Corporate Europe Observatory

Exposing the power of corporate lobbying in the EU

Industry hits carbon leakage jackpot

Industry lobbying on emissions trading scheme hits the jackpot: the cases of Arcelor Mittal and LafargeIndustry is currently claiming that a 30% climate emissions reduction target will result in carbon leakage - because companies will be forced to relocate from Europe. New research from CEO shows how heavy industry has already succeeded in using this argument to lobby for free permits under the Emissions Trading Scheme - and how companies including Arcelor Mittal and Lafarge have made windfall profits as a result. CEO research shows how lobbying by heavy industry exagerates the threat of carbon leakage. The cases of Arcelor Mittal and Lafarge.
arcelor
  • Dansk
  • Nederlands
  • English
  • Suomi
  • Français
  • Deutsch
  • Ελληνικά
  • Italiano
  • Bokmål
  • Polski
  • Portuguese
  • Română
  • Slovenščina
  • Español
  • Svenska

Climate Change Commissioner Connie Hedegaard has indicated that the EU could increase the EU target for CO2 emission cuts to 30% by 2020, from 20%. The suggestion, currently being discussed by the Commission, has intensified opposition from energy intensive industries, including the cement and steel sectors, which have repeated threats that they will be forced to relocate outside the EU. Yet recent figures show that industry has benefited significantly from EU climate policy. Arcelor Mittal, Lafarge and other companies will have a huge surplus of CO2 emissions permits at the end of the second phase of the EU's emissions trading scheme (ETS) in 2012, just as in phase one (2005-2007). These permits were received free of charge and are worth hundreds of millions of euros. Research by Corporate Europe Observatory shows how these companies have lobbied EU institutions intensively to ensure they retain these benefits in the next phase of the ETS (2013-2020). By using threats of relocation and increased global emissions (carbon leakage), plus scaremongering about massive job losses, these industries have managed to ensure that the ETS will remain a way of providing significant subsidies for some of Europe's worst polluters.

The European Commission has an opportunity to reverse this situation in the next few weeks. By June 2010 it has to submit its assessment of the proposal for dealing with carbon leakage. The huge assets gained by European manufacturing industries reveal the flaws in their claims. They should not be entitled to more free allocations. In the same way, the Commission must resist industry's demands and move quickly to go beyond a 30% commitment.

Download the report

Climate Change Commissioner Connie Hedegaard has indicated that the EU could increase the EU target for CO2 emission cuts to 30% by 2020, from 20%. The suggestion, currently being discussed by the Commission, has intensified opposition from energy intensive industries, including the cement and steel sectors, which have repeated threats that they will be forced to relocate outside the EU. Yet recent figures show that industry has benefited significantly from EU climate policy. Arcelor Mittal, Lafarge and other companies will have a huge surplus of CO2 emissions permits at the end of the second phase of the EU's emissions trading scheme (ETS) in 2012, just as in phase one (2005-2007). These permits were received free of charge and are worth hundreds of millions of euros. Research by Corporate Europe Observatory shows how these companies have lobbied EU institutions intensively to ensure they retain these benefits in the next phase of the ETS (2013-2020). By using threats of relocation and increased global emissions (carbon leakage), plus scaremongering about massive job losses, these industries have managed to ensure that the ETS will remain a way of providing significant subsidies for some of Europe's worst polluters. The European Commission has an opportunity to reverse this situation in the next few weeks. By June 2010 it has to submit its assessment of the proposal for dealing with carbon leakage. The huge assets gained by European manufacturing industries reveal the flaws in their claims. They should not be entitled to more free allocations. In the same way, the Commission must resist industry's demands and move quickly to go beyond a 30% commitment. Download the report
 

As many civil society groups walk back in to the UN climate talks today in Bonn after walking out last November in Warsaw [X], authors of the COP19 Guide to Corporate Lobbying [X], Corporate Europe Observatory, warn that unless we end the cosy relationship between political leaders and the dirty

Concerted lobbying from Europe’s dirtiest industries has resulted in the gutting of EU climate and energy proposals, it has emerged today.

They meet at birthday parties, over breakfast meetings, during cocktail receptions; so just how close are Europe’s dirtiest industries to senior politicians and regulators? And what influence is this lobbying having on the EU’s official climate change policy? These are the kind of questions we need to be asking as leaders from the 28 EU member states try to reach agreement on Europe’s climate targets for 2030. This scrutiny is particularly urgent because – as this privileged access might imply – these industries appear to have been extremely successful at watering down EU climate and energy legislation. Read the new briefing by CEO and Friends of the Earth Europe.
A trade deal between the EU and the US risks opening the backdoor for the expansion of fracking in Europe and the US, reveals a new report by Corporate Europe Observatory together with other groups. As part of the deal currently being negotiated, energy companies could be allowed to take governments to private arbitrators if they attempt to regulate or ban fracking and the dangerous exploitation of unconventional fossil fuels. Campaigners are urging the EU not to include such rights in trade deals.
A crusade for big business-friendly deregulation, waged during José Manuel Barroso's Presidency of the European Commission, shows no signs of stopping. This neoliberal push to weaken or block new legislation appears likely to expand with Jean-Claude Juncker's new Commission team.
Our correspondence with Pr. Anne Glover, the current Chief Scientific Adviser to the President of the European Commission (CSA), on her role in the European Commission's review of endocrine disrupting chemicals shows how the very existence of her position was used by business-friendly interests to convey key messages to the top of the European Commission's hierarchy, playing a determining role in the massive delay now inflicted to the European Commission's handling of this important public health regulation. We ask that the CSA position is not renewed in the new Juncker Commission.
Will EFSA become more transparent, and to lobbyists or scientists? After its public consultation on its draft transparency policy, the Authority must now choose.
Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) today criticised the plenary vote of MEPs to approve the Jean-Claude Juncker Commission.

Corporate Europe Forum