Under pressure

E.U. considers pollution charges on imports from U.S. and other climate scofflaws 4

U.S. failure to enact limits on global warming emissions could cost American companies that export to the European Union.

E.U. President Jose Manuel Barroso on Sunday said the European Commission is considering a charge on importers from nations without carbon limits. Companies from those countries may be required to buy carbon emissions allowances on exports into the E.U. This is intended to level the playing field with European companies who are already part of the European Emissions Trading System instituted to meet E.U. obligations under the Kyoto climate treaty.

Barroso said the Commission could "require importers to obtain allowances (emissions permits) alongside European competitors ... There would be no point in pushing EU companies to cut emissions if the only result is that production and indeed pollution shifts to countries with no carbon disciplines at all."

At the recent U.N. Climate Conference in Bali, Indonesia, the E.U. proposed internationally binding goals to reduce emissions to 25-40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020. The U.S. refused to make that commitment.

Climate policy advocates have long maintained that a crucial reason to pass carbon limits at state and federal levels is to maintain U.S. economic competitiveness in a carbon-constrained world. Putting a price on carbon emissions sends a market signal that alerts companies to become more efficient and to invest in low-carbon products. The E.U. appears close to forcing U.S. companies to begin pating for carbon emissions, even in the absence of U.S. climate policy.

Washington state is the nation's leading exporter per capita with export engines such as Boeing. Passage of the Washington Climate Action and Green Jobs Bill before the 2008 Legislature will prepare the state to enter a carbon cap-and-trade system being created by western states. That system could link up with similar systems at various stages of development in the Northeast and Midwest, as well as the E.U. Prospectively, exporters based in states that take part in trading systems might be advantaged over states without carbon limits. This adds to the case for passage of climate policy at the state level.

This article originally appeared in Climate Solutions Journal.

Patrick Mazza is staff writer and researcher for Climate Solutions in Olympia, Wash.

Related Stories

Advertisement
Advertisement
  1. sindark's avatar

    sindark Posted 6:34 am
    23 Jan 2008

    WTOThis is sure to lead to a big fight at the World Trade Organization.

    a sibilant intake of breath

    Permalink

  2. FuriaFubar Posted 10:47 am
    23 Jan 2008

    Who'd a thunkit?I am glad that states are getting together and making regional and local commitments to decreasing GHG...I am thinking this is because they are closer to us little people who WANT to be clean n green.  Obviously we can't seem to get anything done at the Federal level.  

    All the Best,

    Furia -

    http://www.xanga.com/furia_fubar

    Permalink

  3. GreyFlcn Posted 11:50 am
    23 Jan 2008

    maybe=WTO

    This is sure to lead to a big fight at the World Trade Organization.=
    Perhaps, but then again, thats putting an equal restriction on both imports and domestic products.
    The WTO is really all about creating "level playing fields".

    Permalink

  4. lorna salzman Posted 3:01 am
    24 Jan 2008

    Border Tax AssessmenThe French first proposed this but the EU idea to tax imports proportionate to their carbon footprint is a superb idea. It should be applied across the board and should take into account not only the CO2 released in the production of goods but in their TRANSPORT to other countries. Then we could start to see the true costs of imported goods. In addition, we need to tax fuel used in international travel, which is now exempt due to some absurd treaty signed decades ago. Full cost pricing is of course anathema to those promoting economic growth and increased consumption, topics in the news in the US today due to the recession. Not  surprisingly everyone is talking about how to get more money into peoples' hands so they can go out and spend it and keep the economy running....exactly the thing that is spurring global warming! (note: polls show that 2/3 of those who have gotten such handouts either save them or use them to pay off debt but no one seems to be saying this). Capitalism as presently constituted depends on continued and untrammeled growth and consumption, so the Marxists should be getting on the no-growth bandwagon if they want to abolish capitalism..though a better reason would be to save the earth.

    Permalink

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Viewed
More
Commented
More
Advertisement