EU stands firm as polluting tax row threatens Airbus sales

Jun 25, 2011
EU climate action commissioner Connie Hedegaard is pictured on June 21. The EU refused Saturday to back down on a planned pollution tax on airline companies after reports China has put an Airbus order on ice and growing discontent in the United States.

The EU refused Saturday to back down on a planned pollution tax on airline companies after reports China has put an Airbus order on ice and growing discontent in the United States.

Expectations that Hong Kong Airlines would announce a contract to buy billions of euros worth of aircraft failed to materialise this week at the Paris air show, prompting fears Beijing may have blocked the order.

A source close to the matter who asked not to be identified told AFP he was aware of "the possibility that China could put the deal on ice."

He said it is well known that "the Chinese government is very unhappy" about legislation bringing airlines operating in Europe into the EU's system.

That comes as US companies fine-tune their legal challenge to the European Union in a Luxembourg court -- a hearing is set for July 5 -- and follows concerns expressed this month by Airbus.

Isaac Valero Ladron, spokesman for EU climate action commissioner Connie Hedegaard, said the row has resurfaced because companies are looking at the award in September of emissions allowances post-2012 based on past pollution data forcing airlines to pay for their pollution.

"I cannot comment on internal dealings between Chinese authorities and companies," the spokesman said, indicating that the anticipated political pressure from Beijing over commercial plane-buying decisions.

"Whatever the Chinese or the Americans are saying, there is no Plan B -- we don't intend to back down," he said.

The legislation, adopted in 2008, is to enter into force on January 1, 2012.

Based on figures from 2004-6, companies get a set emissions allowance and then bid to buy the remaining 15 percent of the available polluting rights -- the equivalent of 200 million tonnes of annually.

The spokesman said "the only other possibility open to the Chinese or the Americans" is a provision to exempt companies where their countries have implemented "equivalent measures" to reduce carbon emissions.

He added that Airbus planes are considered "fuel-efficient, meaning lower emissions."

China earlier this year announced reductions in its emissions targeted for 2020, which is "something we're analysing," the commission spokesman said.

While the commission is "confident" its case will stand up in court, Chinese airlines have also indicated they plan to lodge legal action alongside the China Air Transport Association.

They fear the country's aviation sector will have to pay an additional 800 million yuan ($122 million) a year on flights originating or landing in Europe, and that the cost could be almost four times higher by 2020.

Explore further: Pilot plant for the removal of extreme gas charges from deep waters installed

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

EU extends hacker-induced emissions trading halt

Jan 27, 2011

The EU extended a freeze Thursday on trading in carbon credits ordered after hackers broke into national trading registries and stole and then sold millions of euros worth of polluting rights.

EU sets new limits on CO2 emissions for vans

Feb 15, 2011

The European parliament signed off Tuesday on new carbon dioxide restrictions for commercial vans to cut fuel costs and limit emissions blamed for global warming.

Study says Chinese air quality standards not yet met

May 13, 2008

With the Olympic Games in sight, the Chinese Government is committed to improving the air quality in Beijing, and has had measures in place since 1998 which have already made a difference. However, there is still some way ...

EU to ban China, India carbon credits trade

Jan 21, 2011

Europe is to ban a highly lucrative trade in polluting rights obtained by European-based companies under a UN scheme to favour environmentally-friendly industrial investment in the likes of China or India.

Recommended for you

Finding innovative solutions for reducing CO2 emissions

36 minutes ago

Today, the company Gaznat SA and EPFL signed an agreement for the creation of two new research chairs. The first one will study ways to seize carbon dioxide (CO2) at its production source and increase its value ...

Rolling lab tracks methane to its source

2 hours ago

McHenry Township, Lycoming County. Equipped with a gray box, a map and an SUV, Thomas Lauvaux and a team from Penn State's Department of Meteorology has been at it for hours, taking measurements and racking ...

What we've learned from the Boxing Day tsunami

2 hours ago

Much has been learned from the devastating experience of the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami, and it's had lasting benefits for disaster management plans in Australia, according to forensic staff from the University of Adelaide.

UN sends team to clean up Bangladesh oil spill

18 hours ago

The United Nations said Thursday it has sent a team of international experts to Bangladesh to help clean up the world's largest mangrove forest, more than a week after it was hit by a huge oil spill.

How will climate change transform agriculture?

19 hours ago

Climate change impacts will require major but very uncertain transformations of global agriculture systems by mid-century, according to new research from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

User comments : 9

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

omatumr
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 25, 2011
Are politicians really concerned about pollution?

Has pollution outstripped global warming as their main concern?

Or are both of these issues simply being used for some other purpose?

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel


rlbond86
3 / 5 (8) Jun 26, 2011
omatumr, carbon dioxide pollution causes global warming.
bluehigh
3 / 5 (6) Jun 26, 2011
I will be brave and suffer the howls of protest. I try to protect myself with qualifiers; atmospheric pollution is bad, climate is changing and human associated emissions whether through rice crops, cow farts or hydrocarbon related emissions etc must have some effect ... BUT ribond86 it is not an established fact that carbon dioxide emissions cause global warming (even if I believe it true). The evidence is that climate change (specifically global warming) precedes rises in atmospheric carbon dioxide content and is therefore unlikely a specific cause but rather an effect. Even if an amplifying or feedback inducing effect, still not a prima facae cause.

ted208
2.1 / 5 (7) Jun 26, 2011
The EU is going down to tube just listen to the talking heads.
Listen to the Jill Duggan interview about ½ way through @:

http://www.mtr137...;id=8095

EU climate action commissioner Connie Hedegaard is as thick as a brick as are most people in her department. In Australia recently she sent down Jill Duggan the EU carbon commissioner. As an expert on carbon markets for the European Commissions Directorate-General for Climate Action, Duggan will help mastermind the EUs bold and massively expensive plans to reduce Europes carbon emissions by 20 per cent by 2020.
Turns out she could not answer the most basic of climate, Temp, costs or CO2 questions on a radio interview.
She was asked: Cont....
ted208
2.1 / 5 (7) Jun 26, 2011
Cont...
1st question: Whats the expected cost is of this grand Europe-wide scheme to reduce carbon emissions by 20 per cent by 2020. Duggan says she doesnt have a figure. So her interviewers put to her the estimate by (non-sceptic) Richard Tol: $250 billion.

2nd question: Does Duggan know what the estimated effect on global temperatures will be if Europe goes it alone in its carbon emissions reduction campaign? Her interviewers tell her 0.05 degrees C by 2100.

Youre in charge of a massive programme to re-jig an economy and you dont know what it costs and you dont know what it will achieve,

Duggan claims that a million green jobs have been created in Germany; and that many hundreds of thousands of green jobs are going to be created in Britain. Really?.That would seem to contradict the real world evidence, which shows that, far from creating jobs; government investment in renewable energy is in fact destroying jobs in the real economy.
omatumr
1.9 / 5 (9) Jun 26, 2011
omatumr, carbon dioxide pollution causes global warming.


Science does support that conclusion [1,2]. Eisenhower explained on 17 Jan 1961 why a "scientific-technological elite" of government-funded scientists would claim it does [3].

1. "Super-fluidity in the solar interior: Implications for solar eruptions and climate",
Journal of Fusion Energy 21, 193-198 (2002)

http://arxiv.org/.../0501441

2. "Earth's Heat Source - The Sun", Energy and Environment 20, 131-144 (2009)

http://arxiv.org/pdf/0905.0704

3. Eisenhower's Farewll Address to the Nation (17 Jan 1961) with a warning about future dangers of a federal "scientific-technological-elite"

www.youtube.com/w...ld5PR4ts
lengould100
3.7 / 5 (6) Jun 27, 2011
Let's see if I get this straight. Omatumr and others fear the dangers of a "scientific-technological-elite" so therefore reject science based findings on climate change, regardless of the outcome.

I think that meshes well with the denial activity I've seen thus far.
ricarguy
1.7 / 5 (6) Jun 27, 2011
It is clear that global-warming / climate-change is being used as an argument for control over the masses. But not all at once, only in incremental steps. These people do not believe in individual freedom, they believe that only the enlightened, as they define it, can understand and therefore must regulate the un-enlightened. They claim that this is "a moral issue" (thus stifling further debate and avoiding the need for justification), and that their ends justify the means. Already these policies have demonstrated themselves to be costing jobs overall. The green job revolution has thus far proven itself an oft-repeated myth.

"A lie told often enough becomes the truth."
- Lenin (1870 - 1924)
lengould100
4 / 5 (4) Jun 28, 2011
So you can't stand a "scientific-technological-elite", you clearly don't want an artistic elite, in fact the only elite you can stand for is a religious one, provided they spout the same fantasies which your parents fed you as children.

Where have we seen this attitude before...? Oh yeah. Islamic fundamentalists.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.