Carmen Bunzl - Universidad Pontificia Comillas

Chapter 4. Case Study: Spain 220
In order to differentiate commitments, a number of measures were proposed.
GHG reduction commitments in the sectors not covered by the EU ETS could be
allocated in such a way that Member States with a higher ability to pay get
higher efforts awarded – using GDP per capita as the main criteria.
Furthermore there is the option to distribute the auctioning rights differently
between Member States. Given that redistribution of RES targets might lead to
high costs, trade in RES could be allowed. Finally investments in JI/CDM
impacts on the overall costs of the package.
The year 2005 is used as a common reference, therefore the individual
achievements of each country until 2005 are socialized. Since global EU
reduction in 2005 was 6%, a global reduction target of 14% is established in
order to achieve the unilateral EU 20% reduction target compared to 1990
levels. This is very beneficial for countries that have reduced less than the
average, such as Spain. In addition, due to Spain’s peak of emissions in 2005, it
is especially beneficial for Spain. The 14% GHG reduction is split between 21%
reduction in sectors covered by the ETS (60% of total reduction), and 10%
reduction in disperse sources (40% of total reduction).
In Table 4 – 17 an example is given of reduction targets by 2020 compared to
2005 levels for Spain for the sectors not covered by the EU ETS (as Spain’s GDP
per capita is approximately in the EU average, its reduction target would also
be 10%), of RES targets by 2020 and of auctioning with a certain distribution of
auctioning rights between the Member States (certain countries, including Spain
– 13% – receive and additional amount of allowances to auction, due to an
expected higher economic growth and therefore a higher reduction effort).
Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería ICAI Carmen Bunzl Boulet Junio 2008