO2 emissions from aviation within the 25 EU states increased by 73 percent. According to EU statistics, air transport is the fastest growing source of CO2 emissions even though it currently accounts for just 3 percent of global emissions. Air transport is projected to account for 15 percent of worldwide CO2 emissions by 2050. Jet Aviation adds another customer to Emissions Trading Scheme Now 101 Jet Aviation customers are signed up for the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme services offered by the company. Jet Aviation helps business jet operators to comply with the EU’s Emissions Trading System. Jet Aviation has added another client to its roster of customers for the European Union’s Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) management support services. “Our turnkey compliance solution is particularly helpful to small operators who don’t have in-house staff to ensure they are complying with EU ETS compliance requirements,” said Matthias Gruber, manager of Jet Aviation’s EU ETS services. “We recently expanded our offerings to include account opening and administration services to help our customers avoid fines for non-compliance.” EU attempts to regulate aviation emissions caused outcry U.N. body meant to agree on plan next year China set to declare backing for market-based deal BRUSSELS, June 17 (Reuters) – The boss of International Airlines Group on Wednesday said the industry would prefer a global emissions trading scheme to tackle aviation pollution, although other “interesting” options were also under consideration. Emissions from European flights are already covered by the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), but an EU law, meant to take effect from 2012, that extended the arrangement to intercontinental aviation emissions caused outcry. That forced the EU to retreat and U.N. body the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) took on the task of coming up with a global alternative. Its deadline is a meeting planned for late 2016. “The industry has a clear preference for a global emissions trading scheme, but I think some of the suggestions that are being introduced are interesting and should be examined,” Willie Walsh, the chief executive of British Airways and Iberia’s parent IAG, told a press conference. “We’ve moved on significantly from where we were a couple of years ago when there were separate states and they would not participate and we’ve also moved on from where people felt ICAO would be unable to reach an agreement.” He said the industry was not divided on the issue, but that governments were. In 2012, nations such as Russia, China and Saudi Arabia accused the European Union of infringing national sovereignty and threatened a trade war. Planemakers such as Airbus also put pressure on the European Union, saying multibillion-dollar orders for aircraft were at risk. A joint pledge between China and the European Union, expected to be signed off later this month in Brussels, calls for “a timely agreement in ICAO on a global market-based measure in 2016″. But environmental campaigners are concerned about how “market-based” will be defined and that the result will be less effective than including aviation in the EU ETS, a cap and trade system that limits the level of pollution allowed and forces emitters to buy permits to cover emissions up to that level. Allowance prices are weak on the ETS at around 7.50 euros per tonne, but are expected to strengthen as a series of reforms are enacted. Any deal allowing airlines to use international carbon offsets could mean they avoid having to cut pollution as the carbon reductions would be achieved elsewhere, campaigners say. (Writing by Barbara Lewis. editing by David Evans) Unilateral emission trading and competition between US and EU carriers Linda Paul graduated in 2007 in Industrial Organisation at Tilburg University. She did a research internship at the Netherlands Institute for Transport Policy Analysis. Her Master thesis deals with the impact of an international emission trading system on competition between European and US carriers. She currently works at the finance department of a software company. Mark Lijesen is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Spatial Economics at VU University Amsterdam. He was formerly affiliated at the Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis and the Netherlands Institute for Transport Policy Analysis. He received his PhD in 2004 from VU University. His main research interests lie in the field of competition in network sectors and spatial competition. International Journal of Aviation Management Article / Chapter Tools Related Content Search Keep in touch: Aviation EU Emissions Trading System - Key Facts is part of the Occupational Health & Safety Information Service's online subscription. Bringing you a comprehensive selection of legislation, regulations, guidance, standards, including BSI and best practice which is updated daily, you can find documents on a wide range of subject areas such as Food & Drink, Environmental Health, Environmental Management, Fire & Offshore Safety. Publication Date: January Abstract: We are working to provide abstracts for all documents in our service. If you would like further information about this publication, please call +44 (0)1344 328300 Publisher: United Kingdom Accreditation Service About IHS IHS, formerly known as Technical Indexes, is one of the leading global providers of critical information, decision-support tools and related services to customers in a number of industries, such as energy. defence. aerospace. construction. Educación. health & safety. transport. We service customers ranging from governments and large multinational corporations to smaller companies and technical professionals in more than 100 countries and employ more than 2,300 people worldwide. DEHSt - Aviation Aviation Aviation in Emissions Trading Not only the industrial and energy generating sector, but aviation too are major contributors to global emissions, and their share is on the rise. Aviation has therefore been included in European emissions trading since 2012. Commercial as well as non-commercial aircraft operators must surrender allowances for each tonne of carbon dioxide (CO2 ) emitted by their aviation activity. As a general principle, all aircraft operators are included in emissions trading if they carry out flights departing from or arriving at the territory of the European Economic Area (EU Member States, Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein). From 2010, they have been required to report their emissions to the competent authority (in Germany, to the German Emissions Trading Authority at the German Environment Agency, DEHSt ). For 2012 and 2013-2016, the EU has introduced several exceptions concerning geographic scope, which are explained below. Stopping the Clock 2012 Those aircraft operators whose administering Member State is Germany reported some 16 million tonnes of CO2 released in 2012. However, the overall emissions were much higher. Emission estimates and data from Eurocontrol indicate an amount of around 49.5 million tonnes of CO2 for flights taking off from or landing at European airports. Thus, in 2012 only 30 percent of the aviation emissions originally administered by Germany were regulated through emissions trading. These figures can be traced back to the implementation of the so-called "Stopping the clock". "Stopping the clock" was a temporary concession from the EU to support the ICAO process of negotiating a global market-based measure for regulating international aviation emissions. It allowed aircraft operators to choose to surrender a reduced amount of emissions certificates (i.e. with some exceptions, e.g. Switzerland, only for flights within the EEA ) if they relinquished some of the free allocation of emission allowances at the same time. All in all, the aircraft operators waived about 26.2 million of these free allowances. Amending the Emissions Trading Directive for the reporting years from 2013 A new trading period (2013-2020) started on 01/01/2013; in addition, the previously valid Monitoring Guidelines were replaced by the Monitoring Regulation. At its 38th General Assembly in the autumn of 2013, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO ) adopted a resolution to develop by the autumn of 2016 a global market-based climate protection instrument based on which aircraft operators are to reduce their CO2 emissions from 2020. To support this process, the European Union has decided, in addition to "Stopping the Clock", to temporarily adjust the Emissions Trading Directive. The relevant amendment entered into force on 30/04/2014. For aircraft operators, the following regulations are of particular importance: Mandatory suspension of the inclusion of international flights (flights to or from airports in countries outside the European Economic Area, with the exception of Croatia) and flights to and from certain areas in the outermost regions of the EU from 01/01/2013 to 31/12/2016, and adjustment of the allocation amounts Exemption for non-commercial aircraft operators with annual emissions of less than 1,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2), with respect to the original so-called "full scope", from 01/01/2013 to 31/12/2020 Postponement of the 2014 deadlines for reporting and surrendering 2013 emission allowances by one year to 2015. The relevant deadlines have thus been redefined as follows: Submission of the 2013 and 2014 emission reports by 31/03/2015 Surrender of emission allowances for 2013 and 2014 emissions by 30/04/2015 The verification obligation is waived for the emission reports of operators with less than 25,000 tonnes of annual CO2 emissions, with respect to the original scope, if the emissions report was fully created using data from the Eurocontrol Support Facility. Re-application of the original scope of the Emissions Trading Directive from 01/01/2017 if this is not re-adjusted by the EU due to the introduction of global market-based measures by the ICAO . Facts and data Aviation Since 1 January 2014 Croatia is fully integrated into the aviation part of the Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). Between 1 July 2013, when Croatia acceded to the European Union, and 31 December 2013 only the reporting obligations of the EU ETS applied. Publication of the Allocation of emission allowances to aircraft operators in period 2013-2020 in Croatia On 26/09/2011, the European Commission published benchmarks for calculating the free allocation of emission allowances to aircraft operators. They are around 0.6797 allowances per 1,000 tonne-kilometres in 2012 and 0.6422 allowances per 1,000 tonne-kilometres from 2013-2020. The benchmark is meant to ensure that the allocation cap is maintained and all aircraft operators receive an equal amount of allowances per tonne-kilometre unit. In 2012, 85 percent of the aviation sector emission allowances were allocated for free. Between 2013 and 2020, it will only be 82 percent since an additional special reserve of three percent will be earmarked for new and fast-growing aircraft operators for that trading period. The remaining 15 percent of allowances will be auctioned annually. Amendment of the allocation for the reporting years 2013-2016 The amendment of the Emissions Trading Directive by the Regulation (EU) No. 421/2014 and Corrigendum to Regulation (EU) No 421/2014 resulted in an adaptation of the allocation of free allowances, making it proportional to the reduction in surrender obligation as it results from the reduced geographical scope. This means that the 2013-2016 allocation of free allowances had to be recalculated and flights in areas affected by the above policy amendment (no more reporting and surrendering obligation) are excluded from the allocation. For this, the tonne-kilometres of the flights affected and reported for 2010 will be multiplied by the above benchmark and the resulting calculated value subtracted from the previous annual allocation amount. Allocation table for Croatia -reporting years 2013-2016: Aircraft Operator (CRCO/ETS) ID Giving wings to emission trading Inclusion of aviation under the European Emission Trading System (ETS): Design and impacts The study examines the feasibility of including international aviation in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme in order to mitigate the climate impacts of the sector by encouraging airlines to integrate reduction of those impacts into their business objectives. This study can be regarded as the third study commissioned by the European Commission on the use of economic instruments to mitigate the climate impacts of aviation. Previous studies have shown that introducing a tax on aviation fuel at the European level would give rise to considerable distortions in competition and may need amendment of bilateral air service agreements. En-route emission charges are also under consideration. The study published today complements the existing knowledge base by examining the consequences of including aviation in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). The main conclusion of the study is that emissions trading is a policy option worthy of consideration alongside other instruments for tackling aviation climate impacts. Effects on ticket prices are expected to be relatively modest. The system can be designed to encompass non-European air carriers too, thereby minimising economic distortions among carriers. Introducing emissions trading for the aviation sector does not appear to pose many challenges beyond those already encountered in the context of the current EU ETS. Authors: Ron Wit, Bart Boon and Andrй van Velzen (CE Delft) Martin Cames and Odette Deuber (Oeko-Institut) David Lee (Manchester Metropolitan University) Delft, July 2005 - 245 pag. Report Executive summary EU ETS for Aviation January 1st 2012 the Aviation sector became a fully integrated part of the EU Emission Trading Scheme. In 2010 and 2011 the monitoring and reporting requirements applied and from 2012 the full Directive, including surrendering of CO2 allowances, applied. All aircraft operators arriving in or departing from an EU member state have to comply with the EU ETS for Aviation. In order to do so, an approved monitoring plan for CO2-emmisions is required. September 2014 :Following the temporary changes for aircraft operators in the years 2013-16 (see below) the allocated free aviation allowances to aircraft operators administered by Denmark has now been re-calculated, see 'Adjusted list of free allocation of aviation allowances'. The issuance of allowances to operators will take place shortly after the European Commission has adopted a decision on approval of the recalculations in all member states. June 2014: April 16th 2014 the new Regulation on a temporary change of the rules for aviation was finally approved. It entered into force on the day of publication April 30th 2014. Important changes are that flights between airports within the European economic area (EEA) and airports outside the EEA is temporarily exempted for the period 2013-16 - and this years deadline for reporting of emissions and surrendering of allowances for the calendar year 2013 has been postponed til 2015 where the deadlines in March and April apply for emissions related to both 2013 and 2014. Following the Regulation the individual allocation of free allowances for the years 2013-16 shall be recalculated reflecting the reduction of the geographical scope. For this reason the annual issuance of allowances for 2013 and 2014 is still postponed until the recalculation is completed and approved by the European Commission later this year. November 2013 . October 16th 2013 the European Commission proposed a temporarily amendmend for the period 2013-20 to the aviation part of the Directive on EU ETS. The Danish Energy Agency has send the proposal in technical hearing to operators and stakeholders. A number of exemptions and derogations have been proposed - specific information on the proposed changes and a following FAQ document can be seen at the European Commission website here . July 2013 . In April 2013 the European Parliament agreed upon the stop-the-clock decision exempting 2012 flights between an EU aerodrome and a non-EU aerodrome. All aircraft operators had the option for the 2013 reporting to leave out emission from these flights in their annual emissions for the year 2012. The derogation only covers 2012 flights and seeks to provide room for the ICAO negotiations on a global MBM regulation for the aviation sector later this year. Operators making use of stop-the-clock during this years reporting were required to return a number of free allowances corresponding to the exempted flights. Following these returns the Danish list of free allowances has been updated regarding free allocations for 2012 June 2013 . Following the inclusion of Croatia in the EU ETS from 1st January 2014 domestic flights in Croatia as well as flights between Croatia and non-EU countries will be fully covered by the scope from this date. A trial monitoring and reporting period for these flights starts 1st of July 2013. These emissions are to be reported separately in 2014 as surrendering of allowances are not required for emissions in the trial period July-December 2013. If inclusion og these flights requires an update of your monitoring plan, please submit this to the DEA for approval as soon as possible. November 2011: Following the European Commission's announcement on 26 September 2011 of the benchmark values. which will be used to calculate the free allocation of allowances for aviation operators up to 2020, the Danish Energy Agency has calculated the levels of free allocation its regulated EU ETS aviation operators will receive in each year in the period 2012-2020. The allocations have been calculated by applying the European Commission published benchmark values to the 2010 verified activity data (tonne-kilometre data) submitted by operators. Please note allocations to aircraft operators may be adjusted should an act pursuant to Article 25a of Directive 2003/87/EC be adopted. Información general Under the EU ETS Denmark is the administering member state of primarily Danish operators but also a number of foreign operators. Non-EU operators have been assigned to administering member states based on the country where they had the largest attributed emissions in the period from 2006-2008. All operators flying in the EU must comply with the same requirements regarding monitoring and reporting of CO2 emissions and ton-kilometre data. All flights departing or arriving in the EU are included in the scheme. Flights covered by specific exemptions are excluded. These are specified in the annex to the directive and interpreted in the guidelines on exemptions. For the general EU introduction to the ETS for aviation please see: Guidance document on EU ETS for aviation The omission of aviation from the Paris climate deal could cause a very big problem if talks next year fail to make progress on a global plan to reduce aircraft pollution, the European climate chief said. Earlier efforts to tackle the issue have foundered. Under threat of a trade war with China, India and others, the European Union had to suspend part of a law, meant to apply from 2012, that would have required all aviation using its airports buy pollution permits on its EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), lse.co.uk Reuters reported. Aviation and shipping make up around five percent of global emissions, a share expected to grow to a third of all emissions by 2050 if left unchecked, according to European Commission data. Just back in Brussels from UN talks that delivered a global climate pact, EU Climate and Energy Commissioner Miguel Arias Canete said a deal agreed by nearly 200 countries could never be perfect. He said the European Union got most of what it wanted, but had been forced to drop its demand to include aviation and shipping, sectors that were similarly left out of the Kyoto Protocol, the predecessor to the Paris Agreement. & Quot; For sure we would like to have had more and aviation and maritime are a clear case. We were fighting for it until the last moment," Arias Canete said. Inclusion in the deal would have injected momentum into the quest for agreement at the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), which has been charged with finding a market-based global solution. The EU was forced to limit the scope of its aviation law to flights within the European Union under pressure from nations including China and India which also opposed inclusion of the sector in the Paris accord, delegates said. The EU only suspended its law on international aviation on condition the ICAO found an alternative market-based solution. & Quot; If that doesn't happen, if there is no movement, then we will be in the middle of a very big problem," Arias Canete said. Officials said the European Commission would decide on the next steps depending on the outcome of the ICAO meeting late next year. Shipping is less far advanced than aviation towards agreement on a global scheme, environment campaigners say. The European Union has introduced measures to monitor pollution from the sector. EU proposes delay to Emissions Trading System enforcement What we say - News On 12 March, the European Parliament and Member States in the Council agreed on a legislative proposal to delay enforcement of the EU’s Emissions Trading System (ETS) for international flights to and from Europe. Background to ETS The EU has been seeking a global agreement to tackle aviation emissions through the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) for more than 15 years. In November 2012 the Commission made a proposal to exempt from enforcement flights into and out of Europe operated in 2010, 2011, and 2012 to provide negotiation time for the ICAO General Assembly in autumn 2013. The legislation will continue to apply to all flights within and between the 30 European countries in the EU ETS. Stopping the clock for a global solution The purpose of the delay is to allow more time for international negotiations on a global market-based approach to regulating greenhouse gases from aviation. This so-called “stop the clock” agreement is expected to be formally approved by the Parliament in April 2013 and shortly thereafter by the Council. The European Commissioner for Climate Action, Connie Hedegaard, has made it clear that if the international negotiations fail to make sufficient progress, the EU ETS legislation would be applied in full to all flights to and from non-European countries from 1 January 2014 onwards. We'll keep you posted on progress here - for more details read about ETS in Aviation visit the European Commission Climate Action website For more information on aviation law or related enquiries, contact Alina Nosek, Partner, Aviation. Published: 4 Apr 2013 asb law's aviation claims expert, Tim Brymer presented information to European Parliamentary Assembly hearing on Smolensk plane crash recently. READ MORE The laws and conventions governing air accident investigation and air carrier liability are complex, involving issues of domestic and international law. This article aims to provide a brief overview of the process that a typical investigation of an accident or serious incident will follow, along with some of the key sources of legislation which are relevant from a UK perspective. READ MORE An increase in disorderly behaviour continues to disrupt flights and cause chaos for passengers, airlines and airports. READ MORE On 16 January 2016, also known as implementation day, all nuclear related economic and financial EU sanctions against Iran were lifted following verification by the International Atomic Energy Agency that Iran has met its requirements under The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – an agreement made between the USA, Iran, the European Union, China, France, Russia, Germany and the UK. READ MORE European Union. International Implementation Of EU Emission Trading Scheme Still Unsettled The Scope of the Emission Trading Scheme Remains Limited to Flights Within the EU The European Union (EU) adopted a regulation in April 2014 that continued the application of the European Union Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) as to flights operated inside the European Economic Area (EEA). Implementation of the international aspects of the ETS continues to be a work in progress with numerous issues and challenges that may arise from the lack of international consensus on emissions regulations. The European Union (EU) adopted a regulation in April 2014 that continued the application of the European Union Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) as to flights operated inside the European Economic Area (EEA). But implementation of the international aspects of the ETS continues to be a work in progress based, at least in part, on objections to the implementation of regional emissions schemes. These objections have stemmed from several countries, including the U.S. China and India. Parties who presently have or intend to have interests in aircraft using EEA airports, such as operators, secured parties, lessors and lessees, should continue to carefully monitor developments and consider potential implications, including rights and obligations under leasing agreements. EU Continues to Implement ETS Within the EEA While Delaying International Implementation The European Union's Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) Directive 2003/87/EC (Oct. 13, 2003) is a carbon cap-and-trade program wherein the EU sets an overall cap on emissions and allocates emissions allowances that may be used, banked for future use, or sold on the open market. Since Jan. 1, 2012, the broad reach of the ETS purported to touch any commercial and non-commercial aircraft operator (including operators based outside of the EU) using an airport located within the EEA, 1 with certain de minimis exceptions under the Aviation Directive 2008/101/EC (Nov. 19, 2008). 2 The following are exempt as de minimis under the ETS: flights performed by aircraft with a certified maximum take-off weight of less than 5,700 kg (approximately 12,500 lbs) aircraft operators operating (a) fewer than 243 flights touching the EEA airports for three consecutive four-month periods, or (b) flights touching the EEA airports with total annual emissions less than 10,000 metric tons Total Flight Emissions Considered – Not Just European Airspace Emissions As originally enacted, ETS aircraft operators were required to obtain allowances for carbon dioxide emitted during the full length of any flight that departs from or arrives at an EEA airport. Thus, a flight to London from Los Angeles would require more allowances than a flight from New York even though the planes flew over the same amount of European airspace. Aircraft operators are required to submit allowances equal to their flight emissions by April 30 of the following calendar year. Each aircraft operator is assigned to a member state for the purposes of reporting and submitting allowances. Penalties for failing to submit allowances range from a fine of €100 per metric ton of carbon dioxide in addition to the cost of purchasing requisite allowances on the open market to an operating ban for continued noncompliance. Before the submission deadline for the 2012 allowances, the European Commission proposed a delay on implementation of the international aspects of the ETS to encourage negotiations for the creation of a global emissions scheme at the United Nations International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Assembly in September and October 2013. On April 24, 2013, the European Parliament and European Council considered the European Commission's proposal and decided that the EU would not enforce monitoring, reporting and verification requirements for flights between EEA airports and non-EEA airports for calendar years 2010-2012. 3 However, "intra-flights"– flights between EEA airports – had to be fully compliant with ETS requirements. This decision is sometimes referred to as the "Stop the Clock" Decision. On Oct. 4, 2013, the ICAO Assembly created a roadmap for the development of a global emissions scheme to be voted upon by the ICAO Assembly in 2016 with implementation by 2020. 4 The ICAO Assembly also passed a resolution that countries or groups of countries designing or implementing their own emissions scheme for international aviation should engage in consultations and negotiations with other states. 5 The EU voted against this resolution and later submitted a reservation noting that there is no legal requirement for a mutual agreement to implement its own emissions scheme. 6 Notwithstanding its opposition to the ICAO's resolution, the EU has taken additional steps to delay implementation of the international aspects of the ETS. On Oct.16, 2013, the European Commission proposed a two-prong amendment to enforcement of the ETS. First, the "Stop the Clock" Decision applicable to 2010-2012 would be extended to cover calendar year 2013. Second, the proposed amendment called for enforcement of the ETS during calendar years 2014-2020 on (i) all flights between EEA airports; and (ii) portions of flights that take place in European regional airspace for flights between EEA airports and non-EEA airports. In April 2014, the EU implemented Regulation No. 421/2014, which extends the "Stop the Clock" Decision to calendar years 2013-2016. 7 The regulation also excludes certain flights between "outermost regions" of the EEA for calendar years 2013-2016. 8 Further, in addition to the existing de minimis exception, there is an ETS exemption for non-commercial aircraft operators with a total of less than 1,000 tonnes CO 2 per year from calendar years 2013-2020. Compliance dates for reporting emissions and surrendering allowances for calendar year 2013 emissions were extended to March and April 2015 to coincide with existing deadlines for calendar year 2014. Importantly, the regulation did not extend the ETS to portions of flights that take place in European regional airspace for flights between EEA airports and non-EEA airports Potential International Implementation Warrants Attention Several countries have voiced strong objections to the ETS. In the U.S. the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition Act (the "ETS Prohibition Act") became law on Nov. 27, 2012. 9 The ETS Prohibition Act applies to all "civil aircraft of the United States" registered under 49 U.S.C. 44101 et seq. (i.e. operators of N-registered aircraft) and authorizes the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation to conduct international negotiations to pursue a "worldwide approach to address aircraft emissions." Further, the ETS Prohibition Act empowers the U.S. Secretary of Transportation to prohibit an operator of a U.S. civil aircraft from participating in the ETS at a later date. Section 2(a) of the ETS Prohibition Act requires the Secretary to make a determination that the prohibition would be "in the public interest" after taking into account the impact on: U.S. consumers, U.S. carriers and U.S. operators U.S. economic, energy and environmental security U.S. foreign relations, including existing international commitments Following the European Commission's proposed amendments in October 2013, members of Congress and industry groups asked the U.S. Secretary of Transportation to use its powers under the ETS Prohibition Act to oppose application of the ETS to U.S. aircraft operators. To date, the Secretary of Transportation has not exercised its authority to prohibit U.S. aircraft operators from participating in the ETS. Compliance With ETS Raises Many Considerations In looking ahead, one of many potential areas of consideration are the rights and obligations under existing aircraft leasing and financing agreements. The aircraft operator at the time the aircraft arrives or departs from an EEA airport is the party responsible for compliance with ETS. Thus, responsibility for ETS compliance would likely arise from the nature of the leasing agreement. Under a "wet lease," the lessor retains operational control of the aircraft. Conversely, under a "dry lease," the lessee obtains possession of the aircraft and thus operational control. Based on their respective positions, the parties to a leasing agreement should further evaluate their insurance and indemnification rights – especially because failure to comply with the ETS could result in liens, detention, or operational limitations that have a direct impact on the contracted rights and obligations. As the ETS is implemented into national law by each member state, the specific rules regarding seizure and sale or other penalties differ from member state to member state. Such rights and obligations of parties to a leasing agreement may be implicated if, for instance, the U.S. Secretary of Transportation exercises its power to prohibit a U.S. civil aircraft from participating in ETS. In such an instance, an operator may be unable to simultaneously comply with the ETS and the ETS Prohibition Act. Where a lease permits a lessor to declare a default in the event of a material risk of detention resulting from fees owed in respect of the aircraft, it is conceivable that compliance with the ETS Prohibition may result in a lessor's exercise of remedies. Current Scope of the ETS At the current time, the scope of the ETS remains limited to flights within the EU. The discussion in this alert identifies only a small sampling of what are likely to be a plethora of issues and challenges that may arise from the lack of international consensus on emissions regulations. Although these issues may not appear to have immediate significance, they nonetheless deserve the consideration of parties who ultimately may be impacted by a broader ETS implementation. Footnotes 1 The European Economic Area (EEA) includes the EU countries, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. Croatia joined the EU on July 1, 2013, and its membership to the EEA is pending. However, as of Jan.1, 2014, Croatia became fully integrated into the aviation part of the ETS. 2 A study by Price Waterhouse Cooper estimates that approximately 88 percent of 3,557 aircraft operators covered by the ETS in 2012 were non-commercial small emitters who contribute 0.8 percent of estimated aviation emissions. See ETS Aviation Small Emitters: Cost Assessment of Applying EU ETS (Mar. 25, 2014). 3 See Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council No. 377/2013/EU (Apr. 24, 2013). 7 Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council No. 421/2014 (Apr. 16, 2014). 9 European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Act, Pub. L. 112-200, 126 Stat. 1477 (2012); see also S. 1956, 112th Cong. (2011) . El contenido de este artículo pretende proporcionar una guía general sobre el tema. El consejo de especialistas debe ser buscado de acuerdo a sus circunstancias especificas. To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com. Haga clic para iniciar sesión como usuario existente o Regístrese para poder imprimir este artículo. Do you have a Question or Comment? Click here to email the Author EU includes aviation in emissions-trading plan The European Union's executive arm approved plans on Wednesday to include aviation in its emissions-trading system, giving international flights in and out of the EU a one-year reprieve before they have to join. Flights within the EU will join the scheme, aimed at cutting global air pollution, in 2011. Flights into and out of the 25-nation bloc will be included the following year, giving non-EU carriers time to prepare and to see how the system works. The United States quickly objected, arguing through an embassy spokesman that the EU was trying to circumvent the International Civil Aviation Organisation by proceeding on its own. Green campaigners branded the proposals "weak", claiming they would reduce the sector's emissions by only 3% rather than the 46% suggested. They urged the EU to end the tax exemption on jet fuel -- worth €35 billion a year for airlines -- as a genuine weapon for fighting climate change. Environmental groups said the plans would hand a windfall profit to airlines, worth up to €3.5 billion a year, by giving carriers free carbon allowances rather than forcing them to bid for pollution permits at auction. 最新文章 Latest Articles Bonn-Chengdu: Three lessons from green city partnerships Closer cooperation between Chinese and western cities can help drive common solutions on climate change, if partnerships are formed in a more constructive way, argues Shinwei Ng EU targets ‘disposable’ electric items in bid to reduce pollution and energy use As China readies plans for a ‘circular economy,’ the EU is grappling with ways to reduce mountains of environmentally-damaging waste, writes David Burrows 最新博客文章 Latest Blogs Coal is parching the planet as well as cooking it, says new report On World Water Day, a new report outlines how coal use is the number one threat to water supplies 最新文化 Latest Culture Book review: China’s Renewable Energy Revolution John A Mathews and Hao Tan’s new book provides an excellent account of the policies driving China’s green transition – but feels light on politics and power, writes Sam Geall Europe’s first underwater sculpture museum highlights plight of the ocean A series of underwater sculptures will be transformed into a permanent habitat for coral polyps and fish 分享 Social 合作伙伴 Partners 项目 Projects 书评 Books Revised European Emissions Plan Draws Criticism from All Corners Despite an apparent historic consensus at the ICAO Triennial Assembly in Montreal in early October to develop a global market-based mechanism for managing aircraft emissions, the European Commission ( EC ) has pressed ahead with plans to implement its emissions trading scheme ( ETS ) in the meantime. The key difference lies in the fact that the new policy would apply only to fuel burned within European airspace, rather than cover full intercontinental flights to and from European cities. But, crucially, it would still apply to non- EU airlines, provoking renewed resistance from the air transport industry, even though European officials always made clear their intention to take some form of limited unilateral action ahead of implementation of the envisioned worldwide system. “It would take us back to the brink of a trade war, a situation the industry certainly would want to avoid,” warned Paul Steele, senior vice president of member and external relations for the International Air Transport Association ( IATA ), at a media event last month in Geneva, Switzerland. The European Parliament must vote on the plan by April for airlines to meet emissions reporting requirements for applicable flights in 2013. Schedules call for a preliminary vote to move forward on January 30 in the parliament’s environment committee. Upcoming elections in late May for most of the parliament’s 766 members appear sure to complicate the political wrangling. The new plan still requires all airlines that fly into or out of airports in the European Economic Area ( EEA ) to account for their carbon dioxide emissions and purchase carbon credits for any that are not covered by an allowance of free credits. The EEA comprises the 27 members of the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein. Airlines would not have to report their emissions while flying over Switzerland, which is a member of neither the EU nor EEA. More than a dozen other countries, known as “the coalition of the unwilling”—including the U.S. China, India, Canada, Brazil and Russia—opposed the original EU - ETS scheme on sovereignty grounds. The U.S. Congress passed the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition Act 2011, barring U.S. aircraft operators from participating in the EU - ETS . China used economic leverage, holding up a $12 billion order for Airbus aircraft. The EU backed off, deferring in November 2012 to the forthcoming ICAO assembly and implementing a “stop the clock” policy that applied only to European airlines. The Chinese then allowed the order for Airbus A330 s and A380 s to proceed. Plans for the EU to forge ahead on its own have drawn dissension within Europe. French, German and UK government leaders—three countries with huge stakes in Airbus—have publicly opposed the new EU emissions implementation. Meanwhile, European low-fare carriers such as Easyjet and Ryanair object to the prospect of EU -only fees diminishing their competitiveness against non-European airlines. European Low Fares Airline Association ( ELFAA ) secretary general John Hanlon has called for reversion to an all-flights ETS as “the real way to remedy the reduction in environmental effectiveness, instead of the attempt to inflict further discriminatory and distortive penalties on those operators and their end-customers, EU citizens.” Environmental groups consider the ICAO resolution, which calls a market-based mechanism plan by 2016 and implementation by 2020, a delaying tactic. Peter Liese, a spokeman for the European Parliament’s environmental committee, called the ICAO resolution “a very modest result.” “We have no guarantee that a system will be introduced in 2020 and that the benefit for the environment is substantial,” he added. “There are too many ifs and buts. EU law has to be applied and we can’t give in to threats. We must not capitulate and be bullied by third countries.” EU Emissions Trade Scheme and Aviation This book provides a concise and convenient compilation of the EU directives and decisions concerning the inclusion of aviation into the existing greenhouse gas emission allowances trading scheme (ETS). An introduction has been added to set out the European and international context. Furthermore, some practical templates for reporting annual emissions and tonne-km data are included as well as a list of useful contacts. The 2003 ETS Directive introduced emission trading for energy-intensive installations on an European level. Subsequently, the 2004 Linking Directive made further flexible mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol available. In 2008 the Aviation Directive took EU ETS to the next level, as it included aviation in the scheme. This directive has been accompanied by the 2007 Monitoring and Reporting Guidelines (MRG), which were revised on 16 April 2009 providing detailed guidance as regards the determination of emissions and tonne-km data and streamlining the compliance cycle consisting of monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) duties. The book is a timely and welcome addition to the literature in the field and should be of interest to anyone dealing with aviation and environmental law. This book is volume 6 in our Essential Air and Space Law series, a book series set up with the aim of establishing a collection of prominent studies in this particular field of law especially for experienced practitioners (e.g. lawyers, policy makers in governments, national and international organisations and private entities), in addition to scholars involved in the research and study of air traffic and space law. /system/uploads/21310/original/9789077596791_omslag108px.jpg?1300176581 isbn:9789077596791 Eleven International Publishing Media > Books > Non-Fiction Price: 85.0 Condition: new EU Emissions Trade Scheme and Aviation Year of publication 2009 448 pages Ulrich Steppler and Angela Klingmüller 978‐90‐77596‐79‐1 | hardcover | 1st edition | € 85.00 / $ 127.50 / £ 78.20 This book provides a concise and convenient compilation of the EU directives and decisions concerning the inclusion of aviation into the existing greenhouse gas emission allowances trading scheme (ETS). An introduction has been added to set out the European and international context. Furthermore, some practical templates for reporting annual emissions and tonne-km data are included as well as a list of useful contacts. The 2003 ETS Directive introduced emission trading for energy-intensive installations on an European level. Subsequently, the 2004 Linking Directive made further flexible mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol available. In 2008 the Aviation Directive took EU ETS to the next level, as it included aviation in the scheme. This directive has been accompanied by the 2007 Monitoring and Reporting Guidelines (MRG), which were revised on 16 April 2009 providing detailed guidance as regards the determination of emissions and tonne-km data and streamlining the compliance cycle consisting of monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) duties. The book is a timely and welcome addition to the literature in the field and should be of interest to anyone dealing with aviation and environmental law. This book is volume 6 in our Essential Air and Space Law series, a book series set up with the aim of establishing a collection of prominent studies in this particular field of law especially for experienced practitioners (e.g. lawyers, policy makers in governments, national and international organisations and private entities), in addition to scholars involved in the research and study of air traffic and space law. Target group Author's information Ulrich Steppler ([email protected]) is a partner with Arnecke Siebold Rechtsanwälte in the firm’s Frankfurt office. He specializes in aviation matters, focusing in particular on passenger air transportation. Ulrich has published numerous articles, case notes, and reviews as well as a book on IATA interlining. He is a graduate of the University of Marburg (1999) and the University of Kent at Canterbury (Diploma in English Law, 1996). He trained in London and Toronto, Canada and articled in Duesseldorf and New York, USA. Ulrich also holds a Master of Laws’ degree of the University of Applied Sciences Mainz (LL.M. 2007). Ulrich represents various national and international airlines, industry participants, and organisations in all relevant areas. He co-heads the Transportation, Aviation, and Logistics (TAL) department at Arnecke Siebold. Dr. Angela Klingmüller ([email protected]) is a partner with Arnecke Siebold Rechtsanwälte in the firm’s Frankfurt office. She specializes in aviation law, real property and environmental law. She advises clients from the national as well as the international aviation industry in a wide range of legal matters, including registration of airlines and aircraft mortgages, issues relating to the use of the airport and curfew restrictions, self-handling rights, relocation projects. She also advises international companies in real property transactions, commercial leasing agreements and environmental related matters. Angela is a graduate of the University of Munich (LMU) and received her doctoral degree (Dr. jur.) in 1997 from the University of Muenster. She trained in Cape Town, South Africa and Frankfurt and articled in Munich and New York, USA. She holds a Master of Laws’ degree (1993) of Duke University, School of Law, Durham, North Carolina, USA and has been a visiting scholar at the University of California at Berkeley; she is also admitted to the New York State Bar. Angela has published numerous articles and is a speaker at national and international seminars and conferences. First online: 10 November 2010 Open Access This content is freely available online to anyone, anywhere at any time. The economic impact of the upcoming EU emissions trading system on airlines and EU Member States—an empirical estimation Martin Schaefer Affiliated with Institute of Propulsion Technology, German Aerospace Center (DLR) . Janina Scheelhaase Affiliated with Institute of Air Transport and Airport Research, German Aerospace Center (DLR) Email author . Wolfgang Grimme Affiliated with Institute of Air Transport and Airport Research, German Aerospace Center (DLR) . Sven Maertens Affiliated with Institute of Air Transport and Airport Research, German Aerospace Center (DLR) Abstract Purpose In February 2009, the European Union’s (EU) Directive for the inclusion of aviation into the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS) for CO 2 -emissions came into force. From 2012 onwards, the EU-ETS will cover virtually all flights departing or arriving in the EU. As aircraft operators (i.e. airlines) will be required to hold emission allowances for all flights that are subject to the EU-ETS, the economical impacts of the system are currently being discussed. This paper aims at estimating and analysing the economical impact of the EU-ETS on the aviation sector in total, on selected groups of airlines and on the administering states. Materials and methods This paper describes a simulation model for the economical impact of the EU-ETS. According to current plans, the initial allocation of emission allowances to airlines will be based on a benchmark which is calculated by dividing the 2004–2006 CO 2 -emissions by the transport performance of the year 2010. The simulation model calculates CO 2 emissions and transport performance of European aviation for the timeframe 2004–2012. The approach is based on flight schedules for passenger and cargo air traffic coupled to an aircraft performance module. By use of this model, the benchmark and hence the initial allocation of emission allowances to airlines can be estimated. Using assumptions on the development of the CO 2 allowance price, the economical impacts of the EU-ETS can be discussed. Results and discussion The economic effects of the upcoming EU-ETS on the aviation sector in total, on selected groups of airlines and on the administering states are analysed and discussed. It is shown that additional to the freely allocated allowances, nearly all aircraft operators need to purchase allowances for about one third of their emissions in 2012. The total cost for the aviation sector is expected to be in the range between 1.9 and 3.0 billion € in 2012. Certain airline groups and administering EU States will be affected very differently by the new EU legislation. It is shown that particularly European network carriers will be affected by a competitive disadvantage compared to non-EU airlines. Keywords Environment, aircraft emissions Airline competition Air transport policy Climate change Environmental economics EU emissions trading scheme European Commission Emissions trading in aviation Abstract Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable. Author can archive a pre-print version Author cannot archive a post-print version Permission must be sought 3 months on author's personal website 12 months for employers website or free public servers in subject area On author's personal website, employer's website or institution website or free public servers Pre-print must be accompanied by statement that article has been submitted to journal Published source must be acknowledged with full citation Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used Contesting Aviation’s Role in European Emission Trading The European Union’s emission trading scheme (EU ETS) has hit a brick wall erected by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). In an October 4 resolution. the ICAO denied a country (or in this case, a region) the right to unilaterally include another country’s airline in its ETS. Instead, the ICAO committed to agree in 2016, to a global emissions trading mechanism that would take effect in 2020. There is no guarantee, however, that such a system will be introduced, and that it would be as environmentally beneficial as an all-inclusive EU ETS. This is widely perceived as a political defeat of the EU, which had offered to exclude from its scheme any emissions released outside of EU airspace, but to include all emissions within it. In doing so, the EU had hoped to reach an international deal, particularly with the United States and China, which have opposed inclusion of their airlines in the EU ETS. The EU has justified the inclusion of foreign airlines in its ETS on the basis of the 1947 Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation, which allows for each country’s sovereignty of its own airspace. Although the consequences of the ICAO resolution are unclear, the decision is poised to make enforcement of the EU ETS in the aviation sector much more difficult. For the EU to amend the existing ETS to exclude foreign airlines, it would need approval from the European Parliament as well as from EU member states. A complete exclusion of foreign airlines is somewhat unlikely, given that this could endanger the competitiveness of domestic carriers and ultimately prevent overall inclusion of the aviation sector in the ETS. Members of parliament across the political spectrum have opposed the resulting weakening of EU climate policy. The European Union’s emission trading scheme (EU ETS) has hit a brick wall erected by the International Civil Aviation Organization. Source: Wikicommons user Vards Uzvards. In response to the ICAO resolution, the European Commission proposed on October 16 to amend the EU ETS so that, effective in 2014, the scheme covers only those segments of flights that occur within European regional airspace. The change would apply until the planned global emissions trading mechanism enters into force, presumably in 2020. Some European carriers will likely not be happy with this compromise either. In particular, a higher share of the flights of smaller regional airlines will face the burden of permitting costs than those of larger competitors that operate intercontinentally. Emissions from EU aviation increased 87 percent between 1990 and 2006 alone, and they are projected to reach more than double the 2006 level by 2020, threatening to cancel out a substantial part of the emission reductions achieved in other sectors. Given the importance of the EU ETS as Europe’s key transnational tool to meet its climate policy commitments, it is of vital importance to include the aviation sector in the scheme. At the same time, the European Commission must advance in its efforts to take emission allowances off the market in order to boost their prices and create incentives to curb emissions, both in the air and on the ground. Carousel image credit: Joe Ravi +++We provide and deliver EUA and CER2 certificates for plant- and aircraft operators++Welcome to the information portal for emissions trading+++We offer a CO2 Hassle-free-package for emission trading++ Welcome to Emissionshändler.com® Emissionshändler.com offers companies trading and consultancy services for the European Emissions Trading Scheme. Emissionshändler.com is a service provider for the middle and smaller participants of the mandatory EU emissions trading scheme, which is in addition to consulting services and support services also offer easy access to exchanges and trading markets for the purpose of sale, exchange and sale of CO2 emission allowances are given. Emission News from Emissionshändler.com® The emission letter appears about 12 times a year in German and English language (letter emission and emission News) and deals with issues around the European emissions trading. Here you can order your Emission News (paid or for free). Penalty Risks for System Operators - Technical Reasons and Liability without Culpability according to the ECJ Judgement The ECAS system and its problems with mobile communications as well as technical insufficiencies around the VET entry characterize the authorized account holders' workflow process in March of a running year. In this context a special attention should be drawn to the fact that a huge number of different technical reasons can cause an account lockout which can be avoided, however, by means of comparatively simple protection measures. Emissionshändler.com® describe in the 2nd Part of Emission News 04-2016 established here how and in which form account lockouts and account closures can arise and how they can be avoided so that no risk for a penalty shows up. Especially the technical aspects on the system operator's side are awarded with detailed explanations. Liability Risks for System Operators of the EU Emission Trading – Also appointed Employees are concerned by the Law governing Administrative Offences If the managing directors or executives of mandatory emissions trade's system operators try to get informed about possible risks in this field, they just use to hear the words “100 Euros fine per ton CO2”, an amount which becomes due at the end of April for the past year in case of a non-submission. Without further detailed knowledge about the subject, however, the question arises less frequently how commissioned employees happen to commit such a failure and how, above all, this scenery of a penalty duty could be avoided economically. It is amazing that operators rarely or never ask themselves how liability risks in accordance with the Administrative Violations Law OwiG happen to be managed and who in the Company would in which way be held responsible. In fact the administrative offences seem to contain a kind of direct liability which finds its way through to commissioned employees as there are authorized account holders and annual report authors. It means that not only managing directors and executives are held responsible for administrative offences. Emissionshändler.com® explains in the first part of Emission News 03-2016 (German version here ) drawn up here how and in which form liabilities in accordance with OWiG arise, on which level of the EU and the national legislation they find application and how these risks can be reduced in a way that is economically representative. Also criminal aspects will be treated here. The Predictability of EUA Volatility at the Beginning of a Year - Emissions Limits in Construction Plans Threaten Systemerators Since many years, January and February use to be the months where potential gamblers make a lot of money in the EUA market, systematically and in a big style. This way of action which can be observed for 6 years already since 2011 - with one (half) exception in 2015 - could mean a chance for ordinary market participants like system operators but can also mean a high risk if the participation in the trade started at the wrong moment. Price fluctuations at an average of 33.2% having been observed in the years 2012-2016 took place exclusively in January/ February. A clear explanation of this fact is that the high surplus of up to 2.4 billion EU-ETA certificates is laying to a big extent in the hands of professional gamblers who either push the price upwards or downwards. How this development took place and continues in January 2016 is explained in the Emission News 02-2016 (German version here ) of Emissionshändler.com®. We furthermore add a guest column of Attorney Dr. Marc Rutloff. He reports about an expanding method to fix emissions restrictions in construction plans. These restrictions may include a sudden reduction of the acting radius of local system operators. Paris Agreement Could Downsize Carbon Leakage List - Integration of Road Traffic into EU-ETS Can Push Up Prices Considering the Paris Agreement's results in detail and reflecting who made which statements on site not only to the Agreement but also about future plans in the EU-ETS, certain subjects attract attention. These are worth being scrutinized closer with regard to the European Trading System and its possible price development. Especially the intended linking of a Chinese ETS with the EU-ETS being planned for 2017 could lead to stronger shortenings on the CL list which consequently could cause a shortage of emission rights thus producing a price increase. But also various statements of the EU Commission's responsible Chief Executive Jos Delbeke make us listen carefully. Mr Delbeke considers the integration of road traffic into the emission trade as definitely positive even if it will primarily only be realised in Germany. This possibility having been proposed by the bvek already years ago could still withdraw additional emission rights from the EU-ETS, if requested. Furthermore Emissionshändler.com® list up in their Emission News 01-2016 (German version here ) how certificate amounts and price information can be detected at the beginning of the year in order to integrate them into the balance sheet. Facts on the Paris World Climate Agreement - Is the EUA Victim of a Decarbonisation? The "Paris Agreement" which was concluded by the Parties' Conference of the UN Framework Convention on Climate on 12th December 2015 will influence the nations' handling with the climate for decades and will replace the old Kyoto protocol beginning 2020. Emissionshändler.com® describes once again in the second part of this Emission News 13-2015 ( German version here ) what consequences would have been occurred respectively will occur in case of a failure of the Paris negotiations if the realization of the agreement will not be successful in the coming years. The first part of the letter, however, includes the most essential results of Paris and describe the probable effects on the EU emission trade and its price development which might appear already in the coming days and weeks. Connection between MzB (Notification to operation) and Monitoring Plan becomes more and more apparent to Operators - Update of Annual Account Data While almost all operators in the EU are invited to submit their Notification to operation (MzB) to their authority already in December, German operators will do this only in coming January. The earlier German operators have the chance to elaborate a correct MzB for which the monitoring plan can play an essential role. This is of importance because the verifier is obliged on the verification of the emission report to check simultaneously if the information about the enterprise was drawn up in accordance with the demands of the approved monitoring plan and reports about the plant situation in a correct way. Due to the extremely detailed verification of the MzB by the national authority DEHSt, the very high risk occurs that a reduction of free allocations will be determined because certain modifications took place in the plant or its operating method changed. In order to avoid probably such unintended effects - also by means of a monitoring plan updated still in this year - Emissionshändler.com® offers advice for the very complex connections between the various reports and the monitoring plan. Furthermore Emissionshändler.com® reports in this Emission News 12-2015 (German version here ) about some innovations on the annual update of an operator's account data. Cybercrime in Online Banking Could Harm Safety of Union Register - 3 Years Updates Occurring Incorrect activities of authorized representatives in the register might cause the possibility of a certificate theft in case of an insufficiently secured mTAN procedure. Due to fraud series with stolen mobile TAN numbers (mTAN) in online banking leaked out lately the question arises in how far certificates of the Union register's account are still safe if simultaneously authorized representatives of a system operator violate the register regulation's rules. Emissionshändler.com® examines in its Emission News 11-2015 ( German version here ) being presented here the possibilities and procedures leading probably to a possibly successful cyber theft of certificates (as already happened in 2010). We furthermore report about the running invitations of DEHSt to update data being necessary for the opening (at that time) of an investment account of the system operator as well as about personal data of the relevant authorized representatives. We also reproduce in a foreign reporting from BBH a survey about the level of the financial market directive MiFID II and how this would impact on system operators, traders and public utilities. Access to Register Account only possible with updated safety standards – Authorized Persons are requested to apply for it safely and correctly The safety standard for the encryption of web pages for access to register accounts will be increased by the EU register beginning of October 16. The fixing on TLS standard 1.2 means a direct request for action for up to 25% of account representatives, according to the opinion of Emissionshändler.com®. Users whose browser version only deal with the former TLS version 1.0 will have to undertake safety improvements on their browsers in the best case, the worst case could cause them to replace it by a completely new one. Emissionshändler.com® explains in their Emission-News 10-2015 ( German version here ) which individual browser version requests what kind of modification on the adjustments and which browsers are concerned to what extent. We furthermore point out which one of the present procedures needs special attention of the responsible persons, this for the modification of a password in ECAS as well as for the application and replacement of account representatives. The special attention is needed because irritating false system reports may in fact lead to avoidable insecurity. Sanctions for wrong declarations being detected after submission in a verified emission report - EuGH expresses protection of good faith Can a plant operator rely on the information of its audited and rated as satisfactory annual report on the emissions? Or will he have to fear sanctions if too few allowances were issued, because it turns out in retrospect that his annual report was flawed? This question for protection of good faith in the rightness of the verified and approved emission report is of principle meaning for plant operators. After all, a certain error rate is immanent for emission reports and besides, the threatening sanctions are considerable. An article by Attorney Ruttloff in our Emission News 09-2015 (German version here ). Furthermore Emissionshändler.com® reports in his third and final part of a final criminal fraud with VER / CER credits and provides information on how to avoid it. CO2 Certificates Investment scams for individuals, Part II - Will we see emission trading for road transportation ? As we have already started our Part I in Emission-News 03-2015 . Emissionshändler.com® reports on the fraudulent activities of brokers and traders who sell in the context of a "Green Investment Hype" worthless CO2 allowances to medium-sized companies and individuals, and always try to entice new customers with promises of immense value increases. This obviously known scam, that has fared already for several years still attracts private customers and small and medium-sized businesses who are looking in the vicinity of a zero interest rate policy for salvation in an industry in which not only high yields but also the satisfaction of a green conscience is promised. In the present Part II we review the methods of fraudsters in detail and give first hints on how you can protect yourself. In Part III, presented in August 2015, it be explained in detail from the perspective of a fraud victim, how the approach and the exploitation took place. Furthermore we report in our present Emission-News 08-2015 (German version here) on first ideas in Europe from 2021 to include road transportation in the emissions trading scheme and on what this would potentially cost the individual car driver or a truck. [Bitte in "Englisch" übersetzen:] Branchenvergleich der Zuteilungen ermöglichen Hinweise auf mögliche Erhöhung der Allokation bei technischen Änderungen [Bitte in "Englisch" übersetzen:] Nach nun zwei Jahren kostenloser Zuteilung für deutsche Anlagenbetreiber in der dritten Handelsperiode scheint es erstmals möglich, dass ein belastbarer Vergleich der Zuteilungen innerhalb einer Branche bzw. einer Tätigkeit gezogen werden kann. Nicht viele Anlagenbetreiber dürften Ende Mai 2015 den Bericht der DEHSt (VET-Bericht 2014) zur Kenntnis genommen haben, der nun nach den zwei Berichtsjahren 2013 und 2014 eine breitere Datenbasis zur Verfügung stellt. Dieser zusammenfassende Bericht sollte jedoch vor allem für die Anlagenbetreiber der Industrie interessant sein, da dort Vergleichszahlen aufgeführt werden, bei denen es um die Höhe ihrer kostenlosen Zuteilung für die eigene Branche und vor allem innerhalb der eigenen Branche geht. In dem Papier wird der Vergleich gezogen, indem durch die DEHSt ein sogenannter „Ausstattungsgrad“ errechnet wird. Dieser ist das Prozentprodukt aus kostenloser Zuteilung einer Branche (Tätigkeit) und der errechneten Jahresemissionen (VET). Emissionshändler.com® analysiert in seinem vorliegenden Emissionsbrief 07-2015 die Daten und ermöglicht Betreibern im Zusammenhang mit gesetzlichen Spezialregelungen Rückschlüsse dazu, ob und unter welchen Umständen eine nachträgliche Zuteilungserhöhung ggf. für die eigene Anlage möglich sein könnte. A branch comparison of allocations indicates potential raises of individual claims due to technical modifications After two years of free allocations for German plant operators within the third trading period it seems to be possible for the first time that a reliable comparison of allocations within one industry branch or one activity can be made. Not many plant operators might have taken notice of the DEHSt report (VET report 2014) end of May 2014 which offers a larger set of data after the two reporting years 2013 and 2014. However, this conclusive report should first of all be interesting for plant operators of the industry because comparative figures that are listed show the quantity of their free allocations and, above all, of their own industry branch. The paper shows a comparison by means of a so-called "equipment level" calculated by the DEHSt. The "equipment level" is the percent product of free allocations of a branch (activity) and the calculated annual emissions (VET). Emissionshändler.com® analyses in its present Emissions News 07-2015 the data and enables operators to realize conclusions in the context of special lawful rules, if and under which circumstances a supplementary increase of allocations could be made possible. Market Stability Reserve to be introduced in 2019 but already shows effects - Invalid CER have to be removed from Accounts The Market Stability Reserve MSR will be introduced in January 2015 but takes influence on EUA price already now. Contrarily to the expectations of most market participants, certificate prices did not fall after April 30 settlement date but continued to rise. Gripping in advance to agreed MSR and its price stability effects, some industrial investment operators, in any case speculative market participants, however, seem to stock up with more and more certificates with the aim to cash up later. Emissionshändler.com® takes the opportunity in the present Emission News 06-2015 to explain the function of the now coming MSR and the expected price movements in the years to come. Furthermore our Emission News proposes how account holders should act with remaining and now invalid CER/ERU in their register accounts. Confirmation of EUA-returns with new ECAS software - Prevention strategies against interference in the register The upcoming annual year returns of certificates to the register, which are about the amount of last year's emissions, are in April again coming into focus of the tasks at hand for the account representative. This, however, must be done now in April 2015 under severe conditions. By 02.April, not only ECAS software requires the attention of the authorized representative but in particular the continuing problems of ECAS mobile authentication system. However, the fact that these problems appear since January 2015, and in April – for the return of the certificates – the problems are still not resolved, cannot, even under closer inspection, lead to any legal claims. An analysis of the problems’ causes by Emissionshändler.com® and possible strategies to avoid access problems to ECAS can be read in our Emission News 05-2015 , and it indicates that the causes can be viewed as a commercial problem to bypass such technical shortcomings. CO2 exchange, emissions report and VET entry in registry - Characteristics and pitfalls that should be noted in March Plant operators creating their yearly emissions report at the end of March, and the VET-entry (Verified emission Table = entry of the emission in the registry account) should give some things their attention, as reported in this issue of Emissionshändler.com® letter. The preservation of trade and business secrets, the correct and timely order in VET-entry, the note of (non-existent) N2O and PFC emissions, as well as giving away any gains from trade of CERs / ERUs in EUA certificates are issues related to the VET-entry should not be missed out. Furthermore Emissionshändler.com® provides in this Emission News 04-2015 an interview with Jürgen Hacker, chair of the Federation of emissions trading and climate change on the future of the EU ETS as well as the quantities and price aspects of the planned initiative of market-stability reserve MSR. ECAS access problems present risks to account agents - CO2 certificates serve as an investment fraud for individuals and small enterprises The ECAS authentication system increasingly stresses market participants in Europe, which is represented as an account manager for access to the Emissions Trading Registry and shall allow as a trader daily transfers in the market. From its easy access to the register at any time depends on whether the legal activities of the given company can be processed at the prescribed deadlines or otherwise suffer high penalty payments. If the necessary access to the ECAS SMS either not possible or not possible on time or not in full or not in legible form, then arises a question of what is or could be a possible alternative for it. In particular, if the national authority or the ECAS helpdesk cannot provide any immediate corrective actions. More detailed information and possible solutions are in our Emission News 03-2015 . Furthermore, we give in our Emission News a summary of the preliminary decision on the reform of emissions trading, which has been discussed on 24/02/2015 Environment Committee of the European Parliament, and which also could be a sign of medium term rising EUA prices. Finally Emissionshändler.com® addresses the criminal activities of brokers and dealers who sell in the context of a "Green Investment hype" worthless CO2 allowances to medium-sized companies and individuals and advertises promises of huge increases in value. Legally compliant emission trading is challenge for plant operators Is there an reporting problem for Combined Heat/Power engines? Legally compliant and simultaneously economically operated emission trading for system operators in Europe turns into an all-time growing challenge. The growing complexity of legal regulations and administrative tasks that had to be done “by the way” by the responsible staff stands against the loss of financial revenue from emissions trading since 2013, previously an effective and economical management of this special region was not mandatory in the company. In order to take account of these changes plant operators in greater numbers than ever will also have to think about to what extent the legal compliance and efficiency can be ensured by its own staff, or whether they should be selectively supported by external professionals or alternatively if all tasks should be carried out in part or in whole by highly specialized Services. Our here presented Emission-News 02-2015 ( German version here ) will report about the individual problems and tasks arising, as well as possible solutions. We also provide in our Emission-News an overview of possible problems regarding the reporting of lubricating oil in KWK engines. Ministry of Economy provides funding for energy consulting - Small and medium sized companies can benefit With the enactment of the German Directive on the promotion of energy consultancy for SMEs to 01.01.2015 a funding program was launched for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which also applies to operators in the mandatory emissions trading if they comply with certain conditions. As the energy efficiency of these operators, due to low CO2 prices and consequent lack of willingness to invest, continues to show high energy savings potential for efficiency improvement, many operators can also achieve multiple simultaneous cost-saving effects in relevant activities in individual cases. By a non-repayable grant in an energy efficiency consulting, operators may be able to save as a result not only through a reduction of primary energy costs but also still receive higher allocations as well as reduce costs for the purchase of emission rights (see also Emission-News 13-2014). In our present Emission-News 01-2015 ( German version here ) we address the concrete steps that should be taken by an operator now in January, in order to secure the up to 8,000 euro subsidy for an energy efficiency consulting. New EU targets for reduction of primary energy consumption - Also installations in emissions trading benefit from new funding In October 2014 the European Union has established in its energy and climate package to reduce the consumption of primary energy at least by 27% until 2030 (in relation year 2007). The German Federal Government has established a Cabinet decision on 12.3.2014 that as an immediate measure, the National Action-Plan Energy Efficiency (NAPE) enters into force on 01.01.2015, which will launch major initiatives and support programs. Alongside also a funding program for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) applicable was launched, which also applies to operators in mandatory emissions trading if they comply with certain conditions. The underlying idea of the funding principle of improving energy efficiency applies in principle also to installations in mandatory emissions trading. As the current energy efficiency in these installations does, due to low CO2 prices and consequent lack of willingness to invest, continue to show high potential energy savings for efficiency improvement, many operators can implement further cost savings here. For this reason Emissionshändler.com® demonstrates in his Emission News 13-2014 ( German version here ) not only the technical potentials that can lead to energy cost reductions but moreover the potential for savings and increase of CO2 emission rights, which are often in a direct relation. EU Council sets a new framework for the climate targets until 2030 - EUA certificates prices raise significantly Despite or even because of the half-baked and generally formulated proposals of the EU Council regarding a framework for a climate and energy policy in the EU until 2030 one can observe a trend of rising certificate prices in the market. The schedule which has to be detailed by the Commission until March 2015 and the proposals to be completed by December 2015 could mean for plant operators who held back with necessary purchases of allowances, a significant financial burden if they postpone their demands further. This is significant mainly because the instrument of a market stability reserve MSR is increasingly becoming into the focus of market participants. To assess as an operator or market participant, to what extent one hand, these first ideas of the council and the following elaborated actual regulations can affect a EUA price upwards we need to take a closer look. The present Emission News 12-2014 examines this fact and on the other hand how the currently hidden 900 million backloading certificates can act in opposite market directions (with or without MSR). So the “Conclusion Paper” from the Council of 23 / 24. Oct. 2014 is considered in more detail here, especially the first time mentioned possibility for a one-time withdrawal of certificates from the trading system. CO2 tax fraud is followed by black money laundering and lending transactions with certificates Starting in 2008 VAT fraud with CO2 certificates have cost EU member states since 2011 at least 5 billion euros. After those "business models" of criminal gangs have been put to use also in electricity and gas trading industry of the EU, nowadays not only the financing of terrorism but also the normal CO2 black money laundering moves into the field of view of market participants. The lending of EUA certificates of plant operators to domestic and foreign traders as well as the cheap purchase of EUA for the purpose of building up some momentum may be typical signs of illegal activities of operators that can be considered with a little good as criminal transactions. Emissionshändler.com® like to draw attention with the present here Emission News 11-2014 (German version here ) to possible dangers to which operators are obviously exposed for some time with regards to all involved legal as well as in financial aspects. MS regarding Carbon Leakage status to be reported until 01.10.2014 - Recalculation of allocations for Airlines After returning from their summer holidays, most plant operators can expect a “To Do” from the DEHSt, with a deadline for completion by 1st October 2014. With the addition of several PRODCOM-numbers more than 10% of industrial operators will get a chance to be added with their products to the Carbon-Leakage-List (and thus doubling their free allocation in part) according to estimates by Emissionshändler.com®. Therefore it may be necessary to resubmit the required information to the DEHSt by the aforementioned date. But even if there is only a very slim chance of a higher allocation according to an assessment of Emissionshändler.com®, at least half of the German plants operators will still have to create an appropriate notice in accordance with Regulation of 05. August 2014. Assistance and information about this topic and also about the specifics of the reorganization of free allocation to airlines you will find in our current Emission News 10-2014 ( German version here ). ECAS cell phone / text message problems create obstacles for account holders to fulfil surrendering obligations During middle of May and now again in June 2014 problems appeared between the ECAS (European Commission Authentication Service) and mobile operators for the umpteenth time about technical issues, in consequence of which a regular trade in emission rights was no longer possible for many plant operators and distributors. Due to the failure of the second authentication channel (not receiving SMS on the mobile device is possible) entrants no longer could execute partial transfer any certificates in the register in the period 27.06.-04.07.2014 and thus were unable to meet even their surrendering / delivery obligations. Thus, millions of EUR for potential recipients of the certificates were then paid too late or not paid to trading partners at all. Since such a malfunction of the register according to estimates by Emissionshändler.com® can occur at any time again, each authorised account holder should secure oneself against these kind access problems, as these could of course also repeat in sensitive times such as the mandatory surrender allowances in April of each year. How this can be done and the circumstances under which these solutions can be used as well as the legal implications this may have on the delivery obligation - plus a run-up on the latest legal requirements for ETS in the aviation world - is described below in our current Emission-News 09-2014 ( German version here ) Forest and forestry certificates - Development, Utilisation, Perspectives in voluntary and mandatory Emissions Trading (Part II) As we already begun in the previous Emission News in Part 1, we hereby continue our article on forest and forestry certificates. We report on the development of VER-forest certificates, their use in the voluntary carbon markets, through various conservation categories and about the likely (non-) perspectives in the mandatory EU Emissions Trading Scheme. Our Emission News 08-2014 ( German version here ) uses the summer break in the EU-Emissions Trading to illuminate this neglected issue parallel to the Paris World-Climate-Conference in 2015. Here it could happen that the community agrees on a deal to set new ambitious climate targets and thus forest certificates can again come to the limelight. Backloading alone is no longer sufficient, a stability reserve is re-quested to support the EUA price - All about Forest Emission Rights The EU Commissions plans for further support of the EUA price that have become public since January have been further specified in the last weeks. In addition to the already commenced Backloading Process a Market-Stability-Reserve (MSR) shall now to be established that limits the excess emission rights that are available in the system. Whether or not MSR will not start until 2021 or perhaps earlier and if this is combined with a set-aside or even with the final shutting down of emission rights is certainly going affect the price of emission rights to greatly in the future. This is at least theoretically offset by the additional approval of forest emission allowances in the EU-ETS pursuant to Article 28f of Directive as long as a provided signature of defined climate targets is agreed on internationally in the coming years. The operation of the MSR as well as to the formation and use of forest emission rights, this clarified by Emissionshändler.com® in this Emission News 07-2014 ( German version here ). CER-Exchange rates not exploited by many operators in EU - Polymer chemical plants reignite fight over 100.000 tons of CO2 The exchange rates for CER/ERU into EUA published by the EU Commission on 02.May 2014 were a surprise for most emissions trading professionals, as these were still far below the general expectations. Instead of the expected quantity of up to 400 million tonnes for the tax year 2013 by European operators it was only 132.8 million tonnes, which was probably mainly due to the German plant operators or because of completely new legal rules for participants. About this new exchange method for "Old and New plants" in emissions trading and the chances of isolated high additional revenue - our Emission-News 06-2014 wants to inform you ( German version here ). Furthermore, we highlight the dispute, which is obviously emerged between the EU Commission and the DEHSt which deals with the polymer production in the German chemical industry, which is to be protected by the German legislature to fulfil an obligation for the EU Emissions Trading and we cover the politically sensitive sanction notices of DEHSt against a high number of airlines. Only the right combination of Register Account Represen-tatives ensures the timely delivery of EUA to the end of April The delivery of allowances at the end of April, a procedure with which with most operators are already familiar, is essentially different in this year, compared to previous years. The EU-Register system implemented since 20.06.2012 has reached a new stage of development since 31. March 2014, where the authorised representatives who've been active for some time, not longer find their way in the system or worse - may even have troubles entering into it. The content of the most significant change in the registry account is that now there exist various "Qualities" of representatives there whose permissions apply to the execution of trans-actions and charges only in conjunction certain combinations and that it must be at least two involved representatives, for almost all types of transactions. But since not everyone can understand the operations of the front-connected ECAS authentication system, not all account holders can manage a timely delivery of the certificates until the 30. April. In order to demonstrate to account holders, authorised representative and the person legally liable can manage the navigation and delivery in the new register system and how occurring problems might be solved – Emissions-händler.com® has featured all issues here in the present Emission News 05-2014 ( German version here). Exchange ability of CER/ERU now ready - New Registry Regulation 389/2013 operators can now cause problems The at the 20. and 24.Mar.2014 carried out update in the CO2-register now brought operators the hoped-for clarity how an exchange of CER/ERU in EUA certificates to the investment account is carried out in practice. The already at beginning of March 2014 implemented exchange function can now be used even if the previously-established data of the assessments of CER/ ERU of each plant operator could not be processed on the 20.Mar.2014 by the EU registry system. However, this small delay is likely to be less of a problem for several hundred account holders, since the practical implications of the new rules of the registry regulation and its implementation in the register software can do far greater damage than too late swapped certificates. The harmonisation and improvements listed in the far from operators rather less attention Regulation 389/2013 will be in April 2014 a higher number of account holders and their authorised representatives prepare partially massive difficulties to meet its legal obligations and to avoid heavy penalties. For this reason, in our Emission News 04-2014 ( German version here ) we will inform you about the main changes in a 1. part (Part 2 in our next Emission Letter on 08.Apr.2014). Opposition period for the allocation notices - Reasons for object- tion and Opportunities because of technical installation features The 2014 issuance of the allocation notices commenced on the 17. February 2014 was completed by the DEHSt on 28th, February. Starting from the point of receipt of the VPS message, the 1- month period for a possible objection begins for each operator. Because of the simultaneously performed account allocations for the years 2013 and 2014 many operators only realized now how much impact the general correction factor has and what other reductions for individual technical features of the system were listed in the allocation notice. The challenge now is to decide whether an objection is to be lodged within the prescribed period and what reason for this the operators could present. In addition some companies will now have to deal with the question in what form technical characteristics of the installation can be mapped in a revised or new deputy of allocation request to get more free allocations. Some of these options show on our Emission News 03-2014 ( German version here ) which also will address problems regarding the allocation in Poland, which is likely to have a higher impact on the price trend. Free allocations 2013-2020 published - Early backloading and correction factor of EU drives up the price The list of final free allocations for the years 2013-2020 for German plant operators was published on 27.01.2014. By applying the correction factor from an average of 11,5% - and the resulting reduction in allocation numbers - one or the other operator could rub his eyes the next morning, when looking at the events on the price trend. Since on 30.01.2014 the Environment Committee of the European Parliament decided for an early start of backloading, the EUA price was driven up from its already high level once again to 5,82 EUR/t. Now also German operator (with a few exceptions) have the assurance about the quantities of allowances that must be purchased in addition to 2020 - or how long their stock of own EUA will last - the immediate decision is when and at what price certificates should be purchased. The resulting alternatives and perspectives will be explained by our Emission News 02-2014 ( German version here ) and also the unpleasant mail that some plant operators received in this eventful week from the DEHSt that invalid CER/ERU must be removed within 40 days from the account. DEHSt startet Antragsverfahren für Anlagenbetreiber in einem FMS „Beihilfe zu indirekten CO2-Kosten“ Attention: No english version available Eine gute Nachricht sollte es für einen Teil der Anlagenbetreiber sein, die in Deutschland dem EU-Emissionshandelssystem ETS unterliegen und gemäß den EU-Vorgaben in bestimmten Produktionssektoren einer Gefahr der Abwanderung in das EU-Ausland ausgesetzt sind. Aber auch Produktions-betriebe, die nicht im EU-ETS sind und unter die CO2-Richtlinie der EU, §10a, Abs. 6 fallen, können sich ab sofort durch den CO2-Handel verursachten Stromkostenanteile in Höhe von rund 5 Euro/MWh für das Vorjahr zurückerstatten lassen. Die gute Nachricht relativiert sich allerdings, wenn man weiß, dass die Beantragung in einem elektronischen FMS Strompreiskompensation noch um einiges komplexer ist als die der schon bekannten Zuteilungsanträge für die Periode 2013-2020. In diesem müssen historische Daten des Betriebes aus den Jahren 2005-2011 erfasst werden, die bisher noch nie benötig wurden sowie die Herkunft und Beschaffenheit des bezogenen Stroms durch Zertifikate des jeweiligen Energielieferanten nachgewiesen werden. Zudem muss das eigene Produktportfolio genau untersucht werden, inwiefern dieses mit den Vorgaben kompatibel ist und dabei auch noch beachten, dass eine erfolgreiche Erstattung von Stromkosten nicht einen eventuell parallel laufenden Antrag auf Befreiung der EEG-Umlage torpediert. Zu dieser finanziell interessanten Fördermöglichkeit und der von Emissionshändler.com® empfohlenen Vorgehensweise informieren wir auf unseren Webseiten detailliert unter dem Menüpunkt Strompreiskompensation und in unserem Emissionsbrief 01-2014 . Meaningful and accurate treatment of remaining CER/ERU - Deadlines and Problems in CO2 Account Closures Many operators have taken the recommendation by the national authorities at end of 2012 to close its KP registry accounts in order to save account fees from 2013. Apparently for operators that have followed this advice this may turn out to be a mistake, because residual stocks of grey CER/ERU at EU accounts are creating problems (Purchase and Adoption grey/ineligible CER/ERU and EUA Remaining Stocks here ) . Furthermore, operators that have left (or are excluded from) emission trading in the new trading period are faced with the task to close their accounts in accordance with the statutory time limits within 40 days. This will then mean that these operators have to decide whether they want to spend a great deal of time and expense for any residual certificates to be derecognised correctly or to delete them and to deal any subsequent problems with the accounting treatment of the process thereafter. These problems and possible solutions on this issue and the final positive decision for Backloading are reported this Emission News 11-2013 ( German version here ). Climate Change Conference in Warsaw failed terribly - Commission tightened emissions trading for airlines The climate conference having taken place in Warsaw last week can be regarded as spectacularly failed. The interests of the coal lobby - particularly those of the host country Poland - blocked all approach for an agreement on a new global climate accord. On the other hand, it was only natural that the host country with its large dependency on coal for its citizens must continue to lobby for affordable heat and electricity. As the Polish Environment Minister then lost his job and on the penultimate day, all the NGOs left the conference because no more movement was visible in the negotiations, it became obvious how hopeless the current situation of climate change efforts currently is. Irrespective of that situation, European emissions trading for airlines will be continued in order to secure the so-called "climate-results" of the IACO Conference in Montreal by the EU Commission. To this end, a new proposal is on the table, which should be implemented by March 2014. The aforementioned subjects as well as the judgment of the European Court of Justice on the delayed or incomplete delivery of emission allowances and resulting penalties will be reported in our Emission News 10-2013 ( German version here ). Who can use how many CERs / ERUs certificates, and when? - The future of CO2 trading for aviation will be decided in Montreal Since the change in CO2 registry software on 18.07.2013 and the consequent classification of "valid", "invalid" and "question" CER / ERU more and more operators, impacted by ETS posed the question, at what point in time and by which procedure it will become clear which CER / ERU Certificates can be used for delivery in the EU emission trading system and can be thus also be used in commercial transactions and transferred into money. In addition, many new facilities located in emissions trading and aircraft operators as well as operators of the last period do not seem to be all informed about the EU's complex rules regarding the Exchangequotas for the period 2013-2020, therefore Emissionshändler.com® has decided to list in concentrated form once more the related opportunities and risks. In these days in Montreal the Annual Meeting of the International Civil Aviation Organization takes place and will probably make some crucial decisions on an emissions trading system for aircraft operators. More on these two issues and their impact on the emissions trading scheme can be found here in our Emission News 09-2013 (German version here ) EU Commission announced the allocation amounts/factors- Problem cases in the " MzB " (Notification to operation) On Friday, 06/09/2013, the European Commission announced the allocation amounts for 2013-2020 and shocked some operators and market participants as they had expected a much lower correction factor. With an average of around 11.6 % the factor is almost twice as high as it had been suspected by the market before. The EUA price - which had already risen sharply as a result of rumors on Thursday, and then pulled clear over the mark of 5.40 EUR/t also continued to increase on 09/09/2013. This happened especially because the quantities for auction will come later in 2014 to the market. After the summer holidays, the last employees responsible for CO2 have returned to their desks to complete the "MzB-message" and are discovering now some unexpected problem cases. For this problem cases and for the publication of the correction factors you find more details in our Emission News 08-2013 (German version here) . Backloading decreases rather than increasing EUA price - “Notification to operation” will often shortened the allocation amount Two events were foreseen to nearly 100% since mid-May 2013: An agreement of the European Parliament for Backloading and the bursting of the 4 EUR/t price bubble built in the EUA. The positive decision for Backloading, which initially looks like a first provisional "rescue" of emissions trading, cannot inspire insider and objective experts of the European Emissions Trading. At most, the trend for the funeral of the EU emissions trading is halted for several months. Inspiring, as we may say, is the predictability financial wizards in the advance of policy decisions which push up the EUA price and outbid each other in extravagant orgies of purchase on the exchanges. The ever so resulting price bubble has now - as announced by the Emissionshändler.com® Newsletter 05-2013 - burst again. It can be observed that, in response to such "gamers orgies" otherwise rather conservative market participants place bets on falling prices – which is almost understandable. For more information on the decision of the European Parliament and of the further path of the Backloading by the EU institutions and the dangerous aspects of “Notification to operation” we refer you to the Emission News 07-2013 . German version here. DEHSt- FMS “Reports on the Operation” start now in due time for summer - Actual analysis on the validity of CER/ERU How Emissionshändler.com® already announced in his newsletter 04-2013, German plant operators (stationary equipment) will spend more of their working time in the summer, to fight the new FMS request message “Reports on the operation. In the new Form-Management-System (FMS) operators can survey a new hype of data heralding, insensibly called "Data collection", by the German authorities, which give many managers a hard time. The previously still running under the theme "Changes to the operation" announcements are available since the 28.06.2013 in a software "Reports on operation" and must be delivered until 30.09.2013. A notice from the authority DEHSt has been shipped on 28.06.2013 to the plant operators. About this current request as well as an extensive analysis of the validity of CER and ERU in the period 2013-2020 new Emission News 06-2013 . New EUA price bubble by financial wizards created - Air transport is not able to support the certificate price It's actually hard to believe how gambling around the EUA price and backloading currently repeats itself in an almost identical fashion just after 4 months. A similar situation could already be observed in the period of February to mid-April 2013 where the backloading prices were moving ahead of an expected positive decision by the Environmental Committee and the European Parliament with the highest volatility, as this seems now to be repeated in almost exactly the same way. Currently it is observed how an EUA price of 4.78 EUR/t approaches the 5 EUR mark, without any fundamental changes regarding the existing surpluses in the system. It should be noted that prior to the decision of the Environment Committee on 19 June, according to Emissionshändler.com® the market was already overbought and will anticipate even greater losses in June 2013 - as compared to the losses in mid-February 2013. Starting from a positive decision for backloading in the first week of July through the EU Parliament, the medium term price level will, at best, be stabilised at 3.50 and 4 EUR, in case of a negative decision most likely at 2 EUR. This price outlook, the EUA market bubble and the current developments of emissions trading in aviation by the IATA Annual Conference in Cape Town are detailed our Emission News 05-2013 . German version here. New reporting requirements for each operator still expec-ted in the summer of 2013 - Backloading can still hope Almost all plant operators that are currently on the allocation notices for the free allocation of the 3rd Trading period wait, assume that the applications submitted in January 2012 and with the expected moderation of the authorities on the free allocation amounts for the period August / September 2013, the relevant issue should be completed without further work. In the former effort creating the allocation applications, however, was isolated already registered by careful observers that the questions asked in the FMS to determine the rate of activity pointed to a development that could be extremely burdensome for operators in the long term. Now is a study conducted by Emissionshän-dler.com® analysis of EU Monitoring Directive, the TEHG, the ZuV2020 and FAQs DEHSt clear that the subject of that determination of activity rates in the allocation request comes down to it, that it is a later control the allotment decision free Certificates will be and that this control will meet annually in full each operator. More on this topic as well as to new developments in the "Backloading" and to refer CO2 price development in our Emission News 04-2013. German version here. Special features by the transactions of certificates in the new union registers at the end of the trading period 2008 - 2012 Actually ended the 2. Trading period of the European Emissions Trading Scheme after it started already on 01.01.2008 on 31.12.2012. In practice, the legal process and return the stock exchange and bilateral trade, however, this happens only on 30.04.2013, because plants and aircraft operators until this date to meet their legal return in the European Register. This is not done on time for during the year 2012, it is subject to penalty of 100 EUR per ton of CO2 emitted. This comes as nothing news, since this rule at the end of the 1st Period or at the time was already "junk certificates" could be purchased at almost zero cost. What is new, however, now that it is first come to companies that in the past period were less than their free allocation of CO2 was emitted amount, this time certificates must be physically delivered to already significant price and their delivery must be ensure until 30.04.2013. More information here in our Emission News 03-2013 ( German version here ) Climat protection for low price. - CO2-Trading in TV Climate protection for low price. The European CO2 trading from the threat? Introduced eight years ago, the price of pollution rights for carbon dioxide is at the bottom. Only about 5 Euros, there are a ton of CO2 traded.This is so dramatic because the system has encouraged the industry to develop climate-neutral and environmentally friendly technologies. What does the price drop but really? Why it affects the world's climate protection? Made in Germany, the business magazine of Deutsche Welle is visiting Emissionshändler.com in Berlin . To see, please klick in the picture above. Speculators gamble again on Backloading decision - Price fluctuations up to 50% are expected The today begins, 8th Week of the year 2013, will be the week of the truth in terms of the CO2 price in the coming years. An obviously already significantly increased EUA is speculative at best, after a brief flare insert the backward gear and slowly return to around the 5 EUR stabilize. More likely however, is that an already recognizable speculation dent flattens despite positive Backloading-Vote and the EUA again approaching 4 EUR limit and this is below. This certainly also possible worst-case scenario of a negative earnings-ordination of the environment committee would immediately drive the EUA price in the “Price-Basement”, which will open up the opinion of Emissionshändler.com® at 2 EUR. More about this scenario, and the further steps of the political bodies to a positive Backloading-Decision, see our Emission News 02-2013 . Allocation decisions expected soon - chance for correction of applications may have been possible -Airlines before decision The notification of the allocation decisions for 2013-2012 is imminent in the coming weeks. Because of already published in May 2012, provisional allocation lists (in Germany "NIMs InstData-List") were at least German and Polish operator ever seen, which estimated allocation they will receive in 2013-2020. Here, in some cases, companies were downright shocked if the small number of certificates, which had provided the authority for this. The estimated allocation amount was even less than half, of the company before even calculated worst-case scenario. In other cases, the company clearly only due to the allocation list, the economic consequences if not approved by a CL-status (NACE code not on the carbon leakage list) enters a lack of free allowances. In other cases, companies with a service company get their energy in an indirect way, it became clear that the contractor obvious errors have occur in the allocation applications, which now (due to lack of free allowances) will be to increase the lead secondary energy prices through this. Since it now shows that in some of these cases corrections of past errors apparently still might be possible should inform affected operators quickly that corrections to the authority is necessary. More here in our Emission News 01-2013 (German version here) . Almost all operators in the European Union are excluded by costs and bad legal conditions of EUA auctions The good intention of the European Commission can be assumed, is found in Articles 56 and 57 of the new auctioning regulation. The goal is to ensure fair and orderly trading conditions, as well as small and medium enterprises (especially small emitters) to ensure a fair, full and equal access to auctions. Unfortunately, there is nothing of the above, again in the current reality, though, the common auction platform of the EU is in operation by the Leipzig EEX, commenced a few weeks ago. The small and medium plant operator specially created auction model "Auction Only" will fail due to miserable statutory framework conditions terrific and thus exclude almost 100% of all operators of the auctions, which anyway are already members of a stock exchange. Of the reasons we issue our current Emission News 09-2012 (German version here ). EU tries to stabilize CO2 prices with backloading and achieves the opposite - Emissions trading in Aviation partly interrupted The results of the trading week from 12.-16. November 2012 will most likely influence participants in the European emissions trading for a long time in their economic decisions making. The announcement by the EU Commission's decision to postpone auctions (backloading) failed not only its objective of increasing the level of prices, but apparently caused in connection with other events the exact opposite: a starting price decline. The Standard Auctions 2008-2012, the Early Auctions from 2013-2020, the new installations Reserve Auction and starting aEUA Auctions for Airlines funnel increasing amounts of certificates into a saturated market, which already has to digest an over inventory of probably 2 billion allowances. Moreover, masses of CER and ERU certificates are pushing into the market, which hardly find buyers and have driven the spread temporarily to record levels. Together with the occurrence of speculators and gamblers this results in volatility and turmoil between EUAs, CERs and ERUs that give operators some opportunities, but also great risks - just as in our Issue Brief 08-2010 of years ago 2 Emissionshändler.com ® predicted. In today's issue we want 08-2012 detail the events of last week - especially on the partial exposure of emissions trading for airlines - and illuminate some of the background. Read more in our Emission News 08-2012 (German version here ). Un surplus de 2 milliards de tonnes d’EUA et les récents développements dans la guerre du transport aérien ne laissent aucune chance au prix du CO2 Ce fût un feu d’artifice bref et riche d’enseignements que la flambée du prix de l’EUA dans les 6 semaines précédant les décisions préliminaires bruxelloises concernant le set-aside. Bien trop de spéculateurs avaient parié sur une hausse des prix et sur des informations claires de la part de la Commission concernant les délais et les quantités en cas d’un éventuel retrait de quotas, si bien que le prix remonte de manière régulière depuis le 29.02.2012 vers l’ancien niveau de 6 Euro. Plus d'informations sur la lettre 02-2012 question ici. Es war ein kurzes und lehrreiches Kursfeuerwerk, welches der EUA-Preis in den 6 Wochen vor den Brüsseler Vor-Entscheidungen zum Set-aside abbrannte. Allzu viele Spekulanten hatten auf steigende Preise und klare Aussagen der Kommission zu Terminen und Mengen bei eventuellen EUA-Kürzungen gesetzt, so dass der Preis seit dem 29.02.2012 wieder ständig dem vorherigen Niveau von 6 Euro entgegenstrebt. Hierzu trägt insbesondere auch der drohende Handelskrieg von 23 Ländern gegen die EU-Kommission bei, die den CO2-Handel im Luftverkehr ablehnen und sich erfolgreich organisiert haben. Mehr Informationen im Emissionsbrief 02-2012 hier. 24.03.2016 Prices ++EUA 5,28 Euro/t++CER2 0,75 Euro/t++ Peter Liese MEP (EPP), rapporteur on Aviation in the EU ETS . talks to leading environment journalist Sonja van Renssen about the provisional agreement on including aviation in the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) . On the 4th of March, the European Parliament, Council and European Commission reached a provisional agreement on ETS rules for aviation, which will restrict the scheme to intra-European flights until 2016, after which it would apply to all flights unless there is a global deal on airline emissions . In this interview, rapporteur Peter Liese explains what the deal means and his expectations for a global agreement. The Parliament’s environment committee is due to vote on the deal on 19 March and the plenary on 3 April 2014. Videos relacionados More 'Environment' videos Forum for the Future of Agriculture 2016 5th InnoGrid2020+ 14th GIE Annual Conference In Sofia, Bulgaria | 9 and 10 June 2016 Latest news on EU Trade Insights Coming up on viEUws.eu Interview with Jeffrey D. Sachs, Director of The Earth Institute Brussels Briefing on Tech – All you need to know for March-April 2016 EU Tweets of the Week: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly – 1 April 2016 They trust viEUws MODERATOR: Hi, folks. It’s [Moderator]. I’m sorry for the late notification for the call. We’ve been getting a couple of inquiries on ETS, and we have for you today [Senior Administration Official]. The ground rules for the call are we’re going to do this on background, attributable to a Senior Administration Official. There will be a time for a few questions before [Senior Administration Official] has to leave, but with that I will turn it over to [Senior Administration Official]. SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Thanks, [Moderator]. I have just a few quick comments, really intended to be a response to various inquiries that we’ve been getting on this subject. So the – we’re on the subject of the EU’s Emission Trading Scheme as it applies to foreign air carriers. We are hosting a meeting – it’ll be at the Department of Transportation – tomorrow and in the morning of Wednesday with 16 countries that are all significant aviation players and are not within the EU. So these are non-EU countries that are significant aviation countries. The – all of the countries who are part of this meeting – and this certainly goes for us – are opposed to the EU’s application of its Emission Trading Scheme to foreign carriers. We oppose on both policy and legal grounds. And that’s been made clear now for quite a long time. There have – there were – or there have been two previous meetings of countries opposed to the application of the ETS to foreign carriers. Those were in Moscow and Delhi, where – and in those cases, there were statements put out asserting that opposition. The purpose of this meeting is different. I would not regard this as a third in the line of the Moscow and Delhi meetings. The purpose of this meeting is really to try to explore whether there might be a basis for a global solution to addressing greenhouse gas emissions from aviation and a global solution that would include the EU and would set aside or would include the setting aside of the ETS as applied to foreign carriers. This is going to be an informal set of discussions, I think very much of an exploratory character, where we will be talking with our counterparts about those issues. And we don’t anticipate any deliverable, per se, coming out of the meeting, but we do anticipate, again, having that kind of exploratory discussion to see if we can get on a path that could lead to a global solution that would then be considered in ICAO, the International Civil Aviation Organization, which is the multilateral body that properly deals with international aviation, and go from there. So that’s the purpose of the meeting. That’s the background. And I’m happy to take a few questions. OPERATOR: Ladies and gentlemen, if you wish to ask a question, please press * followed by the 1. You will hear a tone indicating that you’ve been placed in queue. You may remove yourself from queue at any time by pressing the # key. Again, for questions press *1. And one moment please for our first question. Todo bien. Our first question comes from the line of Julia Pyper – please go ahead – with ClimateWire. QUESTION: Hi there. Thanks very much for taking – for having this call. I understand there’s some potential of discussing a plan that would not override the EUS* policy until 2020, and – but then would put in place a global policy, and the U.S. was maybe going to start proposing a cap on airline emissions from 2005 levels starting at the 2020 timeframe. Is that something that is in on the table right now? SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, I wouldn’t say exactly like that. The – there – if you go back to the last assembly resolution from ICAO, which is from 2010, there was an agreement to an aspirational goal of trying to limit emissions, I think starting in 2020, at 2020 levels. So that was a – that was in the nature of an aspirational and collective goal, if you will. And I would expect that goals of that sort will be part of the conversation that we have in our meeting, or at least it’s quite liable to be, since our view is the starting place for discussion ought to be what countries already agreed to in ICAO in 2010. These ICAO assemblies happen every three years, so the next one’s 2013. That is – that – those should not be taken to mean, because it does not at all mean, that the notion would be we accept the ETS until 2020 and then it changes. That’s completely not in the cards and that’s not the contemplation. I think that if there’s going to be a kind of global deal and a global solution that might be – that would be desirable within ICAO, again, it would – it has to be global by definition, it would have to include the EU. And part of the overall, as we see it, would need to be that it – that the – that such an arrangement or such a solution would lead to the setting aside in the near term, not down the road, of the application of the ETS. QUESTION: Can I have a quick follow-up? And I’m wondering if you guys have singled out any particular market mechanisms you’d like to discuss as part of a global strategy. SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: No. There is a conversation going on right now. There’s been technical conversations and experts from various countries meeting all during this year, and it may have – it may well have begun before this year, but – on the subject of potential market measures. But there’s, I think, far from any agreement on whether there will be any kind of measure, whether that is an offsetting measure or something else at a global level, and there’s also a conversation within ICAO about how regions or countries might use measures. But those are – I would think it’s fair to describe those as happening at a technical expert level and not at all clear whether or if there will be buy-in by countries at a higher level. QUESTION: Okay. Thanks very much. MODERATOR: And our next question comes from the line of Jo Biddle, representing AFP. Please go ahead. QUESTION: Hello. Buenas tardes. Thank you for taking this call. I wanted to check with you. Are you just opposed to the ETS for aviation emissions? That being the case – PARTICIPANT: Hold that question one second. Gracias. Could you repeat it, please? QUESTION: Okay. Lo siento. Bueno. I’ll repeat the question. Can I just check that this is about ETS covering aviation emissions and not a whole plethora of other emissions that – such as power stations (inaudible)? SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Oh, absolutely. Absolutely, yes. QUESTION: Okay. And then can I ask you why you and these fellow countries opposed to the ETS covering the aviation industry? SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, we’re not opposed to the ETS covering the European aviation industry. The opposition is to the ETS applying to foreign carriers. And I think there are both legal issues under the Chicago Convention, which is the governing treaty, and from the point of view of the U.S. under the bilateral U.S.-EU Air Transport Agreement. And I’m not the legal expert to go into the ins and outs of the legal concerns, but there are very real legal concerns. There are also policy concerns, and I think that we – we think that it’s just – it’s a bad idea. It’s essentially we agree with the objective. We would say it’s the wrong way to pursue the right objective. The unilateral imposition of the ETS is creating huge antagonism all around the world to – countries are – have a lot of support and allegiance to multilateral process. There is a multilateral institution, ICAO, that handles aviation, including aviation emissions. So there’s a – there is – whatever chance for progress – and there was – there are a number of areas in which ICAO has been trying to pursue progress – whatever chance there is of that basically grinds to a halt when you’ve got countries just angry and unwilling to deal with the EU in light of this kind of unilateral step. Another concern is that there’s no – if the EU can go and impose their own system around the world in this way, there’s nothing to say that five or ten or twenty other countries wouldn’t do the same thing, and I think that creates a risk which is very much a concern, I think, of airlines around the world, that you end up with a kind of patchwork system of different mechanisms, different taxes, and different kinds of policies applied rather than an overall global policy, which in a situation like international aviation, which is, of course, is inherently and almost uniquely global, it’s just a bad idea. So we think it’s a bad idea for a number of reasons. We think it is a perfectly honorable objective, and not only an honorable objective, but one that we share. But it’s not a right way to go about it. Let me just say one word about the sharing of objectives. I don’t say that lightly at all. The United States is doing a ton in this area. In the decade from 2000 to 2010, our air traffic and our air freight went up by about 15 percent while our emissions went down by about 12 percent. And there’s some piece of that that has to do with the economy, but there is a lot that has to do with much better technology in terms of engines and airframes, much better operations, air traffic control and other things like that. But we also are the world leader in biofuels, which hasn’t had a big impact yet, but it’s probably going to have the biggest impact of anything over time. So we have a very aggressive system, which I think has probably produced results far in excess of anything that’s happened in Europe yet. So we are really not opposed to this policy. We endorse the policy of reducing emissions, just not this way. QUESTION: And if I could have a follow-up. If – supposing you manage to come to some kind of solution that you believe could be applied globally, do you have indications from the EU side that they would accept this? SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, that’s premature. I mean, I think we’re just – we’re starting – we’re meeting to start this conversation tomorrow with this set of countries and to see where people are at and what capacity there is to move in this direction. I think a conversation with the EU – might or might not – but might be something that happens down the road, but no, we don’t – there’s nothing concrete to talk to the EU about yet in terms of what the specific elements of a program would be. OPERATOR: We have time for one final question today and that will come from the line of Bart Jansen with USA Today. Please go ahead. QUESTION: Yes, thanks much for having the call. In terms of that antagonism – I guess the House has already voted to ignore this EU policy; a Senate committee is going to be voting tomorrow – I wondered if you’d have any idea about what kind of timeframe you’d be looking at this group to try to have something to take to ICAO. Or are you just looking toward the end of the year, or are you looking toward March 1 st. or can you say anything about a timeframe? SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yeah, thanks for the question. We don’t really have a timeframe. There are various points in the calendar ahead that may or may not turn out to be relevant. But the – under the EU’s directive as it exists right now, airlines around the world are supposed to surrender the allowances, the emission allowances that they’re supposed to purchase, by the end of April – April 30 th of 2013. That doesn’t – I mean, I think that we don’t – I tell you that as a – as simply a fact on the calendar, not as a timeframe that I think is in any sense controlling here, because I think if this process were to get going, it will probably take some time. Whether it fits within that timeframe, I have no idea. I think that it would be – if anything were to be productive in this regard, I think it is quite likely that there would need to be a strong signal from the EU indicating a willingness to postpone or suspend or whatever its process. But that is a point on the calendar. Another point on the calendar is the September 2013 meeting of the ICAO Assembly. So that is the first ICAO Assembly meeting since the 2010 meeting. That’s another point on the calendar. Again, whether the things we’re talking about fall into those kinds of timeframes, we don’t know yet, but those are – I would at least say those are relevant points to keep in mind. QUESTION: Thank you. SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Okay. Thanks very much, everybody. MODERATOR: Thanks, everyone. I just want to remind you that the call was on background, attributable to a Senior Administration Official. If you have any questions, please call the Press Office. Gracias. Aviation in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme The European Commission’s proposal of September 2005 to include the aviation sector in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS) can be seen as a step forward in including the aviation sector in climate policy. The environmental impacts of including aviation in the EU-ETS will depend fully on the design of the trading system, especially on the total of CO2 emission allowances that will be determined. Kerosene tax and emission charges are instruments worthwhile consider as well. Resumen In September 2005 the European Commission published a communication on Policy instruments to reduce the climate change impacts of aviation''. This MNP policy brief summarises the potential impacts of the proposal at EU and national Dutch levels. Climate impact of aviation significant enough to be addressed If aviation is not included in climate policy, it will be more difficult to meet the long-term EU, and Dutch, climate target. The number of flights in European airspace is expected to almost double in the next 25 years, and this will increase the share of national and international aviation in total CO 2 emissions in the EU15 from a current 3.5% to 5% by 2030. In the same period, CO 2 emissions from aviation in the Netherlands are projected to double, from 4% to 8% (i.e. from 8 to 17 Mton CO 2 ). The overall climate impact of aviation is estimated at a factor of 2 to 4 higher than the impact from CO 2 emissions alone. This is because NO x emissions and the formation of cirrus clouds, for example, also play a role. Aviation in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme: A step forward in climate policy The European Commission’s proposal to include the aviation sector in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS) can be seen as a step forward in including the aviation sector in climate policy. It will be cheaper to reach the Kyoto target. The proposed instrument, EU-ETS, fits well into current EU and Dutch climate policies. In the longer term (after 2012), EU-ETS has the potential to develop into an incentive to improve environmental performance. Considering the long lifetimes of aircraft and the generally considered high costs of efficiency improvements, reductions in fuel consumption and emission improvements might take a while to materialise. In the shorter term, the aviation sector is therefore expected to account for carbon emission reductions by purchasing CO 2 allowances from other sectors. This means that most of the emission reductions do not take place in the aviation sector itself but in other sectors. Economic and environmental impacts could be limited According to some scenario calculations based on certain assumptions with regard to design parameters, including aviation in the EU-ETS in the 2008-2012 period will somewhat increase both the demand (+1%) and price of CO 2 allowances. Increases in ticket prices could range from €0 to €20 for an average round trip. In the longer term, the climate objectives would require large reductions and could significantly limit the CO 2 emission allowances in the EU-ETS and lead to higher costs (irrespective of whether aviation is included in the EU-ETS or not). The environmental impacts of including aviation in the EU-ETS will depend fully on the design of the trading system, with particular emphasis on the total of CO 2 emission allowances to be determined. Economic and environmental impacts for the Netherlands are expected not to differ fundamentally from other countries. ETS design parameters and possible flanking measures will determine environmental impact The design for including aviation in EU-ETS will be crucial for the environmental impact of the system. Design parameters include the geographical scope of the system, accounting for non-CO 2 climate impacts, the methods to allocate emission allowances (e.g. grandfathering, auctioning) and the choice of trading entities, as well as the interplay with the Kyoto Protocol and the monitoring method. With regard to the geographical scope and the type of flights covered, inclusion of all flights departing from EU countries will lead to a higher environmental impact than including only flights between EU countries. To what extent the inclusion of all flights in ETS could affect future volumes and re-routing of trade passenger flows to and from the EU will require further research. Including only CO 2 in the EU-ETS will result in a simpler butless environmentally effective system, compared to accounting for the full climate impact of aviation. Flanking measures are then needed to address the non-CO 2 climate effects of aviation. An emission charge might then be practical and effective. Auctioning is the most cost-effective when it comes to chosing an allocation method. Fuel tax and emissions charges worthwhile to consider as well, though politically sensitive A kerosene tax and emission charging, with revenues earmarked for climate policy, are straightforward instruments for internalising external costs and for stimulating (fuel) efficiency improvements and CO 2 emission reduction from the aviation sector. A tax is in line with Europe’s goal to reduce distortions in competition between different energy products. A charge could also be used to address the non-CO 2 emissions, such as NO x emissions, possibly complementing fuel taxes and/or CO 2 emissions trading. Tuinstra W ; Ridder W de ; Wesselink LG ; Hoen A ; Bollen JC ; Borsboom JAM - Tuinstra W (eds) EU plan to put aviation in emissions scheme The European Union's executive arm approved plans yesterday to include aviation in its emissions trading system, giving international flights in and out of the EU a one-year reprieve before they have to join. Intra-EU flights will join the scheme, aimed at cutting global air pollution, in 2011. Flights into and out of the bloc will be included the following year, giving non-EU carriers time to prepare and see how the scheme works. The US quickly objected, arguing through an embassy spokesman that the EU was trying to circumvent the International Civil Aviation Organisation by proceeding on its own. The quotas allowed for carriers will be equal to the average 2004-2006 emissions data. "EU emissions from international air transport are increasing faster than from any other sector. This growth threatens to undermine the EU's progress in cutting overall greenhouse gas emissions," the Commission said in a statement. The EU emissions trading scheme - its key tool to battle global warming and meet Kyoto Protocol emissions reduction targets - puts a limit on the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) big polluters such as power plants and oil refineries can emit. But so far it had excluded aviation, a large and growing source of pollution as air travel booms. Now airlines, like companies already involved in the scheme, will be able to buy rights to pollute if they overshoot their targets or sell them if they come in below the cap. The majority of the permits will be given away, but 10 per cent will be auctioned. Unlike in the current trading scheme, where member states set limits subject to the Commission's approval, the EU's executive will deal with the caps itself. The original plan to include all flights from the start drew criticism from the airline industry and major trading partners, including the US, that the draft went beyond acceptable limits and effectively regulated non-EU carriers. Comments are submitted under the express understanding and condition that the editor may, and is authorised to, disclose any/all of the above personal information to any person or entity requesting the information for the purposes of legal action on grounds that such person or entity is aggrieved by any comment so submitted. Please allow some time for your comment to be moderated. Apr 6th 2011, 08:32 Popup Email article Times of Malta Premium This article is part of our premium content. You have exceeded your 10 free articles for this month. A subscription is required to access Times of Malta content from overseas. Register to get 10 free articles per month. Subscribe to gain access to our premium content and services. Your subscription will also enable you to view all of the week's e-paper editions (both Times of Malta and The Sunday Times of Malta), view exclusive content, have full access to our newspaper archive to download editions from 1930 to today, and access the website in full from overseas. All of this will also be available to you from our tablet and mobile apps. Already have an account? Sign in here. Copyright y copia; 2016 timesofmalta.com Copyright y copia; Allied Newspapers Ltd. printed on - 24-03-2016 - Printed content is for personal use only, and should not be distributed EU emissions trading The EU emissions trading system (EU ETS) is the central common instrument for achieving the EU climate objectives. In recent years there has been a large surplus of emission allowances in the system, which has caused the price of an emission allowance to drop dramatically. The Government wants measures to be implemented in the near future to ensure the effectiveness of the system. The EU emissions trading system is an important component in Sweden’s efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions. The system was introduced in 2005 and covers all EU countries as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. The aim of the system is to achieve the emission reductions necessary for the EU to live up to its commitments under the Kyoto Protocol in a cost-effective manner. The emissions trading system is based on supply and demand, and is a market-based system in which the price is set by the market. The trading system sets a ‘cap’ that is gradually reduced for the total emissions from the facilities included. Emissions trading covers about half of the EU’s sources of emissions in energy production and energy-intensive industries. To deal with the acute surplus of emission allowances, a decision was taken in autumn 2013 to postpone the auction of 900 million emission allowances scheduled for 2014–2016 until 2019–2020. The trading system was expanded in 2012 to also include the aviation sector. However, to facilitate the international negotiations on a global agreement concerning the impact of aviation on climate, the EU decided that flights into or out of the EU are to continue to be exempt from the requirement on purchasing emission allowances until after 2016. Sweden wants to see prompt action to improve the system In January 2014, the European Commission presented a proposal on introducing a market stability reserve aimed at stabilising access to emission allowances. Under the Commission’s proposal, the market stability reserve is to come into force in 2021. In the beginning of May 2015, the European Commission and the Council of Ministers agreed to move forward the launch of the market stability reserve to 2019, which the Swedish Government takes a positive view of. The Government is also working for emission allowances that have been withheld from the market between 2014 and 2016 to be cancelled so as to reduce the surplus of emission allowances in the trading system. European Union Sweden’s global environmental efforts are largely based on a common EU policy. Within the EU, the European Commission looks after the EU’s common interests and proposes new laws. The Council of the European Union represents the individual Member States and consists of ministers of the 28 EU member countries. The European Parliament represents EU citizens and is elected directly in general elections every five years. The Council and the European Parliament jointly decide on the legislative proposals presented by the European Commission. Published 17 August 2015 · Updated 17 August 2015 La página no se puede encontrar La página que está buscando podría haber sido eliminada, su nombre cambiado o no está disponible temporalmente. Por favor intenta lo siguiente: Asegúrese de que la dirección del sitio Web que se muestra en la barra de direcciones de su navegador esté escrita y formateada correctamente. Si ha accedido a esta página haciendo clic en un vínculo, póngase en contacto con el administrador del sitio Web para avisarles de que el enlace no está formateado correctamente. Haga clic en el botón Atrás para probar otro enlace. HTTP Error 404 - Archivo o directorio no encontrado. Servicios de Internet Information Server (IIS) Información técnica (para personal de apoyo) Vaya a Servicios de soporte técnico de Microsoft y realice una búsqueda de título de las palabras HTTP y 404. Abra la Ayuda de IIS. Que es accesible en el Administrador de IIS (inetmgr), y la búsqueda de temas titulados Web Site Setup. Tareas Administrativas Comunes. Y Acerca de los mensajes de error personalizados. European Parliament votes to include aviation in EU emissions trading European Parliament yesterday voted as expected to include aviation in the EU's Emissions Trading System from 2011 and to place tighter pollution caps on airlines than initially had been proposed by the European Commission. The move sets up a likely legal challenge from the US and any number of nations opposed to the EU's unilateral action. The EP voted to include international flights to and from EU airports and intra-EU flights in the ETS from 2011. The EC had proposed bringing non-EC. Subscribe to Access this Entire Article "European Parliament votes to include aviation in EU emissions trading" is part of ATW Plus . our online premium membership. Subscribing will provide you access to exclusive news, carefully researched airline financial, fleet and traffic data, plus the option to receive our popular, award-winning print magazine. To learn more, click here. If viewing via ATW Mobile, please login and click "Read web article" to view fully. ¿Preguntas? [email protected] Already registered? Log In here. Boeing used to spend 1.5 weeks training new employees, but now it has to spend six weeks—a telling shortfall of the US education system in the digital, globalized business world, but also a poignant example of why some Americans are siding with nativist and protectionist politics in this year’s presidential race, the former head of the OEM said March 22. More Click here to read ATW On-Location from the Singapore Air Show and other events Print this post EU Environment Ministers Endorse Emissions Trading for Aviation 5 December 2005 EU Environment ministers meeting on 2 December endorsed a suggestion to include the aviation sector in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS) as “the best way forward” to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from aviation and urged the Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal by the end of 2006. Aviation’s share of overall EU greenhouse gas emissions is still modest at about 3%, but its emissions are growing faster than any other sector and risk undermining progress achieved through emission cuts in other areas of the economy. EU emissions from international flights grew by 73% from 1990 to 2003. This increase could widen to 150% by 2012 unless action is taken. Such growth would cancel out more than a quarter of the 8% reduction in total greenhouse gas emissions that the Kyoto Protocol requires the EU-15 to achieve between 1990 and 2012. To minimize potential negative trade-offs between the different impacts and safeguard the environmental integrity of the overall scheme, both the CO 2 and non-CO 2 impacts of aviation are to be addressed to the extent possible. The ministers prefer that the cap apply to air carriers and not to airports or aircraft manufacturers as some had suggested. The rules should apply for all flights departing from EU airports, whether internal or international. Limiting the scope to intra-EU flights would address less than 40% of the emissions from all flights departing from the EU. Other guiding principles suggested by the ministers include: The development of a working model for aviation within emissions trading in Europe that can be extended or replicated worldwide. The methodology for distributing the total number of allowances allocated to the aviation sector within that sector should be harmonized at the EU level. The inclusion of aviation should not adversely affect the accounting system established in Commission Regulation (EC) to ensure consistency between trading under the EU ETS and trading under the Kyoto Protocol. The EU Emissions Trading Scheme, which started on 1 January 2005, covers almost 11,500 industrial installations which together are responsible for nearly half of all EU CO 2 emissions. Operators of these installations receive emission allowances giving them the right to emit a certain level of CO 2 per year. The total of these allowances creates a cap on overall emissions from these installations. After each year, operators must surrender the number of allowances equal to their actual emissions in that year. The existence of a market in which these allowances can be traded enables participating companies to manage their emissions cost-effectively. If they anticipate that their emissions will exceed their allowances, they can either take measures to reduce their emissions—for instance by installing more efficient technology—or they can buy additional emission allowances on the market, whichever is cheaper. Conversely, if their actual emissions are lower than their allowances, they can sell their surplus allowances on the market or else bank them to cover future emissions. Including the aviation sector in the Emissions Trading Scheme would expand the market covered by an overall emissions cap. Aircraft operators would be allocated emission allowances, thus giving them a permanent incentive to reduce their climate impact, but they would also have the flexibility to buy or sell allowances as necessary. The International Air Carriers Association and the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are not enthusiastic about the prospect. At its Annual General Meeting on 1 December 2005, IACA airlines urged the European Commission not to underestimate the financial impact of including aviation in an Emissions Trading Scheme. IACA carriers stressed that current fuel prices are already curbing demand and that the inclusion of aviation in the EU Emission Trading Scheme should be designed in order to preserve the viability of an industry operating on tight margins. Speakers at the meeting agreed that a comprehensive approach should be adopted to reducing the environmental impact of aviation, with economic instruments such as emissions trading, forming just one element of this strategy. Improvements in technology, infrastructure and operational practices should precede economic measures, they argued. For its part, the FAA says that US companies should be exempted from inclusion in the ETS, and aviation emissions should be addressed through the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). First of all, what is our concern about the emissions trading system? As I outlined earlier, we still think that there are very fundamental issues that need to be resolved when it comes especially to the discussion about CO 2 . As you know, we are not Kyoto signatories. We think there are fundamental issues of science that still remain unresolved. Certainly the issue of whether or not U.S. airlines can be included in any European trading scheme raises legal issues that we think must be resolved. We think that the potential for that would be very controversial, something on which we would hope to have agreement with our European counterparts before it moved forward. That’s pretty much the nub of it. When you think about how you actually work through the international system where aircraft are taking off every three seconds to go from one airport to another nation, that’s a very complex [matter] and that’s why I think that ICAO is the right forum to work through those issues and why it’s not a very simple thing where one region can make certain kinds of choices and decisions. This isn’t a U.S. and EU issue; this is really a world issue. —Sharon Pinkerton, FAA Assistant Administrator for Policy, Planning, and Environment EU backs compromise on plane CO2 emissions The EU will not levy a carbon emission tax on airlines when their planes are outside European airspace, the European Parliament has decided. The exemption for airlines will apply until 2017, by which time a global deal on aviation emissions may be in place. An EU tax will still apply for flights inside the EU. The new rules followed difficult talks with EU governments. Aviation is a fast-growing source of CO2 emissions, blamed by experts for contributing to global warming. The MEPs' vote on Thursday was a climbdown from more ambitious targets that the European Commission had originally proposed. The US, China and India had complained about the EU's decision to tax international airlines for emissions. Global negotiations The Commission now hopes that the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) will reach a global agreement by 2017 to limit aviation emissions. EU governments - jointly called the Council - wanted to extend the exemption until 2020, but MEPs decided that 2017 should be the deadline. The emissions tax is part of the EU's Emissions Trading System (ETS), under which heavy emitters of CO2 buy and sell carbon allowances. Addressing MEPs, the EU's Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard said "the Commission would of course have preferred and fought for a higher level of ambition. it would've been better for Europe's self-respect and reputation and even more important, for the climate. But we are where we are". The ETS was originally set up in 2005 to cover factories and other land-based emitters of CO2, but was extended to cover aircraft in January 2012. Under the rules adopted on Thursday, the 28 EU member states will also have to report openly how they spend revenues from the ETS. The transparency drive is aimed at ensuring that the money is spent on measures to combat climate change. November 27, 2012 - 07:02 PM EST Obama quietly signs bill shielding airlines from carbon fees in Europe President Obama has signed into law a bill that requires U.S. airlines be excluded from European carbon emissions fees. Environmentalists had framed the bill as the first test of the president's commitment to fighting climate change in his second term and urged him to veto it. Obama quietly signed it Tuesday over their objections. "The Obama administration is firmly committed to reducing harmful carbon pollution from civil aviation both domestically and internationally, but, as we have said on many occasions, the application of the EU [Emissions Trading System] to non-EU air carriers is the wrong way to achieve that objective," a White House spokesman said in a statement to The Hill. The spokesman said the Obama administration will work to address airline emissions at the "the appropriate multilateral forum — the International Civil Aviation Organization." The U.S. airline industry lobbied heavily for passage of the legislation, arguing that the European Union rules were unfair because they would have been applied to the entire length of flights to European destinations, not just the time spent in EU airspace. Under the emissions trading system, airlines would have had to trade credits for pollution emitted by flights in a system that is similar to cap-and-trade proposals that environmentalists have pushed in the United States. Earlier this month, the EU put the emission fees on hold for a year to buy time for a global agreement on aviation emissions. The rules were not frozen for airlines in the EU, however. “It never made a bit of sense for European governments to tax our citizens for flying over our own airspace — and with the passage of this law we’ve got the tools we need to prevent it from happening and protect American jobs,” she said in a statement. “American sovereignty will no longer be threatened by the E.U.’s illegitimate and disingenuous ‘environmental’ tax on our country,” Thune said in a statement. “My bill will ensure that we protect U.S. air carriers and passengers from this illegal tax, freeing up billions of dollars that can instead be invested in creating jobs, modernizing or purchasing new aircraft and stimulating our own economy." Airlines had said they would have had to make their first payments in the EU emissions system in the spring of 2013. The rules, which were first applied to the aviation industry this year, called for airlines to reduce their emissions from 2006 levels by 3 percent by 2013 and 5 percent by 2020. The White House had been under pressure from environmental groups to veto the bill. Those advocates want Obama to address climate change more forcefully in his second term, and said the emissions bill provided an opportunity to chart a new course. The New York-based Environmental Defense Fund called the emissions ban "[a]t best. simply superfluous" when it was approved by lawmakers earlier this fall. But the World Wildlife Fund adopted a more measured tone on Tuesday. “WWF called for a veto of this bill and we are disappointed that it passed," WWF Director of International Climate Policy Keya Chatterjee said in a statement. "However, there is a silver lining here — the administration has appointed high level representatives to pursue a global solution for aviation and climate," Chatterjee said. "The White House now must endorse a global, market-based measure to rein in carbon pollution from aviation. If they do, we are optimistic that the U.S. can work with ICAO to develop a package of policies that will reduce our share of global emissions.” The industry group Airlines for America said the law will allow carriers to reduce emissions through international agreements. "With the President’s signature today, the United States has sent an unequivocal signal to the EU and the world that while the illegal and unilaterally-imposed EU ETS is the wrong way to proceed, there is a steadfast commitment to the right way — a global sectoral approach at the international level,” A4A President Nicholas Calio said. “Working within the framework of the International Civil Aviation Organization, the United States will continue to lead the effort to secure a policy that will meet the twin goals of allowing for industry growth and continuing improvements in fuel efficiency and reduced emissions,” Calio continued. — This story was updated at 3:05 p.m. and at 4:41 p.m. Sustainability EU ETS Verification for the Aviation Sector Meet your obligations under the EU Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) for aviation with SGS. Find out more about our verification services specifically designed for the aviation sector. From 2012, the aviation sector is involved in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). If you are operating flights to, from and within Europe, you will have to meet legislative requirements of the EU member state to which you have been assigned. Compliance means using an approved methodology to monitor your tonne-kilometer and carbon dioxide emissions and submitting a verified report of your data. Free allowances will be allocated, but only if you have submitted the appropriate baseline data. Failure to comply can be costly, as every tonne of carbon dioxide emitted above the free allocation will have to be purchased annually. SGS is recognized as the global leader in the verification of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. We work on hundreds of GHG emission reduction projects and GHG inventories every year, including over 450 installations in the EU. With this experience, we are uniquely placed to assist you in the verification of your tonne-kilometre and carbon dioxide emission reports. We are also experienced in working with aviation operators and are members of the International Air Transport Association (IATA). We were active participants in working groups on the inclusion of aviation in the EU ETS organized by the EU Commission, the European Accreditation forum (EA) and the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA). We have a split verification service – with an initial compliance assessment one year and final data verification the following year prior to reporting deadlines. This approach gives an early check of your internal systems and a warning of any areas for improvement. The data enables you to address any capacity issues and minimize the risk of non-allocation of free allowances. With more than 200 experienced greenhouse gas assessors globally, we can tailor a verification team to meet your needs, including local assessors around the world to provide the highest level of service as well as minimize travel costs. Call our accredited verification teams today to find out more about EU ETS verification for the aviation sector. Downloads Brochures | PDF 731.87 KB EU emissions trading scheme and aviation xix, 448 pages. forms ; 25 cm. Introduction -- United Nations framework convention on climate chage -- Kyoto protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on climate change -- Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC (text with EEA relevance) -- Directive 2008/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to include aviation activities in the scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community (text with EEA relevance) -- Directive 2004/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 2004 amending Directive 2003/87/EC establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community, in respect of the Kyoto Protocol's project mechanisms (text with EEA relevance) -- Commission decision of 18 July 2007 establishing guidelines for. European Union emissions trading scheme and aviation by Ulrich Steppler and Angela Klingmüller. Abstracto: "This book provides a concise and convenient compilation of the EU directives and decisions concerning the inclusion of aviation into the existing greenhouse gas emission allowances trading scheme (ETS)."--Page 4 of cover. Comentarios Agregar una reseña y compartir sus pensamientos con otros lectores. Sé el primero. Datos enlazados Entidad primaria # EU emissions trading scheme and aviation a schema:Book. Esquema: CreativeWork; library:oclcnum " 432982451 " ; Biblioteca: placeOfPublication; # Portland, OR library:placeOfPublication ; Biblioteca: placeOfPublication; # Utrecht rdfs:seeAlso ; # Directive 2004/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 2004 amending Directive 2003/87/EC establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community, in respect of the Kyoto Protocol's project mechanisms. rdfs:seeAlso ; # Directive 2008/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to include aviation activities in the scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community. rdfs:seeAlso ; # Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC. schema:about ; # Climat--Changements--Législation--Pays de l'Union européenne schema:about ; # Aircraft exhaust emissions--Law and legislation schema:about ; # Global warming--Law and legislation schema:about ; # UE/CE Directives schema:about ; # Protocole de Kyoto schema:about ; # Climatic changes--Law and legislation schema:about ; # Weltraum schema:about ; # Contrôle d'émission schema:about ; # Climatic changes--Law and legislation--European Union countries schema:about ; # UE/CE Union européenne schema:about ; # Europe--European Union countries. schema:about ; # Aircraft exhaust emissions schema:about ; # Effet de serre--Législation--Pays de l'Union européenne schema:about ; # Aircraft exhaust emissions--European Union countries schema:about ; # Permis de pollution négociables--Entreprises publiques--Droit--Pays de l'Union européenne schema:about ; # Umweltzertifikat schema:about ; # Internationales Umweltrecht schema:about ; schema:about ; # Emissions trading--Law and legislation schema:about ; # Luftverkehr schema:about ; # Aeronautics, Commercial--Law and legislation--European Union countries schema:about ; # Aeronautics, Commercial--Law and legislation schema:about ; # Emissions trading--Law and legislation--European Union countries schema:about ; # Aéronautique--Économies d'énergie schema:about ; # Transport aérien schema:about ; # Avions--Moteurs--Gaz d'échappement--Législation--Pays de l'Union européenne schema:about ; # Greenhouse gas mitigation--Law and legislation schema:about ; # Aircraft exhaust emissions--Law and legislation schema:about ; # Polluants de l'air schema:about ; # Changement climatique schema:about ; # Greenhouse gas mitigation--Law and legislation--European Union countries schema:about ; # Handel schema:about ; # Global warming--Law and legislation--European Union countries schema:about ; schema:alternateName " European Union emissions trading scheme and aviation " ; schema:bookFormat bgn:PrintBook ; schema:contributor ; # Angela Klingmüller schema:contributor ; # Ulrich Steppler schema:contributor ; # European Parliament. schema:copyrightYear " 2010 " ; schema:datePublished " 2010 " ; schema:description " Introduction -- United Nations framework convention on climate chage -- Kyoto protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on climate change -- Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC (text with EEA relevance) -- Directive 2008/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to include aviation activities in the scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community (text with EEA relevance) -- Directive 2004/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 2004 amending Directive 2003/87/EC establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community, in respect of the Kyoto Protocol's project mechanisms (text with EEA relevance) -- Commission decision of 18 July 2007 establishing guidelines for. "@en ; schema:description " "This book provides a concise and convenient compilation of the EU directives and decisions concerning the inclusion of aviation into the existing greenhouse gas emission allowances trading scheme (ETS)."--Page 4 of cover. "@en ; schema:exampleOfWork ; schema:inLanguage " en " ; schema:isPartOf ; # Essential air and space law ; schema:name " EU emissions trading scheme and aviation "@en ; schema:productID " 432982451 " ; schema:publication ; schema:publisher ; # International Specialized Book Services [distributor for U.S.A. and Canada] schema:publisher ; # Eleven International Publishing schema:workExample ; wdrs:describedby ; . Entidades relacionadas # Eleven International Publishing a bgn:Agent ; schema:name " Eleven International Publishing " ; . # International Specialized Book Services [distributor for U.S.A. and Canada] a bgn:Agent ; schema:name " International Specialized Book Services [distributor for U.S.A. and Canada] " ; . # Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC. a schema:CreativeWork ; Esquema: creador; # European Parliament. schema:name " Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC. " ; . # Directive 2004/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 2004 amending Directive 2003/87/EC establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community, in respect of the Kyoto Protocol's project mechanisms. a schema:CreativeWork ; Esquema: creador; # European Parliament. schema:name " Directive 2004/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 2004 amending Directive 2003/87/EC establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community, in respect of the Kyoto Protocol's project mechanisms. " ; . # Directive 2008/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to include aviation activities in the scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community. a schema:CreativeWork ; Esquema: creador; # European Parliament. schema:name " Directive 2008/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to include aviation activities in the scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community. " ; . # Essential air and space law ; a bgn:PublicationSeries ; schema:hasPart ; # EU emissions trading scheme and aviation schema:name " Essential air and space law ; " ; . Aviation and "Emissions trading" Versione Italiana Directive 2008/101/EC: Amendment of Directive 2003/87/EC so as to include Aviation activities in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme On 24 October 2008 the European Council adopted Directive 2008/101/EC amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to include aviation activities in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS). This Directive was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 13 January 2009 and became effective on 2 February 2009. This website page reports the main references for the implementation of the emissions trading scheme extended to the aviation sector. For further information please check the European Commission's website. which includes all the processes for the inclusion of the aviation sector in the EU ETS. Scope of Directive 2008/101/EC and participants List of aircraft operators All aircraft operators that perform an aviation activity listed in Annex I of Directive 2003/87/EC as amended by Directive 2008/101/EC are included in the emissions trading scheme, basically, all aircraft operators performing flights through Europe (European Economic Area – EEA, including EU + EFTA countries) or intercontinental flights to and from the EU-EEA are included in the emissions trading scheme. The European Commission developed “Guidelines on the detailed interpretation of the aviation activities listed in Annex I to Directive 2003/87/EC ”. Based on the scope of Directive 2008/101/EC and on the methodology described in the document "Aircraft operator allocation by EC Member State (pdf, 215 KB) ", the European Commission adopted annually a list of aircraft operators that have undertaken a relevant aviation activity on or after 1 January 2006, specifying the administering Member State for each aircraft operator. As a result of the extension of aviation part of EU ETS to EEA-EFTA countries (namely Iceland Liechtenstein and Norway), a revised list of aircraft operators (pdf, 3.786 MB) was adopted on 29 January 2013, as annex to Commission Regulation (EU) no. 109/2013 (pdf, 3.786 MB) . Prior Compliance List On June 2013 the European Commission published an updated "prior compliance list" (pdf, 746 KB) including some aircraft operators who had not been included in the previous revised list of aircraft operators. Aircraft operators who are included in this prior compliance list, and administered by Italy, are kindly asked to contact the Italian Competent Authority as soon as possible at the following email address: [email protected] . Italian Competent Authority The National Italian Committee for the management and implementation of Directive 2003/87/EC ("Comitato nazionale per la gestione della direttiva 2003/87/CE e per il supporto nella gestione delle attività di progetto del protocollo di Kyoto" hereinafter also referred to as: “the Committee”) represents also the national Competent Authority for the implementation of Directive 2008/101/EC. On 6 August 2009 the Committee adopted Decision 027/2009 (pdf, 61 KB) in order to define urgent prescriptions for the implementation of Directive 2008/101/EC and to implement Commission Decision 2009/339/CE (pdf, 815 KB). amending Decision 2007/589/EC, on the inclusion of monitoring and reporting guidelines. By means of Legislative Decree of 30 December 2010, no. 257 (pdf, 2.326 MB). amending Legislative Decree of 4 April 2006, no. 216 (pdf, 150 KB). Italy has implemented Directive 2008/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council which includes aviation activities in the scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community. The Legislative Decree 216/2006 was abolished with the entry into force of Legislative Decree of 13 March 2013, no. 30 (pdf, 4.931 MB). for the implementation of Directive 2009/29/EC amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to improve and extend the greenhouse gas emission allowance trading scheme of the Community. The Legislative Decree 30/2013 entered into force on 5 April 2011. Monitoring and reporting of emissions data All aircraft operators administered by Italy are required to carry out monitoring of emissions released from the aircraft for aviation activities listed in the Directive (Annex I), in accordance with the monitoring plan for annual emissions, as approved by the Committee. In accordance with Article 10 of Legislative Decree 30/2013, the monitoring plan shall be sent to the Committee within 60 days from the date of entry into force, or within 60 days from the moment the aircraft operator is reported as aircraft operator administered by Italy within the updated list of aircraft operators. The Phase III of the EU-ETS: Monitoring and Reporting Regulation from 1 January 2013 On 21 June 2012 the European Commission adopted Regulation (EU) N. 601/2012 (pdf, 1.450 MB) . (“Regulation 601/2012”) on the monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions pursuant to Directive 2003/87/CE of the European Parliament and of the Council, which is valid for the third trading period of the EU system ( the second for the aviation sector ) from 1 January 2013. The Regulation 601/2012 replaces Decision 2009/339/EC (pdf, 815 KB) . amending Decision 2007/589/EC on the inclusion of guidelines for monitoring and reporting of emissions and tonne-kilometre data for aviation activities. The Committee approved on 28 December 2012 the Decision No. 45/2012 (pdf, 398 KB) containing provisions for the implementation of Regulation 601/2012. From 1 January 2013 aircraft operators administered by Italy shall monitor and report their emissions under provisions of Regulation 601/2012 and Decision 45/2012 of the Committee. Under Article 2, paragraph 1 of the Decision No. 45/2012, all aircraft operators administered by Italy, already own of an approved monitoring plan, are required to submit the updated monitoring plan for annual emissions by 31 January 2013 . through the new standardized electronic template established by the Commission and in accordance with Regulation 601/2012. Under Article 2, paragraph 2 of Decision No. 45/2012, and in accordance with Article 10 of Legislative Decree 30/2013, all aircraft operators administered by Italy are required to submit the monitoring plan for annual emissions . through the new standardized electronic template established by the Commission and in accordance with Regulation 601/2012, within 60 days from the date of entry into force of the Decree, or within 60 days from the moment the aircraft operator is reported as "aircraft operator administered by Italy" within the list of aircraft operators. The plan, as well as the updated plan, shall be signed with a qualified electronic signature (QES), as defined by Directive 1999/93/EC of 13 December 1999, of the European Parliament and Council, concerning a Community framework for electronic signatures. The plan shall be sent to: [email protected] Information about the procedures to acquire a digital signature, based on a qualified certificate is available on the website of DigitPA - National Agency for the digitization of public administration . The National Committee will accept only standardized electronic template in Italian or English languages: < & Gt; AE Monitoring Plan (EN) (xlsx zip, 166 KB) AE Monitoring Plan (IT) (xls, 490 KB) Commission’s websitesite. and in particular to the document “Guidance document No. 2 - The Monitoring and Reporting Regulation - General guidance for aircraft operators” (pdf, 563 KB) . On 19 June 2013 was approved the Decision no. 14/2013 (pdf, 496 KB) . through which the Committee carried out the reconnaissance of the AE Monitoring Plans of aircraft operators administered by Italy pursuant to article 10, paragraph 5, of Legislative Decree no. 30/2013. All aircraft operators administered by Italy are required to monitor their emissions in accordance with the approved monitoring plan and with the Regulation 601/2012. The annual emissions report (relating to the previous monitoring year) shall be submitted by March 31 of each year. The report of annual emissions shall be submitted through the standardized electronic template established by the Commission: Report of annual emissions for Phase III: the new template will be available on this page The report shall be signed with a qualified electronic signature (QES), and it shall be sent to the email: [email protected] . The National Committee will accept only standardized electronic template in Italian or English languages. By April 30th of each year . all aircraft operators administered by Italy are required to surrender a number of allowances equal to the total emissions in the previous year, monitored and reported in the manner as described above, through their account on the Union Register. The first surrender of allowances must be made by aircraft operators administered by Italy before 30 April 2013, in reference to 2012 emissions. Approval of the Monitoring Plans The National Italian Committee adopted the following Decisions on approval of the monitoring plans for the aircraft operators administered by Italy. Through these decisions, moreover, Identity Codes are now assigned to approved plans in order to open the Registry account under the Commission Regulation (EU) No. 1193/2011 ( for more information about the Registry, see next paragraph and the links indicated there ). Allowances free of charge for 2012 and for the period 2013/2020 For the period from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2012 and for the period from 1 January 2013 until 31 December 2020, the applications (doc, 38 KB) were submitted through the standardized electronic template established by the National Italian Committee, with a QES, to the email: [email protected] . The application included the tonne-kilometre data for aviation activities performed during the year 2010, monitored, verified and reported according to the provisions indicated in the afore mentioned Decisions. On 30 June 2011 the Committee approved Decision 24/2011 (pdf, 346 KB) on the recognition of the submission of reports concerning tonne-kilometre data for the allocation of allowances free of charge. In compliance with the provisions of Art. 3-quater (3) of Legislative Decree 30 December 2010, no. 257, on 30 June 2011 the Committee submitted to the European Commission the total tonne-kilometre data received together with the aforementioned applications for free allowances. Aircraft operators who are eligible for the allocation of allowances free of charge . and who provided the total tonne-kilometre data submitted to the European Commission, are listed in the Annex A to Decision 24/2011. On 26 September 2011 the European Commission adopted Decision 2011/638/EU. on the EEA-wide benchmark values which have been used by the Committee to calculate greenhouse gas emission allowances to be allocated to aircraft operators free of charge for the period starting on 1 January 2012 until 31 December 2012 and for the period starting on 1 January 2013 until 31 December 2020. On 29 December 2011, pursuant to Art. 3-sexies of Legislative Decree 216/2006, as amended by Legislative Decree 257/2010, the Committee adopted Decision 36/2011 (pdf, 49 KB) in order to determine the amount of free allowances to be allocated to aircraft operators free of charge. Annexes 1 and 2 (pdf, 69 KB) to the aforementioned Decision of the Committee contain the lists of all concerned aircraft operators stating the amount of free allowances to be allocated for each of the two periods (2012 and 2013-2020). For information about opening an account on the registry of allowances of the Union, and about requesting free allowances, to those entitled to it, all aircraft operators assigned to Italy can refer to the ISPRA web page dedicated to EU ETS. Please note that the identification code of the plans of aircraft operators administered by Italy (under the EU Regulation. 1193/2011) is defined through Decision 10/2012 (pdf, 58 KB) and Decision 15/2012 (pdf, 307 KB) . adopted by the Commission. Accession of Croatia to the European Union and extension of the aviation part of the ETS Following the planned accession of Croatia to the EU on 1 July 2013, also the E.U. ETS will be extended to Croatia and thus the scope of the aviation part of ETS will be fully extended to Croatia by 1 January 2014 . The extension of EU ETS to Croatia will entail the consideration of additional flights within the scope of ETS that are: domestic flights within Croatia flights between Croatia and non-EEA Countries For any further information and updates on the inclusion of Croatia in the EU ETS, please refer to the European Commission dedicated webpage: http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/aviation/croatia/index_en.htm Update of the Monitoring Plan The changes to the monitoring methodology which require an update of the monitoring plan shall be subject to the approval of the Competent Authority. Aircraft operators shall submit their updated monitoring plan at least 90 days before any change in the monitoring methodology or, if it resulted not technically possible or unpredictable, no later than 30 days after the change occurred. The monitoring plan shall be updated in accordance with Articles 14, 15 and 16 of Regulation 601/2012 . In particular, the following changes are considered "significant," and they shall be promptly notified to the Competent Authority promptly and in no case later than the deadlines listed above . Article 15(4) of Regulation 601/2012 : "Significant changes to the monitoring plans of an aircraft operator shall include: i) a change in the relative levels of fuel consumption; ii) a change in the value of the emission factor; iii) a change of the calculation method (method A - method B); iv) the introduction of new source streams, or a change in the classification of source streams; v) changes relating to the status of the aircraft intended as a "small emitters" under Article 54 of Regulation No 601/2012 (see section below) i) a change in the status of non-commercial to commercial air transport service provided; ii) a change concerning the subject of air transport, defined as passenger, cargo or mail; iii) a change in the method of calculation; iv) a change of the levels relative to the mass of the passengers. (a) with regard to the emission monitoring plan: b) with regard to the tonne-kilometre data monitoring plan: Changing of the fleet In those cases where changes to the fleet list or other identification considered “not significant” by the Competent Authority, and the aforementioned changes do not affect the monitoring methodology as approved by the Competent Authority, with regard in particular to the uncertainty assessment, aircraft operators shall: inform promptly the Competent Authority by sending an e-mail to: [email protected] . update all the information within the approved monitoring plan by 31 January of the following year with respect to that when the changes take place, in order to get a new approval by the Competent Authority. P.ej. if an aircraft operator adds a new aircraft to its fleet list on 18 May 2012, and if that variation does not affect the monitoring methodology previously approved by the Competent Authority, that aircraft operator shall promptly inform the CA about the incoming variation through an e-mail; then an updated monitoring plan is to be submitted with the inclusion of the additional aircraft . Therefore it is useful to point out that the operator is asked to update the monitoring plan only once, preferably before the end of the year, unless the occurring variations are "significant". If there is any doubt about the identification of the variation "significance" and about the updating of the plan, please contact the Competent Authority by sending an e-mail to: [email protected] . Reports of annual emissions and tonne-kilometre data have to be verified by accredited entities (see Article 1, paragraph 13 of Directive 2008/101/CE). The National Italian Committee adopted Decision 024/2010 (pdf, 121 KB) relating to requirements for the accreditation and verification activity as a EU ETS verification body (including aviation sector). Decision 05/2011 (pdf, 78 KB) was published on 4 February 2011, it deals with the recognition for verifiers, including the list of accredited verifiers for the aviation sector. The European Commission published the document “EU ETS Verification Guidance for Aviation”(pdf, 465 KB). This guidance is designed to clarify the EU ETS requirements on verification and to give practical advice to verifiers, operators, competent authorities and accreditation bodies on how to interpret these requirements in a consistent manner. On June 21 st. 2012 the European Commission adopted Regulation (EU) No 600/2012 (pdf, 933 KB) (the "Regulation 600/2012") on the verification of greenhouse gas emissions and tonne-kilometers and the accreditation of verifiers under Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, valid from January 1 st. 2013. Further information and all relevant documentation about accreditation of foreign and Italian verifiers, including forms, are available on this website at the dedicated webpage: Verificatori ETS . “De minimis” exemption The "de minimis” exemption under subparagraph (j) of Annex I to ETS Directive 2003/87/EC is applicable where an operator: I. is a commercial air transport operator. This means that he holds an air operator's certificate (AOC) under Part I of Annex 6 to the Chicago Convention, and II. has performed less than 243 flights per period for three consecutive four-month periods or less than 10.000 tonnes emissions per year. If both conditions (I) and (II) are met but the operator is included in the list, it is possible that traffic data used for the estimation of emissions are partially missing or not up to date. All aircraft operators included in the list of aircraft operators and administered by Italy, are required to monitor their emissions starting from the year when they have been included in the aforementioned list and to submit their Annual emissions report, duly verified by an accredited verifier. Aircraft operators that, with reference to an (x) monitoring year, can prove that they meet the conditions set at bullets I. and II. above, through submission of their updated AOC and the verified Annual emissions report, stating that they do not trespass the aforementioned thresholds concerning annual emissions or number of flights, will be considered exempted under the “de minimis” rule set out in Annex 1, letter “j”, to the ETS Directive. Therefore they need not comply with ETS obligations related to aviation activity performed in the following year (x + 1). However, such aircraft operators shall constantly check that the aforementioned conditions are met and, in case they cannot be confirmed with reference to aviation activity performed in year (y), they shall: Inform promptly the Competent Authority; Start again monitoring emissions according to their already approved monitoring plan, provided that the same operational methodology is maintained, or submit a new annual emissions monitoring plan for the approval by Competent Authority; Submit a verified Annual emissions report by 31st March of the following year (y + 1) with respect to the year when the conditions for the exemption from ETS ceased to be applicable, and surrender by 30 April a number of allowances equal to the emissions during the preceding calendar year. Inclusion after 2010 Operators falling again within the scope (with regard to at least one of the conditions I and II) and operators who become for the first time aircraft operators after 2010 may apply for free allowances from the "special reserve" pursuant to article 8 of Legislative Decree 30/2013. We underline that any application must be submitted to the National Italian Committee by 30 June 2015 together with a verified tonne-kilometre data report referred to aviation activities performed during the year 2014 . According to Art. 54 of Regulation No. 601/2012, an air craft operator whose flights in aggregate emit less than 25 000 tonnes of CO2 per year, or which operates less than 243 flights during three consecutive four-month periods . is considered a “small emitter”. A small emitter can use a simplified procedure to monitor its emissions. On 9 July 2010 the Commission adopted a Regulation on the approval of a simplified tool developed by Eurocontrol to estimate the fuel consumption for operators who are “small emitters”. The tool is available on Eurocontrol's website (registration to the extranet is needed). Further support and useful documents for the operators For any request or information please contact the Technical Secretariat of the National Committee at: [email protected] . Some guidance documents have been prepared by the Task Forces that have been set under the EU ETS Compliance Forum, and a guidance to help aircraft operators to compile their monitoring plans has been prepared by the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. All the documents are available on the European Commission's web site . Latest update: 26 June 2013 EU Emissions Trading Scheme Update European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Update — Originally published in BusinessAir Magazine . April 2013, Volume 23, No. 4. April 2013 is proving to be a challenging month for many aircraft operators who fly point-to-point within the European Union (EU) and haven’t already taken the necessary steps to establish a registry account for the EU’s Emissions Trading System (ETS). Point-to-point flights within the EU must comply with the ETS, even though the EU has temporarily postponed enforcement of the ETS for international flights. On April 30, 2013, operators must surrender the correct number of allowances from their registry accounts to cover their carbon dioxide emissions. This means a registry account must already have been established with the appointed member state in order to surrender the allowances on that date. Compliance with the ETS has proved difficult for many aircraft operators in the United States. All operators are assigned a specific EU member state as their regulatory authority within the EU-ETS; however, the member state that is assigned as the entry point for each operator is random and the requirements of each member state vary. Once an operator is assigned to a member state, that operator must submit its monitoring plan within the timeframe established by the specific member state. The process and timing for submission of the monitoring plan is dictated by the specific member state and varies from one member state to another. Many of the United States operators who have started this process have found it to be time-consuming and invasive. Operators are struggling, at the outset, with the amount and type of information required in order to establish a registry account. Owners who have established an ownership structure in order to protect confidentiality and achieve their tax goals are finding they are left with very few options, depending on the member state, in protecting their confidentiality. Regardless of the process of the specific member state and the disclosure requirements, all operators must be ready to surrender emission allowances on April 30, 2013. The April 30 deadline is for submitting credits to cover carbon emitted on flights between EU airports during 2012. This requires that the operator open an EU registry account in its appointed member state and submit the allowances by the deadline or face penalties. The credits for surrender of emission allowances have to be submitted via an approved EU registry account, and setting up this alone can take 30 days. Operators face fines of €100 (approximately $130) per metric ton of carbon for every credit not submitted by the April 30 deadline. This penalty seems high considering carbon credits are currently trading on the European market around €4.25 ($5.52) per metric ton. U.S. aircraft owners who do not perform any intra¬European flight missions escape, for the time being, the legal obligation to register with the EU-ETS, although that freedom may only be temporary. The EU originally intended to begin enforcing compliance on all operators conducting international flights to-and-from EU member states beginning in 2012, but the EU’s stance provoked a worldwide firestorm of controversy, including adoption by the U.S. Congress of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition Act of 2011. Faced with the threat of a boycott by airlines flying to Europe from China, India and the United States, the European Community announced it would defer enforcement of ETS as a “goodwill gesture” to allow nations time to reach agreement on a global framework for tackling aviation emissions. Please contact Amanda Applegate at 877-237-5398 or [email protected] Comentarios Aerlex Law Group 2800 28th Street, Suite 200 Santa Monica CA, 90405-6203 Tel: 310-392-5200 © 2008-2016 AERLEX Law Group | All Rights Reserved | Descargo de responsabilidad | Site by MYHRECO Home > News > Consultation outcome: Aviation EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) Consultation outcome: Aviation EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) On 30 April 2014, EU Regulation 421/2014 came into force across the 28 Member States. The EU Regulation temporarily reduces Aviation EU ETS to an intra-European Economic Area scope from 2013 until 2016. The Government has carried out a consultation for the UK Regulations that will implement the EU Regulation. Mensaje de navegación Updated: July 2015 The EU Emission Trading Scheme is by many EU leaders seen as a cornerstone of EU climate policy It covers 42% of EU greenhouse gas emissions. Unfortunately several flaws in the scheme makes it presently an ineffective tool to reduce greenhouse gases because of excess emissions and resulting very low emission costs. Index of this Page Restriction of Excess Emissions Functioning of the EU-Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) - External allowances into EU-ETS - Airlines included - EU Single Registry Read - INFORSE-Europe Analysis Limits of the EU-ETS System. Read - INFORSE-Europe Proposals to improve the EU-ETS. Leer Legislation - Directive 2008/101/EC to Include Airline Emissions into the EU-ETS (November 2008). Read - Directive 2009/29/EC to improve and extend the greenhouse gas emission allowance trading system (April 2009). Read - Link Directive (April 2004). Leer In 2010, it was clear for everybody that there were excess emissions in the EU-ETS, leading to unexpected low prices. In March 2011 the EU Commission suggested to reduce allowances. The proposal was welcomed by most EU countries, but because of resistance from Poland, the proposal was delayed. In July 2012, the Commission proposed to reduce allowances in the coming auctions for 2013 and set them aside for later. This was agreed among the EU countries, but in 2013 the Parliament first objected and then agreed to a less ambitious arrangement. The agreements is that allowances for 900 million tons of CO 2 emissions are set-aside 2013-14 until 2018. Because of the large number of excess emissions, the set-aside has not raised the price of allowances to a level, where it will be effective to reduce emissions, (such as above 15 Eur/ton), but it has probably avoided the collapse of the EU-ETS market (a collapse is if the allowance price reaches 0) In July 2015, however, the EU Comission's Summer Package proposes a revison of the ETS system in line with the 2030 climate and energy policy framework agreed by the EU leaders in October 2014. A reduction of the emission allowance quantity by 2.2 % every year from 2021 which would increase the price of CO 2 emission. The EU ETS should continue to inspire other international partners, such as China, to use carbon pricing as a cost-effective driver for a gradual but sustainable decarbonisation of their economies for the benefit of future generations. Read INFORSE-Europe's opinion in the Press Release dated ( pdf file 137 kB) . Follow the development at the Commission's website http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/energy-union/index_en.htm Functioning of the EU Emission Trading Scheme (EU-ETS) The aim of the EU-ETS Directives is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a cost-efficient way, with introduction of greenhouse gas emission ceilings of major emitters and a mechanism for trading among them. All greenhouse gas emitters in EU that are covered by the EU-ETS must have enough greenhouse gas "allowances" to be allowed to emit their greenhouse gases. The EU countries' governments allocate greenhouse gas allowances to companies in their respective countries. These allowances can be traded between companies if they choose to do so. Each year, companies must submit a number of allowances that corresponds to their actual emissions. If they do not have enough allowances, they will have to pay a fine. The holding and tracking of allowances are done through national electronic registers. The sectors covered are energy, iron, cement, glass, ceramics, pulp, paper, and board. Only larger installations are covered, e.g. combustion installations above 20 MW input. The total number of allowances given or auctioned is each year reduced with 1.74% compared with the previous year. The first phase of the scheme was 2005 - 2007, before the Kyoto Protocol's commitment period. In this phase allowances were given for free to participating installations and there was a low level of penalty for non-compliance of 40 EUR/tons of CO 2. Due to large allowances given by countries, the market price of the allowances fell to close to zero during the period. The second period followed the Kyoto Protocol commitment period 2008 - 2012. In this period at least 95% of the allowances are given for free, but the countries could decide to auction up to 5% of the allowances. The penalty for non-compliance was increased to 100 EUR/ton of CO 2. The third phase is covering 2013-2020 with allowances to be auctioned to most power plants and to the part of the industry least vulnerable to international competition. In this phase unused emissions from the second phase can be carried over, a decision that is giving large over allocation of allowances, leading to low costs of emissions. A fourth period i foreseen for the period 2021-2030, for which the EU Commission has proposed to reduce emissions with 2.2%/year. Other improvements of the EU-ETS are also proposed. External allowances feed into EU-ETS With the "link" directive (see below), companies can buy emissions from project that should reduce emissions as CDM-projects as specified by the Kyoto Protocol and following UNFCCC guidelines. This has added to the excess of emissions, in particular because of a large influx on Chinese CDM quotas that are results on questionable projects with very little greenhouse gas reduction effects. The types of CDM projects that can be used for EU-EST allowances were reduced in 2013, but the "link" directive is still a loophole that makes the EU-ETS less likely to become effective. On September 2011, the EU established the rules of allocation of free emissions to airlines, stating that the aviation industry will become part of the EU ETS from 2012. The effect of the rules are that airlines get about 85% of their emissions for free. The inclusion of airlines caused protests from China, USA and many other countries. EU bowed to the protests and excluded flights outside EU from the EU-ETS until 2020. Also flights to airports near EU external borders are exempted from EU-ETS since the Regulation n°421/2014. In 2012, the EU Commission activated the single registry, replacing the national registries. It covers all EU Member countries plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein and records the national plans with the allowances assigned to each Member State, the accounts of the companies or physical persons who hold these allowances, the transfers of allowances, the annual verified emissions from installations and the annual reconciliation (settle and fitting) of allowances and verified emissions. The verification, recording and authorization of transactions now are held by the European Union Transaction Log (EUTL). INFORSE-Europe Analysis: Limits of the EU-ETS The EU Emission Trading Scheme is regarded as one of the cornerstones of the EU climate policy, but the first periods have shown a number of weaknesses in the systems: - Large variations in prices of allowances, reducing the incentives for long-term investments to reduce emissions. - Unjustified windfall profits for companies with large CO 2 emissions that receive free allowances and that can increase their product prices with the quota prices. Also nuclear power plants enjoy these windfall profits - Reduced incentives to continue with reductions when allowances are sufficient and prices are low. This is because a number of previous policies are abandoned for the companies included in the EU-ETS, such as CO 2 -taxes. - The uncertainty regarding future systems and CO 2 costs have given uncertainty for actors if they should aim at low or high emissions. - large influx of questionable allowances from the CDM (Clean Development Mechanism) of the Kyoto Protocol. The CDM influx is less prominent in the third period, but with the ETS allowances currently allocated until 2020, there are too many allowances allocated, if the EU countries shall reduce emissions in line with limiting global warming to 2’C. The current reduction rate of 1.74% per year is too slow: It will only result in phase-out of emissions by 2068, if continued.The carry over of allowances from the second period and from CDM projects adds to the problem. In conclusion, because of the flaws the EU-ETS is not the cornerstone of the EU climate policies it was meant to be. INFORSE-Europe Proposals to Improve the EU-ETS To improve the EU-ETS and achieve larger greenhouse gas reductions, INFORSE-Europe proposes the following changes: - There should be a minimum (floor) price for allowances of 20€/ton of CO 2 . - Allowances carried over from one period to the third period must be limited, by degrading them by a factor 2-3 or more (two-three or more unused allowances from the previous period shall give only one allowance in the next period). - The industry sectors that receive free allowances should be reduced, and instead of free allowances, companies should be offered support, including grants and loans for transition to low carbon technologies - Much stricter rules than the current ones must be introduced to limit the use of allowances from CDM projects in EU-ETS. Only projects that are clearly contributing directly to poverty reduction and basic needs of those that implement the measures should be eligible. The use of external (CDM) credits should be limited to 10% of reductions (for instance 10% of reductions is 2% of total allowances if reductions are 20%) - a windfall tax shall be introduced for nuclear power. The tax shall be equal to the extra revenue that the nuclear power plants will gain because of increased electricity prices caused by the EU-ETS. Follow also the development at Climate Action Network's site at www.climnet.org/EUenergy/NAPs.htm. and the Commission's site http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/emission.htm Regulation n°421/2014, amending the Directive (2003/87/EC) on gas emission allowance trading within the Community, on April 16th 2014. This amendment concerns the derogation of the Aviator sector concerning the external borders of EU. It has been done in advance of the implementation, by 2020, of an international agreement applying a single global market-based measure. Read the Directive . Directive (2009/29/EC) of 23/4 2009 to amend the 2003 Directive (2003/87/EC) to improve and extend the greenhouse gas emission allowance trading system (until 2020). Read the Directive on the EU Law website . Read the consolidated text of EU-ETS dir. 2003/87/EC including amendments with dir. 2009/29/EC and other amendments from 2009 and earlier, on the EU Law website . Agreement to Include Airline Emissions into the EU-ETS On November 19, 2008, a Directive (2008/101/EC) was agreed to include aviation in the EU-ETS in 2012. Emissions from plane will be reduced by 3% in 2012 (compared to the 2004-2006 level) and by 5% in 2013. 85% of the emission certificates will be allocated for free. Read the Directive on the EU Law website. Link Directive: Directive 2004/101/EC SIn 2004 this Directive was approved. It allows use of CDM credits within some limitations to be used as EU-ETS allowances. Credits from projects generating sinks and from hydropower above 20MW are not allowed in the EU-ETS Read the directive at the EU Law website. Read about the development and problems of EU-ETS at http://www.sandbag.org.uk/ A Bit of History The European Climate Change Programme for EU's implementation of the Kyoto Protocol identified in 2000 a cap-and trade system for greenhouse gas emission from large emmitter as a possible cornerstone in EU climate policy. One reason for this conclusion was that since 1992 the EU countries had discussed a common energy/CO2-tax, but were not able to agree on such a tax In 2001, the EU Commission the proposed a directive for the EU-ETS, covering the period until the end of the Kyoto Protocol, 2012. In 2003, the directive was adopted. In 2004, the use of CDM credits in EU-ETS was included with the "link" directive. Statement on emissions trading system in aviation EU´s emissions trading system should be confined only to intra-EU flights The Environment Committee of the European Parliament voted on 30th of January to apply the EU´s emissions trading system to all airlines operating in the union´s air space. It is the position of the Finland Chamber of Commerce that the emissions trading scheme should be confined only to intra-EU flights. We are concerned about the current proposal on the following grounds: First, the proposal ignores the views of important trading partners such as the United States, Russia and China may therefore have negative impacts on trade. Second, the current proposal may lead to the weakening of aviation relations with third parties. For European business and industry as well as for airline companies the routes to Asia are vital. Therefore it is important that the aviation relations are functional. Third, the Commission proposal does not take into account the resolution of the ICAO (UN aviation organisation) assembly meeting in October. According to the resolution, the EU may only impose its emissions trading scheme on flights that both depart and land from with its own airspace. If it wants to trade the emissions emitted over its own airspace by aircrafts that have come from outside of the EU, it may now only do so with the consent of the other country. Even though the Commission underlines the sovereignty of its own airspace, this ICAO resolution is sure to make the enforcement of union`s emissions trading system to apply all airlines more difficult. In addition, ignorance of the ICAO resolution does not further the introduction of the global emissions trading mechanism. On these grounds, it is important for business and industry that Eurochambres influences to maintain the current practice of regulating emissions from intra-EU flights only. Lausunnon saaja . Eurochambres Lausunnon pvm . 10.2.2014 Kirjoittaja . Kaisa Saario Titteli . Adviser / Asiantuntija Muokattu 10.2.2014 Uusimmat lausunnot EU emissions trading: 5 reasons to scrap the ETS Every time the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) fails to reduce emissions, the politicians and businesses who promote the scheme reach for their Samuel Beckett: “Try again, fail again, fail better.” The ETS has now been running for over a decade and there remains precious little sign that it has brought about reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. On 15 July, the European Commission published a l egislative proposal to revise the ETS after 2020. This is “more evolution than revolution,” according to Miguel Arias Cañete, Commissioner for Climate Action and Energy. More of the same might have been a better description. As EU Environment Ministers met today (26 October), talk of “carbon leakage” was again at the centre of the discussion. The Commission proposal would change the rules on how free emissions allowances will be allocated, updating more regularly their distribution across different industrial sectors. But new technical formulas and reviews cannot disguise the simple fact that carbon leakage - the perceived risk that caps on EU emissions could price business out of Europe and into less regulated markets, contributing to an overall increase in greenhouse gas emissions – is not happening. The most thorough study of the issue, funded by the Commission itself, is unequivocal: “We found no evidence for any carbon leakage.” As the debate on reforming the ETS starts once again, it is worth recalling the woeful record of emissions trading to date. Here are five reasons why the ETS should be scrapped rather than extended to 2030 and beyond. 1. The ETS has not substantially reduced emissions The EU's greenhouse gas emissions have fallen in the decade since the ETS began operating, including in the sectors covered by the scheme, but there is little evidence that emissions trading caused these reductions. Electricity generation accounts for the majority of emissions covered by the ETS, but reductions in this sector are largely the result of other environmental policies, notably feed-in tariffs and green certificates. More generally, analysis of economy-wide drivers of changing levels of greenhouse gas emissions has shown that reductions in ETS sectors can be explained almost entirely by a combination of increases in renewable energy, the economic downturn post-2008, improved energy efficiency, and fuel switching (from coal to gas) in response to other policies and economic variables. 2. The EU ETS is used to undermine other climate and emissions control policies “Hey! Commission! Leave those emissions alone. they're already covered by emissions trading.” That's the favourite refrain of business lobbyists in the face of proposed environmental regulations, and time and again it has worked. The EU's Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Directive was modified to explicitly exclude CO2 emission limits for the “installations” (power stations and industrial plants) which are covered by the EU ETS amid fears that it could lead to energy efficiency improvements, reducing demand for emissions allowances and in so doing weaken carbon prices. Similarly, the revision of the Energy Taxation Directive was weakened (and ultimately abandoned) for fear of affecting carbon prices, and loopholes that exempt aviation and shipping fuels from minimum tax rates were maintained on account of the ETS. Leaked UK government documents showed that it sought to weaken energy efficiency measures and renewable energy targets on the grounds that these could collapse the carbon price. In another notorious case, the Commission's Directorate-General (DG) on Climate Action warned against tougher energy efficiency measures for fear that these could collapse the carbon price. 3. The ETS sets a ceiling on climate ambition The ETS ensures that greenhouse gas emissions targets are treated as a ceiling on climate ambition rather than a floor. There is no incentive for countries to put in place policies that would encourage companies to over-achieve the target because that opens space for companies in other countries to emit more. The flood of allowances in the system makes it relatively painless to avoid domestic action by cheaply purchasing emissions allowances from elsewhere. To date, the net result has been “cancelling out the abatement that is being delivered by other policies such as the Renewable Energy Supply Directive and the Energy Efficiency Directive.” The failure of the ETS has been compounded by the fact that the EU’s current emissions target of 20 per cent emissions reductions by 2020 is widely acknowledged to be too low, generating a massive surplus of emissions allowances that will undermine the system well past 2020. A new Market Stability Reserve temporarily removes some of these emissions allowances, but does not cancel them. After these removals are accounted for, an estimated 2.3 billion surplus allowances could remain in use in the ETS by 2020. 4. The EU ETS has not been cost-effective and has subsidised polluters at tax payers' expense The EU ETS has consistently seen businesses pass on carbon “costs” to consumers that in reality were never incurred in the first place. A handful of large companies have gained (tens of) billions of euros in unearned profits this way, various academic studies have shown. The power sector has benefitted the most, although there is increasing evidence that industrial sectors (especially oil refineries) have engaged in similar pricing tricks. Heavy industry has also gained considerably from a surplus of emissions allowances, with ten of the largest firms in the steel and cement sector holding onto excess permits worth over €4 billion in the second phase of the scheme. A further source of inefficiency – and unearned profit – relates to changes state aid rules, which mean public money can be used to pay back industry for the increased electricity costs that result from the profiteering described above. The aluminium, steel, paper and chemicals sectors can all claim up to 85 per cent of these cost increases in the form of state aid (a figure that falls to 75 per cent from 2019). The free allocation of emissions allowances is set to continue. It should be recalled that this is a major reversal. In January 2008, the Commission announced that these free allocations would end by 2020. Yet the current “reform” proposal keeps to the current formula of 43 per cent of emissions allowances being handed out for free until at least 2030. The Impact Assessment of this proposal suggests that free permits handed out this way could be worth an estimated €160 billion. That is nothing short of scandalous. 5. The ETS remains susceptible to fraud and gaming All commodity markets contain some illegal activity, but carbon markets have been particularly susceptible to fraud. One key reason is the nature of the commodity being traded. Carbon, unlike corn or oil, is not a tangible product. Carbon permits are a “permission to pollute in the future”, which tends to be estimated by proxy rather than actually measured. Even after a €5 billion VAT fraud, and further scandals involving stolen and re-used allowances, the financial side of the ETS remains under-regulated according to the EU Court of Auditors. The legal definition of emission allowances is not sufficiently clear, the Registry of allowances lacks adequate fiduciary controls, and there is poor cooperation between the Commission and national financial regulators. European Union Aviation Allowance (EUAA) What is an EUAA? A European Union Aviation Allowance (EUAA) is a CO2 emission right that allows airlines that fall under the regulations of the European Emission Trading Scheme to pollute one metric ton of CO2. Starting from 2012, aviation will be included in the cap and trade system for CO2. Airlines operating flights which arrive at or depart from an airport situated in the EU will have to participate in the ETS. In 2012, each airline will receive 85% of the EUAA for free from their administrating state. The remaining 15% will be auctioned. If an airline is short in allocated EUAAs, they may buy CERs or ERUs up to 15% of the total amount of allowances they need to hand in at the end of the year. The remaining deficit must be covered by EUAAs or EUAs. What can we offer? Amsterdam Capital Trading is a company specialized in the trading of environmental products such as EUAAs. As an independent and flexible company with an experienced and knowledgeable team we are one of the liquidity providers in the EUAA’s spot market. We offer airlines access to the carbon market and are able to buy and sell all carbon related products in a fast and efficient way. We built a successful carbon trading business by maintaining a long-term relationship with our clients all across Europe. By sharing our knowledge and solutions we guarantee that we can manage your CO2 portfolio in a successful manner. ¿Como funciona? With our experience, world-wide network and know-how we are able to quote you the best prices in a simple and fast manner. Our company Amsterdam Capital Trading is counterparty in all spot transactions. Contrary to other market participants we don’t charge any brokerage fees or transaction costs, the price we quote is a net price. No minimum transaction volumes No transaction costs No membership fees No complicated long contracts Competitive prices, even for small volumes Anonymity in the market because Amsterdam Capital Trading is your counterparty Simple transaction over the phone Tailor made transactions Fast settlement Free advice on any carbon or energy related issues Free market updates and market information Please feel free to contact our carbondesk +31 (0) 208911780 Verificación EU ETS Verification - Stationary Operators At Lucideon we offer independent third-party verification of Greenhouse Gas emissions for companies that fall under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) and the EU ETS Opt-Out Scheme for Small Emitters and Hospitals. Since 2005 it has been a mandatory requirement for companies who fall under EU ETS to report annual emissions data - data which must be independently verified. Lucideon is fully accredited by UKAS (United Kingdom Accreditation Service) to provide verification for both stationary installations and aircraft operators. Phase III of the Scheme started in 2013 and will cover new sites and will have a different set of rules. Lucideon is now accredited to ISO 14065:2013 by UKAS to provide verification of GHG emissions data under Phase III of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. With industry-leading experience and accredited by UKAS for EU ETS Verification and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Verification to ISO 14065:2013, Lucideon provides: Annual Emissions Verification We will develop a tailored verification plan so that your installation's annual emissions are verified quickly and accurately, allowing emissions data to be reported on time and efficiently. Split Verification By spreading verification across the year and reviewing data centrally, we can identify potential issues early, minimising the risk of non-compliance and ensuring that verification can be carried out cost-effectively and with minimum disruption to you. New Entrant Reserve (NER) and "Significant Capacity Change" Verification NER verification can be complex and poor verification can be costly. An experienced auditor can keep the process simple and ensure you receive the maximum free allowances for your new site or expanded process. Lucideon is the leading NER auditor in the UK. Site Closure Verification CICS performs ‘site closure' verification for sites that require verification of items to leave a mandatory scheme. Lucideon has the capacity to provide verification at short notice to the timeframe your Competent Authority sets. We offer: Single Site Verification For single-sited companies or multi-sited companies where sites operate independently. Multi Site Verification For companies with common reporting, across sites within one or more countries. Here a central data verification at head office is accompanied by compliance visits to the actual sites. This approach has been adopted by many large companies AND trade associations who manage carbon reporting for their clients. Remote Verification Lucideon has perfected an unrivalled system for remote verification. Clients in the aviation sector and offshore industry have benefited from this for several years. For some classes of installation there is the potential to waive site visits during Phase III of EU ETS. For those clients with suitable installations Lucideon will help them through the process of obtaining site visit waivers. Why Lucideon? We have been providing independent verification since the EU ETS Scheme started. You will be appointed a dedicated lead auditor, who understands your industry and your concerns, and who will act as your single point of contact. As a client you will be entitled to our free Phase III training and webinars. Our robust procedures ensure that verification is carried out quickly and efficiently. From quotation, through to the verification report and final opinion, all services are delivered electronically to ensure a quick turnaround time. Where possible, data is verified centrally, minimising time and cost. We have developed standardised verification protocols for many of the available carbon management software packages, ensuring timely and cost-effective verification. Got a question? ICAO Joins Airlines, Nations in Opposing Emissions Trading Scheme The governing council of the International Civil Aviation Organization ( ICAO ), meeting on November 2 in Montreal, adopted a declaration opposing the European Union’s “unilateral” action to include non- EU aircraft operators in its emissions trading scheme ( ETS ) as of January. By endorsing the declaration, expressed in a “working paper ” advanced by 26 countries, ICAO aligned with the international airline industry and a collection of countries including Brazil, China, the U.S. India, Japan and the Russian Federation, in fighting the EU requirement. The ICAO declaration includes language from an earlier, joint declaration by 21 countries adopted September 30 in New Delhi. That document opposes imposition of the ETS on non- EU carriers as being “inconsistent with applicable international law,” pledges to continue opposing the European policy and invites other countries to associate with the declaration. The ICAO Council is a permanent body, composed of 36 states elected every three years by the organization’s Assembly of 190 “contracting” states. According to the online publication GreenAir, eight EU member states belonging to the council opposed the declaration, while Australia and Canada abstained. Echoing a 2009 legal challenge mounted by U.S. airlines and the Air Transport Association of America, the ICAO declaration holds that including international carriers in the EU scheme contravenes the Chicago Convention that created ICAO. an entity of the United Nations. “ ICAO is recognized by all to play a leadership role in matters related to aviation and environment,” states the working paper. “The introduction of these regional schemes affecting international aviation without ICAO ’s concurrence undermines ICAO ’s leadership position and deviates from the established principles of ICAO .” Despite mounting international pressure, the EU resolved to enforce the ETS as planned. “It is disappointing that ICAO discussions once again focus on what states should not do instead of what they should do to curb growing aviation emissions,” EU Commissioner for Climate Action Connie Hedegaard said in a statement. “However, this decision will affect neither the EU ’s commitment to working within ICAO to agree on a global solution nor our adopted legislation to include aviation in the EU ETS . “Europe is delivering on its commitment to reduce emissions,” Hedegaard added. “Our legislation clearly says that if a country outside the EU takes ‘equivalent measures’ to reduce aviation emissions, all incoming flights from that country can be exempted from the EU system. We really look forward to plans from other states to reduce aviation emissions.” Airport and the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS): The next step is what? Airport and the EU emissions trading system (the EU ETS). What to Although support the full implementation of the EU in 2012, EU officials have a clear contemplated in the EU emissions from aviation and tourism transport to supervision at the end of any program, the European Union in 2013 years of the bedroom. Read more about take to inform of governor legislation to the aviation industry leader Linthicum – BWI Thurgood Marshall Airport will be the official host and industry leaders from around the world came to the 18th International Conference in Baltimore, November The airport forecast. Boyd Group International, one of the leading airlines … más sobre Mensaje de navegación Mensajes recientes The Department of Airport Contract: Illinois Waste Management A the the second retirement respected aviation The latest aviation Castle and Cooke Aviation of growth private eyes Airport China The airlines and object on GBTA Aviation Obama budget tax Comentarios Recientes Archivo Categorías Meta Stavros Dimas says aircraft emissions could double by 2020 EU ministers have agreed to impose carbon emissions quotas on airlines in an attempt to fight climate change. The Environment Commissioner, Stavros Dimas, said a strong signal had to be sent, although MEPs had wanted carriers to be included in the EU emissions trading scheme in 2011, not 2012. The United States opposes the idea and has threatened legal action. And the airline industry fears the cost of the carbon trading scheme could force some carriers out of business. But Mr Dimas, said that aviation was responsible for 3% of carbon emissions, more than the steel industry which was already part of the trading scheme. This is a bold step by Europe in the week after the Bali agreement UK environment secretary Hilary Benn He said aviation emissions had doubled since 1990 and were predicted to double again by 2020. Under the trading system, the EU limits the amount of carbon dioxide that industry is allowed to emit. The airlines would have to meet their quotas, either by cutting their emissions or by buying credits from other industries. Environment ministers meeting in Brussels agreed that airlines would have to buy 10% of permits upfront at auction in 2012, substantially lower than the proportion suggested by the European Parliament. They also set the cap on emissions at the average level from 2004-2006. Smaller operators would be exempt from the scheme because of the potential threat to their survival. Campaigners against climate change have complained that the agreement does not go far enough. Tomas Wyns of Climate Action Network Europe said that the ministers had failed to implement ambitious targets and were threatening the EU's credibility and leadership in international climate change negotiations. But UK environment secretary, Hilary Benn, said that Europe had taken "a bold step" in the week after the Bali agreement. The deal will now have to be negotiated with the European Parliament. Carbon Emissions from Aircraft and Ships Whilst aviation and shipping along with other mobile and non-domestic sources were excluded from the emissions-reduction targets agreed under the Kyoto convention of 1997, there has been growing pressure to include these two sectors in any successor to the protocol. Their contribution to total global emissions is around 5%, is growing and should be easier to regulate than the much larger road sector (of which more in a later posting). The European Union has introduced legislation (Directive 2008/101/EC) to include civil aviation in Phase III of its emissions trading scheme. This will cover all flights starting and/or landing in Europe from 1st January 2012. Initially, 85 percent of the emissions are to be allocated for free and 15 percent will be auctioned. From 2013 onwards, allocations will be reduced annually by some 5 percent of the historically accumulated total. The cost of implementation is likely to add an average of €8 to ticket prices on top of airport taxes and landing charges that most governments already levy on flying. Whilst drawing the ire of many airlines both within and outside the EU, there is a recognition that longer term the European scheme may become part of an international system. Although this may take several years to implement via Kyoto, the International Air Transport Association (IATA) has recently announced that its members have agreed to implement a program of emissions cuts. This will involve: Improving fuel efficiency by an annual average of 1.5% to 2020 Stabilizing emissions with carbon-neutral growth after 2020 Cutting emissions to 50% of 2005 values by 2050 Radical innovations in aircraft body, engine and fuel technology will be required to meet these targets, The shipping industry has long argued the difficulty of assigning emissions from international operations to particular national economies and has therefore proposed that any measures adopted should be delivered via its own regulatory body, the International Maritime Organization (IMO). This would ensure rules were enforced worldwide. Regulating the maritime emissions of carbon dioxide would be covered under Annex VI to the International Convention on the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL 73/78). This Annex deals with atmospheric pollution, where the focus in recent years has been on ratifying a program to progressively reduce the emissions of sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrous oxides (NOx) and particulates from ships by enforcing higher standards on the quality of fuel they burn - a legacy issue dating from the 1990's when acid rain, ozone pre-cursors and the quality of air at ground level were of a more immediate concern than climate change. A newly published study reveals the IMO's thinking on how it proposes to extend the technical provisions of Annex VI to cover the abatement of greenhouse gases. This would involve the implementation of energy efficiency measures, both in the design and the operation of vessels, rather than a system of marine emissions trading. A technical solution to the problem is probably seen by those within the industry as the most practical way to proceed, but there is a concern that it may take too many years to reach a consensus and then ratify any new technical standard. In practice, the industry may need to buy into a political mix of enhanced energy performance and emissions trading such as promoted by SEAaT . In preparation for the climate change summit to be held in Copenhagen this December, the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) has launched a web site: Shipping and CO2 which aims to show the industry's commitment to reducing global CO2 emissions. Whilst the ICS backs the idea of trading schemes to control emissions, it admits that the application of market based instruments (MBIs ) to international shipping is proving to be a most difficult subject. For example, the Financial Times reports that some ship owning associations subscribe to the idea of using a trading scheme, whilst others consider a levy on the fuel used by ships to be a more effective way of alleviating the effects of climate change. Shipping releases less emissions per tonne-km than road or air freight (see diagram above), but more significantly is the globalisation of trade and consequent increase of total tonnes shipped. There does however appear to be a consensus that by 2020 through a combination of technical and operational initiatives, the industry should be able to reduce carbon dioxide emissions per tonne / km by some 15-20%. Share this post: Aviation may be included in emissions trading The European Commission is proposing that aviation should also be included in its emissions reduction system, known as emissions trading scheme. The European Commission has approved proposals to include aviation in the emissions trading scheme which is expected to raise the fare of a return flight by up to €9. The aim is to reduce the air travel's growing contribution to climate change. The fare increase will result from the fact that aircraft operators will have to invest in more efficient planes or buy additional emission allowances beyond those allocated to them. Aeroplanes are an important and increasing source of greenhouse gas emissions that are causing global warming. Although aviation's share of overall EU greenhouse gas emissions is still modest at about three per cent, its emissions are growing faster than any other sector and risk undermining progress achieved through emission cuts in other areas of the economy. EU emissions from international flights grew by 73 per cent between 1990 and 2003. This increase could widen to 150 per cent by 2012 unless action is taken. Such growth would cancel out more than a quarter of the eight per cent reduction in total greenhouse gas emissions that the Kyoto protocol requires the EU-15 to achieve between 1990 and 2012. The Commission is now proposing that aviation should also be included in its emissions reduction system, or the emissions trading scheme (ETS). The ETS, which covers about 11,500 industrial installations, enables participating operators to reduce their carbon dioxide emissions in the most cost-effective way. Each operator receives a limited number of emission allowances, creating a permanent incentive for each to minimise emissions. These allowances can be traded on the market, thus giving operators the flexibility to choose the cheapest way to control their emissions. Bringing civil aviation into the scheme would allow aircraft operators to benefit from this cost-effective approach, enabling them to trade emission allowances in an expanded market with industrial operators and other airlines as necessary. The inclusion of the aviation sector in the ETS will come at a cost although this is likely to be modest. According to the Commission the associated costs will vary between €0 and €9 per return flight depending on the strictness of the cap on airlines' emissions chosen and on how the scheme is implemented. The Commission said that in any event, including aviation in the EU emissions trading scheme will have a smaller impact on fares than if the same environmental improvement were to be achieved through other measures such as a fuel tax or an emissions charge. Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said in a press conference that the boom in flying was bringing with it a rapid rise in greenhouse gas emissions. "Extending emissions trading to the aviation sector will limit these emissions and ensure that aviation, like all other sectors, contribute to reducing the harmful greenhouse gases. Through emissions trading, airlines will be able to do so at the least possible costs." The new scheme would involve all EU airlines and all flights to and from European airports, thus including also all non-EU airlines flying to Europe. The Commission said that legislative proposals will be presented in the middle of next year with the intention of applying the scheme from 2008. EU pushing for international maritime and aviation emissions trade system Members of the European Union are pushing for an international agreement designed to curb greenhouse gas emissions in the global maritime and aviation sectors. The EU argues that the implementation of an emissions trading system, similar to one adopted between its borders, would help make use of a $100 billion climate fund. However, the International Maritime Organisation, the International Civil Aviation Organisation and other commercial shipping associations are a bit more hesitant to adopt such an initiative, as it may place large financial burdens on its markets. "Carbon pricing of global aviation and maritime transportation have the potential to generate large financial flows," EU finance ministers stated at a meeting in Brussels, Belgium, last week. "Further work is needed in IMO and ICAO to develop without delay a global policy framework that avoids competitive distortions or carbon leakage." The ministers added that private sector financing must contribute to the fund, however critics have observed that developed nations are increasingly relying on private investment to make up for their environmental obligations, while developing nations are forced to alter their markets in order to comply with international standards. India against European Union's move to slap carbon emission fee on airlines NEW DELHI: India has strongly opposed the European Union's move to slap carbon emission charges on airlines using its airspace, joining a growing global chorus against the move led by China and the United States. At an interministerial meeting between officials of the external affairs, environment and aviation ministries along with representatives from the domestic airline industry, India said the move will lead to retaliatory action by the rest of the world. "The EU has legislated without consulting the rest of the world and they might have to face retaliatory measures from other countries of the world. Therefore, they might have to reconsider whether their call is worth taking," said a senior aviation ministry official, who was part of the high-level meeting. But a final decision on India's stance will only be taken some time in February, officials said. The European Union recently announced that all international airlines using its airspace will have to pay for their carbon dioxide emissions. They will have to pay 15% of the pollution rights accorded in 2012, which will rise to 18% between 2013 and 2020. The EU scheme will kick off on January1, 2012 and has already been strongly opposed by China and the United States. China has said that EU's move will provoke a global trade war, while US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned of reprisals against the move. The cost for airlines is likely to rise if the EU directive is implemented. Indian government officials say there is no need to pay for the emissions from January 1, but all airlines will have to make the payment on an annualised basis if they exceed their carbon credit entitlements. The annual outgo for the Indian airline industry towards the EU emission trading system is pegged at about 400 crore, which could very well rise in the future if the domestic carriers expand more in the region. This directly implies that the cost for airlines for flying to Europe will increase and air tickets will become more expensive. EU emissions trading scheme faces industry opposition January 5, 2012, 05:08 pm The European Union recently implemented its Emissions Trading Scheme over the aviation industry, requiring airlines landing or taking off in European states to meet specific carbon emissions requirements. Many members of the aviation industry, however, are opposed to the regulations and are refusing to pay the carbon charge. The Economic Times reported Chinese airlines have decided not to pay a charge on carbon emission imposed by the EU, arguing the requirements infringe on international law. The EU Court of Justice heard complaints from airline groups in China, the United States, India and other countries, but rejected their claims. Chai Haibo, deputy secretary general of the China Air Transport Association, told the source that the airline group believes the scheme is illegally forcing international airlines to comply with European regulations. The Chinese government is considering taking counter-measures against the European Union, but nothing has been announced. In addition, the International Civil Aviation Organization has issued a statement to the EU urging officials not to require non-EU airlines to participate in the emissions trading scheme. The Helicopter Association International reported the U.S. House of Representatives has also passed a bill prohibiting U.S. airlines from participating in the scheme. Although airlines and legislators may disagree on the carbon emissions plan, most agree that pilot insurance is an important investment to keep pilots and their planes safe. Are you covered? Are you overpaying? Find out! Get a Quote Now! ENN: Environmental News Network -- Know Your Environment EU And U.S. At Odds Over Airline Emissions Trade BRUSSELS (Reuters) - The European Union will press ahead with plans to include aviation in its emissions trading system despite United States' efforts through a U.N. body to discourage it, a spokeswoman for the EU executive said on Friday. Airline emissions are at the top of the agenda of a tri-annual meeting of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) in Montreal, which began earlier this week. The United States, which opposes EU plans to include foreign airlines in its emissions trading scheme, is pushing ICAO to let individual nations decide the best way to manage greenhouse gas emissions from their airlines, a U.S. working paper says. It asks the group to "endorse guidance material for emissions trading that is on that basis of mutual consent" and to say "the only acceptable manner for managing emissions from international aviation is on the basis of mutual agreement." But the European Commission, which authored the legislation that would include flights coming into and out of the 27-nation bloc from 2012 in the EU scheme, said it will go forward with its proposal, which it says is in line with international law. "The mutual consent approach for us is not an option," said Barbara Helfferich, spokeswoman for Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas. She said ICAO conclusions in 2001 and 2004, which supported establishing a global emissions trading scheme for aviation, had helped spur the EU to get a system started. "ICAO seems to be wavering on their previous conclusions, which we believe would undermine their own credibility," ella dijo. Environmentalists say the airline industry must contribute more to reducing the gases blamed for global warming. "After a shameful decade of inaction and obstruction ICAO must now give its full support to emissions trading and other measures to combat rapidly growing aviation emissions," said Joao Vieira of Brussels-based Transport & Environment (T&E) in a statement earlier this week. "The EU must be prepared to go it alone should ICAO give anything less than full backing to the emissions trading plan." T&E said ICAO's guidance on emissions would not be legally binding, but the EU has committed itself in the past to act within the ICAO framework. Industry positions are mixed. The Association of European Airlines, which represents big carriers such as British Airways and Lufthansa, supports the EU scheme but would prefer a global one, a spokeswoman said. Global airlines group IATA, which stresses that airlines account for only 2 percent of world carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, has called for a voluntary but global scheme. The EU trading system, which began in 2005 for energy intensive businesses such as power companies and oil refineries, sets limits on the amount of CO2 factories may emit. Companies that overshoot their targets must buy permits in the market or pay a fine, while those that come in below their limits can sell the extra allowances. &dupdo; Reuters2007All rights reserved Brexit: a competition law perspective Until recently few believed that Brexit could ever actually happen. But, as the 2015 General Election made clear, public opinion in Britain is hard to predict. Given that Britain experienced a white-knuckle referendum on Scottish independence, we take this opportunity to consider the ramifications of a “leave” vote from a competition law perspective. > Read more The wind of change: emergence of an insurance regime appropriate for French marine renewable energy projects? On 3 February 2016 the French National Assembly adopted article 19 of the draft law on the ‘blue economy’ which introduces an insurance regime tailor-made for Marine Renewable Energy installations. > Read more Iran sanctions: guidance for insurers, reinsurers and brokers Insurers, reinsurers and brokers will be looking carefully at the latest Iran sanctions developments to see whether the sanctions relief presents an opportunity or a threat for their businesses, as well as seeking to anticipate what new activities assureds may now be contemplating, in order to be able to respond to their requests for cover. > Read more Foreign investment into Australia Australia’s new foreign investment regime, which came into effect on 1 December 2015 tightens up the process for obtaining government approval to invest in some areas, for example residential, agricultural and other sensitive property, and eases it in other areas. > Read more Safe Harbour 2.0: will the EU-US Privacy Shield stand up to scrutiny? A last minute deal was struck on 2 February 2016 between the European Commission and the United States, in an attempt to fill the void in EU-US data transfer created by the Schrems decision in October 2015. Mongolia: what's new? It is no secret that the fall in global commodity prices and Chinese demand has hurt the Mongolian economy. In addition, the Mongolian government is facing a number of imminent debt repayments and the prospect of having to restructure its sovereign and parastatal debt remains very real. > Read more 1 2 3 4 5 6 La página no se puede encontrar La página que está buscando podría haber sido eliminada, su nombre cambiado o no está disponible temporalmente. Por favor intenta lo siguiente: Asegúrese de que la dirección del sitio Web que se muestra en la barra de direcciones de su navegador esté escrita y formateada correctamente. Si ha accedido a esta página haciendo clic en un vínculo, póngase en contacto con el administrador del sitio Web para avisarles de que el enlace no está formateado correctamente. Haga clic en el botón Atrás para probar otro enlace. HTTP Error 404 - Archivo o directorio no encontrado. Servicios de Internet Information Server (IIS) Información técnica (para personal de apoyo) Vaya a Servicios de soporte técnico de Microsoft y realice una búsqueda de título de las palabras HTTP y 404. Abra la Ayuda de IIS. Que es accesible en el Administrador de IIS (inetmgr), y la búsqueda de temas titulados Web Site Setup. Tareas Administrativas Comunes. Y Acerca de los mensajes de error personalizados. The EU emissions trade system Excerpt 1. Introducción The EU ETS is an ambitious project to meet the EU’s commitment to the Kyoto Protocol to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. The aviation industry is set to enter the ETS regime on the 1st of January 2012. It is necessary to include this industry, so other industries ’t have to shoulder the entire Kyoto burden. The projected cost is significant but not disproportional. Airlines operating modern fuel efficient fleets are advantaged. The international nature of aviation and the apparent disadvantage of international carriers have provoked debates on the legality of the scheme. The short and long term impact on the strategic goals affects mainly investment in fuel efficient technologies and investment in the Clean Development Mechanism. Overall the industry is expected to notice minor demand fluctuations and invest more in emission abatement technologies. 2 The EU and the Climate Climate change has become in recent years a subject of heated political debate. At the G8 summits of 2007 and 2009 and the G20, 2009, climate change was a top priority (European Commission, 2003. Massai, 2011). In all instances the participants were unable to agree on a common agenda, let alone sensible emission cuts. One could even say that no major political encounter takes place without discussing climate policy (Faure and Peeters, 2008). Regardless of the setbacks in the geopolitical arena, the EU has been a leader in climate change policies since the 90’s. The EU voiced vociferously its concern over the destruction of the ozone layer (Hansjürgens, 2005), negotiated the Climate Change Convention in 1991 (Massai, 2011) and played a key role in the enactment of the Kyoto-Protocol, 1997 (Massai, 2011). Further evidence of the EU’s commitment to prevent climate change is the pledge to the Kyoto Protocol to reduce its greenhouse gas emission (GHG) by 20% by 2020, compared with 1990 levels (Massai, 2011). These achievements are impressive, considering that the EU is not a sovereign state, but a bloc of diverse countries. As a result the EU has arguably become the global champion for climate policy. To be credible however, it needs to prove its integrity and lead by example. A Project that aims to do just that is the EUETS. It is a unique large scale pilot project, which its proponents hope, will become the basis for international emissions trade, thus bringing the Kyoto emissions allowance system to the next level (Tuerk, 2009). 3 The EU Emissions Trade System (EUETS) In order to meet this ambitious target the emissions trade system (ETS) has been devised as a way to gradually and effectively reduce the EU’s carbon footprint and change the economy through its incentive system (European Commission, 2003). The EUETS is a so called “cap and trade” model where a cap is set on the maximal output of emissions cause negative externalities, as opposed to “command and control” where either a fixed allowance is granted or emissions are taxed at source. Early research on cost benefit by Tietenberg (1985), suggests a 90% reduction in administration costs using ETS and a study commissioned by the EU commission, certifies 30% (Hansjürgens, 2005). Under the ETS framework these rights to emit are traded as certificates on a specialised market (i.e. initially allocated, in the future auctioned). At the end of the year a company must hold enough certificates to cover its emission over the year; otherwise the company is fined and required to buy the missing certificates (Faure and Peeters, 2008). The hope is that market forces will allocate these rights efficiently and that the economy as a whole will benefit. More precisely industries with a high marginal cost of emissions reduction (compared with the market value of certificates), will purchase certificates on the market, conversely industries with lower marginal emissions reduction costs will reduce emissions and sell their certificates on the market (Hansjürgens, 2005). An emission trade system on a supranational level such as the EUETS has never been tested. Administration, enforcement and viability of the system have yet to be established. The gradual implementation however seems sensible, since the EU itself was created one step at a time. The system is implemented in three phases: 2005- 2007, is the pilot period and intended to develop the necessary structures and gain experience. In this period only CO2certificates for selected industries are traded (11,000 installations and 30% of EU CO2Emissions) (Perdan and Azapagic, 2011). From 2008 onwards nitrous oxide certificates will be capped. In the final stage from 2013 to 2020 more greenhouse gases will be capped and more industries are required to purchase certificates. Among the most prominent and visible industries is the aviation industry. 4 Aviation in the EU ETS In accordance with the EU ETS directives, starting from 2012 the aviation industry will need to purchase CO2certificates to cover its emissions. Lobbying, persuasion and lawsuits have not changed the EU’s intentions (The Economist, 2011b. The Economist, 2011a). This will affect the industry’s competitiveness, customer relations, strategic targets and economic development (Scheelhaase and Grimme, 2007). Under the ETS all airlines (European and international) landing and departing from EU airports are required to surrender CO2 certificates for their emissions or be denied landing, take off or have their aircrafts impounded (Anger and Koehler, 2010). Furthermore an EU-wide CO2 cap is set to stabilise emissions levels, countries are allotted an allowance and are responsible for the administration. In the first phase a predetermined number of certificates will be allocated and gradually phased out to be replaced by auctioning. However due to legal complications these allowances are not compatible with the Kyoto allowances. As a consequence airlines allowed to buy certificates, but only sales to other airlines are permissible. 5 The Necessity to include aviation International aviation, according to Grimme and Scheelhase (2007) is responsible for 2.5% to 3% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions, but has hitherto escaped 1% to 5% of recently introduced taxes, such as the UK Air Passenger Duty and the German Air Passenger Tax and is overall only a fraction of a percentage of total revenue. Reuters (2011) points out differences in free allocation of certificates between airlines (see Figure 7-1). formal emissions regulation. Projections made by Bows et al. (2005), shows that carbon EU emission targets are not achievable if the aviation industry continues to grow and operate outside the EU ETS. The implication of not including aircrafts in the scheme is that other industries need to cut more and faster than is possible to stay competitive. The inevitable conclusion is that the global competitiveness of other industries will suffer if aviation is not held accountable for its emissions. Further analysis done by Grimme (2007) on the impact of ETS on future profitability suggests, that no substantial losses are expected in the short to medium term. 6 Demand for air travel According to Anger (2010) the increasing variable costs of emission certificates will reduce profit margins if the additional cost is not passed on to consumers. The extent to which consumers are willing to accept higher prices is subject to the price elasticity of demand (Zhang and Wei, 2010). It stands to reason that demand for air travel is not perfectly elastic, since substitutes are not readily available (i.e. fast, reliable and international) and according to Bloomberg (2011) due to the vast geographic market, the reduction in demand will be lower than the increase in price. In any case demand should slightly decrease, in the short term. This on the other hand will force airlines to reduce emissions in the long run (Anger and Koehler, 2010). Studies by Ernst and Young (2007) and Boon (2007) agree that prices will increase adjusted for inflation. On the basis of different assumptions such as price and method of allocation (i.e. auctioning or grandfathering) both studies present different figures, Boon’s being substantially higher than Ernst and Young’s estimates. The overall conclusion is: ETS will increase ticket prices, reduce demand to match supply in the short term and slow but not stop industry growth in the long term. The increase in supply is explained as a result of new CO2 reduction technologies and their cost benefit. This however is only speculative. 7 Cost to the industry Reuters Point Carbon (2011), an energy and environmental intelligence unit of Reuters, reckons that the industry will need to buy 88 million allowances beyond the free allocation of 176 million certificates in 2012. The additional purchase will amount to 1.1 billion EUR at current carbon market prices. Research by Bloomberg New Energy Finance (2011), an intelligence unit of Bloomberg, agrees that the EU ETS is an additional cost, but represents only illustration not visible in this excerpt Figure 7-1: Allocation of CO2 certificates as a percentage of predicted 2012 requirements (source (Thomson Reuters Point Carbon, 2011) Scheduled and large long haul carriers are given comparatively more certificates than smaller flag carriers as a proportion of predicted usage. This means that compliance costs are not spread evenly across the industry and on average EEA carriers are better served than their international counterparts. This asymmetric distribution could be regarded as anticompetitive as argued by the USA (see Part 9). However Andreas Arvanitakis points out that “long- haul carriers and those airlines with more efficient aircraft and higher load factors tend to receive more than the average. (Thomson Reuters Point Carbon, 2011)”. Peter Hind reasons that 1.1 billion in additional costs are comparatively little considering rising fuel prices and although substantial for the industry as a whole, are not major costs for carbon efficient carriers. Carriers with obsolete fleets in need of substantial upgrade investments will suffer more (Thomson Reuters Point Carbon, 2011). As argued by Grimme (2007) and Boon (2007) this situation will increase prices and decrease profitability, but will in the long run improve industry wide fuel and carbon efficiency. Since carriers are allowed to buy but not sell certificates under the Kyoto regime, allowances could be increased through alternative mechanisms such as Certified Emission Reductions (CER), generated by the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) by up to 15% of free allocations. This is reckoned to reduce the overall cost to airlines (Thomson Reuters Point Carbon, 2011). Excerpt out of 5 pages - scroll top Detalles Title The EU emissions trade system Subtitle The development and the implications for the aviation industry Author Luca Verginer Year 2011 Pages 5 Archive No. V214090 ISBN (eBook) 978-3-656-42477-2 File size 566 KB Language English Tags Emissions Climate EU European Union Policy Aviation Carbon emissions CO2 Quote paper Luca Verginer , 2011, The EU emissions trade system, Munich, GRIN Verlag, http://www.hausarbeiten.de/faecher/vorschau/214090.html Similar texts Jet Aviation Adds 101st Customer for European Union Emissions Trading System Services Jet Aviation Adds 101st Customer for European Union Emissions Trading System Services Jet Aviation has added its 101st client to its roster of customers for the European Union’s Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) management support services. With the start of the first trading phase of the European Emissions Trading System in spring 2013, Jet Aviation began offering EU ETS management support services to help its customers seamlessly comply with the regulations and avoid non-compliance fees. “Our turnkey compliance solution is particularly helpful to small operators who don’t have in-house staff to ensure they are complying with EU ETS compliance requirements,” said Matthias Gruber, manager of Jet Aviation’s EU ETS services. “We recently expanded our offerings to include account opening and administration services to help our customers avoid fines for non-compliance.” To advertise with Eva International Media Limited please call + 44 (0) 208 253 4000 Our Publications Aviation Today EU Exempts Foreign Airlines from Emissions Trading Scheme November 12, 2012 The European Union (EU) is suspending its policy of charging foreign airlines for carbon emissions on flights to and from Europe until September of next year to allow for an international agreement on reducing pollution. EU Commissioner Connie Hedegaard announced the decision Monday, acknowledging the opposition expressed to the scheme from non-European countries in recent months. “I have just recommended in a telephone conference with the 27 member states that the EU stops the clock when it comes to the enforcement of the inclusion of aviation in the ETS to and from non-EU countries until after the ICAO general assembly next autumn,” said Hedegaard. The announcement comes following the recent ICAO council meeting where it was determined that the ICAO would establish an international requirement for reducing aviation emissions. The House is scheduled to vote Tuesday on the Senate version of a bill that would exempt U.S. airlines from paying the fees imposed on aircraft emissions by EU officials. U.S. airlines, represented by industry trade group Airlines for America (A4A) support the proposed legislation despite the new announcement from the EU. "We are cautiously optimistic about today's actions. As we have said consistently we believe a global sectoral approach though ICAO is the best way to address aviation emissions, and at the same time, we expect Congress to move forward on legislation opposing the EU ETS," said Victoria Day, a spokesperson for A4A. Other countries such as China and Russia also expressed opposition to the EU policy recently. Hedegaard said that if the ICAO fails to provide an international standard to reduce emissions, the EU will re-enact its original policy. “But let me be very clear, if this exercise does not deliver – and I hope it does, then needless to say we are back to where we are today with the EU ETS. Automatically,” the EU Commissioner added. EU airlines will still be required to pay for their carbon emissions under the original emissions trading scheme, Hedegaard said. Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Seminar: European Union Emission Trading Scheme The EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) is the cornerstone of the European Union's policy to combat climate change. It is the EUs key tool for reducing industrial greenhouse gas emissions. According to the EU, it is the first and by far the largest international system for trading greenhouse gas emission allowances. The EU ETS covers more than 11,000 power stations and industrial plants in 31 countries. October, 2008, the Council of the EU adopted an amendment to the original EU ETS Directive whereby all flights arriving at or departing from EU airports would be included in the EU ETS. As an aviation company, what does this mean? What are the implications? And what has been the global response? Eric McCarty, NetJets Aviation Eric received his private pilot license at the age of 18, and his professional pilot's license in 1998, along with a degree in Aeronautical Studies and Communications at the University of North Dakota. Since then, he has flown with a number of regional airlines both as a first officer and Captain. Eric is currently a Captain on the Citation 560XL and the Director of Compliance Planning & Projects for NetJets Aviation. EU CALLS FOR CLIMATE WARMING COMPROMISE IN AVIATION .TR Top Weekly Tourism News | 2013-09-30 In the dispute about climate warming the EU faced a large part of the world in recent years, including the USA, China, Russia and India. They did not accept the EU's emissions trading system which meant their airlines had to produce emission certificates for flights to and from Europe. "We believe a solution is now in sight," said the spokesperson of EU Transport Commissioner Siim Kallas. Kallas intends to address the coming conference in Canada, which will take place at the beginning of October. The ICAO is "the best forum" for a solution, the he said. Earlier this year the EU suspended their flagship project for climate protection. They linked it to a global solution initiated by the ICAO. Although Switzerland is a third country, it has not been exempted from EU aviation emissions trade. This is justified by the fact that Switzerland occupies a similar position to the EU in climate policy issues. In addition, the European Commission referred to the ongoing negotiations linking the Swiss and EU emissions trading schemes. Negotiations aimed at mutual recognition of the two emission allowances have been taking place since March 2011. In Montreal a two-part compromise plan is currently on the table. According to this the EU can pursue their system but in a slimmed-down form. Originally it was planned that all airlines should pay for the entire distance from Frankfurt to New York. According to the compromise proposal they need only pay for kilometres flown over EU territory. In the second part of the compromise, a system for the whole world resembling the European system is underway. According to the schedule it will come into force in 2020. However, there are already attempts to water down the agreement. The USA want a clause exempting majority of countries, including some of the developed ones. Artículos relacionados The European Union's Emissions Trading System Witnesses Panel I The Honorable Ray LaHood Secretary, Department of Transportation Panel II Jos Delbeke Director General of the European Commission, Directorate-General for Climate Action Sean Cassidy First Vice President, Air Line Pilots Association, International Edward Bolen Preisdent and CEO, National Business Aviation Administration Annie Petsonk International Counsel for Climate and Air, Environmental Defense Fund Nancy Young Vice President for Environmental Affairs, Airlines for America Committee Members Present John Rockefeller (D-WV), Chairman Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-WA) John Thune (R-SD) Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) Jim DeMint (R-SC) Claire McCaskill (D-MO) Johnny Isakson (R-GA) John Kerry (D-MA) Mark Begich (D-AK) Olympia Snowe (R-ME) On June 6, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation held a hearing on the European Union’s (EU) Emissions Trading System (ETS ). The EU ETS, launched in 2005, is a cap and trade system employed by the EU member states. Factories, power plants and businesses are given emissions caps by their nation’s government and are required to monitor the amount of carbon dioxide they release on a yearly basis. If an organization or country goes over the emissions cap, it must buy permits from countries or organizations which stayed below their cap. In January 2012, ETS was applied to international airlines based in any country, requiring them to adhere to emissions guidelines set by the EU. The next trading period for ETS begins in January 2013, which is when the EU will require airlines to acquire proper emissions caps. Chairman John Rockefeller (D-WV) began his opening statement by urging airlines in the U.S, and internationally, to reduce carbon. He said he hoped to hear from the second panel of witnesses what airlines have done and will continue to do saying, “Good intentions don’t work … will not reduce emissions.” The chairman said he “support[s] the goals, but oppose[s] the actions” of the EU in applying ETS to international airlines and believes it is an imposition on U.S. sovereignty. Rockefeller raised concerns about how funds acquired by ETS will be spent as there is no provision requiring them to be spent on reducing emissions, which is not consistent with a Directive which amended paragraph three of article 30. The chairman said many in the airline industry and the Obama administration intend to follow an emissions regulation plan by the UN’s International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO ). He said he is skeptical of this as it could be a way for the airlines to “delay and defer any real action” since ICAO would most likely need a lot of time to draft an emissions regulation for international airlines. Ranking Member Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) expressed confidence in the aviation industry, arguing they “are willing to have voluntary standards.” Hutchison said she too views the EU as “acting outside its prerogative” by applying ETS to international flight. Hutchison said this violates U.S. and ICAO authority by essentially taxing foreign companies. As Ranking Member of the Subcommittee for Aviation Operations, Safety and Security and the sponsor of a bill prohibiting U.S. airlines from partaking in the ETS, Senator John Thune (R-SD) gave an additional opening statement. The senator discussed his and Senator Claire McCaskill’s (D-MO) bill, the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition Act of 2011 (S. 1956 ) which would give the Secretary of Transportation the authority to allow airlines and other U.S. companies to refuse to pay for any emissions cap imposed by the EU. A similar bill, the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition Act of 2011 (H.R. 2594 ), has been passed in the House of Representatives. Thune claimed the imposition of ETS on international aviation is “arbitrary, unfair and against … international law” according to ICAO and the Convention on International Civil Aviation, known as the Chicago Convention. He said other countries including India, China and Russia have voiced opposition to the ETS. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) gave an opening statement as the Chairman of the Subcommittee for Aviation Operations, Safety and Security. She began by expressing support for the scientific community’s consensus on the anthropogenic cause of global warming. However, she agreed that the imposition of ETS on U.S. airlines was illegal and expressed doubt that a cap and trade system could reduce emissions. Cantwell cited the possibility for fraud and rewarding historic polluters in a carbon cap and trade system. She supported the airlines’ compliance with the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen ) which will use airspace more efficiently, thus reducing emissions. While she believed action should be taken against the EU, the senator cautioned the disadvantages of a “trade war” with the EU. In his testimony. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood expressed the administration’s strong opposition to the imposition of ETS on non-EU airlines on “both legal and policy grounds.” LaHood and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton sent a letter to their EU counterparts to express disappointment in their “go it alone policy” and urged them to include others in policies with an international effect. LaHood asserted that his department will “take a backseat to no one” in reducing green house gas (GHG) emissions in transportation. He lauded the U.S. airlines for carrying more passengers and cargo while actually reducing emissions. The Federal Aviation Administration reports a 12 percent decrease in GHG emissions from airlines from 2000 to 2010, with a 15 percent increase in passenger and cargo transport per plane in the same period. The secretary said he would express support for a policy if it were made in collaboration with other countries, industry and environmental groups. He assured the committee that the administration is attempting to do this through the ICAO. Hutchison asked LaHood his opinion of S. 1956, Thune and McCaskill’s bill. The secretary reiterated his discontent with ETS as a “lousy policy” but declined to speak for or against the bill. McCaskill asked how the administration could oppose ETS imposition on U.S. airlines without legislation and noted that the secretary’s power does not allow him to defy ETS. Senator Johnny Isakson (R-GA) said that China and India have already begun to prohibit their airlines from paying any fees related to ETS. The secretary agreed with McCaskill that sufficient legislation, like S.1956, would give him the power to prohibit airlines from participating in ETS, but reasoned that the administration can still make international policy through ICAO. The chairman was skeptical that ICAO could produce action in so short a period before ETS is imposed on international aviation, but LaHood explained that a discussion on the issue would be productive and ICAO is the best institution available for that discussion. Senator John Kerry (D-MA) asked if the administration had composed a framework for an international agreement through ICAO. LaHood reemphasized that ICAO is the best place to create an agreement though the ICAO has not begun composing an agreement because “they haven’t been pushed to.” Senator Mark Begich’s (D-AK) questions clarified that while ICAO can begin the discussion, other resources and policy makers will be needed to form an agreement. Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) urged the committee and LaHood to oppose the Law of the Sea (LOS ) treaty claiming it would allow the Secretary General of the United Nations to impose a tax on U.S. sea vessels just as ETS would on airlines. Before his questioning, Kerry denied this claim and asserted there are no environmental regulations imposed by LOS. Kerry said he felt the EU is at least moving in the right direction with ETS, though he said agrees that ETS has no legal right to impose on international aviation. He argued the EU is trying to reduce emissions and is “right to question whether the U.S. is serious about this issue.” He accused the U.S. of being the “chief foot-dragger” against carbon emission control, debating that the United States Conference of Mayors have done more to combat climate change with their Climate Protection Center than the federal government. Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) sympathized with the EU’s logic, saying, “They just want clean air.” However, he said still opposes the ETS imposition on U.S. aviation. Prompted by the chairman, LaHood explained how airlines are buying more fuel efficient aircraft. He said he predicts that the more efficient use of airspace emplaced by NextGen will decrease airline emissions dramatically. The secretary told Hutchison in response to one of her questions that NextGen is a top priority for the FAA. Thune brought up the argument that the U.S and other countries charge arrival and departure taxes for foreign aircraft that land and take off on their soil. Secretary LaHood said the major difference is how these policies were enacted. The arrival/departure tax was agreed upon by nations party to ICAO, while the ETS was formulated by countries in the EU and is now being imposed upon others. Thune agreed that this was a significant difference. Cantwell asked the secretary about asked about possible effects from ETS on non-commercial flight, such as private and shipping aviation. LaHood said he could not speak on this issue in detail, but was confident the second panel could provide a better explanation. The second panel of witnesses was opened by Jos Delbeke, the Director General for the Directorate-General for Climate Action of the European Commission. He cited that European citizens feel climate change is one of the most important issues of today, inspiring the EU to introduce ETS. Delbeke reported that the EU is willing to revise the policy and is committed to a global solution to airline emissions. He argued ETS is in accordance with the Chicago Convention as it does not charge a tax in another state. Funds paid to increase an emissions cap will go to another corporation and though it will likely be a European company, money will not go through the EU. Delbeke asserted that any use of the word “tax” or “fine” is irrelevant to ETS; it is a market-based approach to reducing carbon emissions. He ended his testimony by denying any claims of discrimination in favor of European airlines and assured the committee that any money made from ETS will be put toward lowering emissions. Captain Sean Cassidy testified on behalf of Air Line Pilots Association, International and discussed the detriments of ETS on the 10 million people employed by the airline industry. He felt the system was a “job-killer” and would surely decrease the economic activity of the airline industry from its 2010 level of $1.1 trillion. He argued that the ETS is a tax, citing a conclusions report by the Council of the European Union which claims the system has “the potential to generate revenue.” He claims the ETS is a dismissal of efforts by U.S. airlines to reduce emissions while increasing the number of passengers. He supports the pursuit of an agreement through ICAO as well as S.1956. Edward Bolen, president and CEO of the National Business Aviation Administration, testified that in his view, the ETS is “fatally flawed.” His organization represents non-commercial aircraft owners and businesses, who he claims are “treated even worse” than commercial airlines. He gave an example where a small commercial plane that flies to Europe two times or less a day is exempt from the cap and trade while a non-commercial craft which makes one flight a year is not exempt. He argued that European factories with less than 25,000 tons of emissions per year would even be exempt. In her testimony. Annie Petsonk of the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF ) showed support for EU ETS calling it “modest, effective and reasonable.” She argued with a set of charts that the decrease in emissions was due to the relative small number of flights during the 2008 financial crisis and the FAA predicts emissions will increase through 2020.The ETS allows many channels to garner emissions credits, even through industry projects in developing countries. Petsonk correctly asserted that though the ETS does not explicitly state money raised must be used to address climate change, there is a provision that member states must state how the fund will be used. ETS states this allocation must be in accordance with Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. European nations like Germany have already earmarked trade funds for programs which combat climate change. A FAA-supported study at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology estimated a increase of six U.S. dollars (USD) to round trip airfare, but argued that airlines have “great flexibility to choose when, where and how to meet their caps” and will most likely not raise ticket prices. Petsonk claimed that ETS imposed flight will create jobs in the airline industry, citing the need for workers to develop, build and implement emissions-capping technologies. She stated ICAO has struggled with the issue of reducing airline emissions for 15 years, and has only started to make progress this year, she speculates, from EU ETS. She counter argued the sovereignty issue by discussing arrival and departure taxes levied by many nations, including the U.S. Petsonk closed by presenting a scenario where S. 1956 or H.R. 2594 passes and the Secretary of Transportation prohibits airlines from participating in ETS. EDF alleges that the airlines’ insurance policies cannot cover a breach in compliance, and S.1956 gives no path for the secretary to absolve the airlines of responsibility. She suggests taxpayers may have to “foot the bill” in this scenario. Nancy Young testified for Airlines for America (A4A ) in opposition to ETS imposition on international aviation. Her testimony defined the imposition as a dangerous precedent which could result in taxing carbon emitting U.S. exports to Europe like automobiles, other machinery and chemicals. She argued ETS is “about a new source of tax revenue for … Europe” and will have little effect on the environment. She presented data from the Environmental Protection Agency which claims commercial aviation represents 1.7 percent of GHG emissions for the U.S. more than ten times less than non-aviation transport (24.8 percent). She claims the airline industry’s self-imposed emission cutting reforms have done more than the cap and trade “tax” introduced by the EU. To begin his questioning, Rockefeller compared some of the panel’s testimony against the EU to attacks on the EPA and the president by coal companies as a way to “[make] it OK to hate the government … more importantly, [make] it OK not to do anything about cleaning up [the] product.” He asserted that the technology which reduces airline emissions was not industry’s accomplishment saying, “Don’t congratulate yourselves… the Congress did that.” The chairman questioned Bolen on the 67 percent increase of emissions from non-commercial aircraft. Rockefeller qualified that two-thirds of aircraft over the U.S. are general aviation and private aircraft to emphasize the industry’s sizable effect on GHG emissions. Bolen said the industry now uses pioneering technologies such as the use of composite metal which makes planes lighter and Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) for more direct flight paths. He explained the general aviation community’s excitement for projects like NextGen and the Greener Skies Initiative . Prompted by Thune, Delbeke argued that ETS is an “exception” to most EU policies in that it is explicitly stated that funds raised from ETS must be used to combat carbon emissions. Petsonk supported his answer citing that German legislation requires money made from allowance auctions to be spent on lowering emissions. Young explained to Thune that costs to airlines as a result of compliance with ETS, $3.1 billion between 2012 and 2020, may not be passed on to consumers, but if it is not it will certainly disadvantage the airlines in buying equipment and alternative sustainable fuels. Bolen showed that private companies have already begun to pay to register for the ETS. Cassidy argued that ETS introduces another level of instability, in addition to terrorist threats and other security concerns, and increased fuel prices, to an industry which represents 5 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product (GDP). Delbeke alluded to the fact that differing estimates were made about the impact of ETS, which he attributed to a misunderstanding of the acquisition of allowances. He explained that 90 percent of emissions credits are given out for free by the EU. Delbeke further stated that ICAO decided in 2004 it would not formulate a global aviation cap and trade agreement; rather it should be developed by individual states. Cantwell’s final question was whether the aviation industry would follow a target set by ICAO for global emissions. Young responded that ICAO has set up a target, with a framework that was provided by the airline industry in 2010. She explained that the next step is for ICAO and the airlines to come to agreement on how to implement the framework and achieve these targets. Witness testimonies, opening statements, and a webcast of the hearing can be found on the committee’s web site . Emissions-cutting aviation deal must be enforceable: NGOs By Allison Lampert MONTREAL (Reuters) – A deal this fall to cap carbon emissions from global aviation at 2020 levels must be enforceable and set long-term goals in line with the 2015 Paris agreement on climate change, a coalition of environmental groups said on Monday. Aviation was excluded from the landmark climate accord in Paris in December. But carbon emissions from the sector could triple by 2050 if left unchecked, the International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation, which represents a half dozen non-profit groups, warned in a statement. In Paris, countries agreed to limit the rise in global temperatures to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels. “Now, countries need to fulfill their Paris promises by ensuring that the aviation industry does its fair share,” Brad Schallert, a senior program officer at the World Wildlife Fund, said in the statement. While other transportation modes, such as the maritime industry, are also discussing ways to limit emissions, the world’s attention is centered on aviation – a sector that would be the world’s seventh-largest carbon emitter if it were a country. The International Civil Aviation Organization has until October to finalize a deal that would cap and cut the carbon pollution of all international flights. The market-based plan must win the support of the International Civil Aviation Organization’s 190 member countries at its Montreal assembly, or risk the EU breaking off talks and imposing its own emissions trading plan on international airlines. The International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation, which is closely following the ICAO talks, said any deal must have clear compliance requirements that are enforceable and include accurate flight-by-flight emissions monitoring. The coalition also said a deal should be subject to review to help the aviation industry meet its more ambitious goal of cutting carbon emissions by 50 percent in 2050 from 2005 levels. (Reporting By Allison Lampert; Editing by Dan Grebler) This entry was posted in news and tagged aviation. Bookmark the permalink. Emissions-cutting aviation deal must be enforceable: NGOs By Allison Lampert Mon Mar 21, 2016 4:03am UTC By Allison Lampert MONTREAL (Reuters) - A deal this fall to cap carbon emissions from global aviation at 2020 levels must be enforceable and set long-term goals in line with the 2015 Paris agreement on climate change, a coalition of environmental groups said on Monday. Aviation was excluded from the landmark climate accord in Paris in December. But carbon emissions from the sector could triple by 2050 if left unchecked, the International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation, which represents a half dozen non-profit groups, warned in a statement. In Paris, countries agreed to limit the rise in global temperatures to "well below" 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels. "Now, countries need to fulfill their Paris promises by ensuring that the aviation industry does its fair share," Brad Schallert, a senior program officer at the World Wildlife Fund, said in the statement. While other transportation modes, such as the maritime industry, are also discussing ways to limit emissions, the world's attention is centered on aviation - a sector that would be the world’s seventh-largest carbon emitter if it were a country. The International Civil Aviation Organization has until October to finalize a deal that would cap and cut the carbon pollution of all international flights. The market-based plan must win the support of the International Civil Aviation Organization’s 190 member countries at its Montreal assembly, or risk the EU breaking off talks and imposing its own emissions trading plan on international airlines. The International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation, which is closely following the ICAO talks, said any deal must have clear compliance requirements that are enforceable and include accurate flight-by-flight emissions monitoring. The coalition also said a deal should be subject to review to help the aviation industry meet its more ambitious goal of cutting carbon emissions by 50 percent in 2050 from 2005 levels. (Reporting By Allison Lampert; Editing by Dan Grebler) Latest Life News Top News Videos Emissions-cutting aviation deal must be enforceable: NGOs By Allison Lampert Mon Mar 21, 2016 4:03am UTC By Allison Lampert MONTREAL (Reuters) - A deal this fall to cap carbon emissions from global aviation at 2020 levels must be enforceable and set long-term goals in line with the 2015 Paris agreement on climate change, a coalition of environmental groups said on Monday. Aviation was excluded from the landmark climate accord in Paris in December. But carbon emissions from the sector could triple by 2050 if left unchecked, the International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation, which represents a half dozen non-profit groups, warned in a statement. In Paris, countries agreed to limit the rise in global temperatures to "well below" 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels. "Now, countries need to fulfill their Paris promises by ensuring that the aviation industry does its fair share," Brad Schallert, a senior program officer at the World Wildlife Fund, said in the statement. While other transportation modes, such as the maritime industry, are also discussing ways to limit emissions, the world's attention is centered on aviation - a sector that would be the world’s seventh-largest carbon emitter if it were a country. The International Civil Aviation Organization has until October to finalize a deal that would cap and cut the carbon pollution of all international flights. The market-based plan must win the support of the International Civil Aviation Organization’s 190 member countries at its Montreal assembly, or risk the EU breaking off talks and imposing its own emissions trading plan on international airlines. The International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation, which is closely following the ICAO talks, said any deal must have clear compliance requirements that are enforceable and include accurate flight-by-flight emissions monitoring. The coalition also said a deal should be subject to review to help the aviation industry meet its more ambitious goal of cutting carbon emissions by 50 percent in 2050 from 2005 levels. (Reporting By Allison Lampert; Editing by Dan Grebler) Latest Environment News Top News Videos Emissions-cutting aviation deal must be enforceable: NGOs By Allison Lampert Mon Mar 21, 2016 4:03am UTC By Allison Lampert MONTREAL (Reuters) - A deal this fall to cap carbon emissions from global aviation at 2020 levels must be enforceable and set long-term goals in line with the 2015 Paris agreement on climate change, a coalition of environmental groups said on Monday. Aviation was excluded from the landmark climate accord in Paris in December. But carbon emissions from the sector could triple by 2050 if left unchecked, the International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation, which represents a half dozen non-profit groups, warned in a statement. In Paris, countries agreed to limit the rise in global temperatures to "well below" 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels. "Now, countries need to fulfill their Paris promises by ensuring that the aviation industry does its fair share," Brad Schallert, a senior program officer at the World Wildlife Fund, said in the statement. While other transportation modes, such as the maritime industry, are also discussing ways to limit emissions, the world's attention is centered on aviation - a sector that would be the world’s seventh-largest carbon emitter if it were a country. The International Civil Aviation Organization has until October to finalize a deal that would cap and cut the carbon pollution of all international flights. The market-based plan must win the support of the International Civil Aviation Organization’s 190 member countries at its Montreal assembly, or risk the EU breaking off talks and imposing its own emissions trading plan on international airlines. The International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation, which is closely following the ICAO talks, said any deal must have clear compliance requirements that are enforceable and include accurate flight-by-flight emissions monitoring. The coalition also said a deal should be subject to review to help the aviation industry meet its more ambitious goal of cutting carbon emissions by 50 percent in 2050 from 2005 levels. (Reporting By Allison Lampert; Editing by Dan Grebler) Latest Environment News Top News Videos European Commission publishes a Roadmap on the EU position on aviation emissions negotiations at the 39th ICAO Assembly in 2016 Resource type: Legal update: archive Status: Published on 22-Mar-2016 Jurisdiction: European Union The European Commission published, on 17 March 2016, a Roadmap for a proposal for a Council Decision to be adopted on behalf of the EU in view of the international instrument to be agreed at the 39th International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Assembly later in 2016. Please click the button below if you have Practical Law enabled OnePass account. If you have forgotten your OnePass credentials click the button below to reset them. Please enter your Practical Law username and password below if you do not have Practical Law enabled OnePass account. Request a free trial To access this resource and thousands more, register for a free, no-obligation trial of Practical Law. Register using the button below, telephone +44 (0)20 7202 1220 or e-mail [email protected] . A free trial will give you: ©2016 Thomson Reuters. Todos los derechos reservados. Privacy Policy and Cookies(http://www.practicallaw.com/3-386-5597).Legal Information(http://www.practicallaw.com/8-531-0965). Subscription enquiries +44 (0)20 7202 1220 or email [email protected] The reference after links to resources on our site (e.g. 2-123-4567) is to the PLC Reference ID. This will include any PDF or Word versions of articles. Política de cookies We use cookies to give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse the site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time but if you do, you may lose some functionality on our website. More information can be found in our Privacy Policy and Cookies . level ii trading system All market data originally comes from the exchange that offers the market, and day traders receive the market data via their day trading brokerages.Both level 1 market data and level 2 market data are available for most day trading markets, including most futures markets and stock markets. Thefees for level 2 market data are usually slightly higher than level 1 market data. $ARO - Live Stock Trade - Level 2's Tricked Me level ii trading system. There are active trading programs in several air pollutants. For greenhouse gases, which cause dangerous climate change, permit units are often calledcarbon credits. The largest greenhouse gases trading program is the European Union Emission Trading Scheme,[11] which trades primarily in EuropeanUnion Allowances (EUAs); the Californian scheme trades in California Carbon Allowances, the New Zealand scheme in New Zealand Units and the Australianscheme in Australian Units.[8] The United States has a national market to reduce acid rain and several regional markets in nitrogen oxides.[12] Level ii trading system. One of the tools that day traders use to make their trades is the market data for their markets. The market data includes information about theprices, and the completed trades for the market, and is available in two different levels depending upon the information that is required : Level ii trading system - Read more Read more level ii trading system Emissions trading or cap and trade is a government-mandated, market-based approach to controlling pollution by providing economic incentives forachieving reductions in the emissions of pollutants.[1] Various countries, states and groups of companies have adopted such trading systems, notablyfor mitigating climate change.[2] switch to more enlightened trading Sophisticated investors are already using and harnessing the advantages that Level 2 … Basic market data is known as level 1 market data, and includes the following information: Level 1 market data provides all of the information that is needed to trade using most trading systems, including the moving average bounce, zero linecross, and pivot point bounce trading systems.level ii trading system. level ii trading system.Level 2 market data provides the additional information that is needed to trade using trading systems that follow the order flow, and advanced volumebased trading systems. Level 2 market data is also known as the order book, because it shows the orders that are currently pending for the market, andis also known as the depth of market, because it shows the number of contracts that are available at each of the available prices. Additional market data is known as level 2 market data, the order book, or the depth of market, and includes the following additional information: Watch level ii trading system In theory, polluters who can reduce emissions most cheaply will do so, achieving the emission reduction at the lowest cost to society.[9] Cap andtrade is meant to provide the private sector with the flexibility required to reduce emissions while stimulating technological innovation and economicgrowth.[10] Level ii trading system profit. Also known as: Order Book, Level 2, Level II, Depth of Market, DOMlevel ii trading system. Alliance Trader is not targeted or intended for US persons. Services are intended for Jamaican Residents. Member JCC, FSCJ Registered |Google+ A central authority (usually a governmental body) allocates or sells a limited number of permits to discharge specific quantities of a specificpollutant per time period.[3] Polluters are required to hold permits in amount equal to their emissions. Polluters that want to increase theiremissions must buy permits from others willing to sell them.[1][4][5][6][7] Financial derivatives of permits can also be traded on secondarymarkets.[8](level ii trading system profit.|) Also on Our Radar Going Green: Aviation’s Contributions to a Sustainable Future For years, ALPA pilots have worked together with airline managements and regulators to safely enhance the efficiency of flight operations. Through operations such as single-engine taxi; modernized departure and arrival procedures; flying at optimal altitude to limit fuel burn based on aircraft weight, winds, and atmospheric conditions; and using continuous descent arrival and optimized descent procedures; airline pilots are working every day and on every flight to safely enhance efficiency and reduce fuel burn. As a result, commercial aircraft emissions have plummeted in recent decades. In June 2015, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued an “endangerment finding” on aviation and carbon emissions as required by the Clean Air Act. The finding reiterated the United States’ commitment to working through the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) process to develop a carbon dioxide certification standard for new aircraft. ALPA has long held that as an international industry, aircraft emissions standards must be developed and agreed to at the international level. ALPA fully supports ICAO’s efforts to find global solutions to reduce aviation emissions. Flight Plan U.S. government policy must recognize the voluntary contributions of U.S. airlines to reducing carbon emissions. Specifically, EPA should maintain its current course of engaging via the U.S. position at ICAO regarding aircraft emissions and reject outside pressure to adopt separate rules or standards which apply to only U.S. carriers or operations in U.S. airspace. Download ALPA's Comprehensive "Flight Plan" ALPA Members Act Now Americans Take Action Who's My Legislator? Learn who your representatives and senators are, then make your voice heard! Learn More About ALPA-PAC ALPA-PAC helps advance aviation safety and pilots worldwide. El recurso que está buscando se ha eliminado, se ha cambiado su nombre o está temporalmente no disponible. Las causas más probables: El directorio o archivo especificado no existe en el servidor Web. La URL contiene un error tipográfico. Un filtro o módulo personalizado, como URLScan, restringe el acceso al archivo. Cosas que puedes probar: Create the content on the Web server. Revise la URL del navegador. Cree una regla de seguimiento para realizar un seguimiento de las solicitudes de este código de estado HTTP y ver qué módulo está llamando a SetStatus. Para obtener más información acerca de la creación de una regla de seguimiento para solicitudes que han fallado, haga clic aquí. Información de error detallada: bloomberg.com — European Union industry landed a 24-billion-euro ($26.7 billion) windfall from an emissions cap-and-trade program that was intended to moderate emissions by putting a price on pollution, according to an environmental consultancy. Companies in the cement, petrochemical and steel industries gained most from the emissions trading system, or ETS, from 2008 to 2014, according to a study by CE Delft which was commissioned by Carbon Market Watch, an environmental lobby. EU Industry got $27b from #ets Companies in the cement, petrochemical and steel industries gained most bloom.bg/1RKk6WG @Ewa_Bxl Industry landed $26.7bn windfall from EU's carbon trading program that was supposed to cut emissions, by @Ewa_Bxl bloomberg.com/news/articles/… EU Industry Got $27 Billion Cap-and-Trade Windfall, Study Says bloom.bg/1RKk6WG EU Climate and Energy Policy Reporter Energy News Editor EU industry got $27 billion emissions cap-and-trade windfall, study says bloom.bg/1RKk6WG via @business Copyright 2016 Sawhorse Media • Made in NYC Obstruction Lights. Design, manufacture, supply “Liberty International” is a company founded in 2001, specialized in design and manufacturing low, average and high intensity obstruction lights (types “A”, “B” and “C”), as well as obstruction lights control and monitoring systems. Aviation obstruction lights of low and medium intensity are intended for high-rise objects twilight light protection (marking). Light Marking Solutions for: Tall buildings; Telecommunication towers; Water towers; Chimneys; Power lines; Cooling towers; Cranes. Presently «Liberty International» is a leader in the field of low and medium intensity obstruction lights manufacture and high-rise objects twilight indication control systems on Russian and Eastern European markets. We maintain a flawless reputation and offer high-quality innovative solutions. Our team consists of highly skilled specialists with in-depth knowledge of national and international standards, norms and recommendations, such as ICAO, FAA, IAC, CAP, ENAC. We provide our customers with different technological solutions, aid in revealing uncertainty factors, promote technical and normative requirements understanding, care about optimization of customer’s expenses for obstruction lights purchase and maintenance. Our produce was developed with consideration of business cases from the best specialists in the field of telecommunications, construction and power-engineering. Our goal is to provide the market with optimum and effective solutions in the form of modern and reliable equipment, living up to all needs and expectations. “Liberty International” aviation obstruction lights were developed as a result of many years efforts of our close-knit professional team. Before launching new products into mass production, they undergo thorough analysis, with consideration of all technical and market factors. We create an optimum offer of the highest quality. All of our products are a carefully planned marketing move, considering customers wishes, modern technical requirements, competitors’ flaws and our innovations. We are adamant of our produce quality and provide a ten years warranty term for specific low intensity obstruction lights models. We offer modern high-quality equipment, excellent customer support, broad assortment of aviation obstruction lights and attractive prices. We value long-term partnership relations, and offer cooperation to trading organizations worldwide. We aid in order customs processing to facilitate end-user delivery. “Liberty International” obstruction lights are well-known to a broad spectrum of customers in Russia, Eastern Europe, Brazil, Middle East Countries, Latin America and Africa. Our equipment quality is valued by many well-known companies, leading construction and electric-engineering enterprises. Hundreds of companies worldwide trust and choose our produce. Ever growing worldwide competition resulted in tightening the requirements of our produce quality. “Liberty International” is an enterprise with an established complex quality control system, according to international standards, such as ISO 9001. All of our obstruction lights have an international certificate from State aviation service of Ukraine, confirming compliance to ICAO norms and requirements. Recommend us to your partners, follow us on Facebook, press the “Like” button. International standards and regulations. ICAO is the international body responsible for drawing up recommendations for the safety of air transport. The Convention on International Civil Aviation, Annex 14 Volume I "Aerodrome Design and Operations" includes Chapter 6 "visual aids for denoting obstacles" which gives guidance concerning the need to provide safety marking on structures that may be considered to be a hazard to air traffic. Download " Annex 14 Volume I " (1911.69 KB) FAA is the authority in the United States of America responsible for the regulations of aviation light systems. The document AC 70/7460-1K "obstruction marking and lighting" gives guidance concerning the need to provide safety marking on structures that may be considered to be a hazard to air traffic. Download " AC 70/7460-1K " (2683.65 KB) We're almost here! Date has been set and we're now adding final touches to make sure you enjoy an unparalleled experience! Make sure to register on April 1st, 3PM GMT. In the mean time, make sure you visit and like our Facebook page. this is where you will find up-to-date news regarding the launch, upcoming events and other cool bits and bobs. The wait is almost over! We're launching in Welcome to vEZY! WE HAVE SOME BOLD CLAIMS TO MAKE. We firmly believe we are working on the most advanced PIREP and flight tracking system of any virtual airline in the world. We will have countless unique and exciting features to offer our pilots, and we are constantly in development! No stale software, no archaic systems, no dated data displays. We use the latest technologies to bring our pilots an unparalleled experience in Virtual Aviation! We also believe we offer a completely unique Virtual Airline experience - with our PIREPs automatically processed, pilot reports for when things go wrong, public PIREPs for boasting about those awesome arrivals (or sharing those mishaps. ), leaderboards and ranks to add that competitive edge, and a whole host of exclusive resources to offer our pilots! Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner Begins Major Assembly Major assembly of the first Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner is underway, the latest major milestone in the development of the newest member of the super-efficient 787 family. Boeing partner Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd. began installing the circular frames into the midforward section of the fuselage on March 14, a full two weeks ahead of schedule. "Beginning major assembly early underscores the commitment, discipline and performance of the entire Boeing and partner team worldwide," said Ken Sanger, vice president of 787 Airplane Development, Boeing Commercial Airplanes. "We are taking all the right steps to ensure we integrate the 787-10 into the production system smoothly." As a straightforward stretch of the 787-9, which entered service in 2014, Boeing designed the 787-10 for both superior efficiency and maximum commonality. Ninety-five percent of the design and build of the 787-10 and 787-9 will be identical, reducing complexity, cost and risk across the entire production system while providing operational benefits to customers. The 787-10, which will undergo final assembly at Boeing South Carolina in North Charleston, will set a new benchmark in efficiency when deliveries begin in 2018. With a robust range capability covering more than 90 percent of the world's twin-aisle routes, the 787-10 will deliver 25 percent better fuel use and emissions than the airplanes it will replace and at least 10 percent better than anything being offered by the competition in the future. To date, the 787-10 has won 153 orders from nine leading customers around the world, accounting for 13 percent of all 787 orders. Related reports:
Regulated_binary_options_brokers_2013
No_loss_binary_options_indicator_software