[2010.03.25] The wrong sort of recycling 廢物不予利用- 財經Finance & Economics - 經濟學人中文網經濟學人|經濟學家- Powered by Discuz!

[2010.03.25] The wrong sort of recycling 廢物不予利用- 財經Finance & Economics - 經濟學人中文網經濟學人|經濟學家- Powered by Discuz!

本帖最後由加奈於2010-4-6 20:49 編輯 Carbon markets 碳交易市場 The wrong sort of recycling 廢物不予利用 Hungary's sale of used carbon credits damages investor confidence 匈牙利出售用過的碳權證，投資者信心毀於一旦 Mar 25th 2010 | From The Economist print edition THE point of carbon markets is to put an efficient price on the right to emit carbon dioxide. Recent events in Hungary show how tricky it is to achieve that goal. At issue is the sale by Hungary's Ministry of Environment and Water of 800,000 certified emission- reduction credits (CERs). CERs are generated by the Kyoto protocol's “Clean Development Mechanism”, whereby reductions in greenhouse gases in developing countries can produce a carbon credit for use in industrialised markets. The problem with the sale was that Hungarian firms had already used the CERs to offset their own emissions. 碳交易市場存在的意義是為了給二氧化碳排放量購買者定個合理的價錢。 最近在匈牙利達成的交易卻表明，這個市場上竟然有人為達目的不擇手段。 排放減量碳權證（CERs）源於京都議定書中的“清潔發展機制”，依照這個機制，發展中國家減排溫室氣體，就能換得相應的碳權，賣給需要排放的產業。 問題是，匈牙利出售的碳權是企業用過的，抵消碳排放的許可已失效。 Used credits are worthless on European carbon exchanges. The European Union argues that one credit must equal one tonne of carbon dioxide for its Emissions Trading Scheme, the largest emissions market, to be effective. Since the whole point of the credits is to cut carbon, double-counting them makes a mockery of the system. 二手碳權在歐洲碳交易市場一文不值。 歐盟嚴格遵循一個碳權只能用於抵消一噸碳排放，唯有如此，排放交易計劃才能維持有效運作。 既然碳權的根本目的是為了減少碳排放，回收再利用的詭計只是對交易體系的歪曲而已。 But the rules of carbon trading are slacker elsewhere. Hungarian officials say the credits were ultimately destined for a buyer in Japan. Japanese firms can use the credits to prepare for their country's own looming emissions-trading scheme, and the Japanese government can use them to meet its Kyoto commitments. “In Japan's view, so long as some environmental benefit has occurred, then the CERs have a value,” says Yuichi Takayama, the boss of Tokio Marine Asset Management. 然而，碳交易在其他地方的監管更不力。 匈牙利的官員說，這些回收碳權的幕后買主是日本公司。 因為日本也將實行排放交易計劃，日本公司為此買碳權充數，顯出政府兌現了京都議定書的承諾。 用日本海上信託管理公司的社長高山由一的話來說“日本人的觀念是，只要有環境效益，碳權證就算物有所值。” The trouble arose when these used CERs found their way back—how is unclear—on to BlueNext, an exchange based in Paris. (By that time they were out of the hands of the Hungarian ministry, so technically the country did not break any rules.) Once the European Commission realised what had happened, all hell broke loose. BlueNext temporarily suspended trading on March 17th. That sent the spot price(現貨價格) for CERs into free fall. Though trading has since resumed and the price has bounced back to around euro11 ($15) per tonne, Abyd Karmali, global head of carbon markets for Bank of America Merrill Lynch, says there are signs that investor confidence has been hit. 麻煩的是這些二手碳權會循原路返回巴黎的藍次（BLUENEXT）交易所，怎樣循環回來的尚不清楚。 再說這些碳權回歸之時早已和匈牙利環境部脫開干係，從法律上講並未違反規定。 但是，一旦歐盟委員會知道個中隱秘，事情就會變得不可收拾。 3月17日，藍次交易所暫停交易，一時間，碳權證現價直線下跌。 之後，交易雖然重開，價格也回升到每噸11歐元左右，但種種跡象表明，投資者信心已受到打擊。 美林銀行全球碳市場負責人阿比德·卡瑪里這樣評價道。 In particular, there has been a “flip in the curve” of CER prices. Normally, longer-dated futures contracts are more expensive than shorter-term ones. That pattern has reversed since the Hungarian debacle (see chart), with the price of a CER expiring in December 2012 being priced lower than one running out this year. “This tells us investors anticipate this won't be last time we see recycled CERs hitting the market,” says Mr Karmali. Indeed, Hungary has said it intends to sell more recycled credits but will put more stringent rules in place to ensure they do not wash up in Europe. 尤其有影響的是，碳權證價格發生了逆轉。 通常，期限長的期貨合約比期限短的價格更貴。 然而匈牙利的醜聞爆出後，情勢出現了逆轉：2012年12月到期的碳權證價格竟低於今年到期的碳權證。 卡瑪里指出：“投資者希望，這一次不會再出現失效的碳權證重回市場交易的情況。”匈牙利政府的確有意出售更多的回收碳權，不過實施更嚴格的措施，保證碳權證不會在重新洗牌後流回歐洲。 The incident adds to the difficulties of finding a successor to Kyoto, which expires in 2012. Its architects believed making the various flavours of carbon credit fungible was the best way to make the system work. Closing the loophole on double-counting could put off new entrants. Keeping it open would be even worse. Flooding exchanges with recycled CERs that do not yield any additional project finance in poor countries would not be doing the market any favours. The environmental industry has a spectacular knack for scoring own goals,” says Gavin Tait of Croft Consulting. 京都議定書即將在2012年到期，回收碳權的出現讓之後的前景越加迷茫。 京都議定書的擬定者認為，若想體系運作良好，唯有兼顧各方利益，變通地制定碳排權才是解決之道。 因此，改革重複交易碳權的弊病未免會打擊才開始實行碳權交易的國家，即便如此，對漏洞視而不見或會遺留後患。 大量交易已經回收的CER不會給貧窮國家帶來額外的項目融資，也不會給碳權交易市場帶來任何好處。 正如克羅夫特諮詢公司的加爾文·泰特所說：“如何劃分遠景和近景，環境產業自有經緯。”

本主題由藍冰於2010-4-6 08:50 解除高亮