IP/07/1274
Brussels, 31 August 2007
Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said: "Denmark has proposed a sound national allocation plan which we have accepted with only a minor change. The Danish government has understood the need to ensure that the Emissions Trading Scheme remains a successful weapon for fighting climate change. There are three more plans to be assessed. These will be finalised swiftly to ensure an orderly transition to the second phase of the EU ETS starting in 2008."
Assessment of the NAPs
Following the Commission's decisions in November 2006, January 2007, February 2007, March, April, May, June and July 2007 (IP/06/1650, IP/07/51, IP/07/136, IP/07/247, IP/07/412, IP/07/415, IP/07/459, IP/07/501, IP/07/613, IP/07/667, IP/07/749 and IP/07/1131), Denmark is the 24th national allocation plan (NAP) for the 2008-2012 period to be assessed by the Commission.
NAPs determine for each Member State the 'cap,' or limit, on the total amount of CO2 that installations covered by the EU ETS can emit, and specify how many CO2 emission allowances each plant will receive.
The Commission is responsible for assessing Member States' proposed NAPs against 12 allocation criteria listed in the Emissions Trading Directive. The Commission may accept a plan in part or in full.
The assessment criteria seek, among other things, to ensure that plans are consistent (a) with meeting the EU's and Member States' Kyoto commitments, (b) with actual verified emissions reported in the Commission's annual progress reports, and (c) with technological potential for reducing emissions. Other assessment criteria relate to non-discrimination, EU competition and state aid rules, and technical aspects. To this end, the Commission is requiring the following change in the Danish NAP:
The proposed extent of companies' use of credits from emission-reduction projects carried out in third countries under the Kyoto Protocol's flexible mechanisms[1] is not consistent with the rule that these mechanisms should be used to supplement domestic action on emissions. Denmark is required to ensure the use of these credits does not represent an addition to its annual allocation of more than 17.01 %.The Commission's approval of the plan will become automatic once Denmark has made the appropriate change.
See also:
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/emission.htm
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/2nd_phase_ep.htm
Summary information on the 24 plans assessed to date:
Approved allowances for 2005-2007, verified emissions in 2005, proposed caps for 2008-2012, approved caps for 2008-2012, additional emissions covered in 2008 to 2012 and limit on the use of credits from emission-saving projects in third countries. (All figures are annual)
|
Member State
|
1st period cap
|
2005 verified emissions
|
Proposed cap 2008-2012
|
Cap allowed 2008-2012 (in relation to proposed)
|
Additional emissions in
2008-2012[2]
|
JI/CDM limit 2008-2012 in
%[3]
|
|
Austria
|
33.0
|
33.4
|
32.8
|
30.7 (93.6%)
|
0.35
|
10
|
|
Belgium
|
62.1
|
55.58[4]
|
63.3
|
58.5 (92.4%)
|
5.0
|
8.4
|
|
Cyprus
|
5.7
|
5.1
|
7.12
|
5.48 (77%)
|
n.a.
|
10
|
|
Czech Rep.
|
97.6
|
82.5
|
101.9
|
86.8 (85.2%)
|
n.a.
|
10
|
|
Denmark
|
33.5
|
26.5
|
24.5
|
24.5 (100%)
|
0
|
17.01
|
|
Estonia
|
19
|
12.62
|
24.38
|
12.72 (52.2%)
|
0.31
|
0
|
|
Finland
|
45.5
|
33.1
|
39.6
|
37.6 (94.8%)
|
0.4
|
10
|
|
France
|
156.5
|
131.3
|
132.8
|
132.8 (100%)
|
5.1
|
13.5
|
|
Hungary
|
31.3
|
26.0
|
30.7
|
26.9 (87.6%)
|
1.43
|
10
|
|
Germany
|
499
|
474
|
482
|
453.1 (94%)
|
11.0
|
12
|
|
Greece
|
74.4
|
71.3
|
75.5
|
69.1 (91.5%)
|
n.a.
|
9
|
|
Ireland
|
22.3
|
22.4
|
22.6
|
22.3 (98.6%)
|
n.a.
|
10
|
|
Italy
|
223.1
|
225.5
|
209
|
195.8 (93.7%)
|
n.k. [5]
|
14.99
|
|
Latvia
|
4.6
|
2.9
|
7.7
|
3.43 (44.5%)
|
n.a.
|
10
|
|
Lithuania
|
12.3
|
6.6
|
16.6
|
8.8 (53%)
|
0.05
|
20
|
|
Luxembourg
|
3.4
|
2.6
|
3.95
|
2.5 (63%)
|
n.a.
|
10
|
|
Malta
|
2.9
|
1.98
|
2.96
|
2.1 (71%)
|
n.a.
|
tbd
|
|
Netherlands
|
95.3
|
80.35
|
90.4
|
85.8 (94.9%)
|
4.0
|
10
|
|
Poland
|
239.1
|
203.1
|
284.6
|
208.5 (73.3%)
|
6.3
|
10
|
|
Slovakia
|
30.5
|
25.2
|
41.3
|
30.9 (74.8%)
|
1.7
|
7
|
|
Slovenia
|
8.8
|
8.7
|
8.3
|
8.3 (100%)
|
n.a.
|
15.76
|
|
Spain
|
174.4
|
182.9
|
152.7
|
152.3 (99.7%)
|
6.7[6]
|
ca. 20
|
|
Sweden
|
22.9
|
19.3
|
25.2
|
22.8 (90.5%)
|
2.0
|
10
|
|
UK
|
245.3
|
242.4[7]
|
246.2
|
246.2 (100%)
|
9.5
|
8
|
|
SUM
|
2142.5
|
1974.36[8]
|
2126.14
|
1927.93 (90.5%)
|
53.84
|
-
|
[1] These mechanisms are known as Joint Implementation (JI) and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).