China Vs EU

[Piltdown Man]

EU Aviation Prevention Department scores again!

Yet more unelected numpties in Brussels/Strasbourg/Wherever decide, probably at the end of yet another lunch (with undoubtably excellent wine and after meal "entertainment") I've paid for, to unilaterally implement a new tax. Quite reasonably China, Russia and India tell them to stick their tax up these numptie's pleasure zones. The tax will neither save the planet nor make it a better place to live, just more expensive and a little more unstable. Short of scrapping the tax, there is no solution.

[akerosid]

China says "get stuffed"

China has banned its carriers from co-operating with the new EU tax. The move is certain to raise the tempo in this dispute. One can't help wondering if this was communicated to Chancellor Merkel during her recent visit to China.

The ball is in the EU's court on this; will they force the issue (resulting in suspensions of flights?) or back down. I predict the former, largely because the latter would be the intelligent move, given the EU's other, far more pressing problems.

China to defy EU emissions tax - World News, Breaking News - Independent.ie

[2EggOmelette]

Excellent to see. There is always the possibility that it could end up in the WTO's lap for arbitration. This in itself could be an interesting move as the WTO interests lie in the global arena. Wether the EU would pay any notice to this, or for that mater ICAO (who are currently strangely silent on this matter) remains to be seen. The EU does have a habit of screwing up.

[lomapaseo]

ICAO (who are currently strangely silent on this matter)

I believe that ICAO has no power to over-rule laws of Nations, thus the silence. Instead it lets its individual members speak.

Its individual members however, may come together under ICAO and adopt any non-binding resolution that suits them and to then present it to their individual governments for rejection.

[2EggOmelette]

Understood Lomp, and I'm glad to hear it. Would be a major worry if they could over rule a sovereign nation. However, surely though they can rattle the sabres and create a hullabaloo? Or must this be requested by the member nations first?

[lomapaseo]

However, surely though they can rattle the sabres and create a hullabaloo? Or must this be requested by the member nations first?

Like anything to do with the UN it would probably take years to get it out of committee for presentation to those sovereign nations.

I'm reminded of the reverse of "speak softly and carry a big stick"

[2EggOmelette]

I have the feeling that this will drag out for quite some time..........

''Governments opposed to the EU climate levy on international aviation have agreed a limited package of counter-measures during a meeting in Moscow.''

BBC News - EU aviation climate charge faces limited opposition

[gtf]

Maybe a bit of calm reading...

China has banned its carriers from co-operating with the new EU tax.

Not quite. China banned its carriers from paying for emission credits. Guess what? Credits for the first year are free and all Chinese airlines have already applied for theirs!

"Governments opposed to the EU climate levy on international aviation have agreed a limited package of counter-measures during a meeting in Moscow."

Limited because they couldn't agree on stronger sanction, the US said not worth a trade war. The EU opponents want this solved at the ICAO, what the EU asked for all along.

Me thinks lots of noise and quiet negotiations will solve this.

[fdr]

Schadenfreude? Nein!

The arrogance of the EU commissioners is only matched by the irrelevance of the processes they produce.

Imposing unilateral decisions across borders is an affront to the sovereignty of the nations confronted by this action.

How does the ETS "tax" in any meaningful manner change the fundamental underlying issue of excessive population (with principal growth in 3rd world nations), excessive energy consumption by the 1st world nations, reliance on finite energy resources? It is assumed that the ETS evolves from the concern about the grand experiment that civilisation has elected to undertake; of unchecked pollutants being discharged into a closed system without consideration to their impact on the system behaviour.

The ETS has similarities with one certain fiddler in Rome.... it takes skill to be both arrogant and irrelevant concurrently. The problems of the rock are in need of rational and timely input, lest the outcome be allowed to continue the petrie dish experiment that is currently underway.

As instituted, the EU is way out of line imposing tax on activity outside of it's borders.
Tax is hardly an effective method to adjust the direction of the program in the time available.
ICAO's failure to develop any meaningful change to the aviation industry's component of energy consumption or pollution is in keeping with the UN's inability to achieve meaningful progress in general.

What we need is for Scotty to beam us up, as in general, as stewards of the planet, we have collectively failed miserably.

We are in deep doo doo.

Whoops, daydreaming again.... gotta go drive an imported SUV down to the corner store, buy some food that has been shipped around 1/2 the world from a 3rd world nation that employs child labor, fill up the truck with fuel imported from another nation that is actively engaged in destabilising it's part of the world, send some clothes made in a country with no labor laws, (and no rules on pollution) to a tailor to get adjusted to fit my 1st world body shape, and of course send alms to Greenpeace, WWF, CCF etc to ease my conscience. At the same time, I can at least use an 3G IPAD, (made in a shining example of free enterprise that is Foxconn) to watch the quality Murdoch drivel that passes for news and current affairs in this part of the world, while munching on a GM grain fed battery bred chicken part stuck between two slices of Monsanto's finest Frankenflour bread, while drinking some French red laced with CH3OH, off a paper plate infused with PCB's and sundry organochlorides. But then, just as you start to wonder if civilisation is a Scud missile, going somewhere unknown and usually ending with an untidy mess.... I am going to go crank up a little jet, and go burn up some fossil fuel and emit great belches of CO2 working on projects to improve fuel efficiency and reduce CO2 emissions. Self interest is alive and well, just ask the Concordia's Captain. Oh yes, the airport car parking price will also be somewhat more than the price of the air ticket I pay to get to the testing area....

China 1, EU 0, civilisation -1

PS: I'm voting for Cpt Schettino to be EU Commissioner, anyone with either the panache, calm (or lack of SA) to reportedly order room service while the Titanic is taking a decidedly undesirable reduction in metacentric height... should fit right in within Brussels (Washington, Moscow, Abuja, Manama, Canberra... etc).

[ExXB]

Originally Posted by gtf

Not quite. China banned its carriers from paying for emission credits. Guess what? Credits for the first year are free and all Chinese airlines have already applied for theirs!

Not quite. In 2012 85% of the credits are free. 15% are to be paid for.

Limited because they couldn't agree on stronger sanction, the US said not worth a trade war. The EU opponents want this solved at the ICAO, what the EU asked for all along.

The EU has no standing with ICAO (or any UN organisation) other than 'observer status', they are not allowed to speak. Only the 27 MS are allowed to negotiate. At the last meeting the EU told the MS not to propose anything that differed from ETS and not to agree anything other than ETS. Some negotiation.

ETS is misguided. CO2 produced from aviation is a low percentage of the total and aviation fuel cannot be substituted by anything else. Offsets, which do have a positive effect, cannot be used. Work is in progress for a 'green' drop-in substitute, but we are a long way from there.

The objective of the EC Commissioner for Climate change is to have airlines reduce their burn in the only way possible, buy reducing the number of flights. As the 85% free credits will reduce over time it only means that aviation will become more expensive (with no positive return from the extra expense) and it will become less efficient. Any airline that wants to grow (like the Chinese attempting to compete with EU airlines) has another trade barrier to face.

[2EggOmelette]

Haha, this just get funnier.

China blocks Airbus deals over EU carbon tax, says EADS................

BBC News - China blocks Airbus deals over EU carbon tax, says EADS

[panda-k-bear]

Hilarious, I'm sure

BBC News - Aviation plea to leaders over EU price on carbon

[2EggOmelette]

Ah good. I was wondering what the "sarcasm" icon was, i needed that for the last post.
However, it is depressingly hilarious, this is without doubt. It Affects many businesses, and therefore staff and passengers. Perhaps not so much for EU based operations (although many of them now disagree as Panda has shown us) but severely effects operations from further distant bases, especially those who operate from a hemisphere away.
The main points of argument against seem to be that 1). Why charge a company from point of departure regardless of whether if in the EU? What basis does the EU base this rationale? And 2). Why charge aviation so much when they are responsible for only 7% of carbon emissions in the UK let alone Europe when other commercial transport (excluding Aviation) is responsible for 25%! Residential emissions (that the every day person) are at 25% and business makes up the rest (42%).
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Q&A: Aviation emissions
The fact is that all this rubbish started in 1997 with the seriously flawed Kyoto protocol. This protocol is so flawed that many countries are finding what ever way they can to exit it.
Europe has not.
ICAO was asked to come up with some sort of solution. They cant, because many of the countries that are member states of ICAO know what a pile of rubbish the protocol happens to be. If the member states cant agree, then ICAO can not form a mandate that its member nations must import into national law.
In 2003, the EU approached ICAO and its member states in regard to "trade credits" which are simpily a joke. These are nothing more than a form of fictional currency, and in itself a whole story to be told elsewhere in the annals of ridiculous history. The problem being, that ICAO was still powerless as no one can agree as to what the hell reality really is in regards to climate change.
This problem is exasperated as none of the 27 ICAO nations can negotiate independently with the EU. Why is this? ICAO is obviously not working, so what's the harm in independent negotiations?
Oh that's right, I'm sorry, I forgot! We are dealing with the unelected EU cronies here. My bad.
I can only thankfully say that the EU only has observer status with ICAO.
Not so long ago, the US took this issue to the EU court.... Guess what happened!
So now the EU likes to remind us that in 2012, 85% of credits are free! wow. This is like going to Noel Leemings! Can I get Hire purchase with this? You bet. That's exactly what this is!
How many billions of Euros are to be made out of this in the following 3 years?
Someone, and for the life of me I cant remember who, mentioned the possible involvement of the WTO. This would be useful as it is utterly removed from most EU influence. However, I see no evidence that this has yet begun.
I guess that's why China has taken the course it has. That is, to stop all Chinese airlines from paying any form of tax/compensation in regard to this issue, And now it would seem, to prevent any purchases from European aeroplane manufacturing companies.
This sound suspiciously like the start of a Trade war.
It has European companies worried.
BA, Virgin, Lufthansa, AF, Iberia.
All have expressed their concern. And yet the unelected EU bureaucrats will not pull their heads out of their rectums.
This is a concern. For all of us.

[brakedwell]

And yet the unelected EU bureaucrats will not pull their heads out of their rectums.

That's because their empty heads are too far up their orifices

[powerstall]

So i'm guessing now who bent over?

[ironbutt57]

Sell you a 300 million dollar aircraft, then give you a bill when you pollute their skies with it...hmmmmm

Next up, "buy our Airbus for 300 million, and we give you 300 million ETS credits....

[mattman]

Lufthansa CEO: A380 rights to Shanghai denied in ETS dispute

And so it Begins........................



Lufthansa CEO: A380 rights to Shanghai denied in ETS dispute


China’s opposition to the European Union’s Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS), has prevented Lufthansa (LH) from obtaining rights to operate an Airbus A380 to Shanghai, LH chairman and CEO Christoph Franz said.

“The EU ETS is further increasing the already distorted level playing. We [the European airline industry] cannot accept retaliatory measures against the EU ETS in whatever form, landing rights or other. Some days ago, Lufthansa once again did not get the authorization to use an A380 to Shanghai,” Franz told the European Aviation Club in Brussels Tuesday.

“Listening and nodding is not enough,” he warned European regulators. “We are in favor of a global solution [under ICAO]; however, in the meantime there is distortion. This distortion has started for Lufthansa in the second half of 2011 when we started hedging and buying CO2 certificates. We are trapped in a corner,” he said.

LH has said it will have to buy at least 35% of the ETS certificates it needs this year and has estimated the ETS cost on group level this year at €130 million ($171.4 million). It decided to pass on this cost to the passenger and include it in the fuel surcharge.

Franz slammed regulators for not addressing other market distortions and for not creating the right regulatory framework for European network airlines to thrive. “There are some indications that [European Commission’s] DG Competition will analyze subsidies to low cost carriers. It is a scandal that Ryanair receives €18 support per passenger at Charleroi airport (CRL) while Brussels Airlines [in which LH holds 45%] has to pay €26 in passenger duties and taxes at Brussels airport, which is just 45 km away [from CRL].”

He also criticized the inability of European and national authorities to deal with the massive influx of capacity by airlines from the Arabian Gulf states. LH offers some 7,000 weekly seats from Germany, which has 82 million inhabitants, to the Gulf states, whereas the airlines from the Gulf states, which have 6 to 7 million inhabitants, offer 38,000 seats to Germany, Franz said. “This is real distorted market access, today. This is not a forecasted situation for tomorrow. This has to be addressed through bilateral agreements because air transport is not part of the WTO and thus the normal instruments of addressing such market distortions are not there.”

Lufthansa CEO: A380 rights to Shanghai denied in ETS dispute | ATWOnline

[500 above]

And so it continues....

[vinayak]

India to ask airlines to boycott of European Union's carbon credit scheme

India will urge its airlines not to take part in the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), a senior official said. This is the latest salvo in an escalating row over an EU law requiring all flights in and out of Europe to pay for their emissions.

China, in February, said its airlines were barred from participating in the scheme unless they get government approval to do so. Beijing has also suspended the purchase of $14 billion worth of planes for Europe's Airbus due to the dispute.

India does not yet plan to ask airlines to cancel Airbus purchases, but that is a possibility if the dispute escalates, the Indian official said.

The official, with direct knowledge of talks between the EU and other countries on the issue, told Reuters that India would soon ask local airlines not to share emissions data with the bloc or buy any carbon credits.

If the European Commission retaliated by suspending Indian airlines from flying to Europe, India would make similar moves and consider charging an "unreasonable" amount for flying over India, the official said on Monday.

"We have lots of measures to take if the EU does not go back on its demands. We have the power of the economy; we are not bleeding as they are," the government official said, adding that Europe's position would harm its own economy and airlines.

RELATED STORIES
India to ask airlines to shun EU carbon scheme
Profit Top 10: Vodafone wins $ 2 bn tax case , Kingfisher on skeletal schedule
Virginia is bullish on doing business with India
India keen on expanding oil, gas explorations in Vietnam
Analysis: Yum eyes young India to help mirror China profits
The Indian government is awaiting formal approval from several ministries to implement the order to airlines, which it expects soon, the official said.

"The question is, 'Are you (the EU) provoking the world into a trade war?" the official said.

FAST-GROWING MARKET

Amber Dubey, director for aviation at global consultancy KPMG, said India was in the midst of a huge increase in the size of both its civilian and defence fleets, with a significant share of the orders coming from European suppliers.

"The EU-ETS issue is escalating fears of a trade war between the EU and the rest of the world. There is a chance that the government may decide to use these large aircraft orders as a negotiating tool," Dubey said.

European planemaker Airbus has a 73 per cent share of the commercial plane market in India. It has orders for more than 250 planes with IndiGo, Go Air and Kingfisher Airlines, making fast-growing India a crucial growth market.

Foreign governments say the EU is exceeding its legal jurisdiction by charging for an entire flight, as opposed to just the part covering European airspace.

But Europe's highest court ruled in December that the EU law did not breach international agreements.

The EU scheme has been widely criticized by the aviation industry, and on Tuesday Indonesia's state-owned airline Garuda said it might stop flying to Amsterdam in response.

"If (the regulation) is too costly, we could be forced to close our European routes," President Director Emirsyah Satar told Reuters.

Thai Airways President Piyasvasti Amranand said the state-controlled airline also opposed the EU law, but declined to comment on its impact on plane purchases.

"If nothing changes, this will cost us 200-300 million baht $6.5-$9.75 million) a year starting 2013," Piyasvasti said.

"I do agree with the idea of reducing carbon emissions but the way EU has come up with the calculation for making airlines pay is something we feel is unfair."

DISRUPTIVE DISPUTE

India this month inadvertently delayed approval of some European summer schedules by a day, which disrupted the flight schedules of many European airlines.

The official said India may use that example to show how disruptive a dispute with the country could be.

"If things continue like this, then European airlines will be forced to avoid flying over India and go over the Indian Ocean and the Bay of Bengal," the official said. "That's not viable for them. They won't have fuel to do that."

The European Commission has said it introduced a carbon cost for all flights, because well over a decade of talks at the United Nations' International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) had failed to agree on a way to curb the sector's rising emissions.

The escalation of international tension over the EU's scheme has accelerated efforts at the ICAO to come up with a global plan. At a meeting last week, it directed a working group to continue studying the options and report back in June.

The European Commission has said it will modify its law if the ICAO can deliver a convincing alternative and is doing its best to help.

"The EU is working hard to achieve a global agreement. The sooner the better. And it is really encouraging how strongly the ICAO Secretariat tries to move things forward," Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard said in an emailed comment.

[vinayak]

A newspaper article.


PS: Indian media is not known for responsible journalism.