A couple of simple observations suggest the EU ETS is not all it's cracked up to be
1) an audit of carbon credits claimed under the Clean Development Mechanism (notable beneficiary China) found that 40% failed to meet even the slapdash criteria. In other words they weren't really emissions cuts so they had the perverse effect of exonerating actual emissions in Europe.
2) last week the Germans opened a huge (2.2 GW) brown coal fired power station at Neurath. The EU ETS was supposed to put the kibosh on all new coal power in Europe.

Seeing as how China accounts for nearly a third of global emissions I'd like to know when they will be regarded a 'developed' country under Kyoto rules. I suspect the Europeans like the endless supply of cheap carbon credits.

Carbon price - Do we really want EU to dictate our economic future?

Is it in Australia’s long term interests to hand to EU the ability to dictate our carbon price? Doing so gives EU enormous power to do what suits them, no matter how much it may damage Australia.

EU introduced their ETS to gain an economic advantage over USA. USA didn’t fall into the trap. Since then, EU has continually tampered with its ETS for its own political purposes and economic advantage. They will do so again.

Is it wise for Australia to subjugate itself to rules made in Brussels?

All negative from the Tasweigan. I don't think there will be much difference between the floor price and the trading price, could even be more for carbon credits than the floor price. Around $ 10__12 / ton. Subject to rise and fall. Seeing AU floor price was not to start for 3 years, and providing Europe comes out of recession. The trading price could be even more. This proposal is in line with company wishes.

Unless the government has changed the rules regarding the percentage of carbon credits that may be purchased from overseas, they will be limited to 50% for each company affected by the new charges.

I have previously expressed my concern that the outflow of money from Australia in order to pay for these pieces of paper will be a strain on our balance sheet. If the EU's carbon credits are cheap, then at least this undesirable aspect of the new tax regime will be slightly reduced, but what a mess this must be for corporations which are trying to establish business plans reaching well into the future - say, 10 or 15 years. With a government that appears to be willing to change the rules weekly and an Opposition that has no policies except to promise to reverse everything, I'm surprised that the BCA and other bodies representing business have not made their frustrations more public.

Presumably, they have decided to operate behind closed doors and may even have sought this latest change, but they have been strangely mute in public.

579 says:

"I don't think there will be much difference between the floor price and the trading price,"

Gee, every other market based carbon trading scheme in the world says the opposite; who to believe; my own eyes or you? The usual argument by AGW alarmists: don't believe what has happened and the ongoing evidence, believe what I say.

579; why don't you tell us what happened in Chicago with carbon trading?

Pollutants are a world problem so it needs to be a world wide trading scheme, as business wants. The more business moves to more cleaner strategies the less the longer term liability. The more cleaner business becomes the less credits they will need to keep, and maintain.
The against everything party, will no doubt go against anything to make the world a better place.