Karbon Fiyatlandırmasından Sonra Karbon Sızıntısı Kavramı & Yeşil Anlaşma Politikaları

Year 2024, , 120 - 131, 24.08.2024

Abdulkadir Bektaş , Eyüp Kaan Moralı , Aygün Aktaş

https://doi.org/10.38009/ekimad.1504317

Abstract

Avrupa Yeşil Mutabakat kapsamında, AB ülkeleri karbon emisyonlarını 2030 yılına kadar %55 oranında azaltmaları ve 2050 yılına kadar karbon nötrlüğüne ulaşmaları gerekmektedir. AB'nin emisyon ticaret sistemi bu hedefin temel taşıdır. Teorik olarak, artan karbon fiyatları karbon kaçağına veya ekonomik faaliyetlerin ve ilgili emisyonların yüksek karbonlu ekonomilerden düşük karbonlu ekonomilere aktarılmasına neden olabilir. Uluslararası rekabette pazar payının rakiplere kaptırılması, kısa vadede uluslararası karbon kaçağına neden olabilir. Uzun vadede ise bu durum yerli işletmelerin yurtdışına taşınmasıyla gerçekleşebilir. Bugüne kadar, yüksek riskli endüstrilerin karbon kaçağı riskini desteklemek için denkleştirmeler ve ETS kapsamında verilen ücretsiz tahsisatlar da dahil olmak üzere çeşitli araçlar kullanılmıştır. Bu çalışma, Türkiye'de karbon kaçağına ilişkin sektör düzeyinde bir risk değerlendirmesi oluşturmak için uluslararası bir teknik olan AB Emisyon Ticareti Programı (ETS) Faz IV istişaresini geliştirmektedir. Bu metodoloji, karbon kaçağı riskini değerlendirmek için iki önemli gösterge olan emisyon yoğunluğu ve ticaret yoğunluğunu birleştirmektedir. Bunlardan ilki genellikle bir şirketin karbon maliyetlerine maruz kalmasının bir ölçüsü olarak kullanılırken, ikincisi şirketin pazar payını kaybetmeden maliyetleri müşterilere aktarma kabiliyetini göstermektedir. Türkiye'de alüminyum, çimento, kağıt, gübre, demir-çelik ve seramik sektörleri için yapılan karbon kaçağı riski çalışmasına göre, çimento en yüksek riske sahipken, kağıt en düşük riski taşımaktadır. Türkiye için karbon kaçağı riski, özellikle emisyon yoğunluğu ve ticaret yoğunluğu göz önünde bulundurularak hareket edilmelidir, böylece düşük karbonlu kalkınmaya ulaşmak daha hızlı ve kolay olacaktır.

Keywords

European Green Deal, CBAM, Carbon Leakage, Carbon Pricing, ETS, EU ETS

Carbon Leakage Concept after Carbon Pricing & Green Deal Policies

Abstract

As part of the European Green Deal, EU nations are required to decrease their carbon emissions by 55% by 2030 and reach carbon neutrality by 2050. The EU's emissions trading system is the cornerstone of this goal. In theory, rising carbon prices may cause carbon leakage, or the transfer of economic activity and related emissions from high-carbon economies to low-carbon economies. Losing market share to rivals in international rivalry might result in short-term international carbon leakage. In the long term, it can be accomplished by moving domestic businesses abroad. To date, a variety of tools, including offsets and free allowances granted under the ETS, have been used to support the carbon leakage risk of high-risk industries. This paper develops an international technique, the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) Phase IV consultation, to produce a sector-level risk assessment of carbon leakage in Türkiye. This methodology combines emissions intensity and trading intensity, two important indicators for assessing carbon leakage risk. Although the former is commonly employed as a measure of a company's exposure to carbon costs, the latter indicates its ability to pass on costs to customers without losing market share. According to the carbon risk study carried out in Türkiye for the aluminium, cement, paper, fertilizer, iron-steel, and ceramics sectors, cement has the highest risk, while paper carries the lowest risk. For Türkiye, it is important to consider the risk of carbon leakage, in particular emission intensity and trade intensity, in order to accelerate and facilitate low-carbon development.

Keywords

European Green Deal, CBAM, Carbon Leakage, Carbon Pricing, ETS, EU ETS

Ethical Statement

This article adheres to ethical standards in research and publishing. The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article.

Thanks

Special thanks for accepting this article.

References

• Aldy, J., & Pizer, A. (2011). The competitiveness impacts of climate change mitigation policies. NBER Working Paper No. 17705. National Bureau of Economic Research.
• Balistreri, E. J., Böhringer, C., & Rutherford, T. F. (2017). Carbon policy and the structure of global trade. The World Economy, 41(1), 194-221.
• Bektaş, A. (2021). The impact of European Green Deal on Turkey’s iron and steel industry: Decomposition analysis of energy-related sectoral emissions. Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi. https://doi.org/10.18466/cbayarfbe.823265
• Böhringer, C., & Lange, A. (2005). On the design of optimal grandfathering schemes for emission allowances. European Economic Review, 49, 2041–2055.
• Böhringer, C., Rosendahl, K. E., & Storrøsten, H. B. (2017). Robust policies to mitigate carbon leakage. Journal of Public Economics, 149, 35-46.
• Branger, F., Quirion, P., & Chevallier, J. (2016). Carbon leakage and competitiveness of cement and steel industries under the EU ETS: Much ado about nothing. The Energy Journal, 37(3).
• European Commission. (2018). Preliminary carbon leakage list, 2021-2030. (2018/C 162/01).
• European Commission. (2019). Delivering the European Green Deal, On the path to a climate-neutral Europe by 2050. Available at: https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal/delivering-european-green-deal_en [Access: 09 February 2024].
• European Commission. (2021). Carbon leakage. Available at: https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/eu-emissions-trading-system-eu-ets/free-allocation/carbon-leakage_en [Access: 09 February 2024].
• European Commission. (2023). Regulation (EU) 2023/956 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 May 2023 establishing a carbon border adjustment mechanism. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv%3AOJ.L_.2023.130.01.0052.01.ENG&amp%3Btoc=OJ%3AL%3A2023%3A130%3ATOC [Access: 09 February 2024].
• Grebe, V. (2023). Current and future protection against carbon leakage in the European Emissions Trading System. Renewable Energy Law and Policy Review, 11(2-3), 72-78.
• Grubb, M., Jordan, N. D., Hertwich, E., Neuhoff, K., Das, K., Bandyopadhyay, K. R., Asselt, H., Sato, M., Wang, R., Pizer, W. A., & Oh, H. (2022). Carbon leakage, consumption, and trade. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 47, 753-795.
• International Carbon Action Partnership. (2024). Emissions trading worldwide: 2024 ICAP status report. Available at: https://icapcarbonaction.com/en/publications/emissions-trading-worldwide-2024-icap-status-report [Access: 22 July 2024].
• Juergens, I., Barreiro-Hurle, J., & Vasa, A. (2013). Identifying carbon leakage sectors in the EU ETS and implications of results. Climate Policy, 13(1), 89-109.
• Kartensen, J., Peters, G. P., & Andrew, R. M. (2018). Trends of the EU’s territorial and consumption-based emissions from 1990 to 2016. Climatic Change, 151, 131-142.
• PMR Türkiye. (2018). Assessment of carbon leakage risk for Turkey under carbon pricing policies. Available at: https://pmrturkiye.csb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Assessment-of-Carbon-Leakage-Risk-for-Turkey.pdf [Access: 19 February 2024].
• Republic of Türkiye Updated First Nationally Determined Contribution. (2023). Available at: https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/NDC/2023-04/T%C3%9CRK%C4%B0YE_UPDATED%201st%20NDC_EN.pdf [Access: 09 February 2024].
• Sun, W., & Huang, C. (2022). Predictions of carbon emission intensity based on factor analysis and an improved extreme learning machine from the perspective of carbon emission efficiency. Journal of Cleaner Production, 338, 130414.
• Tan, X. J., Liu, Y., Cui, J. B., & Su, B. (2018). Assessment of carbon leakage by channels: An approach combining CGE model and decomposition analysis. Energy Economics, 74, 535–545.
• Ulmer, C. (2022). Free allowances and the risk of carbon leakage at the beginning of the third phase of the EU ETS. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3880946 [Access: 10 February 2024].
• Verde, S. F. (2020). The impact of the EU Emissions Trading System on competitiveness and carbon leakage: The econometric evidence. Journal of Economic Survey, 34(2), 320-343.
• Wang, Q., & Wang, L. (2021). How does trade openness impact carbon intensity? Journal of Cleaner Production, 295, 126370.
• World Bank. (2023). State and trends of carbon pricing 2023. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/entities/publication/58f2a409-9bb7-4ee6-899d-be47835c838f [Access: 8 February 2024].
• World Bank. (2024). State and trends of carbon pricing 2024. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/entities/publication/b0d66765-299c-4fb8-921f-61f6bb979087 [Access: 22 July 2024].
• Yu, B., Zhao, Q., & Wei, Y. (2021). Review of carbon leakage under regionally differentiated climate policies. Science of The Total Environment, 782, 146765.
• Zachmann, G., & McWilliams, B. (2020). A European carbon border tax: Much pain, little gain. Policy Contribution, 05/2020. Bruegel.