Carbon costs are moving from the background of industrial planning to the center of trade compliance, as EU climate policy tightens the link between emissions and market access. At a recent Belgrade Energy Forum, Lafarge Serbia’s director, Dimitrije Knjeginjić, warned that exporters will face a growing obligation to account for CO2 when selling into the European Union. His remarks placed CBAM and the broader green transition—including changes in the energy sector—alongside the practical question of how domestic producers will manage competitiveness in EU markets.
Deadlines and the expanding coverage of carbon charges
Knjeginjić said that from January 1, 2026, every ton of CO2 will have to be paid for when exporting products to the EU, and that by 2034 all CO2-related payments will apply fully. He framed the timeline as a test of operational efficiency, arguing that if EU alignment occurs without sufficient preparation, the adjustment could be painful. The discussion also highlighted that compliance pressures are not limited to a single product line but affect entire value chains.
He pointed to six sectors that are particularly exposed due to intensive energy consumption: aluminium industry, fertilisers, cement industry, steel, and hydrogen. For firms in these areas, carbon pricing is expected to translate into higher costs tied to production emissions and energy use, with downstream implications for pricing and market positioning in the EU.
How CBAM certificates connect to ETS carbon prices
Under CBAM, companies must buy certificates linked to embedded emissions, with one CBAM certificate equivalent to the price of one ton of emitted CO2 as reflected on the emission exchange. The reference point discussed at the forum was the European ETS market price: 93 euros per ton currently, and close to 104 euros in February. The same analysis noted that ETS prices have been rising since 2019, when the Green Deal was adopted.
Estimates cited during the discussion suggested ETS prices would not drop below 80 to 90 euros over the next two years. For importers and exporters subject to CBAM accounting, this creates a compliance environment where budgeting depends not only on measured emissions but also on volatile market pricing for allowances.
Decarbonisation pressure meets energy-system transformation
Knjeginjić described alternative fuels and footprint reduction as central levers for meeting future requirements, emphasizing that alternative fuels are better than traditional options. He also argued that industrial change needs support beyond individual company initiatives, calling for “absolute support” from ministries responsible for environment as well as mining and energy. In his view, decarbonisation is tied to workforce development as well as technology deployment.
To illustrate circular-economy thinking applied to industrial processes, he used a “Lego system” metaphor: assembling products from blocks while enabling dismantling and reassembly so components return to their next use. The underlying message was that without systems designed for reuse and recovery, industrial continuity would be harder to sustain while emissions constraints tighten.
Policy rationale: preventing carbon leakage and addressing double taxation
Dr. Sanja Filipović, scientific advisor at the Institute of Social Sciences and full professor at Singidunum University, characterized CBAM as having a protectionist element because it helps prevent production shifts toward countries with less demanding CO2 reduction rules. She argued that this approach protects EU industry while reducing incentives for emissions-intensive production relocation outside Europe’s regulatory perimeter.
Filipović also stressed that Serbia—while not an EU member—must align with EU market rules if it wants to export there. One solution she highlighted is establishing a national market of emission permits based on the European model so that double taxation can be avoided and emission-related payments can remain in-country for decarbonisation projects.
Compliance implications across importers, exporters and EU producers
Taken together, the forum discussion links CBAM certificate obligations with ETS price dynamics and places immediate planning demands on firms operating in cement, steel, aluminium, fertilisers and hydrogen supply chains. For exporters targeting EU buyers, compliance readiness hinges on accurate emissions accounting tied to carbon costs starting from 2026 and scaling through 2034. For EU producers already operating under ETS rules within the Green Deal framework, CBAM functions as an additional boundary condition shaping competitive outcomes versus imports.
The broader message for industry is clear: emissions measurement systems, procurement strategies for lower-carbon inputs such as alternative fuels, and investment plans for decarbonisation projects are becoming trade-relevant capabilities rather than purely regulatory exercises. As energy-sector transformation accelerates alongside industrial restructuring needs—especially for energy-intensive sectors—market access will increasingly reflect both operational emissions performance and readiness to manage carbon-price-linked obligations.