This year airlines will be required to take part in the scheme and pay for emissions rights for the first time. The decision, which applies to all airlines whose planes land and take off in the EU, has been attacked by airlines based outside the EU. A group of US airlines launched a legal challenge to having to pay for emissions rights in the European Court of Justice last year. In December the ECJ backed the EU’s right to include all airlines in the scheme. Authorities in the US and China have threatened to take retaliatory action if the EU goes ahead with forcing airlines to pay.

The ETS will enter its third stage from January 2013 with a further reduction in the total amount of allowances. Seven years since the ETS started operating, there are questions about whether the scheme is being as effective as it should in contributing towards reducing CO2 emissions. The economic downturn in the EU has reduced industrial activity which has, in turn, lowered the price of carbon to under €10 a tonne, a level which experts believe is too low to incentivise the necessary investment in low carbon technologies.

Some industry groups and environmental campaigners are calling for a revision of the ETS so it plays its intended part in combating climate change. In December, MEPs on the European Parliament’s environment committee voted on draft legislation on energy efficiency to take 1.4 billion emissions trading rights out of the system in 2013-2020. This would raise the carbon price by reducing the supply of emissions certificates. Energy-intensive industries, on the other hand, oppose tightening the scheme.

The aim of this event is to examine how the ETS is working and whether it needs a major overhaul. It will discuss the impact of including additional sectors such as airlines and shipping in the scheme on efforts to cut CO2 emissions and assess the possible political consequences. The event will also look at the importance of the ETS in maintaining the EU’s global leadership role in combating climate change.

Provisional Timing

18.00-18.30 Welcome of participants and registration
(registration desk at Esplanade entrance of Altiero Spinelli (ASP) building)

18.30-18.35 Introduction of participants by Simon Taylor, news editor, European Voice

18.35-19.05 Panel discussion*

-          Peter Liese MEP, opinion rapporteur for the environment committee on the energy efficiency directive and rapporteur on the inclusion of aviation into the ETS, European Parliament

-          Jos Delbeke, director-general for climate action, European Commission

-          Baroness Bryony Worthington, founder, Sandbag

-         Robert Jeekel, director, energy & climate change

19.05-19.55 Debate (audience participation strongly encouraged)

19.55-20.00 Conclusions by David Hone, Senior Group Climate Change Advisor, Shell

20.00 Networking reception

*Please note that the speakers are in the process of being invited and we are still awaiting their confirmation

The issue

On 25 October 2011, Michel Barnier, European Commissioner for the internal market announced legislative proposals to improve transparency in the extractive industries. Commissioner Barnier said that he wants European energy and mining companies as well as forestry companies to provide more information about their global activities and their financial relationships with governments in the markets where they do business.

Photo: Jennifer Jacquemart / (c) European Voice

The proposal, which comes in the form of a revision of the existing transparency directive, is part of efforts to improve public knowledge about the activities of multinationals involved in sourcing raw materials. It reflects the conviction that governments find it harder to conceal corruption and abuse of national resources if their financial relations are publicly known. It also fits with the priorities of France’s presidency of the G20 group of the world’s richest and fastest growing countries. Nicolas Sarkozy, France’s president, wants the recent overhaul of financial market regulation agreed by the G20 to be matched by greater transparency in markets for raw materials such as oil and foodstuffs.

European companies involved in oil prospecting and extraction of raw materials argue that voluntary schemes, such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), are more effective than compulsory legislation. The EITI was launched in 2002 by Tony Blair, then UK prime minister, and agreed by governments, extractive industries and civil society representatives. Thirty-five countries are now signed up to EITI and 11 comply with EITI rules.

They are also concerned that disclosure rules that only apply to EU-based companies would give an advantage to their global competitors, damaging EU competitiveness.

This event will debate the importance of greater transparency in the extractive and energy sectors and explore how meaningful policies can deliver anti-corruption objectives.

The panel

-          Claire Bury, director, capital and companies, DG Market, European Commission

-          Reinhard Bütikofer MEP, rapporteur on an Effective Raw Materials Strategy for Europe, European Parliament

-          Vicky Bowman, global practice leader, external affairs, Rio Tinto

-          Simon Taylor, founding director, Global Witness

Conclusions by Andrew Vickers, vice-president, NGO and stakeholder relations at Shell International BV.

Moderation by Simon P. Taylor, news editor, European Voice

European Union leaders have set themselves the goal of achieving a low-carbon economy by 2050. A major element of that goal is the de-carbonisation of Europe’s energy sector.

The European Commission’s energy department will present, later this year, an energy roadmap that will outline details of how to meet the challenges of energy supply and security and a move towards a low-carbon economy.

Policymakers are confronted with recent developments and changes in the global energy markets. The conflict in Libya has reduced supplies from this significant supplier country. The catastrophe at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan has prompted a rethinking of attitudes towards nuclear energy – for example, the German government has decided to phase out the use of nuclear power by 2022.

A clear strategy to help meet energy demand and tackle CO2 emissions is therefore needed. It will have to combine effective policies to support the integration of the energy market with energy efficiency measures in sectors like transport and power generation, in a context of rising global energy demand and where full-scale deployment of low-carbon solutions – like renewable energies or carbon capture and storage (CCS) – are still years away.

To this aim, the European Commission recently presented a proposal for a new energy efficiency directive, which would require EU member states to establish energy saving schemes. It raises important policy choices for the EU which, coupled with the energy roadmap, can help make significant progress towards the goal of moving to a low-carbon economy.

Can the EU succeed in transforming its energy sector? Can it deliver without achieving rapid progress on energy efficiency? Will the new directive provide the right instruments? What policies can the roadmap suggest to cut emissions and improve efficiency in the transport and power generation sectors? Which technologies can best support this transition?

The European Union’s fuel quality directive, which was agreed in 2009, requires oil companies operating in Europe to cut the greenhouse-gas emissions of their products by 6% between 2010 and 2020. The EU was supposed to adopt emission footprint values for all types of fossil fuels by 1 January 2011. But this technical decision has been postponed repeatedly.
The European Commission is considering whether to assign a higher emission footprint value to oil sands because of the energy-intensive techniques used in the extraction process.

Environment groups are opposed to production of oil from oil sands on the grounds that extraction takes place in untouched forest areas and can produce considerable amounts of toxic waste. They also argue that putting oil sands on an equal footing with conventional oil would send out a wrong signal about the EU’s commitment to de-carbonising its economy, and would encourage the exploitation of oil sands in other parts of the world, which are less democratic and regulated, instead of encouraging the world towards the use of cleaner energy sources.

The Canadian government and European energy companies investing in oil sands point out that CO2 emissions from oil-sands production have been reduced by nearly 40% since the 1990s. They argue that the carbon intensity of oil sands, taken along the entire production chain, is within the same range or lower than other crude oils and that technological innovation can deliver further reductions.

As worldwide oil-sands reserves are equivalent to more than twice the current reserves of conventional oil, the stakes are high. EU member states appear undecided. The European Commission is still pondering its final decision, and independent studies diverge on the actual carbon footprint of oil sands.

Is it justified for the EU to adopt specific measures on the oil sands? How should other high carbon crudes be treated? What is the actual carbon footprint of oil sands? How does this compare to other fossil fuels? Can technology help to mitigate it? What about other environmental impacts of oil sands development? How compatible is it with EU climate change policy? Would an EU decision to penalise oil sands affect the world’s use of fossil fuels?

—————————————————————————-

Timing

18.00-18.30 Welcome of participants and registration

18.30-18.35 Introduction of participants by Simon Taylor, news editor, European Voice

18.35-19.05 Panel discussion

- Satu Hassi MEP, co-ordinator for the greens in the environment committee, European Parliament

- Jeanette Patell, second secretary, economic and trade policy, Mission of Canada to the European Union

- Samantha Gross, director, integrated research, IHS CERA

- Nuša Urbančič, policy officer, fuels and electrification, Transport & Environment

- Pierre Noël, senior research associate, Cambridge University

19.05-19.55 Debate (audience participation strongly encouraged)

19.55-20.00 Conclusions by John Abbott, senior vice-president heavy oil, Shell

20.00 Networking reception

—————————————————————————-

Location

Museum of Natural Sciences
Rue Vautier 29
B-1000 Brussels

The European Union’s fuel quality directive, which was agreed in 2009, requires oil companies operating in Europe to cut the greenhouse-gas emissions of their products by 6% between 2010 and 2020. The EU was supposed to adopt emission footprint values for all types of fossil fuels by 1 January 2011. But this technical decision has been postponed repeatedly.
The European Commission is considering whether to assign a higher emission footprint value to oil sands because of the energy-intensive techniques used in the extraction process.

Environment groups are opposed to production of oil from oil sands on the grounds that extraction takes place in untouched forest areas and can produce considerable amounts of toxic waste. They also argue that putting oil sands on an equal footing with conventional oil would send out a wrong signal about the EU’s commitment to de-carbonising its economy, and would encourage the exploitation of oil sands in other parts of the world, which are less democratic and regulated, instead of encouraging the world towards the use of cleaner energy sources.

The Canadian government and European energy companies investing in oil sands point out that CO2 emissions from oil-sands production have been reduced by nearly 40% since the 1990s. They argue that the carbon intensity of oil sands, taken along the entire production chain, is within the same range or lower than other crude oils and that technological innovation can deliver further reductions.

As worldwide oil-sands reserves are equivalent to more than twice the current reserves of conventional oil, the stakes are high. EU member states appear undecided. The European Commission is still pondering its final decision, and independent studies diverge on the actual carbon footprint of oil sands.

Is it justified for the EU to adopt specific measures on the oil sands? How should other high carbon crudes be treated? What is the actual carbon footprint of oil sands? How does this compare to other fossil fuels? Can technology help to mitigate it? What about other environmental impacts of oil sands development? How compatible is it with EU climate change policy? Would an EU decision to penalise oil sands affect the world’s use of fossil fuels?

—————————————————————————-

Timing

18.00-18.30 Welcome of participants and registration

18.30-18.35 Introduction of participants by Simon Taylor, news editor, European Voice

18.35-19.05 Panel discussion

- Satu Hassi MEP, co-ordinator for the greens in the environment committee, European Parliament

- Jeanette Patell, second secretary, economic and trade policy, Mission of Canada to the European Union

- Samantha Gross, director, integrated research, IHS CERA

- Nuša Urbančič, policy officer, fuels and electrification, Transport & Environment

- Pierre Noël, senior research associate, Cambridge University

19.05-19.55 Debate (audience participation strongly encouraged)

19.55-20.00 Conclusions by John Abbott, senior vice-president heavy oil, Shell

20.00 Networking reception

—————————————————————————-

Location

Museum of Natural Sciences
Rue Vautier 29
B-1000 Brussels


Enlarge map