Tag Archives: south-korea
South Korea To Launch Ambitious Carbon Trading Scheme, Says Report
South Korea is preparing to introduce the world’s most ambitious emissions trading scheme, potentially paving the way for carbon costs as high as $90 a tonne for many of the country’s key industries. That is the stark conclusion of a major new report from Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) and Ernst & Young, which hails the proposed scheme as the world’s most ambitious carbon-pricing policy but warns that changes to the proposals may be required before the scheme is introduced in 2015 to avoid “punitive” costs on industry. “If the government implements the scheme without any changes, it will have major implications for Korean companies,” said Richard Chatterton, lead analyst for carbon markets at BNEF, in a statement. “A carbon price will lead to higher power prices and impose additional costs on industrial firms. The government is mitigating the impact for covered entities by handing out most allowances for free, but costs could still rise quickly.” The report calculates that if South Korea adheres to its national target of cutting emissions to 30 per cent below business-as-usual levels by 2020 emissions reductions delivered through the planned emissions trading scheme would have to reach 836 million tonnes between 2015 and 2020. But it also predicts the “need to reduce emissions will, however, exceed the options available within industrial companies and from the country’s current fleet of gas fired power stations”, meaning that the target is likely to be missed and the price of carbon in the scheme will effectively be set by a $90 a tonne penalty price for company’s exceeding their emissions cap. The government hopes that businesses will be able to comply with the cap by accelerating the shift toward lower carbon energy sources, such as gas, renewables, and carbon capture and storage plants. But the BNEF report warns that the cost of such technologies is likely to be significantly higher than the penalty price, meaning many firms are likely to opt to exceed their targets. It recommends that the government consider a number of options to improve the proposed scheme, including relaxing the number of offset credits companies can use to count towards their carbon target or loosening the over-arching cap on emissions. “The challenge is to put in place a carbon price high enough to impact investment decisions, but low enough to transition smoothly towards a carbon-constrained economy,” said Milo Sjardin, head of Asia research for BNEF, in a statement. “With the proposed design, demand and supply within the ETS are not well-matched and will lead to unnecessarily high carbon prices. Policy-makers will need to look at cost containment measures closely while not compromising the ambitions of the scheme.” However, Yoon Joo-Hoon, senior manager at Ernst & Young, warned that while changes to the proposals could be made businesses still needed to be preparing now to the likely impact of the scheme, arguing that firms should be looking at carbon mitigation options and developing a plan for operating effectively under an emissions trading scheme. 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
Tackling Climate Change with a Robust Carbon Price
Rachel Kyte First Published in Carbon Finance May 16, 2013 Even as the first generation of the carbon market stutters, a robust price on carbon has never been more important if we are to avert dangerous climate change. Current greenhouse gas emission pledges place the world on a trajectory for warming of well over 2°C, even if they are fully met. We know now that the goal adopted by the international community, to keep the average global temperature increase to 2° C – brings serious risks. A disastrously warming planet is not just an environmental challenge – it is a fundamental threat to any effort to end poverty and threatens to put prosperity out of the reach of millions. In order to better understand the impact of climate change on development, the World Bank commissioned a scientific report, Turn Down the Heat: Why a 4°C Warmer World Must Be Avoided. The report concluded that the world will warm by 4°C, on average, by the end of this century with devastating consequences if we don’t take concerted action now. Inside the World Bank Group, we are stepping up our mitigation, adaptation and disaster risk management work, and immediately ramping up our work with others to: i) build low-carbon, climate-resilient cities by mobilising direct finance and expertise, and by helping fast-growing cities avoid locking in carbon-intensive infrastructure; ii) move forward on climate-smart agriculture through building an action alliance to realise the triple win of increased yields and income, making farms more resilient to climate change, and helping to sequester carbon in the soil; and iii) work with others to accelerate energy efficiency, investment in renewables and universal access to modern energy. But we recognise that our work, alone, is not enough. We need a global response that will drive mitigation action in top emitting countries, get incentives and prices right, and get finance flowing to drive low-carbon growth. We need a response equal to the scale of the climate problem, a response that puts us on a new path to ending poverty and building shared prosperity. In our view, that global response should include supporting the removal of harmful fossil fuel subsidies and placing a robust and predictable value on carbon. We are committed to continue working with others to pursue both ideas. Carbon pricing Let’s be clear: as a first step towards climate action, we need high-level political commitment and ambitious national emission reduction targets. A strong price signal in major economies is essential to establish the right incentives and to direct financial flows away from carbon-intensive growth to low-carbon investments. A carbon price can be achieved through markets or taxes, and different instruments will be appropriate in different countries for different sectors of the economy. But market-based mechanisms are likely to deliver large-scale emission reductions more efficiently and quickly – and with the climate problem, time is not our friend. A larger and liquid global market will also support the necessary level of ambition for reducing emissions as it would drive down the cost of mitigation, catalyse innovation and mobilise investment in low-carbon technology worldwide. A strong price signal in major economies is essential to establish the right incentives and to direct financial flows away from carbon-intensive growth to low-carbon investments. The good news is that an increasing number of countries, provinces and cities around the globe are developing and building schemes to reduce emissions and trade the resulting carbon reductions. Supporting national or subnational governments to put in place these mechanisms must be a priority. Many will want to participate in some level of trading across markets and some are already entering into formal bilateral negotiations to that effect. Adoption of common approaches and frameworks will facilitate linking and significant efforts to share experience and ideas are ongoing. However, recognising that countries will choose the most appropriate approach for their national circumstances and that the result is likely to be some level of heterogeneity across markets, a flexible approach is needed. We need an approach that recognises and accommodates differences across counties and that will support efficient trading across current and yet-to-emerge heterogeneous domestic and regional carbon markets and a range of asset types. As these developments unfold, we believe it is worth exploring the idea of a globally-networked carbon market with: pricing and exchange rates to support fungibility across asset classes; a reserve carbon “currency” for conversion and trading of emission reduction assets; and services and institutions to support a market of global scale. Of course, the principle of environmental integrity would need to underpin any effort of this sort. Possible elements could include independent carbon asset rating systems to provide information to the market and domestic regulators on relative risk and environmental integrity or an International Carbon Reserve supporting, as needed, domestic and regional reserves to help avoid extreme price swings. It could have a clearing-house function to establish exchange rates and possibly act as market-maker for new assets. It could also oversee a cross-border settlement platform to track cross-border trades and holdings of various carbon asset classes. But there are those who doubt that any form of carbon market could still work. What gives us confidence is the level of innovation in countries exploring domestic market mechanisms. There is evidence that carbon pricing can work if it is flexible and aligned with national policy initiatives, in particular economic priorities. While prices in major existing carbon markets like the EU Emissions Trading System flounder, many new national carbon pricing initiatives are emerging. And, not surprisingly, among the new carbon pricing initiatives, many include design features to manage extreme price volatility. The Partnership for Market Readiness In March, the Bank hosted a meeting of the Partnership for Market Readiness (PMR) – a growing coalition of over 30 developed and developing countries working on various solutions to carbon pricing. The World Bank acts as secretariat, trustee and principle delivery partner for the initiative. We are seeing more and more countries taking innovative domestic action. China is showing extraordinary leadership in this field. China’s seven pilot programmes – capturing between them five cities and two provinces with a total population of 246 million and accounting for a cumulative GDP of $1.6 trillion – are planned to launch this year. Shenzhen will launch its pilot in June 2013; Beijing and Shanghai will follow shortly thereafter. These pilots will pave the way for establishing a national carbon market, and China is already looking ahead to how it might link its ETS with others. The PMR is also supporting Chile, which is putting in place the necessary building blocks for an emissions trading system in its energy sector, including building a greenhouse gas registry system to track emission permits. South Africa is spearheading a carbon tax, which will be implemented in 2015. The design of the system includes a carbon offset scheme that helps companies meet their liabilities. Outside of the PMR, South Korea is preparing the first phase of its ETS, to start in 2015. And in California, compliance obligations came into force at the start of this year for its cap-and-trade programme which, when it expands in 2015 to fuel providers, will cover 85% of the state’s emissions. Innovation generating action It is progress at the country level that gives hope – the innovation, energy and farsightedness among the people developing these national and sub-national systems that convinces us at the World Bank that carbon pricing is emerging and carbon markets have a future. We hope to jumpstart a fresh debate. We don’t know if these are the right answers, and they are certainly not the only answers, but we do know that we need to work with everyone – policy-makers, the private sector and civil society – to develop our ideas, learn from others, and together decide how best we can move ahead on catalysing stronger political ambition and translating ambition into robust, predictable carbon prices. At the World Bank Group, we will continue to support innovation and offer technical analysis to countries as they explore their carbon options, and investigate mechanisms that can bring markets to a scale commensurate with the challenges we face. We cannot afford to fail in our efforts to limit climate change. Continue reading
