Major Australia investors urge quick action on climate

(Reuters) – A group of major investors on Friday urged Australia’s new Prime Minister Julia Gillard to take swift action to fight climate change and cut carbon emissions blamed for heating up the planet.

Green Business | COP15

Gillard should outline her road map on climate change as soon as possible and set priorities for consensus building over the issue, said the Investor Group on Climate Change (IGCC) that represents institutional investors with more than $500 billion under management.

“We consider that climate change presents real risks to the Australian economy, which must be addressed,” the group said in a statement.

Gillard moved to revive a stalled carbon trading scheme on Thursday, within hours of becoming prime minister after incumbent Kevin Rudd stepped down. Opinion polls had shown a slump in support for Rudd and he was also unpopular within his own party.

Gillard pledged more consultation with industry and voters to win support for a price on carbon pollution, an issue that has split the nation.

Rudd had championed the carbon trading scheme but it was rejected by a hostile Senate for a third time in March.

His decision in April to shelve the scheme till 2013 angered voters who wanted action on climate change and was a major reason for the plunge in his popularity in opinion polls.

IGCC said its members would continue to support strong climate change policy action but neither the government or the main opposition party had an adequate policy to address risks to the Australian economy from global climate change.

Australia is the world’s top coal exporter and among the highest per-capita emitters of planet-warming carbon dioxide, with coal used to generate about 80 percent of electricity.

While the government has embraced renewable energy and energy efficiency, analysts say putting a price on carbon emissions is the most effective way for Australia to cut greenhouse gas pollution.

“We see indications of significant policy progress in China, Europe and in many U.S. states and do not accept that stalled international progress is sufficient reason for further policy delay in Australia,” said IGCC chief executive Nathan Fabian in the statement.

U.N. climate talks on a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, whose first phase ends in 2012, have bogged down and agreement on a broader pact covering all of the world’s major greenhouse gas emitters is now thought to be more likely by the end of 2011.

(Reporting by Bruce Hextall; Editing by David Fogarty)

2009′s ‘Great Recession’ Slashed Carbon Market in Half Climate

The value of the voluntary carbon market shrunk 47 percent to $387 million in 2009 as the recession shrank the amount of offsets purchased for corporate social responsibility purposes.

Transactions for the year equaled 94 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions reductions, a 26 percent decline from 2008, despite growth in emissions reductions bought for pre-compliance purposes, according to the State of the Voluntary Carbon Market Report 2010. The fourth annual report, to be released Monday, was produced by Ecosystem Marketplace and Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

“The economic recession had a marked impact on the part of the market primarily concerned with buying credits to offset emissions of companies and individuals,” Milo Sjardin, Bloomberg New Energy Finance Director and report co-author, said in a statement. “In contrast, expectations of a possible U.S. carbon trading program lifted the importance of the U.S., which figured as the largest buyer and seller in the market and the most popular transactions were those that could count towards future compliance. However, with the current state of play of U.S. politics this situation is likely to be very different this year.”

The average cost for an emissions reduction was $6.50 per ton of CO2-equivalent. Projects that destroy potent methane proved to be the most popular, comprising 41 percent of all voluntary transactions, followed by forestry at 24 percent, and renewable energy projects, at 17 percent.

About 56 percent of emissions reductions originated in projects in the U.S., followed by Latin America and Asia. The U.S. accounted for 49 percent of voluntary offset demand.

The use of independent, third-party registries to track ownership of emissions reductions nearly doubled, mostly caused by the roll-out of the Voluntary Carbon Standard’s meta-registry, which uses multiple registries across several regions.

The authors warn that figures in the report are likely conservative because of the inherent challenges in trying to inventory and collect data. More than 200 offset suppliers, exchanges and registries voluntary reported the data used in the report.

Image CC licensed by Flickr user nemesisnom.

Firms abusing Kyoto carbon trading scheme: watchdog

(Reuters) – Firms participating in a Kyoto Protocol carbon scheme are abusing it by artificially inflating their greenhouse gas emissions, thereby allowing rich nations’ emissions to rise significantly, a watchdog said on Saturday.

Gulf Oil Spill

Under Kyoto’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), worth $2.7 billion in 2009, companies can invest in carbon-cutting projects in emerging economies, and in return get carbon offsets that can be used against their own emissions.

Findings released by CDM Watch, an initiative of non-governmental organizations, showed the most lucrative projects in the CDM, chemical plants that destroy a potent gas called hydrofluorocarbon-23 (HFC-23), may have inflated their emissions in order to destroy them and sell more offsets.

It also found that plants produced less HFC-23 during periods when they were unable to request CDM offsets, called Certified Emissions Reductions (CERs).

“Analysis of monitoring data from all registered HFC-23 destruction projects revealed that plants are intentionally operated in a manner to maximize the production of CERs,” CDM Watch said in a statement. “Because of the extra revenue … far more HFC-23 is generated than would occur without the CDM.”

Due to inaction by the CDM’s executive, CDM Watch said it made an official submission calling for new CERs handed to HFC projects to be discounted by over 90 percent, and for projects up for renewal to be reviewed at a panel meeting from June 21-25 and by the executive when it meets in late July.

“It would … remove the current financial incentive that causes plants to produce gas for the sole purpose of getting paid to destroy it,” said CDM Watch director Eva Filzmoser.

“It’s completely unacceptable for the UN to keep issuing an inflated number of bogus credits that create vast profits for carbon trading groups and chemical companies.”

If approved, the revision could drastically alter the 2,236-project strong CDM, which to date has been ruled by the credits of 19 HFC projects, mainly in China and India.

Because HFC-23 traps nearly 12,000 times more heat than a molecule of carbon dioxide, and because it is cheap to destroy, HFC offsets account for more than half of the 420 million CERs issued to date by the U.N.’s climate change secretariat.

Industry participating in the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme, which forces firms to turn in carbon permits against every ton of carbon dioxide they emit, also surrendered over 100 million HFC credits in the past two years.

Slashing the flow of HFC offsets would starve an already scarce CER supply, expected to total under 1 billion by 2013.

If the U.S. launches an emissions scheme that accepts CERs, global demand could exceed 10 billion tons by 2020, an amount unlikely to be met even with the current flow of HFC CERs.

ENVIRONMENTAL DAMANGE

CDM Watch made the submission after the second HFC project registered, a South Korean plant owned by Britain’s Ineos Group, requested another 7-year crediting period which would see it get 2.2 million CERs annually to 2016.

CERs currently trade around 13.00 euros ($15.65) each.

Ineos Group was not immediately available for comment.

Projects are only approved under the CDM if they can prove they are “additional,” that they would not have gone ahead without the prospect of the revenues from selling CERs. Critics say CDM projects that are not truly additional contribute to global warming by allowing buyers of their CERs to pollute more.

“The exact amount of the environmental damage cannot be determined but the data suggests that millions of credits have been issued which do not present real emission reductions,” said Chaim Nissim, head of environmental group Noe21.

CDM Watch cited two plants that cut HFC-23 generation when they were ineligible for crediting, and increased production once they could again claim CERs for its destruction. One even stopped HFC production when it was not allowed to request CERs, just to resume when it became eligible again, it added.

CDM Watch also revealed that many plants produced exactly the amount of HFC-23 they are allowed to claim credits for, even though chemical production was lower or varied annually.

(Editing by Louise Heavens)

Firms abusing Kyoto carbon trading scheme: watchdog

(Reuters) – Firms participating in a Kyoto Protocol carbon scheme are abusing it by artificially inflating their greenhouse gas emissions, thereby allowing rich nations’ emissions to rise significantly, a watchdog said on Saturday.

Gulf Oil Spill

Under Kyoto’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), worth $2.7 billion in 2009, companies can invest in carbon-cutting projects in emerging economies, and in return get carbon offsets that can be used against their own emissions.

Findings released by CDM Watch, an initiative of non-governmental organizations, showed the most lucrative projects in the CDM, chemical plants that destroy a potent gas called hydrofluorocarbon-23 (HFC-23), may have inflated their emissions in order to destroy them and sell more offsets.

It also found that plants produced less HFC-23 during periods when they were unable to request CDM offsets, called Certified Emissions Reductions (CERs).

“Analysis of monitoring data from all registered HFC-23 destruction projects revealed that plants are intentionally operated in a manner to maximize the production of CERs,” CDM Watch said in a statement. “Because of the extra revenue … far more HFC-23 is generated than would occur without the CDM.”

Due to inaction by the CDM’s executive, CDM Watch said it made an official submission calling for new CERs handed to HFC projects to be discounted by over 90 percent, and for projects up for renewal to be reviewed at a panel meeting from June 21-25 and by the executive when it meets in late July.

“It would … remove the current financial incentive that causes plants to produce gas for the sole purpose of getting paid to destroy it,” said CDM Watch director Eva Filzmoser.

“It’s completely unacceptable for the UN to keep issuing an inflated number of bogus credits that create vast profits for carbon trading groups and chemical companies.”

If approved, the revision could drastically alter the 2,236-project strong CDM, which to date has been ruled by the credits of 19 HFC projects, mainly in China and India.

Because HFC-23 traps nearly 12,000 times more heat than a molecule of carbon dioxide, and because it is cheap to destroy, HFC offsets account for more than half of the 420 million CERs issued to date by the U.N.’s climate change secretariat.

Industry participating in the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme, which forces firms to turn in carbon permits against every ton of carbon dioxide they emit, also surrendered over 100 million HFC credits in the past two years.

Slashing the flow of HFC offsets would starve an already scarce CER supply, expected to total under 1 billion by 2013.

If the U.S. launches an emissions scheme that accepts CERs, global demand could exceed 10 billion tons by 2020, an amount unlikely to be met even with the current flow of HFC CERs.

ENVIRONMENTAL DAMANGE

CDM Watch made the submission after the second HFC project registered, a South Korean plant owned by Britain’s Ineos Group, requested another 7-year crediting period which would see it get 2.2 million CERs annually to 2016.

CERs currently trade around 13.00 euros ($15.65) each.

Ineos Group was not immediately available for comment.

Projects are only approved under the CDM if they can prove they are “additional,” that they would not have gone ahead without the prospect of the revenues from selling CERs. Critics say CDM projects that are not truly additional contribute to global warming by allowing buyers of their CERs to pollute more.

“The exact amount of the environmental damage cannot be determined but the data suggests that millions of credits have been issued which do not present real emission reductions,” said Chaim Nissim, head of environmental group Noe21.

CDM Watch cited two plants that cut HFC-23 generation when they were ineligible for crediting, and increased production once they could again claim CERs for its destruction. One even stopped HFC production when it was not allowed to request CERs, just to resume when it became eligible again, it added.

CDM Watch also revealed that many plants produced exactly the amount of HFC-23 they are allowed to claim credits for, even though chemical production was lower or varied annually.

(Editing by Louise Heavens)

DTCC Names Andrew Douglas Head of Public Affairs, Europe

LONDON–(Business Wire)–
The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC) today announced that Andrew
Douglas, a respected industry veteran, has joined the company to lead its Public
Affairs efforts in Europe.

In this position, Douglas will play a key role in representing DTCC`s public
policy positions to officials of the European Union and its Member States. He
will also represent DTCC in dealings with other European organisations, such as
regulators, central banks and industry associations.

Douglas will be responsible for communicating DTCC`s European policy agenda and
for building upon existing relationships with key individuals and groups in the
public policy-making process. In addition, Douglas will represent DTCC at
relevant forums, advise senior management on pending legislation and policy
issues and provide input to DTCC line business managers about European issues
relevant to their products.

He will be based in London and will report locally to Diana Chan, CEO of
EuroCCP, in her capacity as head of the DTCC London Operating Committee. He will
report functionally to Larry Thompson, DTCC General Counsel, in New York.

Douglas is joining DTCC from the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial
Telecommunication (SWIFT), where he most recently served as head of that
Belgium-based cooperative`s Securities Research and Development Team.

During his tenure at SWIFT, Douglas was instrumental in developing the
“Giovannini protocol,” which harmonized communication standards among equity
post-trade infrastructures in Europe. He was also responsible for the research
and development of new business solutions for diverse sectors of the finance
services industry, including insurance, Islamic banking and carbon trading.

“Andrew brings more than 20 years of experience in the global securities
industry and has established close working relationships with European
governmental, regulatory and institutional communities,” said Donald F. Donahue,
DTCC chairman and CEO. “With Europe becoming more and more of a focus of DTCC`s
business activities, we are delighted to have Andrew`s vast wealth of experience
as we look to work and collaborate with the broad constituencies in the European
market.”

Prior to joining SWIFT in 1999, Douglas spent two years as head of the middle
office and client service teams for fixed income and money market products at
Deutsche Bank`s investment bank, where he led initiatives aimed at eliminating
the traditional investment banking vertical product focus. He began his
financial services career in 1988 at Citibank, where he worked in the clearing
and custody business and created and ran a team that sold Citibank`s South
American sub-custody services to European banks. He was also in charge of the
client service that supported Citibank`s European global custody and clearing
businesses and its UK domestic custody operation.

Douglas is a highly regarded industry commentator on key European integration
issues such as interoperability. He contributed to the work of the European
Commission`s Clearing and Settlement Advisory and Monitoring Expert (CESAME)
group and is a member of that group`s successor organization, CESAME2.

Global Custodian magazine recently inducted Douglas into its Securities Services
Hall of Fame in honour of his outstanding contributions to the securities
services industry. He was also nominated for an award for Best Personal
Contribution for Operational Excellence by ISITC Europe in 2006.

Douglas has an MBA from Manchester Business School and a Bachelor of Science
degree in Materials Science and Engineering from the University of Surrey.

About DTCC

The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC), through its subsidiaries,
provides clearance, settlement and information services for equities, corporate
and municipal bonds, government and mortgage-backed securities, money market
instruments and over-the-counter derivatives. In addition, DTCC is a leading
processor of mutual funds and insurance transactions, linking funds and carriers
with financial firms and third parties that market these products. DTCC`s
depository provides custody and asset servicing for more than 3.6 million
securities issues from the United States and 121 other countries and
territories, valued at US$33.9 trillion. In 2009, DTCC settled more than US$1.48
quadrillion in securities transactions. DTCC has operating facilities and data
centres in multiple locations in the United States and overseas.

The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation
Judy Inosanto, +1 212.855.5424
jinosanto@dtcc.com
or
Citigate
Lucie Holloway, +44 (0)20 7638 9571
lucie.holloway@citigatedr.co.uk

Copyright Business Wire 2010

NZ says to delay full CO2 trading if no int’l progress

* NZ says could soften CO2 scheme if schemes elsewhere stall

* Government cautious about “getting too far ahead of pack”

* But July 1 start for energy, transport sectors unchanged

(Adds quotes, background)

By Adrian Bathgate

WELLINGTON, April 8 (Reuters) – New Zealand is likely to delay full implementation of its carbon trading scheme if there is no progress towards agreement on similar schemes in other developed countries, the government said on Thursday.

However, it said there would be no immediate changes nor any delay to the scheme, which steps up a gear on July 1 with the entry of the transport sector, along with power stations and steel and cement makers. Forestry began in 2008.

Business groups have been putting pressure on the government to delay or soften the impact of the scheme, even though the current government won parliamentary support for a weaker version late last year.

Greens and some analysts say the scheme, the only national scheme outside Europe, is already too soft and won’t drive deep emissions reductions. Emissions trading during the initial years was also likely to be small and relatively illiquid. (For an analysis on the scheme, click on [ID:nSGE62O0IX])

Climate Change Minister Nick Smith said support measures, such as a fixed carbon price, that are due to expire in 2013, might be extended to protect the competitiveness of New Zealand businesses bound by the scheme.

“New Zealand is cautious about getting too far ahead of the global pack,” Smith told Reuters.

“We have programmed these sectors bearing the full price of their carbon emissions from January 1, 2013, but would reconsider that if no progress is made globally, and particularly amongst our key trading partners like Australia and the U.S.,” he said.

A number of business groups this week lobbied the government for a reprieve of the transport, energy and industrial sectors which account for about half of the country’s emissions.

Agriculture, which makes up the other half of New Zealand’s emissions, will be included in the scheme in 2015.

(For more on climate change in New Zealand and Australia, click on [ID:nCARBONAU]. For a factbox on the scheme, click on [ID:nSGE62O0J0])

FAIR SHARE

However, Smith said the scheme would not be altered for the time being, and the July 1 start date would remain.

Under the scheme, emitters have the option of paying a fixed price of NZ$25 ($17.73) a tonne of carbon, and will only have to surrender one pollution permit for every two tonnes of emissions. These support measures are due to be phased out in 2013.

Under current rules, the scheme will face a mandatory review in 2011. Smith said a key criteria would be how much international progress was being made towards putting a price on emissions in major trading partners.

“We cannot have a small trading country like New Zealand imposing costs on its own industry if similar countries are not also bearing their share of the responsibility,” Smith said.

The Greenhouse Policy Coalition, comprising some of the country’s top emitters, welcomed the prospect of support measures being extended.

“Our view is that New Zealand companies are going to be facing a price of carbon and their competitors won’t. It’s as simple as that,” executive director David Venables told Reuters.

Critics point to the large numbers of free emissions permits to be given out to some of the biggest polluting firms and that there is no cap on the number of those free permits.

The government also hasn’t finalised the nation’s emissions reduction target for 2020 and won’t do so until there is agreement on a tougher global climate pact.

“If Australia doesn’t come in, if other nations don’t come in, almost certainly you want to keep the scheme going at a low level pending decisions as to whether you think international decisions are on the horizon,” said Stuart Frazer from carbon consultants Frazer Lindstrom.

But Simon Terry of lobby group the Sustainability Council told Reuters that big emitters were already being subsidised and the majority of the cost was being passed on to taxpayers.

“Extending the transition provisions means the taxpayer continues to pick up what the polluters would otherwise be responsible for.” ($1 = NZ$1.41) (Editing by David Fogarty)

Australia’s carbon trading plan falters

Sydney – The Australian government’s plans for a carbon-emissions trading scheme were thrown into disarray Tuesday after the opposition pledged to block enabling legislation passing through parliament.

“The question is: Will the scheme work? What’s it going to do for jobs?” opposition Liberal Party leader Malcolm Turnbull said when announcing it would not back the scheme when the bill is voted on in June.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd had hoped to have the legislation through before the United Nations climate summit in Copenhagen in December.

Labor’s trading scheme was to start in July 2011 and is projected to achieve a reduction on emissions on 2000 levels of 5-15 per cent by 2020.

Labor doesn’t have a majority in the upper house of parliament, the Senate, to pass the legislation it has proposed.

It needed the support of either the Liberals or independents. It will now get neither, as the Greens and other minor parties have also opted to block the bill.

The Greens Christine Milne, who opposes the scheme because its targets are perceived to be too low, said blocking the legislation might give the government a pretext for an early election – one she would welcome.

“Let’s bring it on,” Milne said. “I’m very happy to get out and campaign on climate change.” (dpa)

Australia proposes carbon-trading plan

Sydney – The Australian government laid out plans Tuesday for a carbon-emissions trading scheme that industry critics said would cost jobs and environmentalists said would not save the planet.

The cap-and-trade scheme, to begin in July next year, includes the energy and transport sectors but excludes agriculture. The targets a 5 to 15-per-cent reduction in emissions on 2000 levels by 2020.

Australia is among the world’s biggest polluters on a per capita basis, with emissions per head at least five times that of China. It is the world’s largest exporter of coal, on which it relies for over 80 per cent of its domestic power generation.

The Labor government of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd doesn’t have the majority in the upper house of parliament, the Senate, to pass the legislation it has proposed. It needs the support of either the opposition Liberal Party or independents.

“The question that will confront some senators is ‘do you throw away something because you’d rather have everything,’” Climate Change Minister Penny Wong said.

Inevitably, Wong will have to accept amendments to the bill that might see major revisions to the scheme.

Greens’ Senator Christine Milne branded the target for reductions as much too low, and her party is pushing for 25 per cent.

“We know that the wrong number is five and that it has to be changed,” Milne said.

The government said lifting the target above 5 per cent would be possible if other countries also set targets in that range.

Wong ruled out bowing to demands from industry groups to postpone the implementation until Australia was out of recession.

“We do understand that there are global forces buffeting our economy, but what we also know is that we have to plan for the medium- and long-term as well,” Wong said. (dpa)