Carmen Bunzl - Universidad Pontificia Comillas

Chapter 4. Case Study: Spain 195
the Member States with a GDP per capita below EU average than for
other countries.
• If emissions per capita in the sectors not covered in the EU ETS were to
be equalized by 2020, then some EU-15 Member States are not expected
to achieve these efforts.
• An equal percentage reduction per Member State compared to 2005,
which would require GHG emissions in the sectors not covered by the
EU ETS to reduce around 12 % in each Member State. This would require
much larger efforts for most Member States with a GDP per capita below
EU average compared to the cost efficient case.
• A scenario that would differentiate the reduction targets in the sectors
not covered by the EU ETS depending on the relative GDP/Capita of the
different Member States: decreasing the targets in the Non-ETS for
countries with lower GDP per capita and increasing them for countries
with higher GDP per capita increases overall costs in the EU. While cost
increases would remain limited across the whole EU, cost reductions
could be very substantial in those countries with a very low GDP per
capita relative to the EU average.
The Commission proposed to use GDP/capita as the main criteria when
setting the targets for Member States. In this approach, countries with a low
GDP per capita would be allowed to emit more than they did in 2005 in sectors
not covered by the EU ETS, thereby reflecting projections that their relatively
higher economic growth will be accompanied by increased emissions in for
instance the transport sector, and to a lesser extent in heating of buildings.
These targets do however still represent a cap on their emissions, and will
require some sort of reduction effort for all Member States.
The figures chosen are limited to a maximum of -20% or +20% compared to
2005 (see Figure 4 – 15). These limits ensure that specific national targets remain
Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería ICAI Carmen Bunzl Boulet Junio 2008