Carbon Action Blog

Europe urged to lead world on non-financial reporting

2013-05-07T10:56:45+00:00

The European Commission last month proposed an amendment to the existing accounting legislation in order to mandate the reporting of social and environmental information in the annual reports of up to 18,000 large companies. CDP, pioneer of the only global natural capital disclosure system for companies and cities, applauds the Commission’s proposal as a significant move to enhance corporate transparency and accountability across Europe. This legislation must now be progressed without being weakened and should be strengthened to foster consistency of environmental information for investors. This is a view supported by the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB), a CDP special project.

CDP’s chief executive officer Paul Simpson says: “Non-financial reporting is an essential market mechanism to drive more sustainable decision making. Ratification of this proposal could accelerate the integration of environmental considerations into companies’ core strategies, dramatically transforming the market and placing Europe in a leadership position on corporate accountability. Further, businesses that disclose are best positioned to manage their environmental impacts, risks and opportunities, building business resilience across the region.

“However, we would like to see the Commission place a greater emphasis on mandatory disclosure of material information that is relevant, as opposed to a wide range of environmental, social and governance data. This would minimize the reporting burden on companies and ensure that it is the decision-useful information that is consistently available for investors.”

Financial statements capture less than 20% of corporate risks and value creation potential[1], with the balance deriving from intangible factors such as human capital and resource efficiency. Investors increasingly recognize this and are calling for the data that allows them to fully assess longer term factors. 722 investors representing more than half the world’s invested capital are this year requesting over 5,000 companies disclose their environmental data through CDP.

CDSB’s executive director Lois Guthrie says: “We encourage the EU to work with organizations that already promote transparency and action on corporate responsibility in order to ensure the successful implementation of the measures announced today. We invite the EU to use its influence and leadership to promote greater consistency of approach to reporting practices so that a common language may inform decisions on which the long-term flourishing of the economy, the planet and society depend.”

To encourage greater uptake of integrated reporting, CDSB has worked with the world’s leading accounting firms, membership bodies such as the ACCA and IFAC, business and environmental NGOs and regulators, including the UK Government, to produce the climate change reporting framework. This framework assists companies to integrate material climate change information with financial performance in mainstream reports, providing investors with greater insight than the financial report alone, thus improving their ability to make decisions about how climate change affects value creation over time. Ultimately using CDSB’s framework brings benefits to reporters, investors, businesses and wider society by making climate change information clear, consistent and relevant to financial reports. It should play a vital role in ensuring the proposed amendment is executed with success and should be referenced in the proposal as the legislative process now shifts to the Parliament and the Council.

Drawing on experiences of supporting regulators implementing mandatory environmental reporting initiatives, CDP and CDSB will now work closely with the EU Parliament and Council to make certain that the proposed regulation is robust and that implementation across the EU-27 is achieved using international reference points such as the climate change reporting framework.

Article source: CDP website published on 16th April 2013.

EU Carbon Data Signals Airlines May Need to Buy Permits

2013-04-05T08:40:23+00:00

Airlines in Europe may need to buy carbon permits or pay fines after data showed the carriers’ emissions in 2012 exceeded their allocation of free allowances by about 30 percent, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

Ryanair Holdings Plc, Europe’s biggest low-cost airline, emitted 7.46 million tons of carbon dioxide in 2012, or 34 percent more than than its free permits, preliminary data from the European Union shows. EasyJet Plc’s U.K. account indicates it needs 25 percent more allowances, while Aer Lingus Group Plc has a shortfall of 24 percent, the information shows.

Airlines are investing in more efficient technology even as the cost of carbon permits in the EU’s emissions trading system, or ETS, fell 25 percent in the past year. Dublin-based Ryanair said it bought new fuel-efficient aircraft that cut greenhouse- gas emissions by 50 percent, while EasyJet is reducing the weight of its seats and service carts.

“The scheme is designed to create a shortfall to incentivize airlines to operate more efficiently and top up” allowances, Paul Moore, a spokesman for EasyJet in Luton, England, said in an e-mailed response to questions. “EasyJet has long been a supporter of the emissions trading system and will fully comply with its obligations.”

Under Europe’s carbon program, emitters must match emissions with EU allowances or United Nations offset credits by the end of April each year or pay a fine of 100 euros a ton. Polluters can top up their free allocation with allowances bought in the market.
External Flights

Ryanair’s shortfall of 1.9 million tons would cost it 8.4 million euros ($10.8 million) based on the closing price of 4.44 euros a metric ton for December EU airline allowances yesterday on ICE Futures Europe in London. EasyJet’s shortage last year would amount to about 910,000 tons, following emissions of 4.6 million tons, the EU data show.

The EU has proposed excluding from its carbon program flights that took off or landed outside the bloc’s borders in 2012, said Itamar Orlandi, an analyst in London for New Energy Finance. Ryanair, EasyJet and Aer Lingus usually fly within the EU so their data supports the estimate for a permit shortage of about 30 percent, he said.

While airlines with external flights are also granted free allowances for those journeys, they may have only reported emissions for intra-EU trips, Orlandi said. Carriers must hand back the free permits for outside flights unless they choose to include those journeys in the EU program.
No Oversupply

Deutsche Lufthansa AG (LHA) was allocated 14.6 million tons of free allowances in 2012 and reported emissions of 6.1 million tons, according to the EU data published April 2.

Peter Schneckenleitner, a spokesman for the airline in Cologne, Germany, declined to specify what portion of the company’s free permits apply to flights outside the EU.

“The Lufthansa Group doesn’t see any oversupply of allowances,” Schneckenleitner said yesterday in an e-mailed reply to questions. The airline’s yearly carbon market costs will be in the “double-digit millions” of euros, he said.

Lufthansa had historic-low fuel consumption in 2012, he said, without providing details.

“The money we are losing because of ETS would be better invested into new, fuel-efficient technology,” he said.

Ryanair has an average fleet age of less than four years and will comply with all EU laws, Robin Kiely, a spokesman for the company in Dublin, said yesterday by e-mail.

Article published on bloomberg.com 5/4/2013

Article source click here.

UK carbon account decreases by 4% between 2010 and 2011

2013-03-27T09:14:48+00:00

The UK carbon account in 2011 was almost 26% below the 2008 base year, according to the Government.

According to the Government's Annual Statement of Emissions for 2011, the UK's net carbon account was around 573.9 million tonnes of CO2 (MtCO2e), down from an estimated 774.3 MtCO2e in 2008.

The net UK carbon account is what the Government compares against the carbon budgets to determine whether they are being met.

The report also showed that the net UK carbon account decreased by 4% between 2010 and 2011, which was primarily a result of a decrease in residential gas use.

Residential emissions are heavily influenced by external temperatures, and 2011 was a warmer than average year.

However, a reduction in demand for electricity and greater use of nuclear power for electricity generation also contributed to the overall decrease in emissions.

The technical problems observed at some nuclear power stations in 2010 were resolved in 2011 leading to greater nuclear capacity.

Coinciding with the report, Vince Cable announced new funding awards to enhance the supply chain and increase opportunities in the nuclear industry, as the Government confirmed its nuclear strategy.

The funding will support 35 projects across the UK in developing new technologies for the construction, operation and decommissioning of nuclear power plants.

It will also bring together over 60 organisations including Laing O'Rourke, Sheffield Forgemasters and EDF who will work alongside innovative small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) and universities.

The £18m joint funding between the Technology Strategy Board, the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) is expected to leverage in an additional £13m making the total value of the projects £31m.

Business Secretary Vince Cable said: "There are huge global opportunities that the UK is well placed to take advantage of in the nuclear industry. Our strong research base will help develop exciting new technologies that can be commercialised here and then exported across the globe.

"There are many innovative SMEs across the nuclear sector and this joint funding reinforces the government's commitment to a nuclear strategy that will create jobs and growth," he added.

However, environmental groups were sceptical of the Governments plans and many argue that nuclear power is an outdated, expensive energy source.

Last week, planning was approved by the Government for construction of the first nuclear power station in the UK since 1995.

Blog posted in Edie.net - author Leigh Stringer 26-03-13. Article Source here.

Scotland praised on emission targets by climate change report

2013-03-12T10:37:57+00:00

Scotland is making good progress in reaching its climate change emission reduction targets, according to an independent report.

But pressure group Stop Climate Chaos Scotland points out that the UK Committee on Climate Change report said the Scottish government must do more.

The committee found that the annual target was missed by 2% last year.

However, the CCC states that it would have been met if it had not been an exceptionally cold winter.

Overall, the Scottish government has said it wants to cut carbon emissions by 42% by 2020.

Scotland is committed to a series of annual emission reductions targets, which are currently legislated from 2010 to 2027.

In its second progress report to Scottish ministers, the CCC states that, in a normal year for temperature, the target would have been reached.

The fact that it fell short "can be attributed to the exceptionally cold winter months, which increased energy demand for heating, particularly in the residential sector".

'Low-carbon economy'

CCC chief executive David Kennedy said that it was more important that there had been underlying progress in implementing low-carbon policy measures and that, in this respect, Scotland had performed well across most sectors.

"Scotland has made good progress in delivering on emission reduction measures to date," he said.

"This lays the foundations for meeting ambitious Scottish emissions targets and building a low-carbon economy in Scotland with the benefits that this will bring.

"It is important that the Scottish government now focuses on fully developing its policy proposals and ensuring these and existing policies are delivered to their full potential."

The reports states that:

Scotland continues to lead the UK on renewable power with 36% of electricity consumption met from renewable energy, exceeding the 31% target and above the UK's 9%
Setting a 2030 decarbonisation target has provided longer-term certainty for the power sector
Steady improvements in the insulation of homes has led to loft insulation rates more than doubling from 2008-09 to 2011-12
Waste targets have been legislated for ahead of EU requirements, with Zero Waste Scotland set up to help deliver targets
Tree planting rates have been increased to close to target level, with proposals to increase the amount of Scottish timber being used in the construction and refurbishment of buildings
£1.7m of peatland restoration has been confirmed for 2012-15.
Opposition parties complained in January that Holyrood's SNP administration had failed to meet targets and needed to look again at policies across all departments.

The CCC recommends "a significant increase in effort in developing and implementing existing policies in Scotland".

However, the report warns that "meeting targets to 2020 will continue to be difficult unless the EU moves to a 30% target for 2020".

"Without this, even implementing all of the proposed policies will not be enough to meet targets," it adds.

"Through the 2020s, the Scottish government has set out a package of policies and proposals that looks feasible, but there is considerable uncertainty over how exactly it can be delivered."

'More action'

That point was highlighted by Tom Ballantine, chairman of Stop Climate Chaos Scotland.

"While we welcome the areas where progress to meet targets has been made, we share the concerns that the UK CCC latest report flags up of 'considerable uncertainty' in the Scottish government's draft climate plan and the need to increase the rate of policy implementation if we are to deliver our climate targets," Mr Ballantine said.

"The independent watchdog emphasises the continued reliance ministers place on the EU increasing its climate ambition, following previous warnings that the government needs to come up with more action here in Scotland.

"The report echoes the strong evidence heard by four committees in the Scottish Parliament that the government's draft plan does not provide the step change in effort the climate change committee has previously called for and is too reliant on weak proposals, rather than strong commitments to action."

Article Source: BBC News Scotland - 12th March 2013

Linking Australia’s Carbon Pricing Mechanism to the EU ETS: opportunities and risks

2013-02-07T14:21:58+00:00

The Australian Government’s decision to link the Carbon Pricing Mechanism (CPM) with the EU ETS presents Australian liable entities with an opportunity to reduce their cost of compliance during the flexible price phase of the scheme, which is scheduled to begin on 1 July 2015.

This opportunity arises because linking the two schemes allows liable entities under the CPM to import carbon allowances (EUAs) from the EU ETS – initially via a oneway link from 2015 and then through reciprocal trading from 2018. Liable entities under the CPM will be able to meet up to 50% of their liability by surrendering EUAs.

EUAs have fallen below €4 (A$5.04)1. This presents a potentially attractive option for Australian liable entities to purchase EUAs now at current low prices in order to surrender them during the flexible price phase of the CPM2.

Like most market-based transactions that are governed by complex regulations, however, there are risks involved – both legal risks and regulatory risks. In many cases though, these can be managed through adoption of prudent commercial and legal strategies.

The risks

Scheme risks

Currently, the greatest risk to sourcing EUAs in the short term for later use in Australia is the possibility that the CPM may be repealed. The Coalition has already indicated it will repeal the CPM if it forms Government after the next federal election, which Prime Minister Julia Gillard has announced will be held on 14 September 2013.

Even if the CPM is not repealed, the politicised nature of the climate change debate in Australia means that the scheme could be further modified, and that may impact on the ability to subsequently surrender EUAs under the CPM.

The EU ETS has also been plagued with its own design problems that stem from the over-allocation of EUAs. This has been compounded by the poor economic conditions in Europe, which have led to decreased industrial activity and therefore lower demand for EUAs.

To address this issue, the European Commission announced a proposal to reduce the number of EUAs auctioned between 2013 and 2015 by 900 million3. These EUAs would be returned to the market during the auctions in 2019 and 2020 when it is expected that demand for EUAs will have resumed.

On 24 January 2013 the European Parliament’s Industry, Research and Energy Committee voted to oppose the proposal (prompting the EUA price to drop as low as €2.81). While this vote is non-binding and more decisive votes are to take place in the coming months, it is not clear whether the initiative will be supported politically. If it is implemented, it would temporarily address the current oversupply of EUAs. However, even the European Commission has recognised that this does not offer a long-term solution to the underlying problem, and that a more sustainable strategy is required.

Transfer risks

Currently, businesses that want to purchase EUAs and have them registered in Australia cannot do so directly. This is because, as yet, there is no formal relationship between the registries operating in Australia and the EU ETS. The European Commission and the Australian Government are working on establishing a direct link between the two registries by mid-2013.

In the meantime, the Australian Government has implemented an interim measure to enable the purchase and recognition of EUAs in Australia4.

Under the interim measures, the Government authorises the Clean Energy Regulator to open and operate a registry account under the EU ETS. This entitles the Regulator to receive EUAs from entities that hold these units under a valid European registry account.

Once in receipt of EUAs, the Regulator can then retire these allowances and issue a corresponding unit in Australia – an Australian-issued International Unit (AIIU) – to a business with an Australian registry account. AIIUs can then later be surrendered by liable entities under the CPM to meet their flexible price phase liabilities5.

Compliance risks

EUAs and AIIUs are classified as ‘financial products’ under the financial services regime established by the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act). This means that an entity is required to hold an Australian Financial Services licence (AFSL) or rely on a licensing exemption if they are in the business of ‘dealing’, ‘providing advice’ or ‘making a market’ in respect of these units in Australia.

Of these concepts, ‘dealing’ is perhaps the most important for liable entities. ‘Dealing’ in a financial product includes acquiring, issuing or disposing of the product. Arranging for a person to engage in that conduct is also dealing in a financial product. Dealing in a financial product by an entity on its ‘own behalf’ is not ‘dealing’ unless the entity is the ‘issuer’ of the product6.

To obtain an AFSL, a business must follow the rules prescribed by the Corporations Act, Corporations Regulations 2001 (Cth) and applicable ASIC regulatory guides. A licensee then has a number of ongoing obligations, including having a robust risk management system and preparing and lodging annual reports with ASIC7.

While these requirements under the Corporations Act apply to EUAs and AIIUs generally, the Act provides an exemption where a business is ‘self-dealing’ in these units8. Broadly speaking, this exemption will apply when:

    the dealing is not making a market in the units being traded;
    the dealing is being undertaken to manage a financial risk in relation to the surrender, cancellation or relinquishment of the units being traded; and
    the dealing does not form the principal activity of the entity’s business.

Risks management

It is obvious, then, that there are inherent risks and obligations in any strategy to procure EUAs in the near term for use under the flexible price phase of the CPM. While businesses need to be aware of these, it is also useful to know what options are available to assist in managing these risks.

    1. Sit it out (for now) and skill up. Businesses should consider whether it is currently worthwhile sourcing EUAs in the near term for use under the flexible price phase of the CPM. Given the scheme risks affecting the CPM and the EU ETS, a more prudent option may be to wait until these risks are addressed by the schemes’ regulators or overcome by a change in political circumstances.

To determine whether an active trading or a ‘wait and see’ approach is most appropriate, a business will need to carefully model the financial implications of the alternative approaches. This will require a thorough understanding of the compliance options available to a business under the CPM and close monitoring of the schemes as they evolve.

    2. Adopt a flexible approach to trading. If a business decides to source EUAs in the near term, there are particular instruments that can help to mitigate the inherent risks of doing so. While a number of different instruments exist, those that have proven popular with participants in the EU ETS include:

    Futures and forward contracts: These contracts, while not identical, allow a buyer to agree to purchase EUAs at a prescribed price. The delivery of the EUAs and the payment of the purchase price will not occur until a future date that is set out in the contract. Therefore, these contracts can be used to manage price risks and potentially unit transfer risks.
    Options contracts: These contracts enable a buyer to agree to purchase EUAs at a predetermined future price. Unlike futures and forward contracts, this instrument does not commit a buyer to purchase the contracted units. Instead, it holds an option to purchase these on or before a prescribed date. Given the flexibility of options contacts, these instruments can be used to lock in the current EUA price without committing to the purchase of these units.

3. Manage the compliance risks.

Of the risks that have been identified, the one that can most easily be addressed is the ‘compliance risk’. Therefore, if a business’s strategy is to purchase and trade EUA, AIIUs (or any other carbon unit in Australia), it must consider whether or not it needs an AFSL (including whether a relevant exemption applies) before undertaking any transaction.

Risk management options

    Sit it out (for now) and skill up
    Adopt a flexible approach to trading
    Manage the compliance risks.

Article source: Allison Warburton and Shol Blustein - Minter Ellison here

Manage your carbon footprint and stride ahead of the competition

2013-01-30T10:43:13+00:00

WHILE SOCIAL & ENVIRONMENTAL responsibility and financial necessity are now aligned for many larger organisations, SMEs have been slower to recognise sustainability as a driver of bottom-line business success, rather than a nice-to-have. However, the imminent introduction of Mandatory Carbon Reporting (MCR) for listed businesses gives SMEs a chance to get on the front foot when it comes to managing their carbon footprint. For many, it could be the start of a wider environmental sustainability programme that benefits business as well as the environment.

The UK already leads the rest of Europe in carbon emission reductions. The imminent introduction of MCR – which makes it compulsory for companies on the London Stock Exchange to report their levels of greenhouse gas emissions in their annual reports – is set to propel environmental sustainability even further up the corporate agenda, providing a catalyst for action and accelerating changes in business practice across UK plc.

MCR will put carbon data on a par with financial data for companies on the LSE, demanding a new approach to reporting. While it's the UK's largest listed companies that are obliged to act, the impact of MCR is going to ripple downwards. And it will do so fast, as it will initiate a domino effect for small and mid-sized businesses as larger firms place increased value on building their sustainability profile and reducing emissions in their supply chain.

Get ahead of the curve

With only three months left before MCR begins (in April), there's never been a better time for small businesses to manage their environmental assets. Understanding emissions is the first step in planning reductions and proving environmental credentials.

Ultimately, immediate and decisive action is the key to gaining a competitive advantage. This can be achieved by implementing a carbon management programme that uses an ongoing programme of internal emissions reductions and by investing in external reductions by supporting forestry or renewable energy projects. These avenues are certainly not mutually exclusive and combining them gives the advantage of being able to make a credible statement of environmental action can engage staff and customers, from the very outset of the programme.

Accurately measuring a carbon footprint is the first step in any programme, and with the wealth of support available it does not have to be an onerous task. Third-party tools like the CarbonNeutral Footprint Reporter provide an easy, convenient and fast solution for small businesses, allowing them to get third-party verification of their action. Seeing data for energy usage, staff travel and the amount of waste the business generates will also reveal where a business can make effective reductions, and save money through more efficient practices.

As many SMEs don't own their own premises, measures such as changing to LED lighting and addressing building insulation require a landlord's involvement and can appear to be a barrier to a very effective programme. However, significant reductions can be made through encouraging behaviour change. For example, simply turning lights off when an area is not in use can save 30% on fuel bills, and changing computers to hibernate mode will use just 1 to 2W compared to the average 60W used by a screensaver programme. Setting up ‘Green Teams' and rewarding personal efforts to reduce emissions can generate significant savings and a wealth of new ideas which can all benefit the business.

The net effect is a combination of cost saving, slashed energy usage and a reduced carbon footprint. A win-win scenario. The use of external emissions reductions provides a means for companies to mitigate the unavoidable part of their carbon footprint, and to meet targets while internal emissions programmes are being implemented. Certifying a business as carbon-neutral provides a clear statement that a business has taken action to understand and reduce emissions.

While sustainability might have once been considered a ‘big business' issue, there's no question it now filters right down the supply chain. MCR legislation means carbon management is the foundation of any environmental programme – it's embedded in business, not an add-on. As SMEs come under increased pressure to demonstrate their environmental credentials, this in turn empowers them to capitalise on their environmental efforts by identifying cost savings, which can drive tangible business value and support the retaining and winning of business from their discerning customers.

Real benefits, realised now

With legislation like MCR on the horizon and the cost of running buildings and travel programmes rising, reducing carbon emissions is no longer a CSR luxury but a business necessity. There are different ways to tackle sustainability initiatives, yet we can all make a difference by behaving differently. As the economy begins its attempt to recover, it is those SMEs taking action to assess their environmental policies and capitalise on the opportunities in a greener marketplace that will reap the benefits and become a business success story. Those that don't will be left behind.

Author: Nathan Wimble is commercial director at the CarbonNeutral Company (article source here)

EU Carbon Market Disclosure Draws Fire as Permit Prices Slump

2013-01-16T16:31:39+00:00

A lobby group representing traders from Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDSA) to BNP Paribas criticized the quality of disclosure by the European Commission in Brussels when proposing rule changes to its carbon market.

A draft plan from October that would have banned traders from holding Russian Emission Reduction Units issued after 2012 was revised Jan. 10 after market participants showed the regulator the proposal wasn’t workable, Sarah Deblock, European Union policy director at the Geneva-based International Emissions Trading Association, said today in an interview.

“The messages that came out were inconsistent,” Deblock said by phone. “Stakeholders have had a good chance to express their concerns.”

The European Commission is seeking to tighten the market’s supply glut as a new phase begins this year. This month’s revision, which is scheduled for a preliminary vote by lawmakers on Jan. 23, allows the credits to be held through March 2015, as long as they represent greenhouse gas cuts made before 2013. ERUs for December plunged 89 percent to 18 euro cents ($0.24) a metric ton since the initial proposal was discussed by policy makers on Oct. 17. EU permits dropped 32 percent in the same period.

The lobby group today published a letter sent to Yvon Slingenberg and Peter Zapfel, two officials in the climate- action unit of the commission who help oversee the market. “The EU needs to restore confidence in the emissions trading system, and any changes to existing rules need to be presented in a transparent and predictable manner,” Deblock wrote in the letter.
Kyoto Extension

The regulator is seeking to adjust the rules of its own program after United Nations envoys decided Dec. 11 to extend the 1997 Kyoto Protocol through 2020, including the Joint Implementation program that generates ERUs. Kyoto’s emission- reduction targets would otherwise have finished last year. Russia has decided not to participate in the agreement’s second phase. A commission official, who asked not to be named, citing policy, declined to comment.

The commission sometimes publishes draft plans in an understandable effort to prevent leaks during consultation periods, Deblock said.

EU carbon permits for December dropped 4.3 percent today to 5.81 euros a ton on the ICE Futures Europe exchange in London at 1:05 p.m. They earlier matched the record low 5.75 euros reached Jan. 14.

Deblock criticized the commission’s plan to stop traders converting aviation carbon allowances from the phase ending last year to permits that can be used by utilities and factories in the current phase.
Aviation Rules

“It’s true there has been no consultation and no impact statement,” she said in the interview. The rule changes were “particularly concerning” because they will apply with no period of transition, she said in the letter.

The commission wants EU governments and the European Parliament to adopt by early this year its plan to freeze for a year carbon curbs on flights into and out of EU airports. International flights will now be exempted from EU emissions- trading rules for 2012 under the draft decision published Nov. 20 on the EU website.

The commission should have better explained why it needed to make such late changes to the aviation-allowances conversion rules, which previously were “well established,” Deblock said.

The U.K. said Oct. 22 it may seek to adjust the rule that allowed buyers of EU aviation-only carbon allowances for conversion.
Original Intention

“We are aware that the registry regulation appears to permit Phase 2 EU aviation allowances to be converted into ordinary Phase 3 allowances,” the Department of Energy and Climate Change said at the time. That wasn’t the original intention, the department said.

EU carbon traders are worried they are exposed to further “discretionary regulatory changes,” Deblock said.

“IETA urges the commission to be as open as possible to explain the policy intention and the legal meaning behind the amendments as well as the expected consequences for market operators,” she wrote in her letter.

This article appeared on the Bloomberg website on 16 January 2013: here.

Carbon reduction brings 33% average return to investors

2012-12-04T09:49:48+00:00

Carbon reduction activities could have a very positive return on investments, delivering an average return of 33%, according to a report published by Carbon Disclosure Project, an international not-for-profit organisation.

In the report ‘Carbon reductions generate positive ROI', the organisation said high emitting companies that set absolute emissions reduction targets achieved reductions double the rate of those without targets with 10% higher firm-wide profitability.

Energy efficiency and fugitive emissions reductions generate some of the highest reductions and return on investments, the research found.

The report is an outcome of the ‘Carbon Action Initiative', an investor-led initiative designed to accelerate company action on carbon reduction and energy efficiency activities which deliver a satisfactory return on investment.

The initiative was developed by Carbon Disclosure Project with a number of investors including Aviva, CCLA, Robeco and Scottish Widows Investment Partnership.

Click here to read the complete report - CDP Carbon Action Report

Article source.

Ryanair expects EU to face legal action over carbon law

2012-11-19T12:17:04+00:00

The European Union this week said it would freeze for a year its rule that all airlines must pay for their carbon emissions for flights into and out of EU airports, but flights within the European Union will still have to pay for their carbon emissions.

"I think the (lobby group) the European Low Fares Airline Association is certain to bring it to court. It's blatant discrimination," Ryanair Chief Executive Michael O'Leary told Reuters in an interview.

"It means short-haul carriers are being taxed for some notional environmental reason whereas the European flag carriers on their long-haul flights are not. It's complete discrimination against short-haul carriers and Europe's consumers," he said.

A spokesman for the European Low Fares Airline Association declined to comment.

The year-long exemption will apply to flights linking EU airports to countries outside the bloc, a move welcomed by U.S. and Asian officials.

Article source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/16/eu-airlines-ets-ryanair-idUSL5E8MGCQO20121116

EU GHG emissions decreased for the 27 EU Member States by 2.5% in 2011

2012-11-07T11:36:23+00:00

The European Commission has released an annual report detailing progress in 2011 towards achieving the EU target under the Kyoto Protocol, while the European Environment Agency (EEA) has published an associated analysis of EU greenhouse gas (GHG) trends. The report on progress finds that EU GHG emissions have decreased for the 27 EU Member States by 2.5% in 2011.

The EC progress report, titled “Approximated EU GHG Inventory Early Estimates for 2011,” highlights that a majority of emissions reductions occurred in the residential and commercial sectors, in part due to a mild winter, and notes a 47 million ton decrease in emissions from EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) sectors. The report also underscores the increasing share of renewable energy in total energy consumption. It includes sectoral results for energy, industrial processes, agriculture, waste and other source categories in addition to examining uncertainties, methodologies and data sources, and member State GHG emissions. The full report of the EU’s 2011 GHG emissions will be available in 2013.

The EEA projection report, “GHG Emission Trends and Projections in Europe 2012,” examines: 2008-2012 emission targets and compliance under the Kyoto Protocol; current progress towards 2008-2012 Kyoto targets; the EU ETS; 2020 GHG emission targets in the EU and European countries; and projected progress towards 2020 targets. The report notes that EU countries are on target to meet their Kyoto targets underscoring challenges faced by Italy and Spain.

Commenting on the release of the reports, EU Commissioner Connie Hedegaard highlighted that the EU is "delivering on its Kyoto commitment." She stressed that emissions were reduced by 18% while the economy grew by 48% since 1990, stressing that the figures "prove once again that emissions can be cut without sacrificing the economy."

Article sourced from: http://climate-l.iisd.org/news/european-commission-publishes-kyoto-protocol-target-progress-report/

Report can be downloaded from: http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/ghg-trends-and-projections-2011

50 months to avoid climate disaster – and a change is in the air

2012-10-01T14:16:35+00:00

At the halfway point to a climate gamble,
50 contributor ideas give just a taste of the creativity and innovation available to us.

One or other of us will have to go," Oscar Wilde is supposed to have said on his deathbed to the hated wallpaper in his room. The perilous acceleration of Arctic ice loss, and the imminent threat of irreversible climate change poses a similar ultimatum to the economic system that is pushing us over the brink. For society's sake I hope this time we redecorate.

Fortunately, many people are queuing up to propose better designs, rather than just cursing the interiors, as you can read about here.

Monday 1 October marks the halfway point in a 100-month countdown to a game of climate roulette.

On a very conservative estimate, 50 months from now, the dice become loaded against us in terms of keeping under a 2C temperature rise. This level matters because beyond it an environmental "domino effect" is likely to operate. In a volatile and unpredictable dynamic, things like melting ice, and the release of carbon from the planet's surface are set to feed off each other, accelerating and reinforcing the warming effect.

The time frame follows an estimate of risk of rising greenhouse gas concentrations from the world's leading authority on climate change, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), that passed a certain point, it will no longer be "likely" that we stay the right side of the line. Some consider even a 2C rise too much, but it is the limit that the EU and others have signed up to.
Extraordinarily, however, in spite of the stakes, the issue has receded from the political frontline like a wave shrinking down a beach. This could, though, merely be a prelude to it returning with a vengeance. Politicians may have turned their backs, others have not.

What we do in the next 50 months is not a choice between what we have done in the past and what we are doing today. It is an invitation to embark on the most extraordinary, exhilarating and challenging adventure our society has yet faced, learning how to thrive without disastrously destabilising the climate on which we depend. Every step matters, and it matters most that we start walking.

Ref:The Guardian

EU and Australia to create single carbon market

2012-09-04T13:17:10+00:00

The EU emissions trading system (ETS) is to be linked to the
recently launched Australian carbon price mechanism to create the world’s largest carbon market, the European Commission has confirmed

The European and Australian authorities have announced they are working to connect the two cap-and-trade schemes enabling companies subject to the EU ETS to sell excess credits to Australian firms to meet their emissions obligations and vice versa.

The systems will be fully linked by July 2018, but from 28 August 2012 participants in the Australian trading system are able to begin buying EU ETS credits to meet their liabilities from 1 July 2015, when the Australian system becomes a wholly cap-and-trade scheme.

The move means EU firms are provided with a wider market to sell excess allowances and Australian firms can benefit from cheaper credits.

As well as helping to simplify compliance for firms based in both continents, the commission and the Australian government argue that the joining of the two systems is also a signal to the rest of the world how greater international collaboration is possible to tackle greenhouse-gas emissions.

“Linking the Australian and European Union systems reaffirms that carbon markets are the prime vehicle for tackling climate change and the most efficient means of achieving emissions reductions,” said Greg Combet, Australian climate change minister.

“These arrangements provide Australian businesses with access to a larger market for cost-effective emission reductions and provide European market participants with enhanced business opportunities.”

Connie Hedegaard, European commissioner for climate action, said the collaboration would help to build momentum towards establishing an international carbon market.

To allow the systems to be linked the Australian government has decided to not introduce a carbon price floor as planned.

Meanwhile, the commission continues to consult on its proposed changes to the management of the EU ETS that would see it able to postpone the sale of allowances in phase III. The proposals are aimed at combating the effects of a surplus of credits in the ETS which have seen the price of carbon fall as low as €5.99 during 2012.

REF: The Environmentalist
04/09/2012

UPDATE 1-U.N. carbon credits fall to new record low

2012-07-31T10:39:31+00:00

CERs fall to new record low of 2.67 euros a tonne

* Drop extends last week's falls on EU plan to limit supply (Adds comment, background)

(Reuters) - Benchmark United Nations' carbon permits fell 7 percent to a fresh record low on Monday, taking their lead from lower prices for European Union emissions allowances and extending losses made last week.

"This is a technical move as well as continued fall-out from last week's EU announcement," a carbon trader said, referring to a slide in carbon permit prices last week due to the lack of detail in a long awaited European Commission plan to delay the auction of new EU allowances (EUAs)

The Commission presented the proposal to bolster its emissions trading scheme (ETS) by reducing a massive overhang of surplus allowances and urged member states to hurry it through by the end of the year.

There were no firm numbers in the Commission's draft proposal, which disappointed traders, but a Commission analysis has presented three options - withholding 400 million, 900 million or 1.2 billion allowances over the first three years of the market's next phase.

On Monday, the benchmark contract for U.N.-backed permits, called certified emissions reductions (CERs), fell 6.97 percent to 2.67 euros ($3.30) a tonne at 1043 GMT. Volume was low at 575 lots traded.

EU allowances (EUAs) for delivery in December 2013 fell by 3.76 percent to 6.66 euros a tonne, narrowing the spread between the two benchmark contracts to 3.99 euros.

The EUA contract dropped below a 6.85 euro support level earlier on Monday which prompted selling, he added.

Last Friday, the contract's 15-day moving average went beneath its 40-day moving average which was also a bearish technical signal.

Both CER and EUA prices have scope to lose further ground, traders said. EUAs could potentially drop to their record low of 5.99 euros, which they hit in April, they added.

Both EUA and CER prices have lost a lot of ground over the past year and are well below levels needed to spur low-carbon investment and discourage pollution.

CER prices have lost around 70 percent of their value over the past year, beset mainly by a supply glut and flagging demand for carbon permits due to a slowing European economy.

CERs are traded under the U.N.'s Clean Development Mechanism, which was worth $22 billion last year. Under the scheme, governments and companies in developed countries can earn carbon credits by investing in low-carbon projects in developing countries. They can use the credits to achieve their Kyoto targets.

Most of the demand for CERs comes from the EU ETS, the world's biggest carbon market, which itself is oversupplied by over 1 billion carbon permits. Many analysts expect the EU scheme to be oversupplied at least through 2020. ($1 = 0.8084 euros)

REF: Reuters

Carbon Action Training Courses

What is a carbon price and why do we need one?

2012-07-16T13:40:07+00:00

A carbon price is a cost applied to carbon pollution
to encourage polluters to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas they emit into the atmosphere.
Economists widely agree that introducing a carbon price is the single most effective way for countries to reduce their emissions.

Climate change is considered a market failure by economists, because it imposes huge costs and risks on future generations who will suffer the consequences of climate change, without these costs and risks normally being reflected in market prices. To overcome this market failure, they argue, we need to internalise the costs of future environmental damage by putting a price on the thing that causes it – namely carbon emissions.

A carbon price not only has the effect of encouraging lower-carbon behaviour (eg using a bike rather than driving a car), but also raises money that can be used in part to finance a clean-up of "dirty" activities (eg investment in research into fuel cells to help cars pollute less). With a carbon price in place, the costs of stopping climate change are distributed across generations rather than being borne overwhelmingly by future generations.

There are two main ways to establish a carbon price. First, a government can levy a carbon tax on the distribution, sale or use of fossil fuels, based on their carbon content. This has the effect of increasing the cost of those fuels and the goods or services created with them, encouraging business and people to switch to greener production and consumption. Typically the government will decide how to use the revenue, though in one version, the so-called fee-and-dividend model – the tax revenues are distributed in their entirety directly back to the population.

The second approach is a quota system called cap-and-trade. In this model, the total allowable emissions in a country or region are set in advance ("capped"). Permits to pollute are created for the allowable emissions budget and either allocated or auctioned to companies. The companies can trade permits between one another, introducing a market for pollution that should ensure that the carbon savings are made as cheaply as possible.

To serve its purpose, the carbon price set by a tax or cap-and-trade scheme must be sufficiently high to encourage polluters to change behaviour and reduce pollution in accordance with national targets. For example, the UK has a target to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2050, compared with 1990 levels, with various intermediate targets along the way. The government's independent advisers, the Committee on Climate Change, estimates that a carbon price of £30 per tonne of carbon dioxide in 2020 and £70 in 2030 would be required to meet these goals.

Currently, many large UK companies pay a price for the carbon they emit through the EU's emissions trading scheme. However, the price of carbon through the scheme is considered by many economists to be too low to help the UK to meet its targets, so the Treasury plans to make all companies covered by the scheme pay a minimum of £16 per tonne of carbon emitted from April 2013.

Ideally, there should be a uniform carbon price across the world, reflecting the fact that a tonne of carbon dioxide does the same amount of damage over time wherever it is emitted. Uniform pricing would also remove the risk that polluting businesses flee to so-called "pollution havens"' – countries where a lack of environmental regulation enables them to continue to pollute unrestrained. At the moment, carbon pricing is far from uniform but a growing number of countries and regions have, or plan to have, carbon pricing schemes in place, whether through cap-and-trade or carbon taxes. These include the European Union, Australia, South Korea, South Africa, parts of China and California.

Ref: The Guardian

Carbon Action offer a number of Carbon Courses
+44 207 851 4792

Reduce your Carbon Emission Footprint and your exposure to Carbon Risks

2012-07-05T10:20:28+00:00

The Conservative / Liberal Democrat Government are to introduce regulations on mandatory reporting of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by LSE-quoted companies in April 2013. This reporting of GHG emissions aims to provide transparent GHG reporting such that listed companies are seen to be managing their carbon liabilities. The regulation is given legal force under Section 85 of the Climate Change Act 2008 and under section 416(4) of the Companies Act 2006 requiring the Directors’ report of a company to contain information regarding emissions of GHG for which a company is responsible. The new regulations will be introduced from April 2013 onwards with potential tightening up of these regulations from 2015.

Why is this initiative important?

(1) Government requirement soon to be enacted – thus we must measure and reduce emissions.

(2) GHG reporting is now a board room issue as many investors are concerned about carbon risks associated with large corporations, with pension trustees having a duty to consider all financially material risks and exposures of their long-term funds performance. According to a 2010 report “Carbon Risks in UK Equity Funds” (produced by WWF, Mercer and Trucost) significant improvements can be made in portfolio exposures by the relatively straightforward expedient of moving investment from poor Carbon Performers to less polluting industry, whilst for example maintaining their asset allocation to a specific sector.

What can you do about these GHG risks.

The only practical solution to prepare our businesses and sectors from these real risks is to robustly quantify existing portfolio and industry emissions. This is best done and achieves global acceptance by using the internationally recognised Greenhouse Gas Protocol and its allied international Standard ISO 14064.

In order to manage and reduce carbon exposures Investment managers need to be aware and understand to allow them apply the ISO 14064-1 GHG Standard and the WBCSD/WRI GHG Protocol for Corporate Accounting to their portfolios. This will allow managers to develop an understanding of the importance of the design and development of verifiable GHG inventories systems and procedures. This knowledge allows managers to delegate to their staffs and allow GHG practitioners to be able to apply tools, methods and other good practice guidance in the WBCSD/WRI GHG Protocol for Corporate Accounting and the requirements of the ISO 14064-1 GHG Standard for the development of inventory requirements.

Responsibility for GHG emissions may also be uncertain and both the WBCSD/WRI GHG Protocol for Corporate Accounting and the ISO 14064-1 GHG Standard allow for reporting to be allocated appropriately either using the Control Share approach or the Equity share consolidation methods.

Using the Control Share Consolidation approach, the organization accounts for all quantified GHG emissions from facilities over which it has financial or operational control.

The alternative approach uses Equity share, where the organization accounts for all quantified GHG emissions from respective facilities in which it has equity.

Emission types

1. Direct GHG Emissions: Emissions within company’s organizational boundary from sources that company owns or controls such as business travel in company cars.

2. Energy Indirect GHG Emissions: Emissions from the generation of imported electricity heat or steam

3. Other Indirect GHG Emissions: Indirect GHG Emissions other than from the generation of imported electricity heat or steam. Examples include:

• Employee commuting

• outsourced activities

• contract manufacturing and franchises

• waste generated by the organization but managed by another organization

• emissions from the use and end-of-life phases of the organization’s products and services

• GHG emissions from the production of purchased raw or primary materials

The ISO 14064 GHG Standard is flexible so it can be used for different types and sizes of organizations and for different voluntary and mandatory objectives. The ISO 14064 GHG Standard can be used stand alone, but is intended to be used in accordance with established procedures from good practice guidance (e.g., API, CAPP, INGAA, IPIECA, WBCSD/WRI GHG Protocol, EU-ETS, VCS, and Government Reporting requirements).

An organization reporting against ISO 14064-1 should be informed by the WBCSD/WRI GHG Protocol. In the majority of cases, an organization GHG report that meets ISO needs would also meet GHGP needs, and vice versa.

Inventory adjustment procedures are important because organizations are dynamic, operations may vary over time. To ensure a fair comparison of current GHG emissions over time it is often necessary to recalculate the base year depending on variations in the organizations, mergers, outsourcing and other structural changes which will impact the organization’s organization and operational boundaries. By implementing a standard procedure for recalculation, (i.e. what triggers a recalculation and the process to follow) organizations will create consistency and transparency in their GHG inventories.

Carbon Action are Strategic alliance Partners of the Canadian Standards Association who have developed a complete suite of training courses and seminars to equip both business leaders and GHG practitioners with the skills and tools to make sense of and fully understand the issues of GHG reporting in a verifiable and transparent way.

Contact Carbon Action on info@carbonaction.co.uk or on 0207 851 4792 for advice or clarification on any of these issues.

Rio+20 Sustainability Action – UK Carbon Regulation Announcement Implications

2012-06-27T14:01:48+00:00

The landmark announcement by the UK government last week at the Rio+20 conference is the first of its kind to make it mandatory for companies to report their greenhouse gas emissions.The directive applies to approximately 1600 companies listed on the London Stock Exchange with the future potential of expanding to all large companies in the UK when it is reviewed in 2015.

Some are probably asking why this announcement is so critical.
The directive increases the number if LSE-listed companies reporting on their emissions from 400 to 1,600 with the potential of significantly increasing the figure to 24,000 in 2016. Most importantly, before we even get that far, the introduction of mandatory carbon measurement and management for listed companies and sectors lagging behind is significant in itself, however it is likely to indirectly influence others currently not included in the directive. Simply because they will not want to stay behind competitors who are reporting under the new regulations.
Nick Clegg stated that the directive is part of a move to encourage and support companies ‘to measure and so to begin to manage their impact of on the environment in a bid to improve their environmental performance and reduce their stress on the natural world’. This command approach makes sense because it is obvious that current voluntary disclosure mechanisms do not necessarily accelerate carbon reductions. For example the CDP reported last year that only 44% of the companies who responded to its Global 500 survey have decreased their absolute emissions.

What’s more, as and when the new directive gains momentum in achieving significant results in terms of carbon management and reduction, it provides strong substantiation, to all of those still requiring it, of the superiority of regulation over voluntary schemes when it comes to making a difference. To make considerable impacts - regulation is required - but it is also important to highlight the fact that without voluntary schemes such as the CDP this directive would simply not have been implemented. In this the CDP have been in a clear leadership role for the private sector in driving forward GHG reporting. In late July CA and CDP will host a webinar showing FTSE 350 firms how to report GHG emissions without entailing excessive cost.

It also makes financial sense for businesses to report and reduce their carbon emissions. The directive will mean that greenhouse gas management will now be part of organisational risk and opportunity assessments. Recent UK reports suggest 75% of FTSE 100 companies they have worked with have collectively generated £3.7 billion in cost savings from implementing carbon reduction measures.

If you or your organisation requires any further help with reporting your emissions or managing your organisation emission reduction please do not hesitate to get in contact with one of our advisors.
Email info@carbonaction.co.uk

EU ETS emissions down in 2011, permit glut grows

2012-05-17T11:40:48+00:00

The EU's emissions trading scheme (EU ETS) limits the
carbon dioxide emissions of the 27-nation bloc's factories
and power plants and covers nearly half of EU emissions.

Preliminary data in April showed a fall of 2.4 percent in carbon emissions in 2011, suggesting the bloc is on track to achieve its 2020 climate target to cut emissions 20 percent below 1990 levels.
Carbon prices were unmoved by the data but by 1414 GMT had edged down 1.35 percent at 6.59 euros a ton.

"The EU data was not much different to what came out in April so there is minimal reaction on the market," an emissions trader said.
Less than 1 percent of installations taking part in the EU carbon scheme did not surrender allowances covering all of their 2011 emissions by a April 30 deadline, the Commission said.
Only 2 percent of installations failed to submit verified emissions for 2011.

SUPPLY GLUT

Tuesday's data also points to a growing oversupply of carbon units, thanks to a record use of international carbon credits in the EU carbon scheme at a time of stagnant EU economic growth and flagging industrial output.
"Last year's record use of international credits has increased the buffer of unused allowances by some 450 million. This means more than 900 million more allowances have been put into circulation than were surrendered for compliance use over the period 2008-2011," the Commission said.
Carbon permits are handed out to installations in each reporting year. Each company must surrender enough allowances to cover its emissions by the end of April in the following year, otherwise fines can be imposed.
Polluting plants in the ETS can also use a certain number of U.N.-backed carbon credits for compliance, most of which are certified emission reductions (CERS) - credits issued to qualifying emissions-reduction projects in developing countries.

Cumulatively, the EU ETS has been responsible for the use of 456 million CERs, of which over half came from projects located in China and 17 percent from India.

REFORM

European carbon prices have shed around 60 percent of their value over the past year due to market worries about the growing supply glut and weak demand.
The benchmark carbon price hit a low of 5.99 euros a ton in April, well below the level needed to spur green investment.
To prop up low prices, the Commission said last month it would review its auctioning rules for the ETS, a proposal which would have to be approved by member states.
This could involve changing the timing of auctions, or delaying them, to limit supply in the short term, a process referred to as "backloading".

Before the Commission breaks for summer in August, it will outline more ways to boost prices and reform the ETS, with a legal decision expected by the end of the year, EU Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard told reporters on Tuesday in Brussels.

"It's not that one should expect backloading in itself will do the whole trick and then suddenly the price will be very much bigger," Hedegaard said.

"Options to a more structural addressing of the problem of the too-low price in the system...that's a more complicated process."

Such structural reform options would be part of an annual ETS review. They could include discussion on a lower emissions cut target and/or setting aside carbon permits from the third trading phase of the scheme which runs from 2013 to 2020.

EU officials, member states and lawmakers have been debating if and how to intervene in the market for some time, including a one-off move to withhold a certain number of carbon permits for the 2013-2020 period. Many in the market are expecting a decision on that this year or next.

($1 = 0.7789 euros)

17th May 2012 Reuters.com

Collaboration between Google Finances and CDP

2012-05-03T14:18:04+00:00

With a background in physics and sustainability, and a stint as a math teacher in Morocco, I never imagined I would end up at a technology company like Google. But as I approach my fifth anniversary here, I’ve been thinking back on all the projects I’ve been a part of as a member of the Energy team. One that I’m most proud of is a collaboration with the Google Finance team and the nonprofit Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) to put companies’ carbon disclosure ratings into Google Finance alongside financial data. Specifically, these ratings quantify how well a company measures and reports its greenhouse gas emissions, as well as to what degree it is aware of the risks and opportunities climate change poses to its business.
The scores -- which the Google Finance team just updated for 2011 -- are listed as “Carbon Disclosure Rating” and appear in the “Key stats and ratios” box on the right side of a company’s Google Finance page:

There are two things that made this an exciting project for me. First, what started out as an idea in the mind of one Googler became a live feature in a product used by millions of people every day. And second, the launch of this feature in April 2010 marked the first time that individual investors could freely access this kind of information in conjunction with financial data.

Why would investors be interested in a company’s carbon disclosure rating? We thought it would be useful because a company’s emissions, as well as climate change more generally, can pose financial risks -- and investors generally like to understand such risks. These risks can take several forms: from regulatory risks (e.g. legislation placing costs on carbon-intensive activities) to physical risks (e.g. sea-level rise threatening a company’s facilities) to market risks (e.g. consumers switching to another company’s products because they believe that company to be a better environmental steward). All of these factors (and others) go into CDP’s calculation of a company’s carbon score, so it can be a useful metric for investors.

As I begin my sixth year at Google, I’m excited that we’re making environmental information more universally accessible and useful, and I’m looking forward to the projects and challenges ahead.

http://googlefinanceblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/updated-carbon-disclosure-ratings-in.html

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

2012-04-10T08:56:35+00:00

Who or what is the IPCC?
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was jointly established in 1988 by the
World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP),
to assess in a comprehensive and transparent manner all the relevant scientific, technical,
and socioeconomic information to contribute in understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change,
the potential impacts, and the adaptation and mitigation options. Since 1990, the IPCC has produced a series of Assessment Reports,
Special Reports, Technical Papers, methodologies, and other key documents which have since become
the standard references for policymakers and scientists concerned by global warming.

The IPCC will issue, in June 2012, a special report on ways and ideas to manage the risks associated with increased extreme weather events and climate or weather induced disasters. The special report strives to contextualise the challenge of dealing with extreme weather and climate events as an issue in governmental and local authority decision making under uncertainty, analysing responses in the context of risk management. Incidentally, Risk Management is soon to be a publically available educational and practical course from Carbon Action using ISO 31000:2009 Risk management -- Principles and guidelines. ISO 31000:2009 can be applied throughout the life of an organization, and to a wide range of activities, including strategies and decisions, operations, processes, functions, projects, products, services and assets. The IPCC Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation is called, for short, SREX (for special report on extreme events).
The full citation for this forthcoming report is IPCC, 2012: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation.
Field, C.B.et al, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA

To assist in grappling with the content of this report we have reproduced the key terms in Climate Change/Global Warming below:-
Climate Change: A change in the state of the climate that can be identified by changes in the mean or averafe conditions and/or the variability of its properties and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer. Climate change may be due to natural internal processes or external forcings, or to persistent man-made changes in the composition of the atmosphere or in land use.
Climate Extreme (extreme weather or climate event): The occurrence of a value of a weather or climate variable above (or below) a threshold value near the upper (or lower) ends of the range of observed values of the variable. For simplicity, both extreme weather events and extreme climate events are referred to collectively as ‘climate extremes.’
Exposure: The presence of people; livelihoods; environmental services and resources; infrastructure; or economic, social, or cultural assets or treasures (Pyramids, Stonehenge, in places that could be adversely affected.
Vulnerability: The propensity or predisposition to be adversely affected. Examples tajt spring to mind are Bangladesh, and Pacific Island States amongst others,
Disaster: Severe alterations in the normal functioning of a community or a society due to hazardous physical events interacting with vulnerable social conditions, leading to widespread adverse human, material, economic, or environmental effects that require immediate emergency response to satisfy critical human needs and that may require external support for recovery. An example possibly such as famine caused by crop failure due to extreme weather conditions
Disaster Risk: The likelihood over a specified time period of severe alterations in the normal functioning of a community or a society physical events interacting with vulnerable social conditions, leading to widespread adverse human, material, economic, or environmental effects that require immediate emergency response to satisfy critical human needs and that may require external support for recovery.
Disaster Risk Management: Processes for designing, implementing, and evaluating strategies, policies, and measures to improve the understanding of disaster risk, foster disaster risk reduction and transfer, and promote continuous improvement in disaster preparedness, response, and recovery practices, with the explicit purpose of increasing human security, well-being, quality of life, resilience, and sustainable development.
Adaptation: In human systems, the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects, in order to moderate harm or take advantage of beneficial opportunities. In natural systems, the process of adjustment to actual climate and its effects; human intervention may facilitate adjustment to new expected climatic conditions.
Resilience: The ability of a system (or country) and its component parts (Government, Civil Society, Businesses) to anticipate, absorb, accommodate, or recover from the effects of a hazardous event in an effective way by ensuring the preservation, restoration, or improvement of the societies’ essential basic structures and functions.
Transformation: The altering of fundamental attributes of a system (including value systems; regulatory, legislative, or bureaucratic regimes; financial institutions; and technological or biological systems).

Exposure of and vulnerability to extreme events are key determinants of disaster risk and of impacts when risk becomes reality. Again this implies less developed countries in high natural disaster prone areas are in the firing line when the global warming events become commonplace. The question is – how to respond, mitigate or avert such events. This IPCC report is an important step in opening our eyes to what needs to be done.
This IPCC report continues in the time-honoured and established scientific tradition of being replete with self-doubt about assumptions – a proof of its validity – I would suggest.
For example on flood prediction the report states “Confidence is low due to limited evidence and because the causes of regional changes are complex, although there are exceptions to this statement. There is medium confidence (based on physical reasoning) that projected increases in heavy rainfall would contribute to increases in local flooding in some catchments or regions” How can we not at least accept the bone fides of the authors?

In short – fellow earthlings – we need to act urgently.

U.K. Considers Environment Tax to Replace Carbon ‘Burden’

2012-03-23T15:52:40+00:00

U.K. Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne said
today that he may introduce an
environmental tax to replace a carbon-reduction
program that’s become a “burden” on business.

Proposals for the new tax will be made in the fall should the government not be able to simplify the so-called Carbon Reduction Commitment to reduce its administrative expenses, Osborne told lawmakers in Parliament.

“We’re serious in making sure that green tax is effective and not a complicated burden on business,” Climate Change Minister Greg Barker said in a phone interview. “We’re determined not to tie the green sector up in red tape.”

In a budget with few environmental announcements, Osborne doubled a surcharge on carbon emissions by utilities starting 2014. He indicated support for
airport expansion near London, pledged measures to encourage investment in offshore oil and gas and reduced environmental regulation to cut business costs
by at least 1 billion pounds ($1.6 billion) over five years.

“It’s a bit like Sherlock Holmes’ dog that didn’t bark: although not a lot was said, in a way that might be seen as a good thing because many of the crucial policies are still being finalized,” Impax Asset Management Group Plc (IPX) Chief Executive Officer Ian Simm said by phone. They include reform of the electricity market, the government’s Green Deal program to insulate homes and details about how the “Green Investment Bank” is going to work, he said.
‘Nail in Coffin’

Green Party leader and lawmaker Caroline Lucas called today’s budget “the nail in the coffin” of the government’s pledge on entering office to be the “greenest ever.” The environmental group Friends of the Earth said the plans ignore Prime Minister David Cameron’s promise to build a clean future.

“The determination to plow ahead with growth-at-any-cost planning reforms and aviation expansion, throw money at North Sea oil and gas, and ignore the potential of green energy shows that this administration’s environmental policy is blue, not green,” Lucas said, referring to the color associated with Cameron’s Conservative Party.

Osborne has “fired the starting pistol for more roads, airports and gas power that will keep the U.K. hooked on costly fossil fuels for decades to come,” Friends of the Earth Executive Director Andy Atkins said in a statement.

Barker said his department hadn’t made any “major asks” of Osborne in this budget.
‘Harder for Business’

“What we wanted was a clear commitment to the renewables sector and we got that,” Barker said. One request the energy department had made and Osborne delivered was for the so-called carbon floor price to apply only to the emissions associated with electricity generation from combined heat and power plants, and not the heat produced, he said.

The U.K. solar power industry, already reeling from unscheduled cuts to subsidies, faces another hit because of restrictions imposed by the chancellor, according to David Symons, a director at global environmental consultancy WSP Environment & Energy.

The solar industry “faces a further 300 million-pound hit over the next five years as its capital allowances are restricted,” Symons said. “This will make it harder for business to invest in renewables because companies won’t be able to recoup their investment as quickly.”

The carbon-reduction commitment compeled 5,000 U.K. organizations to pay about 3.5 billion pounds over four years in fees for emitting carbon. Osborne in October 2010 turned the program into a tax instead of a system that redistributed money from those organizations that made the least progress in curtailing emissions to those that made the most.
‘Overly Burdensome’

“No amount of tinkering with this doomed tax on British business will ever make it work and therefore the government should scrap the scheme in the autumn,” Gareth Stace, head of climate and environment policy at the EEF manufacturers group, said. “The scheme is overly burdensome, costly and provides no guarantee of carbon reductions.”

Osborne today set the carbon price support at 9.55 pounds ($15.13) a metric ton for 2014, almost double the 4.94-pound cost that takes effect April 2013. The U.K. is introducing the tax on power production to encourage investment in nuclear and renewable power.

Businessweek.com 23.03.12

Delivering Sustainable Supply Chains

2012-02-10T15:18:36+00:00

Regulation, along with a drive to improve efficiency and enhance corporate reputation,
has encouraged the majority of large organizations to look at how they can measure and reduce carbon in their own business.
As this becomes standard business practice, leading businesses are now focusing on how to make continual, ongoing
improvements to their carbon footprint and taking steps to understand the wider impact of their indirect emissions.
Indirect, or “scope 3,” emissions are a consequence of the activities of the reporting company, but occur at sources owned or controlled by another organisation, for example raw materials extraction, distribution by a third party or from a customer’s use of a particular product. An important part of tackling scope 3 emissions is to understand which parts of a company’s operations are responsible for the greatest proportion of emissions.

Our research found that 40 percent of multinationals have taken steps towards addressing the indirect carbon emissions resulting from their extended value chain. Over the next three years, we expect this to increase to 84 percent and impact business of all sizes. If 2011 saw organizations starting to address this area, 2012 will see more widespread action as companies recognize that reducing carbon in supply chains is an effective way to improve business efficiency as well as enhance environmental performance.

To put this in context for an individual company, GlaxoSmithKline revealed in its 2010 Sustainability Report that 80 percent of its overall carbon footprint comes from indirect emissions – with 40 percent through the sourcing and manufacturing of its products and 40 percent resulting from the use phase of its products, such as propellants in inhalers.

As well as GSK, Carbon Trust Advisory is also working with other forward thinking companies including BT, Taylor Wimpey and Whitbread to help them identify carbon hotspots within their supply chains, to uncover reduction opportunities and quantify the value at stake, and to set targets for the reduction of their indirect carbon emissions. These companies recognize the business rationale for reducing indirect emissions, for example, security of supply, resource scarcity, commodity inflation, waste reduction, supply chain optimization, and enhanced customer value proposition.
As these leaders take action, public awareness and expectation of other businesses to do likewise is increasing, and becoming a factor in product differentiation and consumers’ buying decisions. Therefore, companies must be proactive in order to stay ahead of the competition.
If the world’s leading companies see an opportunity to reduce their environmental impact, enhance their reputation, and boost sales by acting on indirect emissions, this will have implications for the many other businesses which supply them. Multinationals will increasingly seek partners who can support their environmental goals, especially as consumer demand for low carbon products continues to grow. New regulations and the move to consumption-based accounting, together with voluntary schemes such as the Carbon Disclosure Project, are also encouraging companies to seek advice on addressing their indirect carbon emissions.

Our research also found that 50 percent of multinationals expect to select their suppliers based upon carbon performance in the future and 29 percent of suppliers could lose their places on “green supply chains” if they do not have adequate performance records on carbon. Conversely, 58 percent of multinationals will be prepared to pay a premium for lower carbon supplies in the future.

http://www.environmentalleader.com/2012/02/09/delivering-sustainable-supply-chains/

Guangdong Carbon Program to Be China’s Largest, New Energy Says

2012-01-27T15:13:49+00:00

A program to curb the increase of greenhouse gas emissions in China’s Guangdong province will probably be the largest of the nation’s seven test climate- protection systems,
according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

Guangdong is seeking to cut the amount of carbon emitted per unit of production in its economy by 19.5 percent in the five years through 2015, New Energy Finance said yesterday in an e-mailed research note. Other regions have lower targets, with Chongqing and Hubei set reductions of 17 percent.

“At this stage, Guangdong is the one to watch, as it has an ambitious target and the highest emissions out of the seven pilot regions,” said Richard Chatterton, an analyst at Bloomberg New Energy Finance in London. “The planned pilots are currently light on detail, but the programs are likely to fit alongside non-market policies, potentially preventing fully fledged cap-and-trade,” he said today by phone.

China, the world’s most populous nation and biggest emitter, is testing emissions-trading programs after global greenhouse gas output from fuel burning advanced 5.3 percent to a record 30.4 million metric tons in 2010, according to data published November by the International Energy Agency in Paris.

Guangdong has emissions of about 465 million tons of carbon dioxide, New Energy estimated, based on 2009 data. That’s compared with 397 million tons for France, U.S. Department of Energy data show.

The Beijing region has yearly emissions of 117 million tons, while the Shenzhen area emits 90 million tons, New Energy estimated. Annual gross domestic product growth varies widely across the seven, from 8 percent for Shanghai to 16 percent for Tianjin, it found.

Implementation Plans

The likely success of the programs in curbing greenhouse- gas output in the five years is so far difficult to judge, Chatterton said. “We’ll know more when the regions submit their implementation plans in 2012,” he said.

Asia Development Bank will help fund one of the pilot carbon-trading markets that may evolve into a nationwide cap- and-trade program.

ADB is providing a $750,000 equivalent grant to Tianjin municipal area’s pilot system, which may begin operation as early as next year, Manila-based ADB said today in a statement on its website.

The 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which set an emissions cap for more than 30 developed nations in the five years through 2012, was never ratified by the U.S. and does not require China and India, the world’s two most populous nations, to cut emissions. United Nations envoys have failed to decide how to extend or replace that agreement for the past 14 years.

Officials from almost 200 nations agreed on Dec. 11 at UN climate talks in Durban, South Africa, to seek a global deal by 2015, with the participation for the first time of the U.S., China and India.

By Mathew Carr - Jan 25, 2012

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2012-01-25/guangdong-carbon-program-to-be-china-s-largest-new-energy-says.html

Unavoidable European Aviation Emissions Trading

2012-01-13T16:05:06+00:00

Unavoidable European Aviation Emissions Trading – Comply or fly-by.

Over the past week we have seen growing opposition over the implementation of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme for the aviation industry. Airline operators are anxious that they may not be able to meet demands set out in the EU ETS directive with some arguing that compliance is a violation of international skies treaty’s while others stating that cost of compliance and penalties are much to stringent.

The trade group that represents China’s biggest airlines, China Air Transport Association, has announced that its members will refuse to cooperate with the emissions trading scheme. The Russian government have also publicly opposed the plan, and demanded that the introduction to the scheme be postponed at least 18 months – they have even hinted at a retaliatory system of charges for air craft crossing Russian airspace.

However resistance seems to be futile – in December the European Supreme Court threw out a challenge by a group of North American Airlines and trade Associations stating that the EU ETS directive did not in fact violate international law and open skies between the USA and Europe.

The aviation industry has known since 2008 that they would be included in the EU ETS directive. The legislation means that overall CO 2 emissions of the aviation industry will be capped. The cap is initially set at 97% of 2005 emissions levels, and from 2013 onwards at 95%. All operators flying to and from the EU will have to surrender one allowance for every tonne of CO 2 emitted on a flight to and from (and within) Europe. By doing so the ETS for aviation becomes the first global emissions trading scheme.

During the first year of the aviation ETS (2012) companies will get 85% of allowances for free, obliging them to pay for just 15%. The free allowances or credits are based on a benchmark relating to number of passengers and cargo using 2010 data as the base period.
According to PWC the aviation sector's emissions are expected to grow to 130% by 2012 (compared with 2005 levels), only about 60 % of the allowances the sector needs will be issued for free in 2012. This shortfall equals costs for entire sector of about 3.5 billion Euros per year assuming a price level of 30 Euro per allowance. These costs are likely to be spread unevenly amongst affected operators, as specific emission levels vary widely between aircraft.
All non-complying aircraft operators face a penalty of €100 per missing allowance on top of obligations to procure and surrender missing allowances. Airlines that do not pay face an operating ban in European countries all together. It will be interesting to following to see how the EU penalties are applied to those who do not comply with the regulations.

COP 17: Measuring, Reporting and Verifying Emissions Reductions

2011-12-22T15:15:54+00:00

At the COP17 meeting Durban there was important progress made
on the establishment of the Green Climate Fund.
The fund is set to mobilise $100 billion annually to aid developing nations reduce emissions and adapt to the negative effects of climate change.
During COP17 it was also agreed that the Green Climate Fund will have a facility to fund private sector initiatives.

A less publicly noted success to come out of the COP17 at Durban was the commitment to develop a common system for measuring, reporting and verifying emissions reduction. This will be essential for progress especially because lending from the Green Climate Fund may be results based. If the private sector is to invest at a substantial scale, then there must be a robust and internationally accepted framework for evaluating achievement. A consensus on measuring reporting and verification will likely increase flow of further private sector investment.

It was highlighted at the meeting that activities funded by the Green Climate Fund “will be regularly monitored for impact, efficiency and effectiveness” and “results measurement framework with guidelines and appropriate performance indicators will be approved by the board”.

A significantly advanced framework for the reporting of emissions reductions for both developed and developing countries was also agreed. Developed countries must prepare biennial reports on their emissions and on their projects to reduce emissions, in accordance with their national circumstances, with their first reports due at the start of 2014. Developing countries will go through a similar parallel process, with their first biennial update report submitted by December 2014; by March 5th next year they must also submit information about their nationally appropriate mitigation actions and low-emission development strategies, in order to obtain financial and technical support by developed countries.

Information sourced from: KPMG ‘COP17 – ‘One step closer to a low Carbon Future’

Emissions traders jailed for tax evasion

2011-12-22T11:56:44+00:00

Six people have been convicted of tax evasion in
Germany after an international probe into
carbon emissions trading involving Deutsche Bank.

The investigation is one of the biggest in the EU into how emissions traders created transactions to evade value added tax. German prosecutors are continuing to investigate 170 people and the suspected tax evasion amounted to €850M approx.

Six traders from Britain, Germany and France have been sentenced to between 3years and 7years 10months in prison.
No employees of Deutsche Bank have been charged in the inquiry but a prosecutor told the court this month that the VAT Fraud could not have been carried out without the involvement of the bank.

The probe is one of a number of problems to have beset the EU’s emissions trading system, which was set up in 2005 to create a price, and market, for CO2 and so help to reduce output of greenhouse gas.

www.ft.com December, 2011

Canada withdraws from Kyoto Protocol

2011-12-14T09:27:54+00:00

The Government of Canada has announced on 12 December its formal withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol. In a statement delivered in the Canadian House of Commons, Peter Kent, Canadian Minister for the Environment, stated that "we are invoking our legal right to formally withdraw from Kyoto. This decision formalizes what we have said since 2006 that we will not implement the Kyoto Protocol."

Kent said that the Kyoto Protocol does not commit the two largest emitters, (US and China) to any emissions reductions, and thus it "will not work." He referred to the Durban Platform, as "a way forward that builds on our work at Copenhagen and Cancun." Kent added that Canada will work towards a legally binding agreement on climate change which will allow Canada to “continue creating jobs and economic growth" and said Canada is well on its way "to meeting the commitment made in Copenhagen by reducing green house gas emissions by 17 per cent over 2005 levels by 2020.

Carbon Action Carbon Courses Ireland and the UK

2011-12-08T09:11:45+00:00

1. Measuring your organisation’s Carbon Footprint ISO 14064-1
(Essentials Greenhouse Gas Inventories for Organizations)
This course provides the information for the first step organisations need to determine their carbon footprint and the ongoing management of GHG emissions.

2. Reducing Your Organisations Environmental Impact ISO 14064-2 Essentials – Greenhouse Gas Projects.
This course provides an introduction and the technical requirements to create GHG projects under the rules of ISO 14064 – 2. Projects that reduce emissions and enhance emissions are addressed.

3. Carbon Emission Reduction Expert ISO 14064-2 Expert - Greenhouse Gas Projects
In this course students apply their knowledge of ISO 14064-2 by creating an actual GHG Project through the use of a series of exercises and two detailed case studies to ensure a practical, hands-on approach to facilitate the learning process.

4. GHG Validation using ISO 14064
Validation is normally performed for GHG emission reduction projects before they are implemented and it helps ensure that the project conforms to the requirements of a standard or the rules of a GHG program.

5. GHG Verification using ISO 14064
Verification provides an independent assessment of the data associated with a GHG inventory or project and typically offers an opinion on the accuracy of the estimates or measurements, thus giving confidence to others interested in the results.

China starts carbon emission rights trading scheme

2011-11-24T15:57:13+00:00

China's top economic planner has confirmed that it has approved a pilot greenhouse
gas emission rights trading scheme in seven provincial regions in an effort to encourage carbon emission reductions.

The municipalities and provinces given the green-light include Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, Chongqing, Shenzhen, Hubei and Guangdong, an official with the National Development and Reform Commission told Xinhua under the condition of anonymity. However, the official refused to elaborate on the pilot scheme. Details such as how the scheme will work and how long it will last are not available.

According to a statement posted on the official website of the Chongqing municipal government (www.cq.gov.cn), the pilot program is an important means for realizing China's emission reduction targets, while minimizing costs.

Compared to levels in 2005, a total reduction of 1.74 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions occurred from 2006 to 2010 as the power sector adopted measures to reduce coal consumption while raising the efficiency of the use of electricity, according to a report on the sector's emission reduction which has been released.

In 2010, the country saw 1.6 million fewer tonnes of smoke emissions from electricity-generating utilities, marking a 31.9 percent reduction from 2009, said the report.
Additionally, sulfur dioxide emissions were reduced by 29 percent in 2010 compared with 2005 levels.

By 2020, the country has pledged to reduce carbon dioxide emissions per unit of GDP by 40 to 45 percent compared to 2005 levels.
According to a white paper China, the government will prioritize global climate change during its 12th Five-Year Plan period (2011-2015).

China.org.cn

Do listed fossil fuel reserves take us to unburnable carbon?

2011-11-18T12:14:34+00:00

We estimate the fossil fuel reserves held by the top 100 listed coal companies and the top 100 listed oil and gas companies represent potential emissions of 745 GtCO2.
This exceeds the remaining carbon budget of 565 GtCO2 by 180 GtCO2. The potential emissions from listed fossil fuel reserves show that just over half the carbon comes from coal reserves, whilst only 5% is attributable to gas.

This has profound implications for the world’s energy finance structures and means that using just the reserves listed on the world’s stock markets in the next 40 years would be enough to take us beyond 2°C of global warming. This calculation also assumes that no new fossil fuel resources are added to reserves and burnt during this period – an assumption challenged by the harsh reality that fossil fuel companies are investing billions per annum to find and process new reserves. It is estimated that listed oil and gas companies had CAPEX budgets of $798 billion in 2010.6 In addition, over two-thirds of the world’s fossil fuels are held by privately or state owned oil, gas and coal corporations, which are also contributing even more carbon emissions.
Given that only one fifth of the total reserves can be used to stay below 2°C warming, if this is applied uniformly, then only 149 of the 745 GtCO2 listed can be used unmitigated.
This is where the carbon asset bubble is located.

If applied to the world’s stock markets, this could result in a repricing of assets on a scale that would dwarf past profit warnings and revaluation of reserves.
How quickly would we reach unburnable carbon if emissions continue business as usual?
According to the latest IEA projections of energy-related fossil fuel CO2 emissions, unburnable carbon will be reached in just 16 years if energy consumption continues unfettered.7 This is based on global annual energy emissions increasing from 30.12 GtCO2 in 2011 to 37.58 GtCO2 in 2027, totalling 570.11 GtCO2 over the period.

Extract from “Unburnable Carbon – Are the world’s financial markets carrying a carbon bubble?” (From Carbon Track)

First Energy Efficiency Performance League Table Published

2011-11-09T11:32:43+00:00

The Environment Agency has published its first Energy Efficiency Performance League Table ranking 2,000 CRC organisations according to how they manage their energy use, including major supermarkets, retailers, restaurant chains, government departments, hospitals and councils.

Twenty-two organisations ranked joint first, with a weighted score of 202.95. More than 800 organisations ranked in the lowest possible position, with a weighted score of 402.
The scheme requires large organisations that use more than 6,000MWh electricity per year to measure and report carbon emissions. They gain credits for installing smart meters and complying with Carbon Trust - or an equivalent accreditation scheme - standards of energy management.

The league tables were initially designed to help government recycle the revenues raised through the CRC, but this element was controversially removed in last year's comprehensive spending review, meaning that the government now keeps the money.

However, the Department of Energy and Climate Change maintains that charging firms based on their energy use through the CRC will provide a financial driver for energy efficiency improvements, while league tables will provide a reputational incentive for companies to try to perform well.

Environment Agency director of environment and business Ed Mitchell said he is encouraged to see that six out of 10 organisations have taken steps to improve their energy management this year.

"This year, government will need to look more holistically at organisations' longer term environmental impact in order to get a clearer picture of our collective progress against the UK's 2020 targets." Ian Foddering, chief technology officer at Cisco UKI.

www.guardian.co.uk, 11/2011

Firms that voluntarily disclose GHGs

2011-11-07T16:30:11+00:00

Firms that voluntarily disclose GHGs have
Environmental Management Systems (uncertified and certified),
have higher corporate governance quality and publicly report to the CDP,
they tend to be large and in the energy, banking, power, FMCG, government, Pharmaceutical, ITC, resources, mining and industrial sectors.

The credibility and extent of disclosures are related to the existence of a certified EMS, public reporting to the CDP, and use of the Robust Carbon or GHG reporting structures such as ISO 14064.

Carbon Action are key components in the education of GHG practitioners in these sectors along with our Strategic Alliance Partners who developed the ISO 14064 suite of training courses.

EU ETS Aviation Scheme

2011-11-04T11:51:29+00:00

The US House of Representatives has passed a bill making
it illegal for US airlines to comply with the controversial
EU ETS Aviation scheme.
The move comes in the wake of the release of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) Advocate Generals opinion, which found the EU plan to extend its emission trading scheme (ETS) to aviation to be fully compatible with international law. Tensions have been escalating in recent months between the EU and a group of countries opposed to the initiative.

The group last month adopted a declaration in New Delhi demanding that the EU cancel the inclusion of aviation in the ETS. India has said that if the EU does introduce the measure as planned in January 2012 it will retaliate. China, which also opposes the scheme, has already blocked the order of Airbus A380s from Hong Kong Airlines.

International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, Volume 11, 31 October 2011.

The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) governing council is expected to adopt New Delhi declaration as well as a set of resolutions calling on the EU to allow non-EU carriers to be exempt from the ETS when the Montreal-based organisation meets this Wednesday. Reuters reports that the ICAO has claimed that the ETS issue poses major challenges and risks for aircraft operators.

The recent developments out of Washington further complicate the dispute as if the bill is also approved by US Senate, thus becoming law, US-based airlines will be put in a difficult legal position. Should they continue to fly to Europe, they would be in breach of US law if they comply with the ETS and in breach of European law should they not. Some experts say the issue could lead to a trans-Atlantic trade war.

Policy and Corporate News

2011-10-27T10:46:02+00:00

Policy Update:

UK scraps Longannet CCS project funding
The British government has cancelled plans to fund a carbon capture and storage (CCS) demonstration project at Longannet in Scotland,according to the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC).

UK free EUA allocation to fall 65 pct in 2013:
The number of free EUAs the UK will hand out in 2013 will fall by 65 percent to 75.1 million carbon permits worth 853 million euros ($1.2 billion), as most power generators will be forced to pay for all the permits they need, a draft allocation list seen by Point Carbon News showed.

Corporate:

Investors worth $20 trillion call for binding climate treaty
A group of 285 investors representing $20 trillion called on G20 leaders and U.N. climate negotiators Wednesday for domestic legislation and a legal international climate agreement to attract private capital to stimulate low-carbon growth.

Finnish power sector emissions crash 13.4 pct
Emissions from Finland’s electricity sector plummeted 13.4 percent in the first nine months of the year as power consumption declined and more energy was sourced from nuclear and renewable plants, which will likely curb demand for CO2 permits.

www.pointcarbon.com, 2011

Global carbon budget

2011-10-21T10:34:49+00:00

Research by the Potsdam Institute calculates that to reduce the chance of exceeding a 2°C global warming to 20% or 1 in 5, the global carbon budget for 2000-2050 is 886 GtCO2.

Minus emissions from the first decade of this century, this leaves a budget of 565 GtCO2 of emissions for the remaining 40 years to 2050.
The fossil fuel reserves held by the top 100 listed coal companies and the top 100 listed oil and gas companies represent potential emissions of 745 GtCO2.
This exceeds the remaining carbon budget of 565 GtCO2 by 180 GtCO2.
This means that using just the listed proportion of reserves in the next 40 years is enough to take us beyond 2°C of global warming.
On top of this further resources are held by state entities.

Given only 20% of the total reserves can be used to stay below 2°C, if this is applied uniformly, then only 149 of the 745 GtCO2 held by listed companies can be used unabated.
Oil, coal and gas investors are thus left exposed to the risk of unburnable carbon.

If the 2°C target is rigorously applied, then up to 80% of declared reserves owned by the world’s largest listed coal, oil and gas companies and their investors would be subject to impairment as these assets become stranded. The economic consequences of having fossil fuels with an emissions value of 180 Giga tonnes CO2 are thus much worse than even the current economic crisis.

Potsdam Institute, 2011

$23* For Every Ton Of Carbon Emmitted

2011-10-14T13:37:30+00:00

Under a controversial plan passed in the Australian parliament, Australia’s 500 biggest greenhouse gas emitters
will pay $23* for every ton of carbon they emit. The carbon pricing scheme, which will go into effect next July after the Senate’s likely nod in November, has been a political hot button for the Australian government and for prime minister Julia Gillard.

Even though packed with “sweeteners” that pull in political support but dampen its likely effect, the bill is considered by many as a huge step for Australia, the world’s largest exporter of coal and a top leader in greenhouse gas emissions per capita.

The Government estimates the carbon price will cost Australian households an additional $10 per week. But the bill passed today will also return more than half of the revenue raised to people via tax credits and direct payments, producing payments to individuals and households that should be more than enough to cover rising commodity and energy prices.

By making burning fossil fuels more expensive and thereby encouraging efficiency, efficient technologies and renewables, the bill, according to Labor estimates, will reduce Australia’s carbon emissions by 159 million tons by 2020, cutting at least 5 percent from the country’s emissions by 2020.

Bloomberg, 2011

Choosing Suppliers Based on CO2 Emissions

2011-09-28T15:10:00+00:00

Half of multinational companies plan to select suppliers based on carbon performance, according to a study by Carbon Trust Advisory.

The research says that 29% of suppliers are likely to lose their places on green supply chains if they do not have adequate performance
records on carbon. The research also finds that 58% of multinationals will in the future pay a premium for low carbon suppliers to
reduce their overall corporate carbon footprints.

In the U.K., 56% of multinationals said that in the future they expect to drop suppliers based upon low carbon performance, compared to just 28% in the U.S.

The research consisted of 100 interviews carried out by Dynamic Markets. Respondents were from the senior manager level or above, working for companies with at least 1,000 employees and with operations, subsidiaries, or investments in more than two countries.

The research found that 40% of multinationals are addressing their indirect carbon emissions, compared to 93% for direct emissions. Among the companies not addressing supply chain emissions, 42% said they would do so within the next year, and another 42% within the next two to three years.

Next month Marshalls Plc, a supplier of hard landscaping, will be hosting a United Nations Global Compact Supplier event to educate first-tier suppliers on its approach to environmental issues.

In the Carbon Trust report, 74% of U.K. respondents said shareholder pressure would be a key driver for them in tackling carbon emissions, compared to just 24% in the U.S.

Environmental Leader, September 2011.

Carbon Action/CMSE Awarded European Sustainable Energy Award for Prisons Programme

2011-09-08T10:40:09+00:00

The European Sustainable Energy Award for Prisons

Carbon Action/CMSE are delighted to have been awarded the European Sustainable Energy Award for Prisons project.The European sustainable energy award for prisons encourages intelligent use of energy in multi-residential buildings, specifically prisons. This project involves a pilot study on energy management in prisons in the UK, Malta, Croatia, Latvia, Greece, Slovenia and Ireland.

The partner organizations in the consortium are: -
Severn Wye Energy Agency – UK
Projects in Motion Ltd - Malta
University of Zagreb, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture – Croatia
Ekodoma - Latvia
University Of Thessaloniki – Greece
Building and Civil Engineering Institute ZRMK – Slovenia
Her Majesty’s Prison Hewell – UK
Chris Mee Safety Engineering - Ireland

Prison sites consume a great deal of energy because of their size, building stock and constant usage pattern. As well as this the increasing cost of energy and focus on cost-effective services, point to a real need to use energy as efficiently as possible.

E-SEAP (European Sustainable Energy Award for Prisons) aims not only to address technical and practical energy issues to achieve savings but also;
to raise awareness, increase skills and improve access to support.
CMSE believe this is a great project and are delighted to be part of it. The project has been developed and is managed by Severn Wye Energy Agency, UK.
SWEA (Severn Wye Energy Agency) is a strictly not for profit, registered charity and Chris Mee Safety Engineering are proud to be contributing partners on this project.

As part of the E-SEAP project each participating prison will receive an award to show what level they are at.
Awards will be leveled at bronze, silver and gold and will be internationally recognised to enable the scheme to be pioneered on a European level.
E-SEAP is offered to prison services free of charge thanks to funding provided by the European Commission's 'IntelligentEnergyEurope' programme.

At present there are 14 participating prisons and there are approximately 800 prisons throughout Europe.

This programme will not only save money in prisons but also give people the skills and knowledge to practice these cost effective techniques outside of this area also.
Prison managers, staff and offenders will all receive training in order to show how vital this project is.
It is envisaged that this training may then be passed on to these participants families and therefore will encourage them to become more energy efficient at home.
This of course results in people saving money on their bills.

The targets of this project are based upon the direct experience and achievements of the UK pilot which has been carried out. The pilot study consisted of 9 prisons in Wales and SW England. This study confirmed the value of working closely with the prison service to achieve a significant increase in energy awareness and energy savings. In the long term it is hoped that E-SEAP will become a model for energy saving that is referenced by institutions other than prisons in the development of their own strategies, e.g. hospitals, universities and military establishments.

Please email us at info@cmse.ie if you would like further information on this topic

Carbon Action visit to China

2011-03-01T16:32:13+00:00

Carbon Action has just returned from an intensive 3 weeks in China which included visits to hospitals, iron and steel mills, bitumen refinery's, an oil port, power stations and magnesium processing plants to advice on energy, Clean Developement Mechanism (CDM), carbon credit projects and the carbon foot printing of selected cities in China. Carbon Action also completed a serious of meetings with representatives from government and business. China is engaging in a series of projects to reduce energy consumption and develop a low carbon economy.

Carbon Action is well placed to assist China with these goals. All of our Quantification, Verification and Project work is based on ISO 14064 the only global standard in carbon measurement and management. ISO 14064 is scheme and country neutral so it cam be applied to any organisation, project in any country. As it is an independently audited system, an organisation can make robust claims about their carbon footprint or reduction projects.

The visit was completed when Carbon Action attended the UK Government Climate Change Project Office Carbon Trade Mission in Beijing. This mission brought together a range of UK companies who can assist China in delivering on its low carbon plan.

The New UK CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme

2010-04-14T10:57:20+00:00

The new Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) Energy Efficiency Scheme began in earnest on the 1st April! The scheme aims to achieve an annual energy reduction of 3.2m tonnes by 2020 and stimulate businesses to make their buildings more energy efficient. It affects around 20,000 organisations.

Any organisation with a half hourly settled electricity meter needs to do something. It was the requirement for qualifying organisations to start monitoring energy usage from all qualifying sources that started on 1st April 2010. And whilst it may be straight forward to gather retrospective data from half hourly sources, this may not always be the case for class 5-8 meters, for example, which are also considered as core sources under the CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme.

Those qualifying for the CRC will also need to register while those under the threshold still need to make an information disclosure. Both actions must be done before 30 September 2010. However, as the process could take up to 4 weeks to complete it should not be left until the 29th September!

A raft of recent surveys indicates just how confused and unprepared organisations are for its implementation

A survey by energy consultancy McKinnon and Clarke found that 54 per cent of participants were uncertain whether they come under the scheme, which encompasses all bodies and businesses with half-hourly meters (HHMs) that consumed more than 6,000 MWh of electricity during 2008. Around 5,000 of the UK’s heaviest energy users will need to participate fully, while another 15,000 odd organisations that consumed less will need to make an information disclosure.

In addition, the survey also found that three in five companies had not factored in the financial implications of having to participate fully in the scheme. At the lowest qualifying level, a typical organisation will pay £45,000 a year to advance purchase allowances at a rate of £12 per tonne of carbon dioxide. In addition, they will be placed in a league table, showing their carbon emissions relative to their peers. Companies at the bottom of the table will be penalised, with the money recycled into rewards for the most energy-efficient.

In another survey by the power supplier Npower, nearly half of companies surveyed said official advice about the new legislation had been “inadequate”. About 49 per cent said they did not understand how to buy the necessary carbon allowances and 44 per cent said they do not know how to forecast their carbon emissions.

A key tool for success within the scheme is to produce a good forecast and strategy, and for that you need good knowledge or ISO 14064. Those with a planned year-on-year approach will perform the best – by starting to make carbon reductions from low-hanging fruit first.

A career in GHG management

2010-03-21T02:59:50+00:00

In these economically distressed times – which could last for a number of years – we need to be alert to emerging trends and to where we should focus our personal development goals? For those of you trying to figure out what discipline will really be important in the next few years, may I recommend a few classes in carbon accounting – every business will need to account for its carbon performance in the coming years – it is a real way to contribute to society and to create a real and productive career and to help society survive and thrive. Becoming a carbon professional is like becoming a doctor during the time of the plague – you are a new science specialist with a real contribution to make to modern life.

Many of us have found ourselves, several times over the last two years wishing we had a carbon accountant at our disposal. This was a universal thought. It didn't matter if we were at a chip maker, in financial services, government departments, local government or the oil and gas business or a software maker or big or small Pharma, or even the Soup Company or local florist or dentist.

But we need to know we are getting the right - and the internationally recognized training in carbon management. Well we need to be sure that our training is in an area fully recognized all over the world – thus it has to be training in the International Standards Organisation (ISO) Green House Gas (GHG) systems - ISO 14064.

On behalf of the ISO, the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) have lead the development of ISO 14064 – a series of international standards dealing with carbon quantification, GHG reduction projects and verification / validation of GHG claims made by businesses.

Our ISO/CSA14064 training provides substantial and robust GHG training which equips our delegates with the tools needed to deal with GHG issues. Our students come from DEFRA, Carbon Trust, DECC, international energy firms, International Banking and Investment houses and engineering, energy, environmental and engineering consultancies.

UK CRC Increases Job Vacancies for Qualified Carbon Consultants

2010-02-01T15:57:59+00:00

April 2010, the UK Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) legislation requires over 5,000 organisations and companies to fully disclose their energy use, and requires another 15,000 to begin collecting baseline data. This means these organisations will have to focus even more on managing and reducing their energy usage. At launch it is has been estimated that this market will be worth £750m in the UK. This new market will need to be serviced by new and existing companies and consultancies focused on calculating and reducing energy output. Carbon consultancies will become very busy servicing this new market, however evidence from the Carbon Show held in London October 2009 suggest there is currently a shortage of qualified and experienced professionals.

Carbon recruitment agencies were interested in acquiring details of trained professionals at the ISO 14064 training stand at the Carbon Show. The recruitment agencies outlined that only 1 in 4 open vacancies are currently being filled with candidates trained in carbon measurement , reduction and verification skills. The carbon recruitment agencies are struggling to fill these positions, this situation will be exacerbated by the introduction of the CRC legislation. They expect that the number of open vacancies will increase over the next 5 - 7 years unless the gap can be filled by trained professionals.

Companies who have an electricity expenditure over £500K per annum will require carbon measurement to be carried out annually and will create a huge need for trained and competent professionals. The employment opportunity for these individuals will be immense.

CSA Highlight the need for Carbon Quantification and Verification Professionals

2009-11-23T10:39:43+00:00

The Canadian Standards Association (CSA) has again highlighted the imminent shortage of trained Carbon quantification and verification personnel at an executive forum of business, industry, environmental and government leaders held at the Canadian Embassy in Washington DC.

According to Suzanne Kiraly, president of CSA Standards, as things stand, the US will require 10,000 facilities to begin reporting carbon emissions in 2010. However when legislators do pass carbon verification or management legislation, this requirement is set to increase dramatically.The CSA has played a key role in setting common standards, and developing policy internationally. The CSA has also recently been very active in the Carribean, working with the Cariri (Caribbean Industrial Research Institute), holding ISO14064 training workshops and a recent seminar at Trinidad and Tobago.

Here at Carbon Action we can see the same scenario playing out as legislators in Europe move towards developing requirements and standards to enable organisations to measure and manage their carbon footprint.

Carbon Quantification and Verification Consultancy- What You Need to Know

2009-11-14T15:31:49+00:00

The Carbon Quantification and Verification industry is becoming more relevant and structured daily, and there are challenges and opportunities for both organisations and practitioners in keeping current and complying with standards and developments. There is undoubtedly still confusion and uncertainty in the carbon consultancy industry due to the lack of a formal standard. However, at this point the ISO 14064 standard looks set to become the internationally agreed standard that is so desperately required.

Many progressive companies are implementing carbon management and are prepared for the change that is inevitable. It’s also clear that many firms to date are not actively reducing carbon emissions, and so therefore have not been recruiting or developing individuals in-house or contracting consultants. One thing is for sure- whatever about the social responsibility aspect of this- it is inevitable that companies will soon be compelled by legislative requirement to manage their carbon footprint. From a societal perspective, it is to be sincerely hoped that agreement will be reached at COP15.

In the UK market where the CRC becomes law in April 2010, some 8000 firms are registered as high energy users and shall be compelled to reduce their emissions. Today many of these organisations are not in a position to handle the CRC challenge robustly – in fact some research indicates up to 60% of firms may not yet be fully aware of their obligations under CRC. So when these factors change, what resources are available?

CRC firms will need to be able to quantify and report their emissions annually – with ISO 14064 they be assured and more importantly they can assure the Environment Agency that their footprint and annual reports are robust and verifiable. As only 20% of CRC will be audited, a firm using ISO14064 or the Carbon Trust Standards can expect to avoid an audit as they will have demonstrated best practice. As the Carbon Footprint Forum has stated on the growth of online transactions and data exchange, data warehouses serving financial transactions, government and NHS issues have doubled in energy requirements and emissions since 2000. Banks, NHS, Revenue, the aviation and travel sectors and other organisations dealing with mass markets use massive amounts of energy and emit very significant GHGs, and will face significant financial liabilities under the CRC.

In the UN’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), uncertainty exists around the actual outcomes of COP15. A failure at Copenhagen may, according to some commentators, lead to a reduced use of CDM-type projects-this would be a backwards step as offsetting does reduce global emissions. In order to reinforce and make CDM–type initiatives more acceptable globally, it would enhance the carbon markets if everyone played on a level played field.

GHG emissions and reductions have today become a commodity with a clear need for an infrastructure to support carbon initiatives. An industry base of competent, credible GHG verifiers and GHG quantifiers is required to support emerging market mechanisms.

There is a major shortage of qualified carbon verifiers in the market, as the following survey highlights indicate:

80% said not enough professionals in this area
80% said likely Enron-type scandal could emerge
80% said area will be professionalized in next few years

This shortage of skilled and competent professionals is going to magnify in the medium term. The large consultancies DNV, SGS, KPMG, PWC, Ernst & Young, WYG, Mott MacDonald and many others are taking an interest in this area. As demand balloons, employment opportunities are likely to materialise within these organisations and within their larger client companies. Competent individuals would also be able to verify and provide consultancy services of their own accord.

So what is the process to demonstrate competence in this new field? Well, high quality training is available to help fill this skills gap in the main GHG sectors of:

GHG Inventories
GHG Projects
GHG Validation and Verification

If an individual obtains the necessary grade in ISO 16064 exams, they are provided with a Certificate of Distinction, which permits them to be considered as having the necessary knowledge to carry out Quantification, Projects or Verification Programme for any organisation in any location, in any jurisdiction in any industry sector, globally. This is the benefit of the ISO 14064 standard.

In addition GHG professionals having gone through a rigorous training program can apply for a Personal Certification qualification – recently developed by the Canadian Standards Association and approved by the American National Standards Association (ANSI). This is facilitated in Europe by Carbon Action.

Carbon Action trains carbon specialists to prepare them for professional work and to take Personal Certification Programs.

Thursday 15 October was World Standards Day - Special Focus on Fighting Global Warming

2009-10-19T00:47:59+00:00

Last Thursday was Global Standards Day with a special focus on fighting climate change. I guess we need standards to keep us on the straight and narrow - without standards people may tend to be a little relaxed about some important stuff. It's OK to be cool about the things that don't hurt us or our kids or friends- but we should try to protect our planet from over consumption and sloppy management of greenhouse gasses - issues which might be happening unless we are alert to what is going on.

Also Thursday 15th October was Blog Action Day 09 (BAD09) - which reached at least 17 million people.

At least three major world governments participated in this year’s blog event - which was all about global warming and climate change. UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown posted the first Blog Action Day entry in Britain and was followed by Foreign Minister David Milliband and many others from the UK stationed around the world. The governing party of Spain hosted a bloggers event focused on climate change and transformed their website for the day to promote Blog Action Day. And late in the day, President Barack Obama’s White House blog joined in become part of the global movement of bloggers shaking the web.

Were you there? If not don't feel bad because tomorrow is another day and you can still make your voice count. As Gandhi said - whatever you do will be insignificant - but it is important that you do it.

We should try to be true to ourselves and think of those coming after us and those people living in low-lying islands in the Pacific who are at real risk of losing their entire countries to sea level rise caused by global warming. I think as well as needing technical standards such as ISO 14064 to keep us on the straight and narrow we need to think big and not be overly concerned with our individual selves ( I do it myself a lot!)

It is interestring that other civilisations failed because of environmental failures

the Maya over farmed in their lands
the people of Easter Island sent out a man to cut down their last tree

A book by Jared Diamond lists the five factors that drive societal failure:

hostile neighbors - probably not a risk today
loss of trading partners - also probably not an issue as trading partners are tripping over each other to trade
environmental damage - a real problem
climatic change - a real problem

and how societies respond to these potentially devastating environmental problems - this is the real problem as countries are argueing over who should do what about climate change - how can we ensure inter-generational as well as international equity in dealing with climate change, unless we all take responsibility?

The general assumption is that civilizations evolve from benign environments that sustain what we may consider a natural state of being, but where poor resource management will lead to certain failure. I think we are at the poor resource management stage today - the real question is what are you and I going to do about it?????

I will leave you with this thought from a long time ago- it asks us to think for ourselves and not to be inattentive of government but to be engaged and active. The gist of it is - we need to be watchful and cautious - Standards are essential!

"...There is no nation on earth powerful enough to accomplish our overthrow. ... Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from another quarter. From the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government, from their carelessness and negligence, I must confess that I do apprehend some danger. I fear that they may place too implicit a confidence in their public servants, and fail properly to scrutinize their conduct; that in this way they may be made the dupes of designing men, and become the instruments of their own undoing." -- Daniel Webster, June 1, 1837

How do we Protect the new Commodity GHG Emissions from Becoming Discredited?

2009-10-08T16:30:20+00:00

Why do we need some mechanism to protect GHG reports from being devalued or adulterated . . . well let's think back to the time when we first created coins. Early silver and gold coins allowed trade to expand and flourish and increased prosperity for most people. Some merchants noticed the coins had smooth edges, so each time a coin passed his way - he "shaved" off a tiny amount of silver or gold from the edge of the coin and built up a stock of gold or silver shavings. This devalued and adulterated the coins. In response the kings and rulers made new coins with serrated or profiled edges to prevent "shaving". Today we can protect our tonnes of CO2 and other GHGs, by measuring and verification under a global harmonised standard - ISO 14064.

GHG emissions and reductions are becoming a commodity. There is a real need for trained and competent:

GHG quantifiers
GHG verifiers
Competent, credible firms working in this space

To support:

emerging market mechanisms, both voluntary and compliance markets,
non-market reporting schemes
corporate social responsibility initiatives

Confused by carbon?

2009-09-24T12:43:13+00:00

You don’t need to be. Use these five steps for carbon performance made simple. Measuring and managing your company’s carbon footprint is a business best practice that is quickly becoming a requirement in today’s competitive marketplace.

Not only do you get to showcase your environmental stewardship and corporate social responsibility, but you also prepare for pending mandates and proposed cap and trade programs. Establishing your carbon footprint can help you reduce risk and potentially even help you ride out the recession. In fact, a new report from A.T. Kearny, Green Winners: the performance of sustainability-focused companies during the economic crisis, shows that companies with established and recognized sustainability practices are outperforming their peers that are not committed to sustainability during the current economic crisis.

So why isn’t everyone doing it? Why haven’t you done it yet?

Perhaps it’s because the carbon management world looks confusing—maybe even a little intimidating. It’s probably outside the core competency of your organization. You know it needs to be done, but how do you go about it?

What the C-Suite and senior management need to know are the basics of carbon performance. When you’re familiar with the ABCs, you can make informed decisions and lead your organization down the right paths.

It’s a step-by-step process

Just as it has with its ISO 9000 quality management family of standards, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has developed a comprehensive, usable, international standard for carbon management under its 14000 environmental management family: the ISO 14064 series (the author’s organization, the Canadian Standards Association, acted as World Secretariat for the development of ISO 14064).

ISO 14064-1 Part 1 Specification with Guidance at the Organizational Level for Quantification and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Removals provides principles and requirements for quantifying and reporting an organization’s carbon footprint. This standard breaks the process down into five steps:

Setting Organizational Parameters and Boundaries
Measuring GHG Activity
Choosing Methodologies
Reporting
Verification

* extract from article by Dr michel Girard, Director Canadian Standards Association. CSA is a strategic partner of CMSE