|
THE
European Parliament voted on April 3 to
exempt international flights from paying
for the EU carbon emissions amid pressure
from national governments to continue applying
the rule to domestic flights only.
The
European Parliament voted by 458 votes to
120 to limit the current regulation to domestic
flights until at least 2016, a spokesman
for the Parliament said in a statement,
reported Reuters.
The
vote marks the end of three years of debate,
during which China and the United States
had threatened retaliation if the EU forged
ahead with plans to tax carbon emissions
over non-EU airspace.
Indeed,
only five per cent of airlines complied
with an EU deadline at the end of March
to report 2013 carbon emissions, according
to preliminary figures published by the
European Commission (EC), reported Reuters.
The
preliminary figures showed just a small
group complied, noted Thomson Reuters Point
Carbon analysts. Lufthansa and Ryanair reported
no emissions, while Qatar Airways reported
in under the rules.
EC
records, published after deadline under
Europe's Emissions Trading System (ETS),
show carbon output from 13,000 power plants,
factories and airlines.
"This
should not be surprising due to the continuous
regulatory uncertainty for airlines operators,"
said Thomson Reuters Point Carbon analyst
Emil Dimantchev.
In
2012, the EU started charging all airlines
for emissions, but confined regulatory reach
to domestic flights after many countries
questioned the EU's right to tax carbon
emissions over non-EU airspace.
To
restore the tax, the EC proposed extending
the current rules to cover all emissions
made in EU airspace from 2013 until a global
scheme is agreed in 2016, though the UN's
International Civil Aviation Organisation
(ICAO) puts an enforcement date in 2020.
Last
September, nearly 190 nations at ICAO, the
UN aviation body, agreed to design a worldwide
scheme to limit aviation emissions by 2016,
which will eventually take effect in 2020.
Some
EU member states oppose the plan because
they say it risks angering major trading
partners, recalling China's boycott of European
plane maker Airbus.
In
February, the EC said member states are
not expected to enforce compliance deadlines
for reporting 2013 emissions due in March.
But the British government, responsible
for policing airlines, warned that the position
is unclear.
"If
the commission's proposal is rejected by
the European Parliament on April 3, airlines
may be required to report emissions,"
said Britain's environment agency's newsletter.
In
response to the rigidity of the measure,
the US air carriers also lobbied the European
Union (EU) not to threaten fines for breaking
its carbon emissions regulations, as non-compliance
could lead to fines of millions of euros.
Mr
Dimantchev said fines could amount to EUR39
million (US$54 million) and the necessity
to by credits in the EU's carbon trading
taxation scheme.
"We
continue to push for a clear statement of
relief from the application of the pending
deadlines," declared the US airline
association A4A.
A4A
said such a statement would avoid invoking
the US blocking law, under which American
carriers can shelter from compliance with
the EU rules.
The
governing European Commission said most
airlines, covering 98 per cent of emissions,
have complied and it relies on member states
to punish those that do not. The EU can
take member states to court if they fail
to enforce the law.
There
is a EUR100 per non-registered tonne fine,
plus the obligation to buy carbon credits
to cover the non-registered amount.
The
UK agreed to go ahead with enforcement,
but it wanted EU-wide application first.
Britain also said the deadline should be
2020, by which time the UN's International
Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) is to
have a global plan in place.
But
an EU official said there was "a broad
consensus among member states and the European
Commission that the law needs to be implemented"
after a closed-door meeting.
The
US and China said the EU law was a breach
of sovereignty and threatened retaliation,
with China having already blocked Airbus
orders.
In
response to the opposition, the European
Union did not apply its law against intercontinental
flights using EU airports, but it did so
against flights within the EU.
Some
European carriers say they are at a disadvantage
if long-haul flights do not pay, and thus
support enforcement.
And
some EU member states came out against the
plan, fearing it could spark a trade war
with major trading partners and hamper progress
towards a globally-agreed deal to curb fast-rising
aviation emissions.
|
