Carbon Traders Whine Permits are Too Cheap to Make a Profit

carbontax

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t JoNova – carbon traders are complaining that over-issuing of carbon permits, a lack of political will to make carbon trading work, has destroyed investor confidence in the industry.

Tough to Keep the World From Warming When Carbon Is This Cheap

Carbon markets, the free-enterprise solution to saving the world from global warming, are now in danger themselves.

The idea was simple enough: Set a cap on carbon emissions, issue enough permits to allow power plants, refineries and the like to stay within those limits and then shrink the cap over time to achieve reductions. The companies whose emissions fall fastest can sell their permits for a profit to slower responders — call it a reward for good behaviour.

The reality, though, is more complex. Undercut by a lack of political will on the size of caps and overtaken by costly new environmental mandates, carbon markets in the U.S., Europe and Asia are collapsing, with prices so low they’ve become virtually valueless. The credits auctioned in the U.S. Northeast in June, for instance, sold for just $4.53 a short ton, a 40 percent drop from December.

“Climate policy has been muddled and messy,” said Michael Grubb, a professor at University College London’s Institute for Sustainable Resources who has advised the U.K. energy regulator. “Governments have set inadequate targets due to lobbying pressures and because they didn’t think carefully enough about overlapping efforts. That has destroyed investor confidence that carbon prices will rise.

The problem is that the permits are selling at a slower and slower rate. The surplus of allowances is becoming so large in systems run by Europe, California and Quebec — which together account for more than 90 percent of global trading — that by 2022 it could cover the emissions spewing from every car on Earth for a full year, according to estimates by the London environmental group Sandbag Climate Campaign CIC and Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

In California’s market, all 23 million allowances sold in an auction in 2014. In May, 7.3 million permits found buyers, only 11 percent of what was put up for sale.

Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-07/tough-to-keep-the-world-from-warming-when-carbon-is-this-cheap

What went wrong?

Carbon trading is the only “market” I know of, in which all the players who matter benefit from fraud.

Issuers of carbon credits benefit when they sell fraudulent permits – they are making money for nothing.

Buyers of carbon credits benefit when they buy from a market flooded with fraudulent carbon permits – fraud keeps prices down.

Regulators benefit personally from fraud, when they receive bribes to turn a blind eye to dodgy dealing.

Politicians benefit from fraud, and from overissuing of permits, because it makes them look like they are doing something about CO2, without actually doing anything which might damage their re-election chances, or have a significant detrimental impact on jobs or the economy.

The only people who appear to be suffering are merchant bankers, who can’t find anyone willing to buy and hold carbon credits as an investment, because everyone believes prices are going to continue spiralling down into total collapse. And of course, anyone who was silly enough to believe carbon markets might have an impact on CO2 emissions.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
128 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
gregjxn
July 10, 2016 2:31 pm

I’ll bet trading carbon credits works just great in theory. There is probably a gigantic econometric model that proves it.

Steve
July 10, 2016 4:12 pm

I have a proposition, I won’t drive around in limos, own we deal mansions or fly to all these Green conferences for $100,000, then AlFord and Leonarndo can use my share of CO2.

July 10, 2016 5:00 pm

The EPA misled much of the world about CO2. Apparently they were not aware of thermalization (transfer of energy from ghg to non-ghg gases) which explains why CO2 and all other non-condensing ghg have no significant effect on climate. Growing awareness of this is contributing to collapse of carbon credits.

M Seward
July 10, 2016 5:07 pm

What do you expect from sub prime economics based on sub-sub prime science? Duh!

Amber
July 10, 2016 11:47 pm

British Columbia’s (BC) carbon tax was imposed and is maintained by a Liberal government. Despite claims by academics that pushed for it BC is increasingly uncompetitive and the tax has zero impact on the earth’s temperature . It is buried in the price of gasoline and in deregulated energy markets it simply gets lost in price volatility noise .Let’s call it what it is .. a politically correct tax grab . Any Province or State that
imposes it deserves to be thrown out of office . If imposed you can count on routine BS studies by
professors from places like SFU to chirp how great it is .
Climate changes and global warming is a very good thing for plants ,trees and animals on earth..
Killing our own economies so fossil fuels can be used less efficiently and with poor emission controls in those “have not countries “is the real carbon tax legacy .

Reply to  Amber
July 11, 2016 4:17 pm

1) Create a carbon tax, and its image a carbon credit.
2) define carbon (dioxide) as a pollutant.
3) Logically it is a pollution tax (or fee) and a pollution credit; Rich entities can buy the luxury of polluting the environment
4) Ask the Carbon trading advocates if they would be willing to be honest and call it a Pollution Tax & Pollution Credit, and therefore define their trading scheme as a pollution trading market.

Bitter&Twisted
July 12, 2016 12:18 pm

I hope they all go bankrupt- every single cheating, thieving carbon “trader”.
And those that made this fraudulent scam possible- the Climate “scientists” and the grasping politicians should all be in prison.

Chris
July 13, 2016 8:42 pm

Be interesting to see if anybody makes a buck short selling carbon credits.