Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The report identifies 'Carbon Fat Cats'—companies that received excessive free emissions permits under Phase 2 of the EU ETS (2008-2012). It finds that the top ten companies held 35 million surplus permits in 2008, valued at €500 million, with projected surpluses reaching 230 million permits (€3.2 billion) by 2012. This over-allocation in industrial sectors like iron, steel, and cement means that a small number of power companies, specifically RWE and EON, must deliver the majority of the scheme's net emissions reductions. The report argues that this creates competitive distortions and undermines climate targets, recommending higher ambition (a 30% cut by 2020), limited access to overseas offsets, and the cancellation of Member State reserves.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • Ten companies, termed 'Carbon Fat Cats', held 35 million surplus EUA permits in 2008, which is equivalent to the annual emissions of Latvia and Lithuania and valued at approximately €500 million.
  • By 2012, the top ten companies are projected to hold 230 million surplus EUA permits worth €3.2 billion, a value that exceeds the EU Commission's total environment budget and the funding for renewable and clean technologies in the European Energy Programme for Recovery (EEPR).
  • The power sector effectively subsidizes industrial over-allocation, with a few companies bearing the brunt of the EU ETS reductions. RWE and EON alone were required to provide or pay for more emissions reductions than the net reductions for the entire scheme.
  • Industrial sectors, particularly iron, steel, and cement, have been universally or largely over-allocated, which the report argues contradicts industry claims that higher climate targets would damage competitiveness.
  • The ability to bank surplus permits from Phase 2 into Phase 3 may insulate companies from needing to make CO2 cuts until 2020. For example, ArcelorMittal's projected 100 million permits by 2012 would likely cover its obligations through 2020 even under a 1.74% annual reduction scenario.
  • The report recommends that the EU increase its 2020 CO2 reduction target to at least 30% against 1990 levels, limit overseas offsets to drive domestic investment, and cancel the 300 million permits held in Member State new entrants' reserves.

Cite the original document

APA
Pearson, A. (2010). The Carbon Rich List. Ember. https://ember-energy.org/app/uploads/2020/03/Carbon-Fat-Cats-2010.pdf
Chicago
Pearson, Anna. The Carbon Rich List. Ember, 2010. https://ember-energy.org/app/uploads/2020/03/Carbon-Fat-Cats-2010.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |last1=Pearson |first1=Anna |title=The Carbon Rich List |publisher=Ember |date=February 2010 |url=https://ember-energy.org/app/uploads/2020/03/Carbon-Fat-Cats-2010.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{pearson2010carbon, author = {Pearson, Anna}, title = {{The Carbon Rich List}}, institution = {Ember}, year = {2010}, month = feb, url = {https://ember-energy.org/app/uploads/2020/03/Carbon-Fat-Cats-2010.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated