Europe starts to realize Carbon Credits are a scam

JaJae · 04-28-2007, 12:48 PM

Defra in storm over discredited EU carbon plan

By Fiona Harvey and Chris Bryant

Published: April 27 2007 03:00 | Last updated: April 27 2007 03:00

The government department spearheading Britain's effort to reduce carbon output is driving companies and individuals towards paying for emissions cuts that do not take place.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is also about to publish final details of a trading scheme that was set up to encourage companies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions which led to only four taking £111m of taxpayers' money between them.

The first charge against Defra is that under a proposed code of practice, it has been advising businesses and consumers wishing to offset their emissions to buy carbon credits through the European Union or UN carbon trading scheme. However, phase one of the scheme was discredited last May for flooding the market with too many permits to achieve any emissions cuts.

With so many carbon trading schemes on the market, many British companies were keen to follow official advice. However, the result is that many were persuaded to buy environmentally worthless carbon credits.

Reflecting the surplus in ETS permits, the market price has plunged to less than €0.50 (£0.34) per tonne, but offsetting companies are selling permits for more.

John Henley, chief executive of MyCarbonWorld, which offers EU phase one permits for sale at £6.40 per tonne told the Financial Times: "It's not a simple case of a gross margin there. There's obviously set-up costs, admin costs, dealing costs, wholesale costs."

Since the FT contacted Mr Henley, the price per tonne has changed to £4.11.

Defra said yesterday: "We believe that businesses and consumers are looking for increased clarity in the offsetting market, which is why we have proposed a code of practice."

The department defended its actions, saying the code, though published in January, would not come into force until 2008, when EU phase one permits would no longer be sold. But companies selling offsets based on EU permits have seen their businesses expand as a result of the Defra code. Equiclimate, used by Calor Gas to offer offsets to its customers, sells a mixture of two-thirds of permits from phase one of the scheme and a third of permits from phase two. It said it had seen much more demand for offsets since Defra issued its code.

Lord Turner, the former CBI director-general and the man who headed the government's Pensions Commission, was one of those who bought the offsets recommended by Defra - albeit before the code was published.

He told the FT: "The price was considerably higher [than today]."

He added that the Defra-backed scheme would be a good one - "once the [EU] emissions trading scheme is in full working order".

Defra is also set to publish soon details of the UK Emissions Trading Scheme, which was set up with £215m government funding to encourage 34 participating companies to cut their emissions.

But more than half the funding went to only four companies - Ineos Fluor, Invista UK, Rhodia Organique Fine and BP - even though the National Audit Office found only 66 per cent of the companies' reductions in the first year could be directly attributed to the scheme. Ineos Fluor was paid £43m after ICI, the previous owner of its Cheshire works, had installed an incinerator for £6m in 1999 to reduce greehouse gas emissions. The company told the FT it had spent about half the government money it received on clean-up technology.

FT.com / World - Defra in storm over discredited EU carbon plan

This basically confirms what the anti-global warming alarmists have been saying for quite some time. Just about all carbon offsets are scams. The people involved are in it for the money. This includes Al Gore's businesses he moved overseas. Europe and Britain are starting to catch on to this scam and the stock values of carbon offsets are starting to drop. The American media is still silent and pushing carbon offsets.

thatguyoverthere · 04-30-2007, 08:54 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

This basically confirms what the anti-global warming alarmists have been saying for quite some time. Just about all carbon offsets are scams. The people involved are in it for the money. This includes Al Gore's businesses he moved overseas. Europe and Britain are starting to catch on to this scam and the stock values of carbon offsets are starting to drop. The American media is still silent and pushing carbon offsets.

Anthropogenic Global Warming deniers are "anti-global warming alarmists" now?

JaJae · 05-01-2007, 12:48 AM

Originally Posted by thatguyoverthere

Anthropogenic Global Warming deniers are "anti-global warming alarmists" now?

This is exactly what's wrong with the global warming arguments. Why does someone have to be a global warming denier to recognize that carbon credits are a scam? This backs up the notion that global warming has become so politicized that knee jerk reactions are to attack those against AGW when there is no reason to.

Nonphixion · 05-01-2007, 02:36 AM

Originally Posted by JaJae

This is exactly what's wrong with the global warming arguments. Why does someone have to be a global warming denier to recognize that carbon credits are a scam? This backs up the notion that global warming has become so politicized that knee jerk reactions are to attack those against AGW when there is no reason to.

But if you care to read the article you posted above, JaJae, one would find that this so-called "scam" has reduced CO2 emissions.

Ineos Fluor, Invista UK, Rhodia Organique Fine and BP - even though the National Audit Office found only 66 per cent of the companies' reductions in the first year could be directly attributed to the scheme.

And as most with at least a basic financial knowledge would know that the mathematical market price is not always the most suitable solution for the value of a good... or in this case a service. Even as he tells you here.

John Henley, chief executive of MyCarbonWorld, which offers EU phase one permits for sale at £6.40 per tonne told the Financial Times: "It's not a simple case of a gross margin there. There's obviously set-up costs, admin costs, dealing costs, wholesale costs."

Your thread title and chosen bolded selections are very unrealistic and in all honesty over-reach the boundaries that your article allows. Because facts just aren't there to support your especially alarmist viewpoint, JaJae