mead berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn bayles
Paging Goldilocks
Brussels Still Can’t Find the Carbon Price Sweet Spot

The European Union has a carbon market, but it doesn’t work very well. The EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) has long struggled to find that mythical goldilocks carbon price—high enough to induce emissions reductions but not so high that major industries choose to flee the bloc for regions without a carbon market (a process known as carbon leakage). That last concern is especially important to policymakers keen to retain any hint of economic dynamism within the EU these days. And so the ETS generously allocated free permits to some of its biggest emitters, choosing to err on the site of the economy. The end result was predictable: a low carbon price.

Now, a European court has found issue with the way in which these free permits have been allocated, and this week ordered the European Commission to examine and fix this problem over the next ten months. Reuters reports:

Europe’s highest court on Thursday ruled that the European Commission’s calculation for handing out free carbon permits to industries was flawed, raising the prospect of higher costs for big energy users.

The decision followed a court advisor’s opinion in November that the ceiling was too high, when a calculation known as the correction factor was used to cap the total amount of allowances distributed to shelter industry from added energy costs they say could drive them out of Europe.

Greens will cheer this decision while industrial groups bemoan it, but this isn’t the end of this debate—not by a long shot. The pendulum can swing between low carbon pricing to high carbon pricing and back again, but wherever it is at any given moment there will be active interest groups mobilizing to push it back the other way. And given that the setting of the price in this so-called “market” is a ultimately political decision, there is no end in sight to these sorts of fights. There might be some sort of goldilocks price somewhere in there by economic standards—a perfect balance between effectively pricing pollution and keeping economic costs in check—but there is little reason to think that it is an equilibrium point, or that the ETS even has the proper mechanisms in place to keep the system there.

This is the problem the EU faces with its regional approach to carbon pricing. Those fears of carbon leakage are real, because if heavy emitters leave to graze on greener grass, they not only take their business with them, but they also do nothing to abate their own emissions—both the environment and the EU economy lose. Brussels has been trying (and failing) to get this right for many years now, and it looks no closer to its idealized priced carbon future than it was when it started.

Features Icon
show comments
  • Blackbeard

    The biggest steel mill remaining in the UK, Port Talbot, is closing taking some 40,000 jobs with it if you include the plant itself plus supporting facilities. The head of the steel producers association in Europe has stated that the same will happen throughout the EU if climate rules aren’t relaxed. A necessary sacrifice of hundreds of thousands of well paying jobs to protect the environment? Well, no, as Europe will be using just as much steel as before, just buying it from China where they mostly burn coal to make steel.

    European elites think this makes perfect sense. And people wonder why Donald Trump-like candidates are popular.

  • CaliforniaStark

    The best thing that could happen for Europe is for the European Union to dissolve. Its regulations and entrenched bureaucracy are arcane and often idiotic; no one is in charge, and the decision-making process is almost paralytic. Its time to put the decrepit brontosaurus to sleep. European nations again need to be free to set, and be responsible for, their own policies; and be directly accountable to their electorates. If there was ever a place that needs “creative disruption”, its the present-day Europe. It is stagnation on steroids.

  • Bill_Woods

    This ought to be an easy problem to solve. Governments should offer to buy all the emission permits anyone wants to sell at a price of X euro per tonne of CO2, putting a floor under the price. Make the floor high enough to have the desired effect on emissions. And also offer to sell permits at Y E/t_CO2, putting a ceiling on the price. Whatever it takes to prevent the industrial economy from collapsing. As long as X<Y, of course.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service