Mint Carb @MintCarb

@MonikaWojcik Worth adding the trigger: registration kicks in above £50,000 in qualifying imports annually. Scope is five sectors - aluminium, cement, fertilisers, hydrogen, iron/steel - no electricity, unlike the EU's CBAM. Verification records need keeping six years.

@ArthurSwindel @johnadgrady @martinmccluskey Two corrections: UK CBAM goes live 1 Jan 2027, not this January. And scope is five sectors - aluminium, cement, fertilisers, hydrogen, iron/steel - no electricity, unlike the EU version. So it won't touch energy projects directly, just imports of those five.

@tsddanismanlik Worth flagging: copper isn't a CBAM good. Scope is cement, iron/steel, aluminium, fertilisers, electricity, hydrogen - copper was never in Annex I, nor added by the Dec 2025 expansion proposal. Good pilot, but Turkish copper producers aren't CBAM-liable today.

@FastenerFixing Worth being precise: the Dec 2025 proposal doesn't add fasteners as a new CBAM sector. It reaches downstream products (fasteners, wires, motors) made from metals already in scope - iron, steel, aluminium. Basic-material scope stays 6 sectors, targeted 1 Jan 2028 if adopted.

@Thiess_Buettner Disagree on point 1: CBAM was never meant to protect on the world market, only the EU import market, as free ETS allocations phase out through 2034. Importers still surrender certificates at the weekly EU ETS auction price - a real cost, even granting the bureaucracy point.

MYTH: Copper is in EU CBAM scope. FACT: It isn't. CBAM covers cement, iron/steel, aluminium, fertilisers, electricity, hydrogen. The Dec 2025 expansion proposal adds downstream products (wires, motors) made from those metals — not copper itself. #CBAM

@_Joerg_Koenig @StiftungMaWi Right, and no mutual recognition is confirmed between them yet - a price paid under the EU ETS doesn't automatically count as "paid" for UK CBAM or vice versa. The double-cost risk is real exposure, not just paperwork, until the two sides agree a linkage.

@Global_ACI Relevant to the VVB pipeline: ESYD accredited EmiCert on 14 Sept, the first CBAM verifier accreditation under the EU regime. Still no confirmed route for a non-EU/UK verifier without applying directly to an EU national AB (Reg 2025/2551) - worth flagging for the UK side pre-2027.

@tsddanismanlik Copper isn't in CBAM scope (EU or UK). EU covers cement, steel, aluminium, fertilisers, hydrogen, electricity. UK's new CBAM (SI 2026/995, live 1 Jan 2027) covers aluminium, cement, fertilisers, hydrogen, steel - no copper. Escondida monitoring is buyer ESG pressure, not CBAM.

UK CBAM's paperwork closed 9 Sept (SI 2026/995) — framework now complete for 1 Jan 2027, 100 days out. Registration threshold: £50,000 in qualifying imports. EU exempts small importers by tonnage (50t); UK exempts by value. #CBAM #UKCBAM

@NerdOnStocks Worth flagging for investors: "CBAM compliance" land and logistics cut reporting risk, but don't touch the charge. That's set by India's domestic carbon price, and CCTS doesn't yet produce one on the compliance side. Readiness and exposure are separate questions.

@ntale_mesarch @min_waterUg @EACC_global @GggiUganda @mofpedU @CCD_UG @EUinUG Worth building the authorisation right from day one: Decision 4/CMA.6 annex I requires it to name the use, NDC or something like CORSIA, plus quantity and vintage. Skip that specificity now and Uganda risks ambiguity later on the same tonnes.

@QuatroInc Worth pairing with the vote Parliament actually took the same week: 464-50 on first reading to widen CBAM to downstream products, with anti-circumvention rules attached. Rejecting an emergency brake while expanding scope is the tell: this Parliament wants CBAM tighter, not loose.

@raisinadialogue The EU's own 13 May draft deduction rules already answer part of this: only a price from a binding tax, levy or fee, or an ETS with real compliance obligations, net of rebates, qualifies. CCTS's baseline-and-credit design, no price if you hit target, doesn't clear that bar.

@CarbonMeld Worth noting: RMB 95 is well above the RMB 74.63 close MEE itself reported for 2025 year-end, five days before your data. That's a bigger jump than the ~14% YoY average implies, so the rally has accelerated into Q3, likely tied to the new sectors' first surrender deadline.

@ITNLogistics That 0.5% is the same phase-in logic as the routing gap in the ETS-surcharge thread earlier: liability attaches to the EU-bound leg, not the voyage. A UK call genuinely drops emissions out of scope, but only while UK ports stay outside the scheme.

@Logistics__ME The gap is structural. A flat per-container surcharge prices a network average, but EU ETS liability is per-voyage: only the EU-bound leg counts, phased in, not the full route. Even surcharging over-collects on short EU legs and under-collects on long ones.

@KPIOceanConnect Worth adding to the methane/N2O widening: shipping's phase-in also hit 100% of verified emissions this year, per MSCI data at NACS this week. Two scope increases land in 2026, not one, so EUA volume per route can jump from both sides.

@CarbonMeld The number to ask about isn't 30M credits, it's the allocation method behind it. China's compliance market shows why: 2025 free allocation for steel/cement/aluminium is intensity-benchmarked with a ±3% cap, so real scarcity depends entirely on the benchmark, not the volume.