I wonder how long before flatlining occurs, like last year with the Chicago Climate
Exchange (CCX):
Even the Guardian is covering this “failure” of carbon markets. They write:
The international market in carbon credits has suffered an almost total collapse, with only $1.5bn (£916m) of credits traded last year…
Now that the Kyoto protocol is essentially dead, the economic markets will surely pull life support for carbon trading with no political support in place for emissions reduction. With this report and news coverage, you can hear the traders already running for the exits.
Then there’s this from Reuters – The Europe Union’s carbon market could be flooded with excess pollution permits over the next decade, cutting prices in half and depriving governments of billions in budgeted revenues, EU sources say
Growth in Global Carbon Market Pauses Amid Uncertainty
Press Release No:2011/514/SDN
World Bank Releases 2011 “State and Trends of the Carbon Market” Report
Barcelona, June 1, 2011 – The World Bank’s annual review of the global carbon market shows that 2010 was a watershed year as the market ended five years of robust growth with a slight decline compared to 2009. The State and Trends of the Carbon Market 2011, released today at Carbon Expo in Barcelona, shows that the total value of the global carbon market was estimated to be US$142 billion last year.
The report’s authors noted that several reasons help to explain the decline, including the continuing lack of clarity about the market after 2012 and the loss of political momentum on setting up new cap-and-trade schemes in several developed economies. Some buyers from industrialized countries, which in previous years had reached or surpassed targets, consequently made fewer purchases in 2010. As well, lingering effects of the recession in several industrialized countries led to lower greenhouse gas emissions, easing emissions reduction compliance obligations.
Furthermore, the primary Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) market, which accounts for the bulk of project-based transactions, fell by double digits for a variety of reasons, including lower demand for credits and competition from more predictable assets (Assigned Amount Units and secondary CERs). The CDM market is now at its lowest level since the Kyoto Protocol entered into force in 2005, having dropped by 46% to an estimated US$1.5 billion in new project-based transactions. Similarly, other carbon markets also declined or stayed at their plateau. Nevertheless, cumulatively, primary offset transactions have reached almost US$30 billion since 2005 and are expected to have catalyzed much larger resources, mostly from the private sector.
“The global carbon market is at a crossroads. If we take the wrong turn we risk losing billions of lower cost private investment and new technology solutions in developing countries,” said Andrew Steer, World Bank Special Envoy for Climate Change. “This report sends a message of the need to ensure a stronger, more robust carbon market with clear signals.”
State and Trends of the Carbon Market 2011 shows that, relative to each other, EU Allowances (traded under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, ETS) remain the largest segment by far, with 84% of the total value of the carbon market. Taking secondary CDM transactions into account, the value of the market driven by the ETS reached 97% of the global market value.
The authors of the report predict that, in the next two years, the difference between gross demand for and the cumulative supply of carbon credits generated under the Kyoto flexibility mechanisms will be slightly less than US$140 million. Virtually all demand will be from European governments. Beyond 2012, although the potential demand for emission reductions could reach 3 billion tons or more, the only substantial and unconditional demand to date comes from Europe, estimated at 1.7 billion tons. The supply available between 2013 and 2020, through existing projects, is seen as sufficient to fill that demand, leaving little incentive for project developers to invest further and create a future supply of emission reductions.
The fall in market value was contrasted with what was generally seen as the successful outcomes of negotiations at the UN climate change conference in Cancun in December which resulted in relatively more positive market sentiment.
Although some opportunities for strengthening regulatory frameworks were missed in industrialized countries, national and local low-carbon initiatives gathered strength and offered hope.
“Carbon market growth halted at a particularly inopportune time: 2010 proved to be the hottest year on record, while global emission levels continued to rise relentlessly,” said Alexandre Kossoy, World Bank Senior Financial Specialist. “At the same time, other national and local low-carbon initiatives have picked up noticeably in both developed and developing economies. Collectively, they offer the possibility overcome regulatory uncertainty and signal that, one way or another, solutions that address the climate challenge will emerge.”
In the face of lagging demand, the World Bank has undertaken a number of initiatives to give confidence to a post-2012 carbon market. The Partnership for Market Readiness, launched in Cancun in December 2010, aims to support the trend of national mitigation efforts using market approaches. A number of the World Bank’s carbon funds and facilities, such as the Carbon Partnership Facility, the second tranche of the Umbrella Carbon Facility, and a new facility for low-income countries currently under development, also respond to future needs by supporting scaled up mitigation and purchasing carbon credits beyond 2012. Furthermore, the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility is supporting REDD+ initiatives which, to date, have not been included under the CDM. The Bank sees carbon markets as an important and versatile tool to provide incentives for a shift to lower carbon development paths.
State and Trends of the Carbon Market 2011 was released at CARBON EXPO 2011, the largest carbon fair in the world with more than 3,000 representatives from governments, private sector and civil society organizations involved in greenhouse gas emission reduction transactions around the world.
For more information on the World Bank’s carbon finance activities and the electronic version of this report, please visit the website: www.carbonfinance.org
best news ever next thing put them all in the lockup
Good one, MrX.
Yes, Anthony. But there is another shoe to drop.
The World Bank still wants to put trillion$ into the climate market.
See where they want to get it from…
http://cbullitt.wordpress.com/2011/06/01/right-hand-youd-better-keep-an-eye-on-left-hand/
Steven Goddard has this rather amazing story posted from the Guardian.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/un-current-limits-to-mindless-global-warming-hysteria-not-enough/
I’m guessing this is no coincidence. From the Guardian:
“But Figueres said reaching 2C of warming would have a devastating impact, such as sea-level rises that could overwhelm low-lying islands and some coastal nations, and levels of warming in sub-Saharan Africa that could severely damage agriculture.”
Run bambi run! No, swim. Now who on earth could support and welcome this kind of bald-faced lying and hysteria?
“Figueres was speaking at Carbon Expo, the annual conference of the International Emissions Trading Association.”
Buy our products or the planet will die!!!
I have got to stock up on popcorn.
What with this turn of events and tfosu AND unc-ch on the verge of an NCAA death penalty it promises to be an entertaining year.
Perhaps this will be a wakeup call to capitalists everywhere. Through the ETS and CCX, the greens have co-opted or silenced big-money with the lure of profits from thin-air. This proposal shows just how ephemeral that idea really is.
Mr. lind did not even discuss the US Geological Survey report prepared for Democrat Bryan Dorgan in the Congress on the latest estimates on the Williston basin oil shales.
In the mid 1990 USGS said we might be able to obtain a minior few hundred million barrels from the oil shales running from Minnesota through North and South Dakota into Montana, Wyoming and Utah. Now the USGS says with the now current horizontal drilling and fracking, the recoverable oil amounts to 8 times all the Oil ever existing in Saudi Arabia! Enough to supply America at its present usage rate for 2041 years.
This doesn’t include any oil from anywhere else like the Eagle-Ford discovery in Texas which looks very big, but nowhere near that gargatuan. Or all the the off-shore oil in the Atlantic, Pacific, Arctic or Alaska put off limits by the green wackos/and true-believer crackpots of the Obama Administration.
The poor Salon, neo-Druid, Green-wackos have to adjust to the reality that their desire for an Apocalypse is fading like all their other Doomsday ideas. Do you remember, DDT? Freons? Alar? Acid Rain? Y2k? Global Cooling? Global Warming? Or any of their other similar Doomsday ideas?
The Salon article is beautiful.
The commenters remind me of the shreiks of the Wicked Witch of the West after Dorothy doused her with water……look what we’ve done to their beautiful wickedness.
The madness continues in Australia, Clarke and Dawe despite working for the ministry of truth capture the dilemma the Liberal opposition have in “dealing with the crap”.
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2011/s3234241.htm
Whoever invented this scheme should be humiliated on primetime TV. Why do we let them get away with it, as anonymous beurocrats? They had two choices here:
a. Set up a taxation system, where you were taxed for how much fossil fuel you used (a straight oil tax).
b. Set up a super complex trading system trading illusionary credits that are made up from thin air by officials all over the world who are open to more pressures of corruption than FIFA (the corrupt football association).
So they went for choice b.?? Why?
Why, when every sane person could see it would fail, did they chose b.?
.
Can anyone point me to a project (successful), using carbon trading funds, to reduce CO2?
After all, this was supposed to be the purpose of the trade.
Thank you
I hope it fails, Gore has made his pile but governments want the revenue so they can live in the manner that they wish. Meanwhile we, the taxpayers, get poorer.
Perhaps a time of Anarchy, I mean time without government, is due. Belgium seems to function without one OK.
Ralph asks, why plan B. Because most polititians are incapable of running a free evening in a brewery, or anything else for that matter!
I guess we shall see a slowing of new tree farms in Scotland, new windmills in Northumbria, and new money in Kenya.
I see the warmista are switching jobs big time as the grants start to fade.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/half-last-months-jobs-came-single-employer-mcdonalds_573220.html
9EA.BE ERA CARBON OFFSETS 0.19 Stock BER
9EA.SG ERA CARBON OFFSETS 0.13 Stock STU
9EA.DE ERA Carbon Offsets Ltd 0.19 Stock GER
9EA.F ERA CARBON OFFSETS 0.13 Stock FRA
ESR.V ERA Carbon Offsets Ltd. 0.19 Stock Pollution & Treatment Controls VAN
http://finance.yahoo.com/lookup/all?s=carbon&t=A&m=ALL&r=3&b=20
^DJECXEUA Dow Jones CCX European Carbon I 16.94 Index DJI
^DLC1GR Low Carbon 100 Europe Gross Tot 91.52 Index DJI
^DLC1GRD Low Carbon 100 Europe Gross Tot 101.10 Index DJI
^DLC100 Low Carbon 100 Europe Index 77.20 Index DJI
^DLC100D Low Carbon 100 Europe Index (US 85.28 Index DJI
^DLC1NR Low Carbon 100 Europe Net Total 89.03 Index DJI
^DLC1NRD Low Carbon 100 Europe Net Total 98.34 Index DJI
^NOCO2BUS NASDAQ OMX Carbon Benchmark Ind 284.54 Index NAS
^NOCO2BEU NASDAQ OMX Carbon Benchmark Ind 299.72 Index NAS
^NOCO NASDAQ OMX Carbon Excess Return 286.24 Index NAS
^NOCO2EU NASDAQ OMX Carbon Excess Return 301.51 Index NAS
^LCTY S&P U.S. Carbon Efficient Index 131.16 Index SNP
^LCNY S&P U.S. Carbon Efficient Index 114.36 Index SNP
^LCUY S&P U.S. Carbon Efficient Index 125.88 Index SNP
^GCEY SGI Global Carbon (EUR) Index,R 75.17 Index SNP
^CBIY SGI Global Carbon Index,RTH 76.23 Index SNP
^CEIY SGI Orbeo Carbon Credit Index T 975.53 Index SNP
^OCCY SGI Orbeo Carbon Credit Index T 118.61 Index SNP
^OBCY SGI-Orbeo Carbon Credit (EUR &a 81.06 Index SNP
UECOP.Z UBS CARBON OPTI PR 108.26 Index ZRH
http://finance.yahoo.com/lookup/indices?s=carbon&t=I&m=ALL&r=3
Looking very grim . . . if you can event get a chart up . . . .
That is an even please . . . not event . . .
Markets and any tokens of “value” depend on the confidence of the users and participants in their stability and durability. Once that starts to crumble, it can turn into a run, a rout, a collapse. The thinner the market and the fewer the participants, the faster this occurs.
Don’t blink, or you may miss the final act entirely.
Ralph, you’ve answered your own question: Any tax is going to be opposed by big money, but let them think they’re going to get a piece of the action and they will tie their own noose. Just look at the membership lists of these things. They are who’s whos of global energy and finance.
Here comes the dastardly AB32 in California:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/energy/detail?entry_id=90243
Stagflation is here for the long haul.
Institute of Public Affairs had a piece on the matter of carbon investment and superannuation.
‘…former union official and now superannuation supremo Garry Weaven in yesterday’s Sydney Morning Herald saying people shouldn’t donate to the IPA because…we’re a bit sceptical about climate change…ouch!’
http://www.smh.com.au/business/invest-to-cut-carbon-emissions-20110531-1femu.html
source: http://hey.ipa.org.au/2011/06/california-dreamin/
website: http://www.ipa.org.au/
SteveSadlov says: June 3, 2011 at 10:26 am
Why Kenya?
DirkH – thanks for the mugshots.
Hmmm…. I could take quite an interest in EU Maritime matters – their representative looks quite dishy….
Markets are very accurate predictors of the future. They are generally better than computer models. I once read a study that showed that orange juice futures markets were better predictors of specific freeze events in Florida, even as close as hours before the occurrence of the event.