How to avoid 'a wave of regulatory pain' from Fuel EU Maritime rules
Companies need to be prepared for the introduction of FuelEU Maritime in less than two months – ...
ATSG: UPDATEMAERSK: QUIET DAY DHL: ROBOTICSCHRW: ONE CENT CLUB UPDATECAT: RISING TRADEEXPD: TRUMP TRADE LOSER LINE: PUNISHEDMAERSK: RELIEF XPO: TRUMP TRADE WINNERCHRW: NO JOYUPS: STEADY YIELDXPO: BUILDING BLOCKSHLAG: BIG ORDERLINE: REACTIONLINE: EXPENSES AND OPERATING LEVERAGELINE: PIPELINE OF DEALS
ATSG: UPDATEMAERSK: QUIET DAY DHL: ROBOTICSCHRW: ONE CENT CLUB UPDATECAT: RISING TRADEEXPD: TRUMP TRADE LOSER LINE: PUNISHEDMAERSK: RELIEF XPO: TRUMP TRADE WINNERCHRW: NO JOYUPS: STEADY YIELDXPO: BUILDING BLOCKSHLAG: BIG ORDERLINE: REACTIONLINE: EXPENSES AND OPERATING LEVERAGELINE: PIPELINE OF DEALS
One of the cornerstones of the European Commission’s new green deal is to extend the emission trading scheme to the road haulage sector as a means for making road freight less attractive to shippers and thus reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, this op-ed in Euractiv argues that the scheme is only likely to increase the risk of Giles Jaune-esque civil disobedience and lead to only a minimal reduction in emissions. “The key question facing the climate movement is how we match our fight against “the end of the world”, with millions of Europeans struggling to make ends meet. How do we make sure the strongest carry most of the burden? Our answer has always been a fair and effective transition can and should be led by industry. Carmakers, oil companies and big transport companies have the resources, skills and scale to drive the transition. They can undertake multi-billion euro investments, they can absorb some of the costs; they can be patient because their time horizon isn’t the end of the month but years or sometimes decades.”
Comment on this article