Friday 18 April 2014
Advertise  |  Subscribe  |  Register  | 

Close

About cookies: we use cookies to support features like login and sharing articles. Keep cookies enabled to enjoy the full site experience. By browsing our site with cookies enabled, you are agreeing to their use. Review our cookies information for more details.

Understanding industrial reality is a necessity

21.02.2013 / 03:35 CET
The ETS is functioning as intended, it is not “dying a slow, painful death” as previously suggested.

The article “Turning point for ETS” (14-20 February) gives cause to remind everybody what the emissions-trading system (ETS) is meant to be. The scheme is supposed to be a cost-effective, market-based instrument to reduce emissions from industry by 21% by 2020. The objective is to reduce CO2 emissions, not to create a high carbon price. Current prices for emissions allowances reflect the economic situation and will go up again once European industry has returned to growth. The ETS is functioning as intended. It is not “dying a slow, painful death” as the article suggests. 

The article states that climate policy is not strangling EU business, but this is totally incorrect. Deindustrialisation in Europe is a reality for thousands of employees affected by a series of plant closures and massive staff reductions in the manufacturing industries in the past year.

Industry is moving away from Europe, and companies explicitly state energy costs as the main reason. Investment is made in the US for example, where gas costs one-third and electricity half of what companies have to pay in Europe. Of course, there are also companies with business models based on selling fuel or energy at higher prices. But this does not mean that high energy costs are generally a good thing.

The EU itself has published calculations saying that, for large energy users such as the steel industry, each euro increase in carbon prices will result in an additional €190 million in energy costs.

Competitors outside Europe do not have to bear such costs. Synergies that ‘could' be created between climate policy and economic innovation, which ‘would' address youth unemployment at the same time, are not a reality. They are attractive ideas, but why not try first to keep the real jobs we have here and now?

Jobs in the European steel industry are not “unsustainable”, provided there is a level playing-field with global competitors.

Future technological challenges for the EU, whether these are in mobility, infrastructure or energy, depend on innovative steels. The European steel industry is a world leader in technology and environmental protection. Steel supplies from outside the EU have a considerably larger carbon footprint.

Eurofer welcomes the Commission's initiative to present a green paper on the 2030 energy and climate package. The European steel industry supports a sound climate and energy policy that integrates social and economic objectives.

Gordon Moffat

Director-general, Eurofer (European Steel Association)

Brussels

© 2014 European Voice. All rights reserved.
Varrow

Most viewed in Environment

Poland referred to ECJ over F-gases

Commission issues infringement notices on a range of environmental issues.

Gavel

Related articles

Commission issues infringement notices on a range of environmental issues.

I read with great interest your recent coverage of the European Commission's communication 2030 targets (“Barroso drops binding green energy goal”, 9-15 January).

Proposals would tighten national emissions ceilings and limit pollution from small installations.

The real threat to the European economy is not carbon leakage, but that the low-carbon future will happen elsewhere.

Advertisement

Comments

 

Your comment
Please note: The fields followed by an asterisk (*) are obligatory fields

Comment*

Name*
E-mail*
Website

Please, copy the code on the left into the box on the right

 I accept the Terms & conditions
 I would like to share my e-mail & website

Advertisement

Cookies info | Privacy policy | Terms & conditions