Carbon trading and the US Dollar

The collapsing US dollar is playing havoc with ETS projections. Governments that had been hoping to make extra revenue by selling carbon permits will now lose money, which means less cash available for subsidies to the developing countries.

That was exposed by this week’s Mid Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook from the Australian Treasury.

In the past six months the Rudd government’s CPRS has gone from being a net contributor to revenue to a big cost – mainly because of the rising Australian dollar.

The CPRS was a $208 million benefit to the budget; now it’s a $1.2 billion cost over the forward estimates (to 2012-13). Over 10 years the net cost is now $2.5 billion.

In 2013-14, according to Treasury’s new forecasts, revenue from the sale of permits will total $12.1 billion and the cost of assistance measures will be $13.7 billion – a $1.6 billion budget hole.

The MYEFO says: “While world carbon prices have remained stable, the appreciation of the Australian dollar has resulted in the A$ carbon price estimate for 2012-13 falling from A$29 per tonne in the 2009-10 Budget to A$26 per tonne. A lower A$ carbon price assumption directly lowers the amount of revenue that is expected to be collected from the sale of CPRS permits.”

via Carbon trading in the dollar doldrums – Alan Kohler – News – Business Spectator.

Australia’s new concessions on energy

Reuters reports

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd would ask state leaders to sign off on further concessions for big electricity users including pulp and paper, steel, cement and silicon industries at a meeting on Thursday in Hobart, the Australian newspaper said in an unsourced report.

The centre-left government has already foreshadowed an exemption for aluminium, which consumes about 15 percent of electricity nationally.

Major industries had complained about the “double whammy” from a planned carbon emissions trading system, set to begin next year, and the new renewable energy target, which requires electricity retailers and large users to source 20 percent of their energy needs from renewable sources by 2020.

 

By removing the target for the major energy produces, the govt. is really cutting down strength of its renewble energy policy.

However, if the carbon trading should do what its suppossed to do then there is no need for a second target for energy?

Emissions trade price tag: 2 latte’s a week

reasury modelling released by the Federal Government today shows there would be a minimal reduction of growth under an emissions trading scheme.

But it also shows that households will spend around $5 a week extra on electricity and $2 a week on gas, and lower-income households will be more affected.

The modelling says annual growth would slow by 0.1 per cent and early action is key to keeping costs low.

It also says the introduction of a scheme would be likely to produce a one-off spike in inflation of around 1 to 1.5 per cent, but there would be minimal impacts on future levels of inflation.

via Emissions trade price tag: $7 a week – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)