WP: Europe's Problems Color U.S. Plans to Curb Carbon Gases

Cap and Trade may not work as well as hoped for

Oh how I love to write articles about "unintended consequences."

Those same words are used prominently in an article in the Monday, April 9, 2007 edition of The Washington Post.  Page A1.

Linked here: Europe's Problems Color U.S. Plans to Curb Carbon Gases

The article talks about how the U.S. is looking to copy the efforts of Europe's experiences in cutting greenhouse gas emmissions. (Of course they might want to check into the article I just put up: EU finds that Kyoto isn't so easy to live with to see how well those efforts have done.)

Check the original article here for some more information about how well Europe's plans are working, and for more details on some unintended consequences of those efforts. If you are still ready for implementing European style solutions after reading the original article in the Washington Post, then god bless your poor misguided soul.

More in the comments area...

3,448 views 7 replies
Reply #1 Top
A few quotes from the originally linked material:

Europe has already hit a few bumps with its program. There's the Dutch silicon carbide maker that calls itself the greenest such plant in the world, but now can't afford to run full-time; the French cement workers who fear they're going to lose jobs to Morocco, which doesn't have to meet the European guidelines; and the German homeowners who pay 25 percent more for electricity than they did before -- even as their utility companies earn record profits.

In some ways, Europe's program has been a success. It covers 45 percent of the continent's emissions, 10,000 companies and 27 European Union countries. It has built registries that list carbon dioxide emissions for every major plant.

In other ways, the approach has been a bureaucratic morass with a host of unexpected and costly side effects and a much smaller effect on carbon emissions than planned. And many companies complain that it is unfair.

Consider the plight of Kollo Holding's factory in the Netherlands, which makes silicon carbide, a material used as an industrial abrasive and lining for high-temperature furnaces and kilns. Its managers like to think of their plant as an ecological standout: They use waste gases to generate energy and have installed the latest pollution-control equipment.

But Europe's program has driven electricity prices so high that the facility routinely shuts down for part of the day to save money on power. Although demand for its products is strong, the plant has laid off 40 of its 130 employees and trimmed production. Two customers have turned to cheaper imports from China, which is not covered by Europe's costly regulations.

Wow.  Talk about unintended consequences.  Lots of them to learn from here.

Here's some more important notes from the original article:

However, because of lobbying by well-connected companies, the E.U.'s limits on emissions ended up being higher than the actual emissions. As a result, fewer companies than expected had to buy emissions this year, and the price of carbon allowances, which had topped $30 per ton of carbon about a year ago, crashed to about $1 a ton. That eased some of the pressure on electricity rates, but prices for next year, after tighter E.U. limits take effect, are still about $20 a ton.

The E.U. is drawing up new rules for a second phase of its program, due to run from 2008 to 2012, but those, too, have sparked controversy.

Fights have erupted as countries seek to guard their interests. Eastern European nations have lobbied for more generous allocations because of their communist legacies and lower living standards. Germany, the continent's largest wind-energy producer, wants an E.U. mandate that each country get 20 percent of its energy from renewable resources by 2020; Poland, which uses no renewable resources, is resisting.

Germany boasts that it has cut emissions to 18.4 percent below 1990 levels, the benchmark used in the Kyoto Protocol and in Europe. But nearly half the reduction was because of sagging industrial output in the former East Germany after reunification. For the 2008-2012 period, E.U. officials sliced 5 percent off Germany's emissions proposal.

Individual companies have also haggled over whether their historical records were representative emission benchmarks.

"A paper mill in Italy would get different credits from a paper mill in Germany, even if they are completely the same," said Marco Mensink, energy and environment director of the Confederation of European Paper Industries.

Perversely, Europe's cap-and-trade system has done little to reduce output at such places as the Janschwalde coal plant, Europe's third-biggest carbon dioxide emitter. Each year, it spews more than 25 million tons of carbon dioxide. The dirty gray plant still has turbines and generators that date from Soviet times. It has nine cooling towers, and just half of its output can power all of Berlin.

But the cap-and-trade system does provide an extra reward for efficiency. And the owner of the plant, the Swedish energy firm Vattenfall, installed new blades in the old Russian turbine, boosting the plant's efficiency to 36 percent, from 33 percent. Vattenfall has also retrofitted a 1,600-megawatt plant nearby at Schwarze Pumpe, which has a much higher efficiency rate.

Well, at least that last clipped paragraph notes some benefit from the cap and trade system.  A whopping 10% increase in efficiency, from 33 percent to 36 percent.  That's impressive.  { Borat mode } NOT! { / Borat mode }

The Post article is filled with irony and more tales of unintended consequences.  Please read the original materials and learn from it as best you can.  It really is fascinating stuff.

Reply #2 Top

It's a pity that Europe's leaders don't seem to have read Atlas Shrugged. Because what they are running into there sounds amazingly like the events in that book.

If you over-regulate industry, the market will move elsewhere.

Reply #3 Top

It's a pity that Europe's leaders don't seem to have read Atlas Shrugged. Because what they are running into there sounds amazingly like the events in that book.
If you over-regulate industry, the market will move elsewhere.

Quite true.  Worse for the Euros and the rest of the world (... that is concerned with Global Warming) is that the market is moving to places where there is no interference and little or no regulation.   Places like China, Mexico, and other countries that aren't as quick to be concerned about protecting the environment of their own country or the rest of the world.

These countries will be happy to trash their own environment in pursuit of the tax revenues, outright bribes for their political leaders, and other money that flows into their own economy in the name of jobs for their citizens.

Eventually Ross Perot may be right about the giant sucking sound and jobs flowing "South of the border."  Eventually.  Like after some well meaning liberals in Congress and/or in the White House commit the U.S.A. to Kyoto or a Kyoto like pact that winds up killing off business here in the U.S.A. or raising costs to the point that we have no choice but to buy goods and services from whatever countries are supplying Wal*Mart at that point in time.

Reply #4 Top
Have you checked any European sources, or do you just trust the WaPo to give you all the info? After all, the WaPo said that Saddam had 9/11 links and WMD, too. Not exactly what one should call a first source.
Reply #5 Top

But, for now, demanding that China act on greenhouse gases is a non-starter, and waiting for Beijing could be an excuse for inaction, proponents of U.S. legislation say.

This part scares me the most.  While we hear them bloviating on outsourcing, they seem to think that it is a plot by evil greedy men, when in fact they are going to force it by thinking locally and acting same.  Until the rest of the world, and yes that means hardships for all countries, not just the first world, get on the band wagon, all this brouhaha is going to do is transfer wealth from developed nations to underdeveloped ones - with no benefit to the planet as a whole.  ANd with that transfer go the jobs.  Outsourcing.

So the clowns will pass more laws to penalize companies which will only accellerate the movement, and the polution.  Not reduce it at all.

And this obsession with CO2 is insane.  Quite frankly, anyone that has been to europe know that it is far dirtier than the US.  Maybe their Co2 is lower, but their particulate polution is a lot higher.  Are we to believe breathing solid matter is better than breathing gases?  It really is stupid and insane.  And pretty much what I would expect from those who think GW is a religion, and not a science.

Reply #6 Top
This part scares me the most. While we hear them bloviating on outsourcing, they seem to think that it is a plot by evil greedy men, when in fact they are going to force it by thinking locally and acting same. Until the rest of the world, and yes that means hardships for all countries, not just the first world, get on the band wagon, all this brouhaha is going to do is transfer wealth from developed nations to underdeveloped ones - with no benefit to the planet as a whole. ANd with that transfer go the jobs. Outsourcing.
So the clowns will pass more laws to penalize companies which will only accellerate the movement, and the polution. Not reduce it at all.
And this obsession with CO2 is insane. Quite frankly, anyone that has been to europe know that it is far dirtier than the US. Maybe their Co2 is lower, but their particulate polution is a lot higher. Are we to believe breathing solid matter is better than breathing gases? It really is stupid and insane. And pretty much what I would expect from those who think GW is a religion, and not a science.


What scares me is the fact that not one of the "green weenies" know 1 simple fact. "All" of the man made CO2 equals exactly 3% of the worlds total CO2 emmissions! So even if they can get us to cut the CO2 in half....it's only 1.5%. Or even if we could cut it out "entirely"....it's STILL only 3%. What about the other 97%?
Reply #7 Top

Have you checked any European sources, or do you just trust the WaPo to give you all the info? After all, the WaPo said that Saddam had 9/11 links and WMD, too. Not exactly what one should call a first source.

Sorry it wasn't Pravda for you Myrr, but in this case you might keep in mind and consider that the Washington Post is actually in favor of Kyoto, or at least is leading some of the charge claiming that Global Warming is a real problem in search of a real solution.

You might be trying to say with friends like these....   but either way the Post is right to caution that rushing to a solution, especially a solution that is modelled after the European solutions, might not result in what we hope for and expect.  In fact it might have a completely opposite and completely adverse effect.