The European Union, with its early and near universal acceptance of the Kyoto Protocol, has long been seen as a model for the United States to follow in improving sustainability.

 

But a rapidly developing crisis in the world economy has put new pressures on carbon restriction plans, and today European Union leaders will vote to determine whether stiff carbon cutbacks for utility companies or increased carbon offsetting in third-world countries is the best course of action. 

Today's meeting of the European parliament, while it will not settle finally any decision on carbon markets in the EU, should provide insight into wider opinions across Europe on the topic of emissions cuts. Rather than a simple yes or no vote, the meeting will consist of several sessions, the first of which will decide proper distribution of money the EU has generated and will continue to generate through the sale of carbon emitting permits. 

 

With more than 40 billion dollars on the table between now and 2013, there’s no shortage of ideas on how to allocate the funding. Proposals include improvements in rainforest protection, development of clean power sources in emerging, third-world economies, and subsidies for increased renewable energy production. 

 

In the face of a darkening economic picture, however, many nations may be pressing for increased availability of cheaper carbon offsets. By paying carbon emitters in the developing world not to produce a certain amount emissions, industries in the EU can more prevent the same amount of carbon from being emitted into the atmosphere for far less many. But many fear that offsets in countries with a high degree of corruption, or with unstable governments may not be an accurate record of true environmental mitigation.

 

With European utilities—which have thus far had carbon caps doled out to them for free by EU governments—set to start buying their own permits in 2013, another major decision for the European Parliament is how to treat carbon sequestering technology. An estimated 10 billion dollars is needed to fund the large-scale implementation of sequestering technology, which is widely seen as one of the most appealing ways to cut carbon emissions while retaining current levels of energy production. 

 

While it is tempting to spread carbon cuts to developing nations by allowing cheaper offsets, I think it’s clearly been established that the rich nations of the world bear the burden of cleaning their own house first. Keeping carbon caps in Europe funnels more money into researching and developing newer, cleaner technologies. The economic impacts may at first be negative, however the development of new technologies without the need for environmental mitigation will pay off in the long run, and become a money-making export for the companies that develop them. 

Photo courtesy Wikimedia Commons