Top ten projects that have earned the most CRTs in the Reserve

We recently achieved the significant milestone of issuing over 40 million carbon credits, each representing one metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gas emissions reduced or sequestered from the atmosphere. Learn more about the top 10 largest offset projects in the Reserve that helped this achievement:

Top ten projects that have earned the most CRTs in the Reserve

We recently achieved the significant milestone of issuing over 40 million carbon credits, each representing one metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gas emissions reduced or sequestered from the atmosphere. Learn more about the top 10 largest offset projects in the Reserve that helped this achievement:

CCAC Commits to Scaling Up Action on Short-Lived Climate Pollutants

---

3 September 2013: Members of the Climate and Clean Air Coalition to Reduce Short-Lived Climate Pollutants (CCAC) met for the third meeting of the High Level Assembly, adopting a Communiqué reiterating their commitment to address near-term climate change, improve air quality and public health, and strengthen food and energy security, by taking urgent action to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs) like black carbon, methane, tropospheric ozone, and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs).

In the Communiqué, CCAC members encourage a global awareness-raising effort to prevent air pollution-related diseases, which account for over six million deaths annually. The Communiqué also includes sections on scaling-up global efforts on: oil and natural gas production; municipal solid waste; hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) alternative technology and standards; heavy duty diesel vehicles and engines; support to national planning for action on SLCPs; brick production; household cooking and domestic heating; and regional assessments of SLCPs.

The meeting of the Assembly, which took place on 3 September 2013, in Oslo, Norway, was co-hosted by Norway's Minister of Environment and the Minister of International Development. At the meeting, Norway committed to contributing an additional 110 million Norwegian kroner (approximately US$20 million) to reduce emissions of SLCPs in developing countries.

The CCAC also announced three new members, namely: the Nordic Environment Finance Corporation; the Centre for Science and Environment; and Local Governments for Sustainability. The Coalition now brings together 72 partners, including 33 government partners, the European Commission, eight intergovernmental organizations and 30 non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

Launched in February 2012, CCAC aims to catalyze action on reducing black carbon, methane, certain hydroflurocarbons (HFCs) and other short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs) to maximize agricultural, climate, energy and health benefits. The UN Environment Programme (UNEP) hosts the Coalition Secretariat. [UNEP Press Release] [Communiqué] [CCAC Website] [CCAC Press Release]

read more: http://climate-l.iisd.org/news/ccac-commits-to-scaling-up-action-on-short-lived-climate-pollutants/

---

Businesses soon may meet California air rules by paying someone else to slash emissions

Published: Sunday, Aug. 11, 2013 - 12:00 am | Page 1A

Last Modified: Monday, Aug. 12, 2013 - 9:38 am

Copyright 2013 The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

It will be a lifeline of sorts for the cement factories, oil refiners and hundreds of other businesses struggling with California's stringent greenhouse-gas restrictions.

Soon they'll be able to comply – in part – by paying other people to reduce their own carbon emissions.
That's right: Under standards being drawn up by the California Air Resources Board, companies that have to meet the state's greenhouse-gas standards will be able to satisfy part of their burden by purchasing "offsets" – credits that are generated when carbon emissions are slashed by others.

Such as a dairy farmer in Michigan. Or a company in Arkansas that destroys gaseous coolants from old refrigerators. Or a tree planter on California's own North Coast.

The use of offsets will inject a somewhat controversial element into California's effort to battle global warming.

Two environmental groups sued the state last year to prevent the use of offsets, although the case was dismissed in January. Their argument: Offsets undermine the basic goal of curbing greenhouse gases by letting companies buy credits for emission reductions that almost certainly would have happened anyway.
"What we actually need is straightforward, meaningful reductions in emissions," said Mark Reynolds of Citizens Climate Lobby, one of the groups that sued.

But state officials and some environmentalists say offsets are a perfectly legitimate way to combat global warming.

They say offsets give California companies greater leeway in how they follow the state's climate-change law, AB 32, which was signed into law in 2006. With companies spending an estimated $1 billion a year to comply, this flexibility will help them save money.

"Offsets are a low-cost mechanism," said Rajinder Sahota, manager of the ARB's climate change program evaluation branch. The ARB oversees the state's year-old carbon emissions standards and will police the use of offsets.

Still, some critics say companies in California shouldn't be allowed to satisfy part of their regulatory burden by paying someone in another state to curb their carbon emissions.

"The local communities living on the fence lines of the refineries and power plants and incinerators don't receive the benefits," said Jeff Conant of Friends of the Earth, another critic of offsets.

But because climate change is truly a global issue, advocates say it isn't important whether some of the emission reductions occur in another state.

"California is still cutting climate change pollution, which is what the law is about," said Derek Walker, an associate vice president with the Environmental Defense Fund.

Offsets aren't new; they've long been a part of the European Union's mandatory carbon program. In the United States, many businesses and individuals already use them voluntarily, often to show their concern for the environment.

Most famously, former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has bought credits from the Pacific Forest Trust, manager of the Fred M. van Eck Forest near Arcata, to offset the carbon emissions from his private jet travel. The money was used to help keep the forest healthy so its redwoods could soak up more carbon.
But for many companies facing California's carbon rules, offsets will likely become a necessity, not a luxury item.

AB 32 sets an annual cap on greenhouse-gas emissions, and reduces it each year. The goal is to reduce California's emissions to 1990 volumes by 2020, a drop of about 30 percent from current levels.

More than 400 manufacturers, food processors and other big industrial firms are subject to the rules. They currently have two ways to get their emissions under the cap: Shrink their carbon footprint somehow, or buy state-issued emission permits.

Offsets will provide a third avenue for compliance. Companies will be allowed to use offsets to satisfy up to 8 percent of their obligation under the law.

To this point, the ARB hasn't approved any offset projects. But the agency is evaluating more than 60 different projects, all of which are designed to dispose of methane, carbon and other forms of greenhouse gases. Decisions are expected by the end of summer, said ARB spokesman David Clegern.
"Everybody's waiting for this," said Jon Costantino, head of a Sacramento-based group called the Association of Carbon Market Participants. "Once there are approvals, there will certainly be activity – they will be bought and sold."

The projects awaiting the ARB's approval, located all over the country, are already in operation.
A privately run Arkansas incinerator has already destroyed nearly 3 million tons of greenhouse gases found in refrigerator coolants. Dairy farms as far away as Virginia and upstate New York have installed "digesters" that consume methane from livestock, while forest managers in California and Maine are offering offsets tied to increased tree planting and other measures.

State officials say industries will be allowed to use offsets from carbon reductions that have already taken place. "Let's reward everyone that took that early action," said the ARB's Sahota.

Project developers say their offsets aren't vague promises. Rather, they represent concrete measures, with results validated by outside auditors, that are making a difference in the fight against climate change.
"These gases have been destroyed, verified by independent third parties," said Patrick Pfeiffer of Eos Climate Inc., a San Francisco company that partners with companies to destroy greenhouse gases that leak out of abandoned refrigerators.

In anticipation of ARB's approval, companies and brokers are already buying and selling some offsets in limited volumes. On average, offsets sell for about $10 per ton of carbon reduced. That's about $3 less than the state-issued emissions permits.

Why the difference? Partly because there's a chance the ARB will reject an offset.
The state agency says it is training dozens of independent contractors to periodically inspect offset project sites and make sure the carbon reductions are legitimate.

As a result, companies could buy offsets only to find out they're worthless.
"There is a risk they're going to be invalidated," Costantino said. "There's just more risk with an offset."

Call The Bee's Dale Kasler, (916) 321-1066. Follow him on Twitter @dakasler.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/08/11/5640618/businesses-soon-may-meet-california.html#storylink=cpy

New Compliance Association Unites California Offset Project Developers

Stemming from the Navigating the American Carbon World conference in 2012, the newly formed Compliance Offset Developers Association (CODA) seeks to unite project developers and to support an effective cap-and-trade program in California. CODA provides a platform for sharing technical knowledge and ideas as they pertain to the Air Resources Board.

1 July 2013 | The latest cap-and-trade development to come out of California is reflective of the Golden State’s reputation as the prevailing leader in domestic climate policy. The newly-minted Compliance Offset Developers Association (CODA) is an alliance of six project developers – A-GAS RemTec, Camco, Coolgas, Inc, Diversified Pure Chem, Environmental Credit Corp, and Terrapass – working together with regulators and other offset stakeholders to support an effective statewide offset market. 

At the 10^th anniversary of the Navigating the American Carbon World conference, North America’s largest carbon event, a number of players in California’s offset market recognized the benefits of exchanging ideas and technical know-how related to the Air Resources Board (ARB). Acknowledging ARB’s impact, their own strength in numbers, and a growing need to respond to future technical processes on a collaborative basis, project developers set out to create a forum for technical discussion and knowledge-sharing regarding ARB protocols and the generation of compliance offsets. 

As reported by CODA, policies regulating offsets, transparency, and the timely review of project documents are critical aspects for project developers in generating and issuing offsets. An anticipated 200 million offsets will be required by California’s cap-and-trade program by 2020, further highlighting the need for increased capacity through collective efforts such as CODA, according to the group’s members. 

Intended to function from a procedural and technical perspective rather than from a political stance, CODA aims to connect project developers to better understand the rules and regulations of the offset market. According to Derek Six, CEO of Environmental Credit Corp, “the project developers involved in CODA face a wide variety of common issues.” The association was formed out of a “desire to see a marketplace that is effective, practical, and efficient,” adds Six. 

While CODA is currently only open to project developers that have at least three registered projects under ozone-depleting substances, forestry, or livestock protocols, there may be potential for including project developers involved in other project types in the future. 

In reference to prospective protocols such as rice cultivation, coal mine methane, and REDD+, Charles Purshouse, CODA’s elected chairperson, stated, “If approved, we would welcome members developing those projects.” However, for the time being, the “focus is on the drawing board,” as lobbying for REDD+ and other potential protocols “doesn’t fall under the group’s remit,” adds Purshouse. 

CODA holds bi-weekly meetings and discussions to formulate strategy. Companies interested in joining CODA can email nick@terrapass.com. 

Why Phasing Down HFCs under the Montreal Protocol is Good for China and the Global Environment

At their recent summit in California, President Xi and President Obama agreed to work together and with other nations to address climate change by phasing down the production and consumption of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), a class of “super greenhouse gases” used widely in air conditioners and refrigeration, via multilateral mechanisms, including the use of the expertise and institution of the Montreal Protocol (see the official statement from China’s foreign ministry in Chinese and English). This is a big step for both countries. The Montreal Protocol is the most successful global environmental treaty, having saved the Earth’s ozone layer by phasing down the production and consumption of ozone-depleting CFCs and HCFCs, and by providing effective means of technology transfer and financial assistance. However, the HFCs that replaced CFCs and HCFCs, while not dangerous to the ozone layer, have extremely high global warming potentials (GWP)*—thousands of times more powerful than CO2 in warming the climate. Their rapid growth in air conditioning, refrigeration, and other uses poses a huge challenge to efforts to avoid the most severe impacts of climate change.

By agreeing to phase down the production and consumption of HFCs in the Montreal Protocol, China and the US can lead efforts to develop climate friendly, safe alternatives to HFCs. By doing so, China will join more than 100 countries that have already signaled that they want to secure an agreement to phase down these chemicals under the Montreal Protocol. Doing so would not only have huge and immediate climate benefits, it would also have huge economic and environmental benefits for China’s government, its domestic industry, and its people. Reducing the production and consumption of these super greenhouse gases is in line with Chinese leaders’ calls to develop an eco-civilization based on resource conservation and environmental protection. It will also help key Chinese air conditioner manufacturers, such as Gree and Midea, which are already moving quickly to research and develop the next generation of air conditioners that will use lower-impact refrigerants, such as HC-290 and HFC-32, that are both ozone-friendly and climate-friendly.

Building on the US-China agreement to work on an HFC phase-down, we hope that the countries attending the Montreal Protocol meeting in Bangkok next week, including China, India, the U.S., and Europe, will agree to launch formal negotiations on an agreement to phase down HFCs under the Montreal Protocol. (The formal step is to create a “contact group” charged with negotiating the detailed control measures, financial arrangements, and other matters.)

A phase-down of these super greenhouse gases would benefit China in three important ways:
1. Transitioning to more climate-friendly refrigerants and coolants will help China address climate change, increase the global competitiveness of China’s manufacturers, and save money for Chinese consumers.

The use of global warming HFCs is projected to grow significantly in the coming years as countries phase out ozone-depleting chemicals and as the use of air conditioners and refrigerators grow – especially in developing countries as these markets are expected to grow most quickly in coming years (see figure**). If left uncontrolled, global emissions of HFCs in 2050 are projected to be 28-45% of the emissions allowed under a global warming reduction pathway. China is the largest manufacturer and consumer of room air conditioners, manufacturing 110 million units in 2011, 70 million for the domestic market and 40 million for export. So if China makes the transition to chemicals with a lower impact on the climate, this would help it make an important contribution to addressing climate change and implementing its 12th Five Year Work Plan on Greenhouse Gas Emission Control which targets efforts to control HFC emissions.

China, as the largest producer of HFCs in the world and as a key manufacturer of residential, commercial and vehicle air conditioners and refrigeration equipment, has a key role to play in the transition to more climate-friendly alternatives. In China, most commercial and room air conditioners currently use HCFC-22, an ozone depleting refrigerant; as HCFC-22 is replaced under the Montreal Protocol, Chinese companies have been shifting to using HFC-410A, which, while not ozone depleting, has 2088 times the warming impact of CO2 and would have a powerful greenhouse gas impact if widely used.

However, the Chinese room and commercial air conditioner industry is already actively looking for more climate-friendly alternatives to high GWP HFCs. More than half the companies making room air conditioners in China have chosen low-GWP HC-290 with financial assistance from the Montreal Protocol’s Multilateral Fund. By 2015, Chinese manufacturers will have retrofitted 18 production lines to produce the refrigerant HC-290, otherwise known as propane, and Chinese manufacturers such as Gree, Midea and GMCC already have HC-290 air conditioner manufacturing lines, with other manufacturers such as Haier and Hisense likely to follow. The implementation of a new national safety standard for heat pumps, air conditioners and dehumidifiers (GB4706.32-2012) as of May 1st this year, which details the safe application of HC-290 as a coolant, will help to assuage concerns about the safe use of propane as a coolant given its flammability, and ensure that Chinese air conditioner manufacturers produce products that are welcomed in the market and meet international safety standards and requirements.

Chinese manufacturers are also looking to produce room air conditioners using HFC-32 (which has a relatively lower GWP of 675, as well as high efficiency), with Chinese manufacturers Gree and Midea already producing air conditioners that use HFC-32. By doing so, they will be maintaining their competitiveness with foreign manufacturers such as Japan’s Daikin, which will produce HFC-32 air conditioners for Japan and India, and Denmark’s Danfoss, which is working with Tsinghua University to research and develop HFC-32 air conditioners.

For car air conditioners, Chinese manufacturers like other global car manufacturers, replaced HCFC coolants with HFC-134a, a coolant with a global warming impact 1400 times that of CO2. Globally, car companies are now switching to an HFC replacement called HFO-1234yf (GWP of about 4) and are researching the use of CO2 as a coolant, as regulations in Europe, the U.S., and Japan are requiring car manufacturers to use climate-friendly refrigerants. In China, a partnership of Shanghai 3F New Materials Company and DuPont has built a plant in China to supply HFO-1234yf, so this replacement chemical should be widely available in China in the future.

By switching to these more climate-friendly alternatives, Chinese coolant and equipment manufacturers will be better prepared for export to key markets such as the US, EU, India, Japan and Australia, which are requiring more climate-friendly alternatives to HFCs. As part of the greenhouse gas standards for cars in the U.S., carmakers are replacing HFCs with chemicals that have less than one percent of the climate impact. And a number of groups, including NRDC, are pushing for a broader phase-down in the U.S. under existing law. Similarly, the E.U. currently has a phase-out of high-GWP coolants for new cars through their “Mobile Air Conditioner Directive”. And the E.U. has proposed an “F-gas Directive” that will phase down all uses of HFCs by two-thirds from today’s levels, which is expected in the near future.

Phasing down HFCs will also save Chinese consumers money, since the equipment developed to use the more climate-friendly alternatives will be based on more efficient designs; while they may require a slightly higher up-front cost, they will save money over the long term. By phasing down HFCs more quickly, Chinese consumers will be able to choose the most advanced air conditioners and save money.

2. By going through the Montreal Protocol, China will be able to tap into the resources and technical assistance provided by the Montreal Protocol.
The nearly 25 year history of the Montreal Protocol has successfully followed a model in which developed countries take the lead in phasing out chemicals harmful to the environment, and developing countries have differentiated commitments and receive financial and technical assistance to help with their phase-downs. The agreement between China and the US follows that model for an HFC phase-down under the Montreal Protocol and is consistent with two current phase-down proposals – the “North American proposal” (from the U.S., Mexico, and Canada) and the Federated States of Micronesia proposal. Both proposals contain features similar to previous phase-down rounds in the Montreal Protocol: (1) developed countries lead with the phase-down; (2) developing countries follow with a several year delay in their phase-down schedule; and (3) through a dedicated fund developed countries provide technical and financial support to help developing countries with the transition. The Montreal Protocol fund has delivered over the years – with more than $3 billion provided for the various chemical transitions, helping developing countries to more quickly phase out ozone-depleting chemicals.

In contrast, trying to secure a similar agreement under the UN climate negotiations would be much more difficult. Funding under the climate negotiations will partly be utilized by the poorest countries and the most vulnerable – such as the large populations in Africa and the small island states that are on the front lines of climate change. China’s government and industry would be hard-pressed to compete with these vulnerable populations for resources in order to upgrade Chinese air conditioners and refrigerators. An agreement under the Montreal Protocol would unlock resources now for reducing production of global warming HFCs – countries such as China and India wouldn’t have to wait years for the mere possibility—much less certain—of funding coming through the climate negotiations.

At the same time, the participants to the Montreal Protocol have the expertise and focus to dedicate to this issue, while the participants to the climate negotiations are busy trying to develop a new global climate agreement for 2015, and most of them have never dealt in detail with this class of chemicals. Delaying an agreement to phase down high-GWP HFCs means that Chinese companies could invest more heavily in the HFC industry, making an inevitable transition to lower-GWP refrigerants more expensive as they find themselves out-of-sync with global trends to use climate-friendly coolants. China’s government and its industry now have a huge opportunity to leapfrog to more advanced, climate friendly refrigerants. An agreement under the Montreal Protocol ensures that China gets the technical and financial assistance right now to help their companies make the inevitable transition away from high-GWP HFCs.

3. Agreeing to phase down high-GWP HFCs under the Montreal Protocol will demonstrate China’s emergence as a leader on the international stage, one that can help address the climate problem even when other nations are stuck.
Achieving success on the recently announced cooperation will build trust between the world’s two most important countries. Agreeing to work together on phasing down HFCs was one of only two concrete agreements reached at the meeting between these two leaders. In international relations – particularly between two powerful countries like China and the US – trust relies on two things. Countries must first reach agreement on how to solve issues that are at the top of their political agenda. Then they must ensure follow through on that agreement. In doing both, leaders gain trust that proves critical on future difficult issues. Following through on this agreement is an important trust-building exercise for the two countries.

China’s efforts to phase down HFCs will also demonstrate leadership on an issue that has been stuck since 2009, when countries first formally proposed to phase down HFCs under the Montreal Protocol. Implementing the agreement will show that China can help implement solutions to address the growing threat of climate change, which is already having damaging consequences globally and within China. Reducing the production and use of super greenhouse gases such as HFCs will help stave off the most damaging impacts of climate change in China, such as reduced water availability and agricultural productivity, more extreme weather conditions, and worsened air pollution tied to extreme heat.
---------------------------
By working with the US and over 100 other countries to phase down HFCs under the Montreal Protocol, China has a chance to help implement a true win-win strategy for its people, its companies, its climate, and its international relations. As President Xi said: “China and the United States must find a new path, one that is different from the inevitable confrontation and conflict between the major countries of the past.” China clearly recognizes that this agreement on HFCs offers a chance for the start of a new path on climate change, one that benefits China and the world. This week’s Montreal Protocol meeting in Bangkok could be a critical advance, one that would see countries formally launch negotiations to phase down the contribution of these super greenhouse gases to climate change.
----------------
This post was co-written with NRDC International Climate Policy Director Jake Schmidt.
* Global Warming Potential (GWP) is a measure of the potency of a gas in comparison to CO2, so a chemical with a GWP of 1430 as commonly used in car air conditioners has 1430 times the potency of CO2 in warming the climate.
** “Non-A5” under the Montreal Protocol are the developed countries and “A5” are the developing countries.
*** Thanks to Xiaopu Sun and Stephen Andersen of the Institute for Governance & Sustainable Development for helpful input on this post.

Coming to America

U.K.'s A-Gas Plans Expansion Into North America

A-Gas’s acquisitions in the U.S. will set it up for a significant expansion into North America, including the international rollout of its refrigerant reclamation technology.

This year, A-Gas celebrates its 20th year in business, but no time in those two decades has been quite as busy as last year. The past 12 months have seen intense activity as the Bristol refrigerant distributor and reclaimer bought two U.S. specialists, Coolgas and RemTec, and set up a fully fledged North American division. The firm has transplanted U.K. managing director Ken Logan to oversee the establishment of the U.S. operations for the next two years at least.

The acquisition of the U.S. businesses, plus a further distributor in Australia, Technochem, has seen the A-Gas Intl. group top £100 million turnover for 2012, with a worldwide headcount of 237.

Acquiring Assets

“A-Gas is now the largest independent refrigerant player outside of the U.S.,” said Jon Masters, European managing director. “Our core territories are in the U.K., South Africa, and Australia, in each of which we have a 30-35 percent market share. So we were keen to try and take that offering to the U.S. — it was the right opportunity in terms of the business and the regulatory framework.”

That framework is the U.S. phase out of HCFCs and the probable phase down of HFCs, expected to closely follow the European Commission’s proposed F-Gas model — although progressive states like California are already bringing in more stringent rules.

The particular attraction of RemTec is that its core business is halon reclamation. Although these are largely from fire suppressants, this offers the right range of skills and technology to allow an expansion into refrigerant reclamation. This is where A-Gas brings its own skills to bear, said Masters. “We can bring our reclamation knowhow, and the benefit of the U.K. experience of selling the reclaimed HCFC product. The U.S. market is maybe four or five years behind Europe, but it is rapidly developing, and the EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] has announced more cuts in HCFC volume.”

The plan is for the RemTec operation to be brought up to the same standard for refrigerant reclamation as A-Gas’s Bristol facilities by the end of this year.

The commercial implications of the rapid cuts should not be underestimated; in the U.S. over the past year, virgin R-22 has increased in price from $3 per pound to $15 per pound.

Coolgas, by contrast, is a conventional refrigerant distributor, but again the purchase is strategic, providing a foothold in the Southwest, from which A-Gas can build, with a brand name well known to the American market. It also holds all-important import rights to HCFCs.

A foothold in such a large territory is a big deal in its own right, but the potential is far bigger. “The U.S. business is roughly the same size as the U.K. business, but whereas in the U.K. that brings a 30 percent market share, in the U.S. it is only 2 percent of the market. It should be easier to double from 2-4 percent than from 30-60 percent.”

If the plans for reclamation at RemTec go well, it could be joined by other sites. While the U.K. can function well with a single reclamation site, the scale of the U.S. is likely to require a network of two or three more. With reclaimed HCFC expected to be useable in the U.S. beyond 2020, that is an attractive long-term target.

Reclamation Technology

In a relatively short time, refrigerant recovery and reclamation has become a serious business for A-Gas. Its environmental services operations now account for around 20 percent of turnover (refrigerants is the largest proportion at 60 percent).

U.K. business director John Ormerod said, “What we do falls into two areas: cleaning up dirty gas by removing contaminants and separating out gases from refrigerant mixtures.

“We probably lead the world in refrigerant reclamation. There is only one other company in the U.K. and three in the U.S. who can separate refrigerants like we do,” he said.

The separation facilities at Bristol have come on apace since the pioneering days when its technology could be housed in a corner of the warehouse. The original plant is still in situ, but it has been joined by Separator 3, located outside the warehouse and large enough to be able to accommodate tanker-sized volumes of refrigerant, with a capacity to process around 400 tonnes a year.

Although the precise technology is secret, both plants are designed to reclaim refrigerant to Air-Conditioning, Heating & Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) 700 standards, as well as being able to split mixed refrigerants into usable batches and to reclaim individual gases from cocktails of recovered refrigerant. The latter is where A-Gas claims distinctiveness, as “the only supplier who has both the technology and the capacity to provide this level of service.”

Content for the European Spotlight is provided courtesy of Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Magazine, London. For more information, visit www.racplus.com.

Publication date: 5/20/2013

UPDATE 2-California carbon permits sell for record high price

Tue May 21, 2013 4:22pm EDT

(Adds details on market, quotes from consultant and broker)

By Rory Carroll
SAN FRANCISCO May 21 (Reuters) - California's largest greenhouse gas-emitting businesses paid $14 per metric tonne (1.1 tons) for the right to release carbon this year, a record-high price that narrowly beat market expectations, the state said on Tuesday.
The state sold all of the more than 14.5 million allowances it offered to cover carbon emissions in 2013 at its third permit auction on May 16.
Allowances that cover emissions in 2016, which were also for sale, saw lighter demand, with buyers snapping up 7.5 million of the more than 9.5 million permits that were offered.
Those allowances cleared at the program's auction floor price of $10.71 per tonne.
"The auction results show increased maturity from program participants and from the market and confirm the good health of the carbon market in California," said Emilie Mazzacurati, managing director of climate consultancy Four Twenty Seven.
Following the release of the results, California carbon allowances in the secondary market were trading at $14.50 a tonne in large volumes on the IntercontinentalExchange, one carbon broker said on Tuesday.
Had allowances cleared the auction at a price higher than $14 a tonne, market speculators would have been more inclined to buy allowances, he said.
"The market looks pretty flat," he said. "I don't see the results as having a dramatic impact either way."

REVENUE RAISED
The state's three auctions have so far raised $256 million for the state and $556 million for its largest utility companies, which are required to use the money to protect ratepayers from higher energy costs.
The state is currently drafting a spending plan for the revenue it takes in from the program, which is required by law to be spent on efforts to drive down the state's emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions.
Last week, California Governor Jerry Brown announced that he would lend the $500 million the state expects to raise during the program's early years to help balance the state's budget under the condition that the money be paid back eventually with interest.

LAWSUITS
California's quarterly allowance auctions are not without controversy.
The auctions are currently the subject of two lawsuits, one by the California Chamber of Commerce, California's largest business group, and one by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative legal group that filed the suit on behalf of a handful of affected California businesses and residents.
Both lawsuits argue that the California Air Resources Board, the program's regulator, is violating state law by raising revenue by selling permits. (Reporting By Rory Carroll; Editing by Peter Galloway, Bernard Orr)

Gov. Brown wants to grab $500 million in cap-and-trade proceeds for general fund

 

Molly Peterson | May 15th, 2013, 10:22am

David McNew/Getty Images

California's carbon-credit market has raised $500 million in revenue, which Governor Brown wants to borrow to balance general fund expenses.

Gov. Jerry Brown plans to borrow $500 million from a program to fight climate change, as part of his effort to balance the budget - a move that has stirred up clean air advocates.

California has begun auctioning off carbon emission permits as part of its cap-and-trade program. They're basically licenses to pollute that businesses can buy to offset their emissions. The money -- $500 million collected so far -- goes into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.

Brown wants to use that money to cover the state's general fund expenses, and pay it back later, with interest. He argues that it's okay to borrow the money because greenhouse gas reduction programs are just getting off the ground.

The Sierra Club, the Greenlining Institute and other environmental groups say the permit fees can only be spent on programs that reduce greenhouse gases.

They argue that some of the money the governor wants to borrow was going to fund clean air programs in low-income and minority neighborhoods near refineries and other sources of pollution.

The governor did sign a law last year meant to protect carbon fees from being diverted for general fund use. But SB 535 doesn't stop him from borrowing the money.

California Considering 25 Projects for Carbon Offset Credits

 

By Lynn Doan - Mar 8, 2013 6:27 PM ET

             

California, the second-largest carbon-polluting state in the U.S. behind Texas, will decide whether to award its first carbon offset credits for 25 projects designed to cut greenhouse-gas emissions.
The candidates for offset credits include a project to improve forest management practices to avoid emissions related to timber harvesting and several to destroy biogas at farms, according to a list posted on the state Air Resources Board’s website. All of the projects must be reviewed by a certified “offset verifier” and then by the air board itself before being deemed eligible.
Should all of the projects be approved, they’ll generate as many as 3 million offset credits to be used under California’s carbon cap-and-trade program, the only system of its kind in the U.S. and the second-largest in the world, behind the European Union’s program. The state defeated a lawsuit in January that claimed the offsets, which companies can use to cover as much as 8 percent of their emissions, aren’t new efforts to cut carbon and would occur without investments.
The projects listed by the air board today will be held to “rigorous verification standards,” Mary D. Nichols, the agency’s chairman, said in a statement posted on its website. “We have determined that every single California offset credit allowed into the program represents a real ton of greenhouse gas reductions.”

Contracts Rising

Contracts based on California offset credits, each allowing the release of one metric ton of carbon, have risen 25 cents, or 2.1 percent, in the past month, according to data compiled by environmental broker Evolution Markets based in White Plains, New York. “Golden” offsets, which come with a seller guarantee to replace any invalidated credits, were unchanged at $12 a ton today, according to Evolution.
The projects would be awarded “early action” credits, which the state agreed to consider to generate an initial supply of offsets for the market. To be eligible, they must cut emissions in the U.S. between 2005 and 2014 and be listed in a preexisting registry designed to meet the state’s early action criteria, among other things.
Emissions-reduction projects that begin in 2015 and beyond must meet a different set of state standards.

Carbon Allowances

Under the cap-and-trade program, California established a pool of carbon allowances, each permitting the release of one metric ton of carbon. That pool is designed to shrink through 2020 to cut statewide emissions by roughly 15 percent. Companies over their emissions limits can buy allowances from those below the cap, as well as a limited number of offset credits, to meet their compliance obligations.
Futures based on 2013 California carbon allowances, which also allow for the release of one metric ton of carbon each, climbed 5 cents to settle at $14.55 a ton today, according to Atlanta-based IntercontinentalExchange Inc. (ICE)
California’s cap-and-trade system will eventually regulate 85 percent of greenhouse-gas emissions released in the state and cover all industries, including power generation, oil refining and transportation. A similar program in the U.S. Northeast, known as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, regulates emissions from power plants only.

Europe Glut

In Europe, an oversupply of offset credits has added to pressure on European Union carbon futures, already trading 49 percent below a year ago because of a glut of allowances due to the recession.
Kathrin Goretzki, an analyst at Unicredit Bank AG in Munich, estimated Jan. 29 that the EU market may have been oversupplied by much as 1.6 billion metric tons of permits by the end of 2012.
The United Nations Clean Development Mechanism has approved 6,619 offset projects in developing countries, more than half of which are in China, according to the UN’s website. More than 2,000 of these projects have supplied 1.26 billion tons of “Certified Emission Reduction” offsets for emissions-trading systems participating in the Kyoto Protocol, UN data compiled by Bloomberg show.
California’s air resources board may take “several weeks” to issue its first offset credits, according to the agency’s statement.
To contact the reporter on this story: Lynn Doan in San Francisco at ldoan6@bloomberg.net

Canadian Cap-And-Trade Program

http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/capandtrade.htm

Brown wants California's carbon market to link with Quebec's

Brown wants California's carbon market to link with Quebec's

By Dale Kasler
dkasler@sacbee.com

By Dale Kasler The Sacramento Bee

Last modified: 2013-04-10T15:06:43Z

Published: Wednesday, Apr. 10, 2013 - 12:00 am | Page 6B

 

Starting next January, California's cap-and-trade carbon market probably won't be operating on its own anymore.

Gov. Jerry Brown on Monday gave state regulators the green light to link California's carbon market with a similar market in the Canadian province of Quebec. The California Air Resources Board is expected to vote April 19 on whether to link with Quebec.

If the two become linked, California companies could buy carbon credits from Quebec and vice versa. "The allowances will be completely fungible," said David Clegern, spokesman for the Air Resources Board.

In addition, "this obviously is a way to have an impact (on climate change) beyond what happens in California," he said.

California regulators had hoped that their carbon market would be part of a Western states consortium. But while California's market debuted last fall, no other state has committed to running a market yet; Quebec is the only Canadian province to join in.

The market is the centerpiece of AB 32, the state's 7-year-old global warming law.

Several hundred big industrial polluters are required to reduce their carbon emissions below a certain level – the "cap." If they don't, they have to buy emissions allowances to compensate.
The total cap shrinks slightly each year, which is supposed to result in a gradual reduction in emissions.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/04/10/5329469/brown-wants-californias-carbon.html#storylink=cpy

California's carbon market may succeed where others have failed

California's carbon market may succeed where others have failed

by Brendon Bosworth

Most weekdays, a long line of rail cars delivers thick slabs of steel to a factory about 40 miles east of Los Angeles. Deep in the bowels of California Steel Industries, the slabs are toasted until they glow white-hot and then rolled into thin sheets used to make shipping containers, metal roofing and car wheels.

The plant churns out more than 2 million tons of flat rolled steel each year, using enormous amounts of natural gas and electricity and releasing over 190,000 metric tons of climate-altering carbon dioxide annually. Now, California Steel and many other businesses have to pay for their carbon emissions under California's new cap-and-trade law, the first of its kind in the nation.

Last November, the company participated in the state's first auction of carbon allowances, purchasing an undisclosed number, each worth one metric ton of carbon dioxide and selling for $10.09. The online auction went fairly smoothly, says Brett Guge, executive vice president of finance and administration at the company. But for Guge, the long-term challenge is finding ways to meet California's ambitious greenhouse-gas reduction targets (down to 1990 levels by 2020) while remaining profitable.

The Golden State forged ahead with the carbon dioxide cap-and-trade program despite the U.S. Senate's 2010 failure to pass a national program. Given the state's history of implementing environmental regulations that later become national policy, a successful cap-and-trade system could serve as a federal model. If cap-and-trade in California "fails, or is perceived to have failed, then that could be the nail in the coffin for cap-and-trade consideration as a policy instrument in Washington," says Robert Stavins, a Harvard professor who studies climate policy.

While its overall impact on U.S. emissions won't be major, the California experiment makes several improvements to existing cap-and-trade strategies. It covers more sources of pollution than the five-year-old Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative in the Northeastern U.S., which applies only to power plants. The European Union started the world's largest carbon cap-and-trade program in 2005, but it had a significant flaw: the initial stage of the program gave away too many free credits, resulting in some power companies raking in windfall profits by raising electricity prices even though they didn't have to pay for their allowances. It also contributed to low prices for carbon allowances, which provides scant incentive to cut emissions.

Mary Nichols, head of the California Air Resources Board, the agency steering the state program, is confident that California's effort will be different. The program covers 360 businesses, which represent about 600 facilities that each release more than 25,000 metric tons yearly -- enough to put a big dent in California's total carbon output. The EU's difficulty, Nichols notes, was that authorities didn't have an accurate measure of the total quantity of emissions initially. California, though, has had a greenhouse-gas reporting requirement in place since 2008.

"We knew (what polluters) were actually putting into the atmosphere," says Nichols. "That gave us the assurance that if we started a (cap-and-trade) program … we would be able to implement it in a way that would not cause the kinds of problems that occurred in Europe."

Fraud could be another obstacle, but experts agree the state is equipped to keep that to a minimum. The Air Resources Board uses third-party verifiers to check reported emissions, and has a system to track allowances and prove their authenticity. Companies that fail to supply enough credits to cover their emissions are fined by having to purchase four times the number of outstanding allowances. While not flawless, the program is unlikely to suffer from market manipulation and fraud, according to an analysis by the University of California, Los Angeles.

But even if the cap-and-trade system works as intended, its economic impacts are a big unknown. Because of its many regulations, high electricity rates and taxes, California is already a costly place to do business.

Guge is worried there won't be a feasible way to reduce the carbon dioxide output of his company's gas-powered furnaces, which account for 75 percent of the plant's total releases. Without reductions, his company will have to pay for more allowances as the cap tightens, but it's reluctant to pass those increased costs on to customers because that might put it at a competitive disadvantage.

Proponents of cap-and-trade hope the system will drive innovations, with new companies popping up to provide emissions-curbing breakthroughs. In late January, the Sacramento-based firm Clean Tech Advocates launched to do just that. It works to help clean tech developers get state funding, generated from the carbon credit auctions, for their projects, and its consultants help companies reduce emissions. Founder Patrick Leathers says that, over time, the auctions will bring in "billions of dollars," which will boost the state's clean tech industry and result in carbon-cutting solutions for companies dealing with cap-and-trade. Environmentalists -- and businesses -- are hoping he's right.

Carbon Markey with Quebec

carbon market with Quebec

• Stikeman Elliott LLP
• Canada, USA   
• April 17 2013

 

Last week, California Governor Jerry Brown approved the link of the state’s carbon market with Quebec. The next step is for California’s Air Resources Board to consider changes to its cap-and-trade program that will allow it to link with Quebec. The Board is scheduled to meet on April 19th. A spokesman has stated that the Board intends to continue to work on all necessary additional steps to ensure California’s efforts to link with Quebec are successful.

If approved by the Board, California and Quebec intend to implement the link between their carbon markets on January 1, 2014. Once linked, they will hold joint auctions of carbon emission allowances which can be used for compliance in either jurisdiction. In the interim, the two jurisdictions will test their auction platforms and trading systems for compatibility.

Both governments are hopeful that linking the carbon markets will improve liquidity for carbon allowances by increasing the pool of permits and companies trading them, as well as encourage expanded investments in low-carbon technologies.

New Lawsuit Opposes California's Cap-and-Trade Carbon Market

April 16, 2013, 1:19 pm • Posted by Laird Harrison

California's quest to reduce global warming hit another obstacle on Tuesday. A conservative legal group filed suit to block California's new cap-and-trade carbon market.

(Craig Miller/Climate Watch)

The Pacific Legal Foundation alleged that the market's charge for carbon emissions violates California law because it constitutes a tax, and taxes in California require approval by a two-third majority in both houses of the state Legislature.

“California’s cap and trade regulation was developed and is being implemented in full accord with all state laws," Dave Clegern of the California Air Resources Board (abbreviated as both CARB and ARB) said in an email response to the lawsuit. "ARB will continue moving forward with this important program to fight climate change and develop a clean energy future for California.”

The cap-and-trade market is the centerpiece of California's effort to reduce emissions of gases that cause global warming. It launched Nov. 14.

Cap and trade functions like a stock exchange for greenhouse gas emissions . Businesses, including oil refiners and manufacturers, have to buy permits for each ton of carbon they emit and can then resell these permits.

The California Chamber of Commerce has also sued to block the cap-and-trade program.
Both lawsuits challenge the way the law behind the program is being implemented.
They say ARB had no authority to auction off carbon allowances, raising billions of dollars for the state.

“PLF’s lawsuit holds CARB’s feet to the fire because CARB cannot be allowed to siphon billions of dollars from California taxpayers in violation of the California Constitution,” said Ted Hadzi-Antich, a lawyer for the foundation, in a press release. “CARB must obey the law, just as the rest of us are required to do.”

Based in Sacramento, the Pacific Legal Foundation frequently challenges government regulations. For example, it sought to remove wildlife from endangered species lists.

The European Union's eight-year-old Emissions Trading System (ETS), the world's largest cap-and-trade carbon market, is broken.

The European Union's eight-year-old Emissions Trading System (ETS), the world's largest cap-and-trade carbon market, is broken.

Steam billows from RWE's Frimmersdorf coal power plant near Grevenbroich, Germany. The European Union's carbon market was meant to curb greenhouse gas emissions, but heavy industry has resisted steps that would make the system more effective, and fossil fuel more expensive.

Photograph by Wolfgang Von Brauchitsch, Bloomberg/Getty Images

Thomas K. Grose in London

National Geographic News

Published April 18, 2013

 

The European Parliament this week voted 334-315 (with 60 abstentions) against a controversial "back-loading" plan that aimed to boost the flagging price of carbon, which since 2008 has fallen from about 31 euros per tonne to about 4 euros (about $5.20). Since the vote, the price has fallen even farther, to 2.80 euros. The collapsing market is hardly the kind of firm foundation needed for building a clean-energy economy. (Related: "Renewable Energy Not Growing as Fast as Necessary," and "IEA Outlook: Time Running Out on Climate Change")

"Now, the market is dead, as far as I can see," said Steffen Böhm, director of the Essex Sustainability Institute at Britain's Essex Business School.

What will be the aftermath of the ETS collapse? Here's a quick primer on what happened, and what it could mean elsewhere, particularly in California, which inaugurated a new carbon market at the start of this year. (Related: "California Tackles Climate Change, But Will Others Follow?")

Q: First of all, what's a carbon market?

A: The U.S. introduced the concept of using market forces to rein in greenhouse gas emissions during the talks that lead to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement to combat climate change. Ironically, Europe wasn't initially keen on the idea. But after it failed to enact an EU-wide carbon tax, Europe ultimately launched the ETS in 2005.

The basic idea is setting an ever-tightening cap on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, then issuing allowances up to that level. Major contributors of greenhouse gases-mainly power companies and heavy industry-face heavy fines if they don't have enough allowances to cover their emissions.

The cleanest companies can either bank the ones they don't need, or sell them to companies in need of more.

The idea is to make it more expensive to emit CO2, and to make green technologies-including renewable fuels, and carbon capture and sequestration-that are initially expensive more competitive with fossil fuels.

Trading certainly was happening; Bloomberg estimates that the ETS represents 89 percent of the $61 billion worth of carbon emissions traded worldwide.

But experts say a price of 30 euros ($39.20) or more is needed for the ETS to be effective at driving adoption of cleaner energy. (Related: "As U.S. Cleans Its Energy Mix, It Ships Coal Problems Abroad")

Q: So why has the price of carbon in Europe fallen?

A: "There were far too many allowances in the system in the first few years," Böhm said. Moreover, he said, Europe was flooded with "cheap CDMs," or clean development mechanism offsets that companies earned for funding green initiatives in developing countries. But what really pummeled the market was the 2008 Great Recession and the subsequent anemic recovery, said Tomas Wyns, director of the Center for Clean Air Policy Europe, a Brussels-based nonprofit, because demand for goods and power has dropped.

Q: Recessions do happen, so wouldn't that always be a problem for carbon markets?

A: Wyns certainly thinks so. The problem, as he sees it, is that while demand fluctuates, the supply of allowances is fixed. "There is no way to respond to the supply side in its (the ETS's) current form." One possible fix, Wyns said, would be a price-stabilization reserve that buys up allowances when prices are too low.

Q: Wouldn't a simple, straightforward carbon tax be a better solution?

A: Some economists think so, and that was certainly the first choice of many European policymakers. But in the EU, a tax needs the support of all member states, and that proved impossible. (Related: (Related: "British Columbia Rethinks Its Pioneering Carbon Tax" and "Coal-Fired Australia, Buffeted by Climate Change, Enacts Carbon Tax")

In the United States, Republican antipathy toward new taxes also makes a carbon tax unlikely. In addition, "taxes have a way of hitting the wrong people at the wrong time and can be pretty inflexible, as well," Böhm said,

Q: What would backloading have done, and would it have worked?

A: Back-loading would have taken a huge chunk of allowances out of the market for two years, creating a temporary scarcity that proponents say would have boosted the price of carbon. But Wyns estimates that, at best, it would have only pushed the price up to about 10 euros ($13.08), well below what would be necessary to effect change.

Q: Who opposed it, and why?

A: Mainly heavy industries that use a lot of energy, Wyns said. These industries-ranging from steelmakers to beer brewers-argued that if carbon prices rose, they wouldn't be able to compete against American rivals who are benefiting from cheap shale gas. "That's a very simplistic argument," he said, "but it plays well."  (Related: "U.K. Dash for Gas a Test for Global Fracking")

Q: Is that the end, then, for ETS?

A: Probably not. As Wyns said: "This is Europe; these things never end." He expects some sort of revised plan will surface eventually.

But Böhm, who is not a fan of carbon trading, said, "They really need to start from scratch." He doubts that will happen, because the political backlash from admitting failure would be too terrible.

Q: The U.S. Senate killed a cap-and-trade plan in 2010, and Japan has also backed away from one. Now, given the ETS debacle, is carbon trading essentially a dead concept?

A: No. California launched an ambitious emissions market last November (though it faces lawsuits), and Korea is considering one, as are seven Chinese provinces. "The good thing is other countries will learn lessons from Europe," Wyns said. Clearly, he would hope that future markets have a mechanism to respond to an oversupply of allowances. (Related: "British Columbia Rethinks Its Pioneering Carbon Tax")

"If it has to be a market solution," Böhm said, then there must be the political will to set a very tough cap. "But if you do that, you effectively have a carbon tax, which is why Europe's cap was not all that tough." He's also dismayed that California's plan accepts international credits. CDMs, he said, lead to "creative accounting" and not effective reductions in emissions. It is better, he said, to keep markets local.  (Related Interactive: "World Electricity Mix")

California carbon market launches, permits priced below expectations

(Reuters) - California's largest greenhouse gas emitting businesses paid $10.09 per metric tonne (1.1 ton) for the right to release carbon, raising almost $300 million for the cash-strapped state and its energy companies in its first-ever carbon permit auction,

The permit price was below market expectations despite strong demand from utility companies, manufacturers and oil refineries participating in the auction, market sources said.

Ahead of the California Air Resources Board announcement on Monday, traders, brokers and analysts had predicted a clearing price in the range of $11.75 to $12.50 a tonne.

"The clearing price was below expectations but total participation was higher than most expected from vintage 2013," said Jeff King, managing director of environmental markets at Scotiabank.
All of the 23.1 million permits offered at the auction to cover 2013 emissions were bought, raising $233 million. The money will be given to the state's utility companies, which must use it to protect ratepayers.

The California carbon auction is a key component of the state's cap-and-trade program, the first of its kind in the country. State officials hope it will serve as a model for other states and the federal government.

The program is part of a broader effort to reduce Californian emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 -- about a 15 percent reduction, compared to business-as-usual forecasts.

The permit sale was held on November 14 and announced Monday. It is a crucial step ahead of the cap-and-trade program's official start on January 1, 2013.

"By putting a price on carbon, we can break our unhealthy dependence on fossil fuels and move at full speed toward a clean energy future," Mary Nichols, chairwoman of the board, said in a statement.
"That means new jobs, cleaner water and air -- and a working model for other states, and the nation, to use as we gear up to fight climate change and make our economy more competitive and resilient."

LAWSUIT LOOMS
Compliance entities -- companies directly affected by the state's carbon caps -- bought around 97 percent of the allowances. Financial institutions bought the remaining 3 percent, the board said.
The state also auctioned 39.5 million permits that cover 2015 emissions but only sold about 5.6 million allowances.

Demand for those permits was weaker than expected, and those allowances cleared at $10.00/t, the lowest price allowed under the program's rules.

The $55 million raised by the sale of those allowances will be deposited into the state's newly minted Air Pollution Control Fund.

The money from the permit auction must be used to fund clean energy projects and energy efficiency programs, although details on how exactly the money should be spent needs to be hammered out by the state legislature.

Nichols said she wasn't surprised that not all of the 2015 allowances were sold given the large number of permits offered.

On the eve of last week's auction, the state's largest business group, the California Chamber of Commerce, filed a lawsuit challenging the state's right to sell allowances and keep the profits.
Although the state is giving 90 percent of the program's allowances away for free to covered businesses at the outset of the program, the group said all of the permits should be handed out freely, which would negate the need for the state's quarterly permit auctions.

Nichols told reporters on a conference call the lawsuit had "no impact" on the auction.
During its first two-year phase, the cap-and-trade program will cover 350 businesses representing 600 facilities, including power plants, cement-making facilities and oil refineries.

Banks and other financial institutions are also allowed to participate in the auction, although there are limits to the number of permits any one entity can hold.

Trade of CCA futures contracts, which have been traded on the IntercontinentalExchange since August 2011, were quiet in the run-up to the auction results.

Prior to the announcement, CCAs for 2013 emissions were bid at $10.25 with an asking price of $14, a wider than usual spread, with no trades seen, one trader said.

Ahead of the auction results announcement, traders and brokers said they expected the secondary market price for allowances to quickly align with the auction clearing price.
(Reporting By Rory Carroll; Editing by Bob Burgdorfer and David Gregorio)

First Carbon Offset Projects To Be Reviewed By Air Resources Board

By Bob Moffitt

Twenty five projects initiated before the state finalized its Cap-and-Trade rules will be inspected to ensure they met state requirements.

Permalink

(Sacramento, CA)
Friday, March 08, 2013

The California Air Resources Board says it's reviewing the first twenty five projects submitted that promised to offset greenhouse gas emissions. If approved, the businesses can earn credits under the state's Cap-and-Trade Program.

Stanley Young with the Air Resources Board says certified inspectors will determine how much pollution each project eliminates. "We require that the project developer hire and accredited person- a third-person verifier, to take a close look at the paperwork involved in this and make sure they went through all of the proper steps and followed the stringent rules."

Most of the projects either used manure from dairy farms in biodigesters or eradicate ozone-depleting chemicals.

If the 25 projects performed as promised, they would eliminate three million tons of carbon

A-GAS INTERNATIONAL EXPANDS ITS PRESENCE IN AMERICA

LEADING REFRIGERANTS SUPPLIER A-GAS INTERNATIONAL COMPLETES STRATEGIC ACQUISITION OF KEY INDEPENDENT US REFRIGERANTS SUPPLIER AND DISTRIBUTOR, COOLGAS

Bristol-based A-Gas International (or“the Group”), one of the world’s largest independent suppliers of refrigerants, associated environmental services, and speciality gases and chemicals, has completed the acquisition of Houston, Texas based Coolgas Inc. (“Coolgas”), a leading independent supplier and distributor of refrigerants to the US market. The terms of the transaction were not disclosed.

The transaction represents the fifth strategic acquisition completed by A-Gas so far in 2012, and forms part of the Group’s acquisitive growth strategy which is being executed both in the UK and internationally. The enlarged group will have a turnover of c. £130m and 237 employees.

Founded in 1994 by Jesse Combs, Coolgas has grown over the past 18 years to become one of the leading independent distributors of refrigerants in the US. Coolgas’ “refrigerants made simple” philosophy reflects the focus on customer service that has enabled it to grow first to a regional and then to a national player. Coolgas has recently commissioned a new refrigerant storage and packaging facility in Houston and has distribution centres in California, Utah, Arizona, Indiana, Michigan, Maryland and Georgia ensuring that Coolgas is close to its customers wherever they are located.

In recent years Coolgas has also become an EPA registered reclaimer of refrigerants and a project developer for the generation of carbon offsets on the California Climate Action Reserve exchange. These capabilities enable Coolgas to manage the lifecycle of Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) and substances with high Global Warming Potential (GWP) to safeguard the environment.

The acquisition builds on A-Gas’acquisition of Ohio based refrigerant reclaimer and halocarbon management specialist RemTec International in July 2012. Coolgas provides a strong strategic fit, bringing a strong brand and complementary footprint that will accelerate refrigerants sales growth. Further the reclaim and carbon credits businesses extend A-Gas’ existing operations in the US Environmental Services market which is already well established in the UK and Europe.

The acquisition of Coolgas follows on from the successful acquisitions not only of RemTec International in July 2012 but also of Australian based Technochem in March 2012 and SA Rural in May 2012, and UK based A-Zone Technologies in April 2012.

Commenting on the acquisition:

John Rutley, Executive Chairman and founder of A-Gas International said:
Jesse Combs and his management team have built a great business in the US refrigerant sector and we are delighted to add it to our rapidly expanding presence in this important market. The fit with our recently acquired business, RemTec, is perfect and allows us to offer a full range of products and services to our customers in the world’s largest refrigerant market.

Jon Masters, Regional Managing Director of A-Gas International said:

The acquisition of Coolgas will significantly strengthen our position as the leading independent global supplier of refrigerants at a time when regulatory changes are providing increasing opportunities for reclamation and recycling of used refrigerants using our market leading technology developed in the UK. We look forward to supporting the Coolgas management team and workforce in continuing to provide outstanding service to its customers.

Jesse Combs, CEO of Coolgas said:

I feel honoured that A-Gas saw Coolgas as a strategic fit and entry point into the US refrigerants’ distribution business. Our team of professionals have a customer service mind-set that I believe sets Coolgas apart from the rest of the industry. I have the upmost confidence that the A-Gas team will support and grow upon our "refrigerants made simple" philosophy for many years to come.

About A-Gas International

A-Gas is an international group of companies with headquarters in Bristol, UK. A-Gas is a market leader in the supply of refrigerants within its core territories in the U.K., South Africa, and Australia, and has state of the art storage, blending, packaging and reclamation facilities in Bristol, Cape Town, and Melbourne. The company also has marketing and distribution centres in Singapore, Thailand, China and Mexico. In the US, A-Gas has a Performance Chemicals business located in Doylestown, Pennsylvania; RemTec International, a refrigerant reclaimer and halocarbon management specialist located in Bowling Green, Ohio; and now Coolgas, headquartered in Houston, Texas. For more information, visit www.agas.com

About Coolgas

Coolgas Inc. was started in 1994 as a distributor of refrigerant gases. Through a continual focus on customer service embodied by its “refrigerants made simple” philosophy it has gained customers across the United States and grown to become one of the leading independent distributors of refrigerants. Coolgas supplies a full product range from essential use CFCs through to the most recent HFC blends. Coolgas also supplies in a wide variety of formats from the smallest auto aftermarket disposable cans through to bulk tankers for industrial customers. Coolgas is an EPA approved refrigerant reclaimer. The Coolgas, Inc. headquarters are located 40 miles north of Houston, Texas. For more information visit www.coolgas.com