EU Carbon Trading 'death spiral' continues

It had to happen. So good news but not the news that Europolitics wanted but if you back a pup you loose.

ENRON ENRON all I can Say. Lock them up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron_scandal

Interesting would be to find out who has a short position in these EU-carbon credits.
I dare to bet that there will be very GREEN names on that list.

Making money out of thin air used to be the profession of central banks and counterfeiters. Now anyone can do it, simply by agreeing to not build a power plant or open a new factory and getting paid for the carbon pollution this saves.
It doesn’t take long to draw up thousands of plans for new power plants and factories and then agreeing not to build them in return for money. Here in Beautiful BC big business has been making hundreds of millions through the Pacific Carbon Trust taking taxpayer money out of the school system in return for not building new manufacturing facilities.
In return the schools are allowed to emit the carbon that business avoid by not expanding locally. Instead, the businesses move to China and burn coal exported from BC. So, instead of using power generated in BC from Hydro Dams, businesses are instead using BC coal in China, all paid for by the BC taxpayers.
The power of bureaucracy in action. Able at a single bound to take a good situation and turn it into a disaster, while making someone rich in the process.

I wonder what this bailout is going to cost us.

I hate to be a party pooper but I’d be just a bit wary of this. I’m betting that the climateers, all along, wanted an approach to global warming (or climate change, or dirty weather, or whatever name the marketing types have discovered to keep it fashionable) that would involve command and control. This gives them the excuse to say, “see, the free market doesn’t work”, we need government edicts instead. Carbon taxes anyone? It ain’t over yet.

How many carbon markets are there?
Are they all in trouble, assuming the EU’s as being the most robust?

@Fred berple: Making money out of thin air used to be the profession of central banks and counterfeiters. Now anyone can do it, simply by agreeing to not build a power plant or open a new factory and getting paid for the carbon pollution this saves.
Well said. I remember well a scene from a 1967 sit com called “The Second Hundred Years.”. The premise of the show was “Rip Van Winkle”, a 1890’s prospector, “Luke”, is found frozen, thawed out, and tries to make sense of modern America while living with his much older son and grandson.
Luke tries his hand a farming. Luke is approached by a US Dept of Ag. Rep and is told that he can receive price supports for taking land out of production. Luke expresses his surprise at the dinner table.
Luke: “Well that got me to thinking. Suppose I take that money and buy another farm, less fertile but more acreage. I agree not to farm that. And do it again. Pretty soon I’ll be the richest farmer in the country with land that grows nothing but money!”
Grandson: “Welcome to the 20th Century, Grandpa.”

What I want to know is why an individual cannot buy say 50 tonnes of carbon and then pay no green taxes on their electrity supply for many years on the basis that they are carbon neutral and can offset the carbon bonds against CO2 emissions resultant from the energy used. Indeed, why can’t it be off-set say against air travel thereby avoiding the green taxes that the government levies on air travel, or perhaps patrol and the green taxes levied on that etc..
I pay at least £1,000 per year in green taxes on my electrity supply so it would make good financial sense to stock up on say 10 tonnes of carbon bonds and pay no green tax. . .

current level is irrelevant as long as it seems prospective that the UNPRI and everyone else can eventually get a critical mass of green energy commitments. as long as th emomentum is moving in the direction of getting more nations on board bit by bit, then there will be a market in the long run.
there are two markets: one where the govt encourages or requires major portions of the economy to go green, and one where carbon credits exists.
lobbyists can influence policy makers to have their governments go green. this can be lobbied by typical lobbying tactics: buy the politicians
If the govts around the world continue to push the move toward green energy, those investments work, AND as more nations and dollars go into green investments/infrastructure, the more likely that a carbon market is to mature.
what can halt this is if enough experience indicates that the economic benefit simply is not there – such as has been developing in spain. but this factor will have to be pretty big for people to see it and believe it applies to them, as well.
there is always the argument that spain moved too early, before the technology was at the right efficiency, but hey, here is the new technology (with limits disguised in graphs and charts).
so, 1. the carbon market being low does not necessarily mean an end to th ecap-and-trade idea at all; 2. if you have money for speculation: BUY! (notice: this comment is for entertainment purposes only, and should not be construed as financial advice. neither the host of this program nor the radio station…)