Tag Archives: cities
Carbon Trading with Chinese Characteristics
To control greenhouse gases the Chinese government is experimenting with pilot programs in seven cities and regions that use markets By Mark Nicholls NEW CITY: On June 18, companies in Shenzhen will have to meet greenhouse gas emission targets as part of a new cap and trade market experiment. Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way… On June 18 China’s pioneering city of Shenzhen is set to notch up another first. From that day 635 companies in the Shenzhen Special Economic Zone—which in 1979 became the vanguard for China’s capitalist revolution—will start using the markets to help meet greenhouse gas emissions targets . This year, alongside the cities of Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin and Chongqing as well as the regions of Guangdong and Hubei, Shenzhen is imposing greenhouse gas targets on hundreds of companies, ranging from power plants to airport operators. The goal is to develop a national carbon market over the next decade that could help put the brakes on the world’s largest carbon dioxide emitter. “China has internationally pledged 2020 climate targets,” observes Chai Hongliang, an analyst at Thomson Reuters Point Carbon, an Oslo-based information-provider specializing in carbon markets. He is referring to a commitment first made by China ahead of the 2009 Copenhagen climate talks to reduce its economy’s overall carbon emissions per unit of GDP to 40 to 45 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. “It has two ways to reach the target: shut down factories in the last months of 2020 or use more market-based approaches like emissions trading,” Chai adds. As with emission-trading programs elsewhere, polluters in China’s pilots have two options: First, they can meet their targets by reducing their own emissions—by investing in energy efficiency, say, or curbing production. Alternatively, they can buy carbon allowances or credits from companies that have spare allowances or from projects elsewhere in China. Shenzhen faces the toughest target. The companies in its pilot emitted the equivalent of 31 million metric tons (Mt) of CO2 in 2010. They will be allocated around 100 Mt of allowances for the duration of the three-year trial, although expected economic growth means they will have to reduce their carbon intensity by an estimated 30 percent by 2015 compared with 2010. Balancing the need for economic growth with carbon control is a challenge. Emissions in China are expected to rise for years, given the importance China’s political elite continue to place on economic growth. Some observers question how much pressure China’s planners are prepared to put on its big emitters. The pilots set emission limits from January 2013 through the end of 2015. “I think the emissions caps will be relatively lenient,” Chai says. Certainly the regulators will be eager to avoid any “carbon leakage”—that is, driving industry out of their jurisdictions through imposing too stringent targets ahead of any national program. But at this point Chai can only speculate about their stringency. Limited information is available about participating companies, their historical emissions—and even the rules under which the pilots will operate. And part of the reason is that some of these data do not exist. The problem with data To run effectively markets rely on an unimpeded flow of information, clear rules and rigorous oversight. China could both benefit from the lessons of earlier efforts, such as Europe’s flagship carbon market—the world’s largest, known as the European Union Emissions Trading System, or ETS. It is under fire from some environmentalists because of its relatively lax targets and low carbon prices, along with its vulnerability to fraud and abuse. For the regulators drawing up targets, “there are existing processes and mechanisms on energy consumption which could be drawn on, as well as local exercises in creating GHG [greenhouse gas] inventories,” says Lina Li, a Beijing-based carbon markets expert at Netherlands-based consultancy Ecofys. Her firm has advised local regulators and international donors on creating carbon market regulations and infrastructure in China. “But there are still challenges regarding emissions data at the company level.” This is exactly where the E.U. was in 2005, when it embarked on the pilot phase of its ETS—and the lack of emissions data allowed companies to game the system. E.U. governments asked companies to provide their own, unverified historical emissions data, and many inflated their numbers so as to claim more free allowances from government. This practice created an overhang of surplus permits that led to a price collapse in 2007. Generous allocations of allowances are probably inevitable as the price paid for industry acceptance, however, suggests Karl Upston-Hooper, legal counsel of GreenStream Network, a Finnish carbon asset manager that is active in China. “You will struggle to find an ETS that is not overallocated” in its early phases, he says. Indeed, he argues that the pilots in China are less about creating carbon markets and more about gathering data. “I’ve taken the view that they’re implementing an emissions-monitoring system, not a carbon market—and I’m okay with that as a first step on the road.” Most observers—including from the environmental movement—are prepared to give China’s regulators time to get things right. “It is our view that the first step for Chinese ETS is to get the system right from the beginning—the trading platform; the monitoring, reporting and verification system; [emissions] inventories; getting companies informed and cooperative—and gradually shift toward more stringent caps,” says Li Shuo, a climate and energy campaigner for Greenpeace East Asia. Plenty of studies see China’s emissions peaking by 2030. Some are more optimistic: recent ones predict 2025 to 2030. A further data challenge is whether China’s regulators will be sufficiently transparent and even-handed when it comes to the country’s carbon markets. “In Europe and elsewhere, ETS data are under public scrutiny. That may not be the case in China,” says Point Carbon’s Chai. Another concern is insufficient coordination among the seven pilots, Li says. Indeed, rivalry exists among the various authorities, with Beijing deliberately encouraging a degree of “policy competition” to test differing approaches to see which works best. Last, despite a recent announcement by the powerful National Development and Reform and Commission (NDRC) that it is to propose a national carbon cap for China’s next five-year plan, which runs from 2016 to 2020, a national Chinese carbon market is not assured. Other methods could prove more effective. “In China the ETS is not the only tool,” says Wu Changhua, Beijing-based Greater China director of the nonprofit Climate Group. She notes that the nation’s finance ministry is promoting a carbon tax whereas other government ministries are considering a system for crediting and trading energy-efficiency improvements. Wu also cautions that international media speculation around the introduction of a national carbon cap by 2016 is overblown. She argues that the NDRC is agitating for the inclusion of the concept in the next plan to ensure resources are available for more research and policy development. “One thing is for sure,” she adds. “The political leadership in China is much more serious, stronger and determined to tackle environmental problems. But it will be a journey. We’re not going to get there immediately.” Continue reading
Real Estate – Europe
The Urban Land Institute (ULI) and PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) have published a report; The Emerging Trends in Real Estate Europe 2013. This report reveals real estate investor’s predictions for the market in 2013, and ranks 27 cities around Europe. London Boasts ‘Safe Haven’ Status The Urban Land Institute (ULI) and PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) have published a report; The Emerging Trends in Real Estate Europe 2013. This report reveals real estate investor’s predictions for the market in 2013, and ranks 27 cities around Europe. Stable real estate markets and robust local micro-economic climates helped Munich achieve top spot; Berlin came in second place and Hamburg fifth place. The city of London took third position, and was the highest climber this year. London is viewed by many real estate investors as having one of the most liquid real estate markets, a strong currency and provides at least some shelter from the economic woes abound in Europe. The Eurozone crisis, along with the financial crisis in 2008 saw Madrid, Barcelona, Lisbon, Athens and Dublin dubbed as the weakest cities in the report. Report participants revealed their outlook for their own businesses is the most positive it’s been since 2008 but felt less positive regarding the cities’ real estate markets. The report suggests that this is a common response and will motivate investors to consider more specific stand-alone assets and strategies which are less focused on countries and cities as a whole. With real estate investors still applying caution to making an investment, they’re searching for the hidden gems in the best performing cities of London, Paris, Munich and Berlin instead of seeking out higher yields in the cities that are still in a poor state of recovery. Investors have adopted this new mind-set and will continue to deploy their capital into the ‘new norm’ environment, and whilst still cautious, feel positive about their future and able to meet their challenges going forward. Munich was seen as the strongest city as investors seek locations that can survive economic uncertainty, it boasts a growing biotechnology and environmental sciences industry, and has a diverse collection of global and medium sized businesses operating within it. Regarding the cities demographics, Munich will see its population rise to112,000 within the next 12 years or so, and it’s current population has the strongest purchasing power within the whole of Germany. Tourism has also increased, predominantly from visitors from the BRIC group of countries, and investors also foresee the rental market experiencing growth in 2013. The city of Berlin has seen an upward trend in its residential property market as well due to the technology sector bringing in skilled employees to work in the 15,000 technology companies it boasts, and the cultural centre of Berlin has long since bought large volumes of tourists which also benefits the rental market. London, which is dubbed as the ‘ultimate safe haven’ by many real estate investors is not seen as fully recovered by any means but is viewed as having a continued strength in its residential market, and some of the most sought after locations and post codes on a global scale, which also supports a growing private rented sector. Canary Wharf is still a highly desirable area but with the financial industry suffering a lot of job losses, the potential for the area to house the growing technology and the creative industries is tangible. With regards to future development, the report shows that Istanbul was the most favoured by investors because it has the most potential for real estate development. This is motivated by the kind of economic growth that rivals even China, and a population that has the average age of 29. Continue reading
China Reveals Details Of First Carbon Trading Scheme
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9221daf4-c221-11e2-ab66-00144feab7de.html#ixzz2U1lYNuu9 By Leslie Hook in Beijing Operating details of China’s first pilot carbon-trading scheme, in Shenzhen, have been released as it gets ready to launch next month, and as the country prepares to roll out seven pilot schemes by 2014. The world’s biggest carbon emitter, China is planning to experiment with carbon trading schemes during the next three years as it seeks to cut emissions. Beijing is targeting a 40 per cent reduction in emissions relative to economic output by 2020, from 2005 levels, but hasn’t identified what means it will use to reach that goal. The Shenzhen Carbon Exchange, the smallest of the seven in terms of total emissions, announced on Tuesday that its trading scheme would cover 635 industrial and construction companies, accounting for 38 per cent of Shenzhen’s total emissions in 2010. The exchange will launch on June 18. “Shenzhen, with it being the first exchange to officially launch, is going to be looked at very closely,” said Richard Chatterton, analyst at Bloomberg New Energy Finance. The exchange said it will add transportation to its scheme soon, and eventually include all major companies that consume oil, coal, gas and power. Emissions trading schemes encourage companies to curb their carbon dioxide emissions by setting a limit, or cap, on the level of carbon dioxide that can be emitted in a country or region, and then distributing permits equal to one tonne of carbon to each emitter. Cleaner companies can sell their permits to firms that pollute more, and therefore need more permits to meet their individual cap. This sets a price on carbon dioxide, the main manmade greenhouse gas scientists say is responsible for climate change. Although carbon trading schemes elsewhere have faltered, most recently with the near collapse of the carbon market in the EU, Beijing’s plans to test out carbon trading are still forging ahead. South Korea is also planning to implement a trading scheme that will be tested next year and go into force in 2015. Despite the setbacks in the EU, whose carbon trading scheme is by far the world’s largest, California launched an emissions trading scheme at the start of this year and is due to link it with a similar system in Quebec, Canada. Australia passed legislation in 2011 for an emissions trading scheme, which the government says will be linked with the EU scheme in 2015. China’s seven pilot schemes – in the cities of Shenzhen, Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin and Chongqing, and the provinces of Guangdong and Hubei – represent the first step towards what might become a nationwide carbon trading scheme after 2015. By 2015, trading schemes will cover around seven per cent of China’s total carbon emissions, according to estimates from Bloomberg New Energy Finance. Beijing hasn’t clearly identified its plans for the exchanges after 2015. The Shenzhen exchange took pains to describe how it would avoid corruption and human error during the quota allocation process by using automatic calculations to assign the quotas. It also said the initial quota allocation will be flexible, varying each year according to a company’s revenue growth and that the overall quota can be raised if need be. One of the most thorny issues for China’s exchanges is that prices for electricity – which accounts for the bulk of carbon emissions – are tightly controlled by the state. Without freely floating electricity prices, imposing a carbon price on electricity producers becomes meaningless. A press officer for the Shenzhen exchange said that coal-fired power plants would be included in its trading scheme but this was not detailed in Tuesday’s press conference. Shenzhen, a manufacturing hub, draws much of its power from nearby nuclear plants on the coast and has fewer coal-fired power plants than cities such as Beijing or Shanghai. China’s new leaders, who took the helm in March, have promised to try to clean up the toxic pollution that has become a growing social issue across the country. Beijing also issued carbon emissions targets to every province under the 2011–2015 five-year plan. It is unclear how these provincial goals will be monitored or met. China’s biggest source of carbon emissions is coal-burning power plants, which account for more than 60 per cent of its electricity supply. The Shanghai pilot exchange is expected to launch before the end of June and Beijing shortly thereafter. David Tang, board secretary of the Tianjin Carbon Exchange, told the FT the exchange there would start trading before the end of the year, without identifying a date. Continue reading