Wednesday 28 March 2018

외환 브로커 오스트 레일 리아

호주 외환 중개인.

지난 몇 년 동안 호주는 세계의 주요 외환 허브 중 하나로 자리 매김했습니다. 이것은 아마도 FX & amp; CFD 브로커와 유연한 규제를 통해 브로커가 뛰어난 트레이딩 조건을 거래자에게 제공 할 수 있습니다. Down Under Under 사무소를 설치하는 국제 중개인이 점점 더 늘어남에 따라 호주의 외환 시장 성장은 지속적으로 성장하고 있습니다.

우리가 & ldquo; flexible regulation & rdquo라고 말할 때, 우리는 중개인과 상인이 그들이 어떤 기분이 든간에 할 수 있다는 것을 의미하지는 않는다고 생각하고 설명하는 것이 중요합니다. 그 반대입니다. 현지 금융 감독원 ASIC (호주 증권 및 투자위원회)은 금융 서비스, 유가 증권 및 파생 상품, 소비자 보호 등에 대해 확고한 지배력을 가지고 있습니다.

ASIC의 주된 역할 중 하나는 호주 소비자, 투자자 및 채권자를 보호하기 위해 회사 및 금융 서비스 법을 집행하고 규제하는 것입니다. 최근에 규제 기관은 중개인이 불리한 사건으로부터 투자자를 보호하기 위해 중개인이 자본화되어 있는지 확인하기 위해 중개인을위한 최소 순자본 요건을 AUD50,000에서 AUD50,000으로 올렸습니다 (내년에는이 요건도 증가 할 것으로 예상됩니다 또한 AUD1,000,000까지).

전략적으로 제한은 거의 없습니다. 호주 중개인의 서비스를 이용하는 거래자는 두피와 헤지 펀드를 사용할 수 있으며, FIFO 규칙은 적용 할 수 없으며, 최대 레버리지는 없습니다.

아래는 호주 밖에서 운영하는 외환 브로커 목록입니다.

호주 외환 중개인.

예 rsv 외환

무료 RSI EA.

무료 RSI 전문가 고문은 rsi 레벨 교차를 사용하는 완전 무료 전문 고문입니다. Ea가 거래를 열고 닫는 데 사용해야하는 레벨을 설정할 수 있습니다. 다양한 설정이 아래에 설명되어 있습니다.

참고 : 기본 설정은 자리 표시 자일 뿐이므로 반드시 최상의 것은 아닙니다. 자신이나 자신의 전략에 가장 적합한 설정을 사용하십시오.

많이 - 이것은 EAs 거래의 많은 크기입니다. 0.1이 기본 설정입니다. AllowBuy - 트레이드를 허용하려면 true로 설정하십시오. 이 설정은 기본적으로 true입니다. AllowSell - 거래를 허용하려면 true로 설정하십시오. 이 설정은 기본적으로 true입니다. StartHour - EA가 거래를 시작해야하는 터미널 시간. EndHour - EA가 거래를 중단해야하는 시간. 기본적으로 EA는 하루 종일 활성화되도록 설정됩니다. RSI 설정 - 사용할 RSI 설정입니다. 기본 설정은 기본 mt4 RSI 설정입니다. BuyPoint - RSI 수준. 위쪽으로 넘어 가면 구매 거래가 열리고 EA로부터의 공개 판매 거래는 종결됩니다. SellPoint - RSI 수준을 넘어서서 아래로 넘어갈 경우 판매 거래가 열리고 EA로부터의 공개 구매 거래가 종결됩니다. MagicNumber - 이것은 EA의 거래에 대한 고유 한 식별자입니다. 이 번호는 차트 통화 쌍이 같을 때만 EA를 첨부 한 각 차트마다 달라야합니다.

RSI 트렌드 전문가 고문.

OneStepRemoved는 RSI 지표를 거래 신호로 사용하는 간단한 전략 인 "RSI Trend Strategy"라는 EA도 제공합니다. RSI가 73 이상으로 떨어지거나 27 미만으로 떨어지면 EA는 그 쌍을 사거나 팔기 위해 주문을합니다. EA는 ATR을 사용하여 종료 가격을 설정합니다. 추세가 입력되면, 정지 손실은 입구 가격 뒤에 3 개의 ATR로 설정됩니다. 가격이 ATR 세 개 이상의 상인에게 유리하게 움직일 때, 손절매는 손익분기로 설정됩니다. 무역이 계속되면 3 개의 ATR이 후행 중지되어 최종적으로 포지션을 마감합니다.

평균 진정한 범위는 Commodities 및 Forex와 같은 갭을 발생하기 쉬운 시장의 변동성을보다 정확하게 측정하는 변동성의 척도입니다.

RSI 무료 Forex 로봇.

무료 RSI 로봇은 RSI (상대 강도 지수)가 과도한 수준 (표준 30)에 도달하면 RSI가 과매 수 준 (표준 70)에 도달 할 때 판매 주문을 엽니 다.

구매 및 판매 레벨을 모두 수정할 수 있습니다. 예를 들어 20과 80입니다.

EA는 판매 주문이 유효 해지면 구매 주문을 마감하고 반대로 구매 주문이 유효 해지면 판매 주문을 종료합니다 (구매 및 판매 RSI 입력 값 기준).

전반적인 추세에 대한 아이디어를 얻으십시오. 그것은 위로, 아래로 또는 평평하게 올라가고 있습니까?

업 트렌드에서는 긴 거래를하고 짧은 거래를 사용하지 않도록 설정하십시오 (EA 속성 일반 탭). 다운 트렌드에서는 짧은 거래를하고 긴 거래를 비활성화하십시오. 평평한 시장에서는 무역의 양면을 가져갈 수 있습니다 (long & amp; short).

선택 사항 : 중단 손실을 설정하고 이익 레벨을 취하십시오.

통화 쌍 : 모두.

선호 시간 프레임 : 1 분 차트 이상에 적합 (목표 레벨 조정).

구성 가능한 전문가 권고 자 옵션.

로트 크기, 정지 손실, RSI 기간, 구매 수준, 판매 수준, 미끄러짐 수준 & # 8230;

M1 / AUD에 대한 Strategy Tester 보고서.

Tuesday 27 March 2018

배출권 거래 시스템 개요

배출권 거래 시스템 개요
교토 의정서 (부속서 B 당사국)에 따른 공약을 가진 당사자는 배출량의 제한 또는 감축 목표를 수락했다. 이러한 목표는 허용 된 배출 수준 또는 할당 된 금액으로 표현됩니다. 2008-2012 년 공약 기간. 허용 된 배출량은 & ldquo; 할당 된 금액 단위 & rdquo; (AAUs).
배출권 거래는 교토 의정서 제 17 조에 명시되어 있듯이, 배출 단위를 보유한 국가는 배출 허용량을 허용하지만 배출량을 사용하지 않는 국가는 초과 용량을 목표치를 초과하는 국가에 판매 할 수 있습니다.
따라서, 새로운 상품이 배출 감소 또는 제거 형태로 창출되었습니다. 이산화탄소가 주요한 온실 가스이기 때문에 사람들은 단순히 탄소를 거래한다고 말한다. 탄소는 이제 다른 어떤 상품과 마찬가지로 추적되고 거래됩니다. 이것은 "탄소 시장"으로 알려져 있습니다.
실제 배출 단위 이상은 교토 의정서의 배출권 거래 제도에 따라 거래되고 판매 될 수 있습니다.
이 부대의 이동과 인수는 교토 의정서에 따라 등록 시스템을 통해 추적되고 기록됩니다.
국제 거래 기록은 국가 간 배출 감축 단위의 안전한 이전을 보장합니다.
당사국들이 단위를 "초과 판매"할 수 있고 이후에 자체 배출 목표를 달성 할 수 없다는 우려를 해결하기 위해 각 당사국은 자국의 등록 기관에 ERUs, CERs, AAUs 및 / 또는 RMUs의 예비비를 유지해야한다. 이 약정은 "약속 기간 예비비"로 알려져 있으며, 가장 최근에 검토 된 재고량의 5 배 중 가장 낮은 금액의 5 배인 당 할당액의 90 % 또는 100 %를 넘지 않아야합니다.
교토 의정서 제 17 조에 따른 배출권 거래에 대한 양식, 규칙 및 지침 more & gt;
교토 의정서 제 7.4 조에 의거하여 할당 된 금액의 회계 처리 방법에 관한 세부 사항 & gt; & gt;

EU 배출권 거래 시스템 (EU ETS)
EU 배출권 거래 시스템은 설명했다.
EU 배출권 거래 시스템 (EU ETS)은 기후 변화에 대처하기위한 EU의 정책과 온실 가스 배출을 비용 효과적으로 줄이기위한 핵심 도구의 초석입니다. 그것은 세계 최초의 주요 탄소 시장이며 여전히 가장 큰 탄소 시장입니다.
31 개국 (모두 28 개 EU 국가와 아이슬란드, 리히텐슈타인 및 노르웨이)은 11,000 개 이상의 무거운 에너지 사용 시설 (발전소 및 산업 설비)에서 배출량을 제한하고 이들 국가간에 운영되는 항공사는 EU 온실 가스의 약 45 % 배출.
자세한 개요는 다음을 참조하십시오.
'모자와 무역'시스템.
EU ETS는 '상한 및 무역'원칙에 따라 작업합니다.
한도는 시스템에 의해 보호되는 시설에서 배출 될 수있는 특정 온실 가스의 총량으로 설정됩니다. 총 배출량이 감소하도록 시간이 지남에 따라 배출량이 감소합니다.
상한선 내에서 회사는 필요에 따라 서로 교역 할 수있는 배출권을 받거나 구입합니다. 그들은 또한 전세계의 배출 저감 사업으로부터 국제 신용을 제한적으로 구입할 수 있습니다. 이용 가능한 총 허용 한도의 한도로 인해 가치가 있음을 보장합니다.
해마다 회사는 모든 배출량을 충당하기 위해 충분한 수당을 내야하며, 그렇지 않으면 무거운 벌금이 부과됩니다. 회사가 배출량을 줄이면 예비 수당을 유지하여 미래의 필요를 충당하거나 수당이 부족한 다른 회사에 판매 할 수 있습니다.
Trading은 최소 비용으로 배출량을 줄이는 유연성을 제공합니다. 견고한 탄소 가격은 또한 깨끗하고 저탄소 기술에 대한 투자를 촉진합니다.
3 단계 (2013-2020)의 주요 기능
EU ETS는 현재 3 단계에 있으며 단계 1 및 2와는 상당히 다릅니다.
주요 변경 사항은 다음과 같습니다.
이전의 전국 대두 시스템 대신에 EU 배출권 한도가 적용된다. 경매는 공짜 할당 대신 공제액을 할당하는 기본 방법이며, 공짜로 할당 된 공제액에 조화 된 할당 규칙이 적용된다. 가스에는 NER 300 프로그램을 통해 혁신 신 재생 에너지 기술 및 탄소 포집 및 저장 배치에 자금을 지원하는 신입 자 예비 (New Entrants Reserve)에 3 억 개의 수당이 포함되었습니다.
섹터와 가스가 덮였습니다.
이 시스템은 높은 정확도로 측정, 보고 및 검증 될 수있는 배출물에 중점을 둔 다음 분야 및 가스를 포함합니다.
철강 공장 및 철, 알루미늄, 금속, 시멘트, 석회, 유리, 세라믹, 펄프, 종이, 판지, 산 및 벌크 유기 화학 물의 생산을 포함한 전력 및 열 발생 에너지 집약 산업 분야의 이산화탄소 (CO2) 질산, 아디 픽 및 글리 옥실 산 및 글리 옥살 퍼플 루오로 카본 (PFCs)의 생산으로 인한 상업용 아산화 질소 (N2O).
EU ETS 참여는이 부문의 기업에게는 필수적이지만,
일부 분야의 경우에만 특정 크기 이상의 공장 만 포함됩니다. 정부가 항공 부문에서 동일한 양의 배출량을 감축하는 재정 또는 기타 조치를 취하면 소규모 시설을 제외시킬 수 있습니다. EU ETS는 그 사이의 항공편에만 적용됩니다 유럽 경제 지역 (EEA)에 위치한 공항.
배출 감축 제공.
EU ETS는 탄소에 가격을 매기고 탄소를 거래하면 효과가 있음을 증명했습니다. 계획에서의 설비에서의 배출량은 3 단계 (2013 년) (2015 년 수치 참조)의 시작과 비교하여 약 5 % 정도 의도 한대로 감소하고 있습니다.
2020 년에는 시스템이 차지하는 부문의 배출량이 2005 년보다 21 % 감소 할 것입니다.
탄소 시장 개발.
2005 년에 설립 된 EU ETS는 국제 탄소 거래의 4 분의 3 이상을 차지하는 세계 최초이자 최대 규모의 국제 배출권 거래 시스템입니다.
EU ETS는 또한 다른 국가 및 지역에서 배출권 거래의 발전을 고무하고 있습니다. EU는 EU ETS와 다른 호환 시스템을 연결하는 것을 목표로합니다.
주요 EU ETS 법안.
2013 년 4 월 30 일 - 유럽 의회와 이사회의 Directive 2003 / 87 / EC의 통합 버전으로 공동체 내의 온실 가스 배출 허용 거래 계획 수립 및 이사회 지침 96 / 61 / EC 23/04/2009 수정 - 지역 사회의 온실 가스 배출 허용량 거래 제도를 개선하고 확대하기 위해 2003 / 87 / EC 지침을 개정하는 유럽 의회와 이사회의 2009 / 29 / EC 지침 2009/11/19 - 2008 / 101 / EC의 Directive 2008 / 101 / EC 2004 년 10 월 27 일 - 유럽 의회의 2004 / 101 / EC Directive 2004 / 101 / EC의 Directive 2003 / 87 / EC를 개정하여 유럽 의회 내에서 온실 가스 배출 허용 거래를위한 항공 활동을 포함하는 유럽 의회와 이사회 이사회는 교토 의정서의 프로젝트 메카니즘과 관련하여 공동체 내에서 온실 가스 배출 허용 거래에 관한 계획을 수립하는 2003 / 87 / EC 지침을 개정 13/10/2003 - 유럽 의회와 EU의 지침 2003 / 87 / EC 공동체 내에서 온실 가스 배출 허용 거래를위한 계획을 수립하고 이사회 지침 96 / 61 / EC를 개정한다.
탄소 시장 보고서.
2011 년 1 월 23 일 - COM (2017) 693 - 유럽 탄소 시장의 기능에 관한보고 01/02/2017 - COM (2017) 48 - 유럽 탄소 시장의 기능에 관한 보고서 18/11/2015 - COM 2015) 576 - 유럽 탄소 시장의 기능에 관한 보고서 14/11/2012 - COM (2012) 652 - 2012 년 유럽의 탄소 시장 현황.
3 단계 EU ETS 개정.
2011 년 4 월 2 일 - 2011 년 2 월 4 일의 유럽 이사회 결론 (결론 23 및 24 참조) 18/03/2010 - EU ETS 지침 (항공 활동 제외)의 부속서 I에 대한 지침 18/03/2010 - 지침 기후 변화와 에너지 패키지 채택에 관한 협의회 보도 자료 12/12/2008 - 유럽 이사회 의장단 결론 (2008 년 12 월 11 일과 12 월 12 일) 12/12/2008 - 유럽위원회 경매 수익 사용에 관한 성명서 23/01/2008 - 공동체의 온실 가스 배출 허용 거래 시스템을 개선하고 확장하기 위해 유럽 의회와 이사회가 지침 2003 / 87 / EC를 개정하는 지침의 제안 23 / 2008 년 1 월 - 위원회 직원 문서 - EU 온실 가스 배출 허용 거래 시스템을 개선하고 확장하기 위해 지침 2003 / 87 / EC를 개정하는 유럽 의회와 이사회 지침에 대한 제안서 첨부 문서 - 영향 평가.
이행.
04/07/2013 - 국제 신용 자격 결정에 관한 개정 된 초안 규칙 05/06/2013 - 국제 신용 증서 결정에 관한 초안 규칙 05/05/2013 2013 년 5 월 2 일의 Commission Regulation (EU) No. 389/2013에 따라 Union Registry 설립 유럽 의회와 이사회의 2003 / 87 / EC 지침, Decisions No 280 / 2004 / EC 및 No 406 / 2009 / EC의 유럽 의회와 이사회 및 Commission Regulations (EU) No 920/2010을 폐지하고 No 1193/2011 EEA 관련성있는 문서 18/11/2011 - 2013 년 1 월 1 일부터 시작되는 거래 기간과 이후의 거래 기간에 대한 EU 집행위원회 설립 지침 (2003 / 87 / EC 지침 유럽 의회와 유럽 의회 및 이사회의 결정 및 의사 결정 280 / 2004 / EC 및 개정 규칙 (EC) No 2216/2004 및 (EU) No 920/2010 - 공식 저널 07 / 10/2010 - 위원회 Regul 유럽 의회와 이사회의 2003 / 87 / EC 지침 및 유럽 의회와 이사회의 Decision No 280 / 2004 / EC에 따라 레지스트리의 표준화되고 보안 된 시스템에 대한 920/2010 유럽 의회 및 이사회의 2003 / 87 / EC 지침에 따라 표준화되고 안전한 등록 시스템에 대한 Commission Regulation (EC) No 994/2008 EU의 ETS와 노르웨이, 아이슬란드 및 리히텐슈타인을 연결하는 EEA 공동위원회 결정 No 146/2007 2011 년 12 월 31 일까지 적용 가능한 버전 - 유럽 의회와 이사회의 결정 No 280 / 2004 / EC - 2011 년 12 월 31 일까지 적용되는 버전 13 / 11 / 2006 - 유럽 의회와 이사회의 2003 / 87 / EC 지침에 따라 교토 의정서에 따른 사업 활동을위한 공동체 배출권 거래 제도에 따른 온실 가스 배출 감축에 대한 DOUBLE COUNTING 피하기에 관한위원회 결정 2006 / 780 / EC (n 문서 번호 C (2006) 5362에 의거 해) 2002 년 12 월 12 일 - 7 월 31 일자위원회 규정 (EC) No 916/2007에 의해 개정 된 표준화되고 안전한 등록 시스템에 대한 EC (Commission Regulation) 2216/2004의 통합 버전 2007 년 11 월 18 일 규정에 의한 변경 사항을 제외하고 2008 년 10 월 8 일의 Commission Regulation (EC) No 994/2008 및 2010 년 10 월 7 일의 Commission Regulation (EU) No 920/2010.
부가가치세 적용.
지침 2003 / 87 / EC의 입법 연혁.
위원회 제안 이전에 일하십시오.
08/2002 - COM (2000) 87 - 유럽 연합 집행위원회의 온실 가스 배출량 보고서 및 ECCP 실무 그룹 1의 결과 : 유연한 메커니즘 04/09/2001 - 의장 요약서 이해 관계자 의견 수렴 기록 1999 년 5 월 19 일 - COM (1999) 230 - 교토 의정서 이행을위한 준비 03/06/1998 - COM (1998) 353 - EU ETS의 EU 포스트 교토 전략 범위를 향한 기후 변화 : 07/2007 - EU 배출권 거래 시스템 내의 소규모 설비 - 2006 년 10 월 - EU 배출권 거래 시스템에 추가 활동 및 가스 추가 조화 및 예측 가능성 증대 : 12/2006 - 신규 진입 및 폐쇄에 대한 접근 10/2006 - EU에서의 CO2 배출권 경매 ETS 10/2006 - 할당 방법의 조화 12/2006 - 국제 경쟁력에 대한 보고서 EU ETS의 검토를위한 배출권 거래에 관한 ECCP 실무 그룹 15/06/2007 - 4th mee의 최종 보고서 2007 년 제 3 국의 배출권 거래 시스템 연계에 관한 협조 22/05/2007 - 추가 조화 및 예측 가능성에 관한 제 3 차 회의의 최종 보고서 26/04/2007 - 강력한 준수 및 시행에 관한 제 2 차 회의 최종 보고서 09/03/2007 - 지침의 범위에 관한 제 1 차 회의의 최종 보고서.
2001 년 10 월의 집행위원회 제안.
2002 년 2 월 22 일 - EC 배출권 거래 제안 (COM (2001) 581)과 IPPC Directive 23/10/2001 - COM (2001) 581 사이의 시너지 효과에 관한 비공식 문서 - 온실 가스 배출권 거래 지침 유럽 공동체 내에서
위원회와 의회에서 제안서를 읽는 것에 대한위원회의 반응 (위원회의 공동 입장 포함)
18/07/2003 - COM (2003) 463 - 유럽 의회와 이사회의 지침에 관한 이사회의 공동 입장에 대한 유럽 의회 개정안에 대한위원회의 의견 20/06/2003 - COM (2003) 364 - 유럽 의회에서 온실 가스 배출 허용 거래에 관한 계획을 수립하고 Council Directive 96 / 61 / EC 18/03/2003 - Common Position (EC)의 개정에 관한 이사회의 공통 입장에 관한 유럽 의회와의 의사 소통 ) No 28/2003 - 공동체 내에서 온실 가스 배출 허용 거래에 관한 계획 수립 및 이사회 지침 96 / 61 / EC 27/11/2002 수정 - COM (2002) 680 - 수정 된 제안 유럽 의회와 이사회가 지 역 내에서 온실 가스 배출 허용량 거래 계획을 수립하고 이사회 지침 96 / 61 / EC를 개정 함.
모든 질문을 엽니 다.
개정 된 EU 배출권 거래 시스템에 관한 질문 및 답변 (2008 년 12 월)
배출권 거래의 목표는 무엇입니까?
EU 배출권 거래 시스템 (EU ETS)의 목표는 EU 회원국들이 온실 가스 배출량을 비용 효과적인 방식으로 제한하거나 줄이겠다는 약속을 달성하도록 돕는 것입니다. 참가 업체가 배출 허용량을 사고 팔 수 있다는 것은 배출량 삭감이 최소 비용으로 달성 될 수 있음을 의미합니다.
EU ETS는 EU의 기후 변화 대응 전략의 초석입니다. 그것은 세계 최초의 CO 2 배출권 거래 시스템으로 2005 년부터 운영되고 있습니다. 2008 년 1 월 현재, EU 27 개 회원국뿐만 아니라 유럽 경제 지역의 다른 3 개 회원국에도 적용됩니다 - 노르웨이, 아이슬란드 및 리히텐슈타인. 현재 EU의 CO2 배출량의 절반에 가까운 부분과 총 온실 가스 배출량의 40 %를 공동으로 담당하는 에너지 및 산업 부문의 설치량은 10,000 개가 넘습니다. 2008 년 7 월에 합의 된 EU ETS Directive에 대한 개정안은 2012 년부터 항공 분야를 시스템으로 가져올 것입니다.
배출권 거래는 어떻게 이루어 집니까?
EU ETS는 '배출권 거래'시스템으로, 허용되는 전체 배출 수준을 제한하지만 그 한도 내에서 시스템 참여자가 필요에 따라 수당을 사고 팔 수 있습니다. 이러한 수당은 시스템의 중심에있는 일반적인 거래 '통화'입니다. 하나의 수당은 소유자에게 1 톤의 이산화탄소 또는 동등한 양의 다른 온실 가스를 방출 할 권리를 부여합니다. 총 수당의 한도는 시장에 희소성을 창출합니다.
이 계획에 따른 첫 번째 및 두 번째 거래 기간에 회원국은 ETS 배출량의 총 수준과 각 국가의 배출 허용량을 결정하는 국가 할당 계획 (NAP)을 작성해야했습니다. 해마다 설치물은 배출량과 동일한 허용량을 내야합니다. 배출량을 허용 수준 이하로 유지하는 회사는 초과 수당을 판매 할 수 있습니다. 탄소 배출량을 줄이는 데 어려움을 겪고있는 사람들은보다 효율적인 기술에 투자하거나 탄소 집약적 인 에너지 자원을 덜 사용하는 것과 같이 자신의 배출량을 줄이기위한 조치를 취하거나 시장에서 필요로하는 추가 공제를 구입하는 것 중에서 선택할 수 있습니다 , 또는이 둘의 조합을 포함 할 수있다. 그러한 선택은 상대적 비용에 의해 결정될 것 같다. 이런 식으로 배출 가스가 가장 비용 효율적으로 감소됩니다.
EU ETS는 얼마 동안 운영되고 있습니까?
EU ETS는 2005 년 1 월 1 일에 시작되었습니다. 첫 거래 기간은 2007 년 말까지 3 년 동안 진행되었으며 중요한 두 번째 거래 기간을 준비하기 위해 '수행함으로써 학습'단계였습니다. 두 번째 교역 기간은 2008 년 1 월 1 일에 시작되어 2012 년 말까지 5 년간 운영됩니다. 두 번째 교역 기간의 중요성은 교토 의정서의 첫 번째 공약 기간과 일치한다는 사실에 기인합니다. EU와 기타 선진국들은 온실 가스 배출을 제한하거나 줄이기 위해 목표를 달성해야한다. 두 번째 무역 기간 동안 EU ETS 배출량은 EU 전체와 회원국이 개별적으로 교토 의정서를 이행 할 수 있도록 2005 년 수준보다 약 6.5 % 가량 낮았다.
지금까지 경험으로 얻은 교훈은 무엇입니까?
EU ETS는 탄소 가격을 책정하여 온실 가스 배출량 거래가 효과가 있음을 입증했습니다. 첫 번째 무역 기간은 EU 전역의 배출 허용량에 대한 자유 무역을 성공적으로 수립하고 필요한 인프라를 구축하고 역동적 인 탄소 시장을 개발했습니다. 일부 회원국과 일부 부문에서 EU ETS 하에서 검증 된 배출량 자료가 이용 가능해질 때까지 배출 전망에 의존하기 때문에 과도한 수당 할당으로 인해 1 단계의 환경 편익이 제한 될 수있다. 2005 년에 검증 된 배출량 자료가 발표됨에 따라이 "초과 분배"가 강조되었을 때, 시장은 용인의 시장 가격을 낮춤으로써 예상대로 반응했다. 확인 된 배출 자료의 이용 가능성은위원회가 제 2 단계에서의 국가 배정에 대한 상한이 실제 배출 감축을 가져 오는 수준으로 설정되도록 보장했다.
검증 된 데이터에 대한 필요성을 강조하는 것 외에도 EU의 ETS 내에서의보다 큰 조화는 EU가 적어도 비용 및 최소한의 경쟁 왜곡으로 배출 감축 목표를 달성하는 데 필수적임을 보여주었습니다. 더 많은 조화를위한 필요성은 전반적인 배출 허용 한도가 어떻게 설정되는지에 관해서는 가장 명확하다.
처음 두 거래 기간은 설비에 대한 할당량을 할당하는 국가 별 방법이 국내 시장에서의 공정한 경쟁을 위협한다는 점을 보여줍니다. 또한 시스템의 범위, EU 외부의 배출 감축 사업에서 얻은 크레딧에 대한 접근, 다른 곳의 배출권 거래 시스템과 EU ETS를 연결하기위한 조건 및 모니터링, 검증 및 검증과 관련하여 더 큰 조화, 명확화 및 개선이 필요하다. 보고 요구 사항.
EU ETS의 주요 변경 사항은 무엇이며 언제 적용됩니까?
합의 된 설계 변경 사항은 2013 년 1 월 3 번째 거래 기간에 적용됩니다. 준비 작업이 즉시 시작되지만 규정 준수가 유지되도록 2013 년 1 월까지 해당 규칙이 변경되지 않습니다.
제 3 기 EU ETS는보다 효율적이고 조화로운 시스템이 될 것입니다.
효율성 증대는 거래 기간이 길어지면 (5 년 대신 8 년), 연간 배출량 상한선 감소 (2005 년 대비 2020 년 21 % 감소) 및 경매 금액이 크게 증가 2 단계에서 4 %, 3 단계에서 절반 이상.
cap-setting (1 단계와 2 단계에서 전국 대문자가 아닌 EU 와이드 캡)과 과도기적 자유 할당에 관한 규정을 포함하여 많은 분야에서보다 많은 조화가 합의되었다.
시스템의 공정성은 산업 설비에 대한 EU 전역의 자유 할당 규칙으로의 이동과 신입 회원국이 더 많은 수당을 경매 할 수있는 재분배 메커니즘의 도입으로 실질적으로 증가했다.
마지막 텍스트는 초기위원회 제안과 어떻게 비교됩니까?
2007 년 봄 유럽 이사회에서 합의한 기후 및 에너지 목표는 유지되었으며 EU ETS에 대한위원회의 제안의 전반적인 아키텍처는 그대로 유지됩니다. 즉, 배출권 수에 대해 EU 차원에서 하나의 상한선이있을 것이며, 이 상한선은 선형 추세선을 따라 매년 감소 할 것이며 이는 2013 년 -2020 년 3 차 거래가 끝날 때까지 계속 될 것입니다. 제안과 비교 된 주요 차이점은 수당 경매가 더 천천히 단계적으로 이루어질 것이라는 점입니다.
위원회의 제안과 비교 된 주요 변경 사항은 무엇입니까?
요약하면 제안에 대한 주요 변경 사항은 다음과 같습니다.
특정 회원국은 2013 년 현재 전기 요금을 무료로 할당 할 수 없다는 규칙을 선택적으로 일시적으로 철회 할 수있다. 이 회유 옵션은 전기의 상호 연결성과 관련된 특정 조건을 충족하는 회원국이 사용할 수있다 그리드, 전기 생산에서의 단일 화석 연료 점유율, EU-27 평균과 관련한 GDP / capita를 포함한다. 또한, 회원국이 발전소에 할당 할 수있는 무상 수당의 양은 1 단계에서 관련 플랜트의 이산화탄소 배출량의 70 %로 제한되고 그 이후에는 감소합니다. 또한 3 단계의 무료 할당은 2008 년 말까지 운영 또는 건설중인 발전소에만 제공 될 수 있습니다. 아래 질문 15에 대한 회신을 참조하십시오. 탄소 누출의 중대한 위험에 노출 될 것으로 여겨지는 부문 또는 하위 부문을 결정하는 데 사용되는 기준에 관한 지침에 더 많은 세부 사항이 있으며위원회의 해당 부문 목록의 발행일이 더 빨라진다 (12 월 31 일) 2009). 또한 만족스러운 국제 협약에 도달했을 때 검토를 거쳐 노출 된 모든 산업의 설비는 가장 효율적인 기술을 사용하는 범위까지 100 % 무료 수당을 받게됩니다. 산업에 대한 무상 할당은 2005 년에서 2007 년까지 총 배출량에서 이들 산업의 배출량의 비율로 제한됩니다. 산업 부문의 설치에 무료로 할당되는 총 허용량은 배출량 상한선 감소와 함께 매년 감소 할 것입니다. 회원국은 또한 CO 2 비용이 탄소 누출의 위험에 노출 될 수있는 경우 전기 가격으로 전달되는 이산화탄소 비용에 대한 특정 시설을 보상 할 수 있습니다. 위원회는 이와 관련하여 환경 보호를위한 주정부 지원에 관한 공동체 지침을 수정하려고 노력했다. 아래 질문 15에 대한 회신을보십시오. 비공개 산업에 대한 경매 허용 수준은위원회가 제안한 바와 같이 선형 적으로 증가 할 것이지만, 2020 년까지 100 %에 도달하는 대신 70 %에이를 것이며 2027 년까지 100 %에 도달 할 전망이다. 위원회의 제안에 따르면 경매 허용 여력의 10 %는 1 인당 소득이있는 회원국에서 1 인당 소득이 낮은 회원국으로 재분배되어 후자가 기후 친화적 인 기술에 투자하도록 재정적 능력을 강화할 것이다. 2005 년에 교토 의정서가 정한 기준 연도에 비해 온실 가스 배출량을 최소한 20 % 감축 한 회원국을 고려한 경매 허용 비율의 2 % 재분배 메커니즘에 대한 조항이 추가되었습니다. 회원국들이 주로 EU 내 기후 변화에 맞서 싸우고 적응하기 위해 권장하는 경매 수입의 비율은 개발 도상국에서 20 %에서 50 %로 상향 조정됩니다. 이 텍스트는 해당 기간 동안 할당 및 액세스와 관련하여 해당 크레딧을 가져오고 사용하는 가장 낮은 예산을받은 기존 운영자에 대해 20 % 시나리오에서 JI / CDM 크레딧 사용을 제안 된 허용 수준에 대한 상향 조정을 제공합니다 2008-2012. 새로운 분야, 기간 2013-2020 년 및 2008-2012 년에있는 신입자는 또한 신용을 이용할 수있을 것이다. 그러나 사용될 수있는 총 크레디트는 2008 년과 2020 년 사이의 감축 량의 50 %를 초과하지 않을 것입니다. 만족스러운 국제 협정의 맥락에서보다 엄격한 배출 감축 량을 감안할 때위원회는 CER과 ERU에 대한 추가 접근을 허용 할 수 있습니다 커뮤니티 스킴의 운영자에게 적합합니다. 아래 20 번 질문에 대한 회신을보십시오. 신규 진입자 보호 지역에서 3 억회의 경비를 경매하는 수익금은 최대 12 개의 탄소 포집 및 저장 시범 프로젝트와 혁신적인 신 재생 에너지 기술을 시연하는 프로젝트를 지원하는 데 사용될 것입니다. 이 자금 조달 메커니즘에는 여러 가지 조건이 붙어 있습니다. 아래 질문 30에 대한 회신을보십시오. 소규모 연소 설비가 동일한 조치를 취한 경우 탈퇴 가능성은 활동과 관계없이 모든 소규모 설비를 포함하도록 확대되었으며, 배출 임계 값은 1 년에 10,000 ~ 25,000 톤의 CO 2로 증가했으며, 연소 설비가 추가적으로 25MW에서 35MW로 증가되어야한다. 이러한 임계치가 증가함에 따라 잠재적으로 배출권 거래 시스템에서 제외 될 수있는 배출량의 비율이 상당 해지며 결과적으로 EU 전체의 배출량 상한선을 줄이기위한 조항이 추가된다.
여전히 국가 배정 계획 (NAPs)이 있습니까?
아니오. NAPs에서 첫 번째 (2005-2007) 및 두 번째 (2008-2012) 거래 기간 동안 회원국은 발행 할 수당 총액 (총액)과 해당 시설에 대한 할당 방법을 결정했습니다. 이 접근법은 각 회원국이 자체 산업을 선호하는 인센티브를 창출하고 할당 규칙에 중대한 차이를 야기했으며, 이는 매우 복잡하게되었습니다.
세 번째 거래 기간부터는 단일 EU 전체 한도가 생기고 수당은 조화 된 규칙에 따라 배정 될 것입니다. 그러므로 국가 할당 계획은 더 이상 필요하지 않을 것이다.
어떻게 3 단계의 배출권 규제가 결정될 것인가?
EU 전체 상한선을 계산하는 규칙은 다음과 같습니다.
2013 년부터 연간 총 수당은 선형 적으로 감소 할 것입니다. 이 라인의 출발점은 회원국이 2013 년부터 시스템의 범위를 확대하여 조정 한 2008-12 기간 동안 회원국이 발행하는 총 허용량 (2 단계 상한선)의 평균 총량과 회원 국가는 제외하도록 선택했습니다. 연간 금액이 감소 할 선형 요인은 2 단계 상한과 관련하여 1.74 %입니다.
1.74 %의 선형 인자를 결정하기위한 출발점은 1990 년에 비해 20 %의 온실 가스 감축이며 이는 2005 년에 비해 14 % 감소한 것과 같습니다. EU ETS는 EU ETS에 비해 더 큰 감축이 필요합니다. ETS 분야에서 배출량을 줄이기 위해 더 싸게. 전반적인 감축 비용을 최소화하는 부문은 다음과 같습니다 :
2020 년까지 EU ETS 부문 배출량이 2005 년 대비 21 % 감소합니다. EU ETS의 적용을받지 않는 분야의 경우 2005 년에 비해 약 10 %의 감소를 보였다.
2020 년의 21 % 감축은 2020 년 최대 1720 백만 배당의 ETS 상한선을 가져오고, 1846 년의 평균 공제 금액 (2013 년에서 2020 년까지)과 2 단계 상한선 대비 11 % 감축을 의미합니다.
모든 절대 수치는 두 번째 거래 기간 시작 시점의 보상 범위에 해당하므로 2012 년에 추가 될 항공 및 3 단계에서 추가 될 기타 부문을 고려하지 않습니다.
3 단계의 연간 배출량 상한에 대한 최종 수치는 2010 년 9 월 30 일까지위원회가 결정하고 발표 할 예정이다.
3 단계 이상의 배출량 산정 방법은 어떻게 결정됩니까?
3 단계 상한선을 결정하는 데 사용 된 1.74 %의 선형 요인은 2020 년에 거래 기간이 끝나기까지 계속 적용될 것이며 4 번째 거래 기간 (2021 년에서 2028 년)까지의 기간을 결정하게됩니다. 늦어도 2025 년까지 개정 될 수 있습니다. 사실 세계 평균 기온 상승을 산업화 이전 수준보다 2 ℃ 이상으로 제한하는 전략적 목표를 달성하기 위해서는 1990 년 대비 60 % -80 %의 상당한 배출량 감소가 2050 년까지 필요합니다.
배출권에 대한 EU 차원의 상한선은 각 개별 연도별로 결정될 것입니다. 해당 설비의 유연성이 감소 할 것인가?
아니요. 설치 유연성은 전혀 줄어들지 않습니다. 매년 2 월 28 일까지 관할 당국은 경매와 배분을 허용해야한다. 수당을내는 마지막 날은 배출이 발생한 연도의 다음 해 4 월 30 일입니다. 그래서 운영자는 전년도에 대한 배출량을 충당하기 위해 용돈을 상환해야하기 전에 당해 연도에 대한 용돈을받습니다. 수당은 거래 기간 동안 유효하게 유지되며 이후 잉여 수당은 이후 거래 기간에 사용하기 위해 "뱅킹"될 수 있습니다. 이 점에서 아무것도 변하지 않을 것입니다.
이 시스템은 거래 기간을 기반으로 유지되지만, 3 차 거래 기간은 2008 년에서 2012 년까지의 두 번째 단계에서 5 년이 아니라 2013 년에서 2020 년까지 8 년 동안 지속됩니다.
두 번째 거래 기간 동안 회원국은 일반적으로 매년 동일한 총 수당을 할당하기로 결정했다. 2013 년부터 매년 감소하는 선형 적 감소는 해당 기간에 예상되는 배출량 경향에 더 잘 부합 할 것입니다.
2013 년에서 2020 년 사이의 잠정 ETS 총액은 얼마입니까?
잠정 연간 cap 수치는 다음과 같습니다.
이 수치는 2 단계 (2008 년 ~ 2012 년)에서 적용 가능한 ETS의 범위와 2 단계에 대한 국가 배분 계획에 대한위원회의 결정에 따라 208.3 백만 톤에 달한다. 이 수치는 여러 가지 이유로 조정됩니다. 첫째, 회원국들이 이러한 확대에서 발생하는 배출량을 입증하고 검증한다면, 2 단계에서 범위 확장을 고려하여 조정할 것이다. 둘째, 세 번째 거래 기간에 ETS의 범위를 더 확장하는 것과 관련하여 조정이 이루어질 것이다. 셋째, 소규모 설비의 선택 해제는 상응하는 모자의 축소로 이어질 것입니다. 넷째, 수치는 항공의 포함이나 노르웨이, 아이슬란드 및 리히텐슈타인의 배출량을 고려하지 않았습니다.
수당은 여전히 무료로 할당됩니까?
예. 산업 설비는 과도기적으로 무료 할당을 받게됩니다. 그리고 선택적 탈선을 할 수있는 회원국에서는 발전소가 회원국이 결정한 경우 무료 수당을받을 수있다. 2013 년 현재 사용 가능한 보조금의 최소한 절반이 경매 될 것으로 추산됩니다.
위원회는 1 차 및 2 차 무역 기간 동안 대다수의 수당이 설비에 무료로 할당되었지만, 위원회는 수당의 경매가 배분의 기본 원칙이되어야한다고 제안했다. 경매가 가장 효율적이어서 시스템의 효율성, 투명성 및 단순성을 보장하고 저탄소 경제에 대한 투자에 가장 큰 인센티브를 제공하기 때문입니다. "오염 자 부담 원칙"을 가장 잘 준수하며 무료로 수령 함에도 불구하고 명목상의 비용 공제 비용을 고객에게 전가 한 특정 부문에 이익을주는 것을 피합니다.
수당은 어떻게 무료로 나누어 줄 수 있습니까?
2010 년 12 월 31 일까지, 위원회는위원회 절차 ( "Comitology") 하에서 개발 될 EU 차원의 규칙을 채택 할 것입니다. 이 규칙은 할당을 완전히 조화 시키므로 동일하거나 유사한 활동을하는 EU 전역의 모든 회사는 동일한 규칙을 따릅니다. 이 규칙은 배정이 탄소 효율 기술을 촉진 할 수 있도록 가능한 한 많이 보장 할 것입니다. 채택 된 규칙은 실행 가능한 한도 내에서 소위 벤치 마크에 기반한 할당을 제공한다. 과거 산출물의 수량 당 많은 수당. 이러한 규칙은 온실 가스를 줄이기위한 조기 조치를 취한 운영자에게 보상하며, 오염원 부담 원칙을보다 잘 반영하고 배출량을 줄이기위한 더 강력한 인센티브를 제공한다. 할당은 더 이상 과거 배출량에 의존하지 않기 때문이다. 모든 배정은 3 차 거래 시작 전에 결정되어야하며 사후 조정은 허용되지 않습니다.
어떤 설치가 무료 할당을 받고 어떤 설치는 그렇지 않을 것입니까? 경쟁력에 대한 부정적인 영향은 어떻게 피할 것인가?
증가 된 배출 비용을 감당할 수있는 능력을 감안할 때, 2013 년 이후 전기 경보기에 대한 전체 경매가 원칙입니다. However, Member States who fulfil certain conditions relating to their interconnectivity or their share of fossil fuels in electricity production and GDP per capita in relation to the EU-27 average, have the option to temporarily deviate from this rule with respect to existing power plants. The auctioning rate in 2013 is to be at least 30% in relation to emissions in the first period and has to increase progressively to 100% no later than 2020. If the option is applied, the Member State has to undertake to invest in improving and upgrading of the infrastructure, in clean technologies and in diversification of their energy mix and sources of supply for an amount to the extent possible equal to the market value of the free allocation.
In other sectors, allocations for free will be phased out progressively from 2013, with Member States agreeing to start at 20% auctioning in 2013, increasing to 70% auctioning in 2020 with a view to reaching 100% in 2027. However, an exception will be made for installations in sectors that are found to be exposed to a significant risk of 'carbon leakage'. This risk could occur if the EU ETS increased production costs so much that companies decided to relocate production to areas outside the EU that are not subject to comparable emission constraints. The Commission will determine the sectors concerned by 31 December 2009. To do this, the Commission will assess inter alia whether the direct and indirect additional production costs induced by the implementation of the ETS Directive as a proportion of gross value added exceed 5% and whether the total value of its exports and imports divided by the total value of its turnover and imports exceeds 10%. If the result for either of these criteria exceeds 30%, the sector would also be considered to be exposed to a significant risk of carbon leakage. Installations in these sectors would receive 100% of their share in the annually declining total quantity of allowances for free. The share of these industries' emissions is determined in relation to total ETS emissions in 2005 to 2007.
CO 2 costs passed on in electricity prices could also expose certain installations to the risk of carbon leakage. In order to avoid such risk, Member States may grant a compensation with respect to such costs. In the absence of an international agreement on climate change, the Commission has undertaken to modify the Community guidelines on state aid for environmental protection in this respect.
Under an international agreement which ensures that competitors in other parts of the world bear a comparable cost, the risk of carbon leakage may well be negligible. Therefore, by 30 June 2010, the Commission will carry out an in-depth assessment of the situation of energy-intensive industry and the risk of carbon leakage, in the light of the outcome of the international negotiations and also taking into account any binding sectoral agreements that may have been concluded. The report will be accompanied by any proposals considered appropriate. These could potentially include maintaining or adjusting the proportion of allowances received free of charge to industrial installations that are particularly exposed to global competition or including importers of the products concerned in the ETS.
Who will organise the auctions and how will they be carried out?
Member States will be responsible for ensuring that the allowances given to them are auctioned. Each Member State has to decide whether it wants to develop its own auctioning infrastructure and platform or whether it wants to cooperate with other Member States to develop regional or EU-wide solutions. The distribution of the auctioning rights to Member States is largely based on emissions in phase 1 of the EU ETS, but a part of the rights will be redistributed from richer Member States to poorer ones to take account of the lower GDP per head and higher prospects for growth and emissions among the latter. It is still the case that 10% of the rights to auction allowances will be redistributed from Member States with high per capita income to those with low per capita income in order to strengthen the financial capacity of the latter to invest in climate friendly technologies. However, a provision has been added for another redistributive mechanism of 2% to take into account Member States which in 2005 had achieved a reduction of at least 20% in greenhouse gas emissions compared with the reference year set by the Kyoto Protocol. Nine Member States benefit from this provision.
Any auctioning must respect the rules of the internal market and must therefore be open to any potential buyer under non-discriminatory conditions. By 30 June 2010, the Commission will adopt a Regulation (through the comitology procedure) that will provide the appropriate rules and conditions for ensuring efficient, coordinated auctions without disturbing the allowance market.
How many allowances will each Member State auction and how is this amount determined?
All allowances which are not allocated free of charge will be auctioned. A total of 88% of allowances to be auctioned by each Member State is distributed on the basis of the Member State's share of historic emissions under the EU ETS. For purposes of solidarity and growth, 12% of the total quantity is distributed in a way that takes into account GDP per capita and the achievements under the Kyoto-Protocol.
Which sectors and gases are covered as of 2013?
The ETS covers installations performing specified activities. Since the start it has covered, above certain capacity thresholds, power stations and other combustion plants, oil refineries, coke ovens, iron and steel plants and factories making cement, glass, lime, bricks, ceramics, pulp, paper and board. As for greenhouse gases, it currently only covers carbon dioxide emissions, with the exception of the Netherlands, which has opted in emissions from nitrous oxide.
As from 2013, the scope of the ETS will be extended to also include other sectors and greenhouse gases. CO 2 emissions from petrochemicals, ammonia and aluminium will be included, as will N2O emissions from the production of nitric, adipic and glyocalic acid production and perfluorocarbons from the aluminium sector. The capture, transport and geological storage of all greenhouse gas emissions will also be covered. These sectors will receive allowances free of charge according to EU-wide rules, in the same way as other industrial sectors already covered.
As of 2012, aviation will also be included in the EU ETS.
Will small installations be excluded from the scope?
A large number of installations emitting relatively low amounts of CO 2 are currently covered by the ETS and concerns have been raised over the cost-effectiveness of their inclusion. As from 2013, Member States will be allowed to remove these installations from the ETS under certain conditions. The installations concerned are those whose reported emissions were lower than 25 000 tonnes of CO 2 equivalent in each of the 3 years preceding the year of application. For combustion installations, an additional capacity threshold of 35MW applies. In addition Member States are given the possibility to exclude installations operated by hospitals. The installations may be excluded from the ETS only if they will be covered by measures that will achieve an equivalent contribution to emission reductions.
How many emission credits from third countries will be allowed?
For the second trading period, Member States allowed their operators to use significant quantities of credits generated by emission-saving projects undertaken in third countries to cover part of their emissions in the same way as they use ETS allowances. The revised Directive extends the rights to use these credits for the third trading period and allows a limited additional quantity to be used in such a way that the overall use of credits is limited to 50% of the EU-wide reductions over the period 2008-2020. For existing installations, and excluding new sectors within the scope, this will represent a total level of access of approximately 1.6 billion credits over the period 2008-2020. In practice, this means that existing operators will be able to use credits up to a minimum of 11% of their allocation during the period 2008-2012, while a top-up is foreseen for operators with the lowest sum of free allocation and allowed use of credits in the 2008-2012 period. New sectors and new entrants in the third trading period will have a guaranteed minimum access of 4.5% of their verified emissions during the period 2013-2020. For the aviation sector, the minimum access will be 1.5%. The precise percentages will be determined through comitology.
These projects must be officially recognised under the Kyoto Protocol’s Joint Implementation (JI) mechanism (covering projects carried out in countries with an emissions reduction target under the Protocol) or Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) (for projects undertaken in developing countries). Credits from JI projects are known as Emission Reduction Units (ERUs) while those from CDM projects are called Certified Emission Reductions (CERs).
On the quality side only credits from project types eligible for use in the EU trading scheme during the period 2008-2012 will be accepted in the period 2013-2020. Furthermore, from 1 January 2013 measures may be applied to restrict the use of specific credits from project types. Such a quality control mechanism is needed to assure the environmental and economic integrity of future project types.
To create greater flexibility, and in the absence of an international agreement being concluded by 31 December 2009, credits could be used in accordance with agreements concluded with third countries. The use of these credits should however not increase the overall number beyond 50% of the required reductions. Such agreements would not be required for new projects that started from 2013 onwards in Least Developed Countries.
Based on a stricter emissions reduction in the context of a satisfactory international agreement , additional access to credits could be allowed, as well as the use of additional types of project credits or other mechanisms created under the international agreement. However, once an international agreement has been reached, from January 2013 onwards only credits from projects in third countries that have ratified the agreement or from additional types of project approved by the Commission will be eligible for use in the Community scheme.
Will it be possible to use credits from carbon ‘sinks’ like forests?
No. Before making its proposal, the Commission analysed the possibility of allowing credits from certain types of land use, land-use change and forestry (‘LULUCF’) projects which absorb carbon from the atmosphere. It concluded that doing so could undermine the environmental integrity of the EU ETS, for the following reasons:
LULUCF projects cannot physically deliver permanent emissions reductions. Insufficient solutions have been developed to deal with the uncertainties, non-permanence of carbon storage and potential emissions 'leakage' problems arising from such projects. The temporary and reversible nature of such activities would pose considerable risks in a company-based trading system and impose great liability risks on Member States. The inclusion of LULUCF projects in the ETS would require a quality of monitoring and reporting comparable to the monitoring and reporting of emissions from installations currently covered by the system. This is not available at present and is likely to incur costs which would substantially reduce the attractiveness of including such projects. The simplicity, transparency and predictability of the ETS would be considerably reduced. Moreover, the sheer quantity of potential credits entering the system could undermine the functioning of the carbon market unless their role were limited, in which case their potential benefits would become marginal.
The Commission, the Council and the European Parliament believe that global deforestation can be better addressed through other instruments. For example, using part of the proceeds from auctioning allowances in the EU ETS could generate additional means to invest in LULUCF activities both inside and outside the EU, and may provide a model for future expansion. In this respect the Commission has proposed to set up the Global Forest Carbon Mechanism that would be a performance-based system for financing reductions in deforestation levels in developing countries.
Besides those already mentioned, are there other credits that could be used in the revised ETS?
예. Projects in EU Member States which reduce greenhouse gas emissions not covered by the ETS could issue credits. These Community projects would need to be managed according to common EU provisions set up by the Commission in order to be tradable throughout the system. Such provisions would be adopted only for projects that cannot be realised through inclusion in the ETS. The provisions will seek to ensure that credits from Community projects do not result in double-counting of emission reductions nor impede other policy measures to reduce emissions not covered by the ETS, and that they are based on simple, easily administered rules.
Are there measures in place to ensure that the price of allowances won't fall sharply during the third trading period?
A stable and predictable regulatory framework is vital for market stability. The revised Directive makes the regulatory framework as predictable as possible in order to boost stability and rule out policy-induced volatility. Important elements in this respect are the determination of the cap on emissions in the Directive well in advance of the start of the trading period, a linear reduction factor for the cap on emissions which continues to apply also beyond 2020 and the extension of the trading period from 5 to 8 years. The sharp fall in the allowance price during the first trading period was due to over-allocation of allowances which could not be “banked” for use in the second trading period. For the second and subsequent trading periods, Member States are obliged to allow the banking of allowances from one period to the next and therefore the end of one trading period is not expected to have any impact on the price.
A new provision will apply as of 2013 in case of excessive price fluctuations in the allowance market. If, for more than six consecutive months, the allowance price is more than three times the average price of allowances during the two preceding years on the European market, the Commission will convene a meeting with Member States. If it is found that the price evolution does not correspond to market fundamentals, the Commission may either allow Member States to bring forward the auctioning of a part of the quantity to be auctioned, or allow them to auction up to 25% of the remaining allowances in the new entrant reserve.
The price of allowances is determined by supply and demand and reflects fundamental factors like economic growth, fuel prices, rainfall and wind (availability of renewable energy) and temperature (demand for heating and cooling) etc. A degree of uncertainty is inevitable for such factors. The markets, however, allow participants to hedge the risks that may result from changes in allowances prices.
Are there any provisions for linking the EU ETS to other emissions trading systems?
예. One of the key means to reduce emissions more cost-effectively is to enhance and further develop the global carbon market. The Commission sees the EU ETS as an important building block for the development of a global network of emission trading systems. Linking other national or regional cap-and-trade emissions trading systems to the EU ETS can create a bigger market, potentially lowering the aggregate cost of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The increased liquidity and reduced price volatility that this would entail would improve the functioning of markets for emission allowances. This may lead to a global network of trading systems in which participants, including legal entities, can buy emission allowances to fulfil their respective reduction commitments.
The EU is keen to work with the new US Administration to build a transatlantic and indeed global carbon market to act as the motor of a concerted international push to combat climate change.
While the original Directive allows for linking the EU ETS with other industrialised countries that have ratified the Kyoto Protocol, the new rules allow for linking with any country or administrative entity (such as a state or group of states under a federal system) which has established a compatible mandatory cap-and-trade system whose design elements would not undermine the environmental integrity of the EU ETS. Where such systems cap absolute emissions, there would be mutual recognition of allowances issued by them and the EU ETS.
What is a Community registry and how does it work?
Registries are standardised electronic databases ensuring the accurate accounting of the issuance, holding, transfer and cancellation of emission allowances. As a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol in its own right, the Community is also obliged to maintain a registry. This is the Community Registry, which is distinct from the registries of Member States. Allowances issued from 1 January 2013 onwards will be held in the Community registry instead of in national registries.
Will there be any changes to monitoring, reporting and verification requirements?
The Commission will adopt a new Regulation (through the comitology procedure) by 31 December 2011 governing the monitoring and reporting of emissions from the activities listed in Annex I of the Directive. A separate Regulation on the verification of emission reports and the accreditation of verifiers should specify conditions for accreditation, mutual recognition and cancellation of accreditation for verifiers, and for supervision and peer review as appropriate.
What provision will be made for new entrants into the market?
Five percent of the total quantity of allowances will be put into a reserve for new installations or airlines that enter the system after 2013 (“new entrants”). The allocations from this reserve should mirror the allocations to corresponding existing installations.
A part of the new entrant reserve, amounting to 300 million allowances, will be made available to support the investments in up to 12 demonstration projects using the carbon capture and storage technology and demonstration projects using innovative renewable energy technologies. There should be a fair geographical distribution of the projects.
In principle, any allowances remaining in the reserve shall be distributed to Member States for auctioning. The distribution key shall take into account the level to which installations in Member States have benefited from this reserve.
What has been agreed with respect to the financing of the 12 carbon capture and storage demonstration projects requested by a previous European Council?
The European Parliament's Environment Committee tabled an amendment to the EU ETS Directive requiring allowances in the new entrant reserve to be set aside in order to co-finance up to 12 demonstration projects as requested by the European Council in spring 2007. This amendment has later been extended to include also innovative renewable energy technologies that are not commercially viable yet. Projects shall be selected on the basis of objective and transparent criteria that include requirements for knowledge sharing. Support shall be given from the proceeds of these allowances via Member States and shall be complementary to substantial co-financing by the operator of the installation. No project shall receive support via this mechanism that exceeds 15% of the total number of allowances (i. e. 45 million allowances) available for this purpose. The Member State may choose to co-finance the project as well, but will in any case transfer the market value of the attributed allowances to the operator, who will not receive any allowances.
A total of 300 million allowances will therefore be set aside until 2015 for this purpose.
What is the role of an international agreement and its potential impact on EU ETS?
When an international agreement is reached, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council assessing the nature of the measures agreed upon in the international agreement and their implications, in particular with respect to the risk of carbon leakage. On the basis of this report, the Commission shall then adopt a legislative proposal amending the present Directive as appropriate.
For the effects on the use of credits from Joint Implementation and Clean Development Mechanism projects, please see the reply to question 20.
What are the next steps?
Member States have to bring into force the legal instruments necessary to comply with certain provisions of the revised Directive by 31 December 2009. This concerns the collection of duly substantiated and verified emissions data from installations that will only be covered by the EU ETS as from 2013, and the national lists of installations and the allocation to each one. For the remaining provisions, the national laws, regulations and administrative provisions only have to be ready by 31 December 2012.
The Commission has already started the work on implementation. For example, the collection and analysis of data for use in relation to carbon leakage is ongoing (list of sectors due end 2009). Work is also ongoing to prepare the Regulation on timing, administration and other aspects of auctioning (due by June 2010), the harmonised allocation rules (due end 2010) and the two Regulations on monitoring and reporting of emissions and verification of emissions and accreditation of verifiers (due end 2011).

슬링 샷 거래 시스템.
Opzioni binarie 120 secondi pdf.
Emissions trading systems an overview brunner.
The European Union Emissions Trading System EU ETSalso known as the European Union Emissions Trading Schemewas the first large greenhouse gas emissions trading scheme in the world, and remains the biggest. Under the 'cap and trade' principle, a maximum cap is set on the total amount of greenhouse gases that can be emitted by all participating installations. Installations must monitor and report their CO 2 emissions, ensuring they hand in enough allowances to the authorities to cover their emissions. If emission exceeds what is permitted by its allowances, an installation must purchase allowances from others. Conversely, if an installation has performed well at reducing its emissions, it can sell its leftover credits. This allows the system to find the most cost-effective ways of reducing emissions without significant government intervention. The scheme has been divided into a number of "trading periods". The first ETS trading period lasted three years, from Brunner to December The second trading period ran from January until Decembercoinciding with the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. The third trading period began in January and will span until December This target has been reached 6 years early as emissions in the ETS fell to mln tonnes in The EU ETS has seen a number of significant changes, with the first trading period described as a 'learning by doing' phase. Overall, brunner its conception, the EU ETS has been characterized by relatively high levels of policy uncertainty. As a result, the scheme has resulted in a rather informal and tepid response by regulated organizations. The first phase of EU Trading was created to operate apart from international climate trading treaties such as the pre-existing United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change UNFCCC, or the Kyoto Protocol that was subsequently established under it. When the Kyoto Protocol came into force on 16 FebruaryPhase I of the EU ETS had already become operational. The EU later agreed to incorporate Kyoto flexible mechanism certificates as compliance tools within the EU ETS. The "Linking Directive" allows systems to use a certain amount of Kyoto certificates from flexible mechanism projects in order to cover their emissions. IET is relevant as the reductions achieved through CDM projects are a compliance tool for EU ETS systems. These Brunner Emission Reductions CERs can be obtained by implementing emission reduction projects in developing countries, outside the EU, that have ratified or acceded to the Kyoto Protocol. The implementation of Clean Development Projects is largely specified by the Marrakech Accordsa follow-on set of agreements by the Conference of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol. The legislators of the EU ETS drew up the scheme independently but called on the experiences gained during the running of the voluntary UK Emissions Trading Scheme in the previous years, [14] and collaborated with other parties to ensure its units and mechanisms were compatible with the design agreed through the UNFCCC. Under the EU ETS, the governments of the EU Member States agree on national emission caps which have to be approved by the EU commission. Those countries then allocate allowances to their industrial operators, and track and validate the actual emissions in accordance with the relevant assigned amount. They require the allowances to be retired after the end of each year. Like any trading financial instrumenttrading consists of matching buyers and sellers between members of the exchange and then settling by depositing a valid allowance in exchange for the agreed financial consideration. Much like a stock marketcompanies and private individuals can trade through brokers who are listed on the exchange, and need not be regulated operators. When each change of ownership of an allowance is proposed, the overview registry and the European Commission are informed in order for them to validate the transaction. During Phase II of the EU ETS, the UNFCCC also validates the allowance and any change that alters the distribution within each national allocation plan. Like the Kyoto trading scheme, EU ETS allows a regulated operator to use carbon credits in the form of Emission Reduction Units ERU to comply with its obligations. A Kyoto Certified Emission Reduction unit CERproduced by a carbon project that has been certified by the UNFCCC's Clean Development Mechanism Executive Board, or Emission Reduction Unit ERU certified by the Joint Implementation project's host country or by the Joint Implementation Supervisory Committee, are accepted by the EU as equivalent. Thus one EU Allowance Unit of one tonne of CO 2or "EUA", was designed to be systems " fungible " with the equivalent " Assigned Amount Unit " AAU of CO 2 defined under Kyoto. Hence, because of the EU's decision to accept Kyoto-CERs as equivalent to EU-EUA's, it is possible to trade EUA's and UNFCCC-validated CERs on a one-to-one basis within the same system. However, the EU was not able to link trades from all its countries until because of its technical problems connecting to the UN systems. During Systems II of the EU ETS, the operators within each Member State must surrender their allowances for inspection by the EU before they can be "retired" by the UNFCCC. The total number trading permits issued either auctioned or allocated determines the supply for the allowances. The actual price is determined by the market. Too many allowances compared to demand will result in a low carbon price, and reduced emission abatement efforts. For each EU ETS Phase, the total quantity to be allocated by each Member State is defined in the National Allocation Plan equivalent to its UNFCCC-defined carbon brunner. The first and foremost criterion is that the proposed total quantity is in emissions with a Member State's Kyoto target. Of course, the Member State's plan can, and should, also take account of emission levels in other sectors not covered by the EU ETS, brunner address these within its own domestic policies. This approach has been criticized [19] as giving rise to windfall profitsbeing less efficient than auctioning, and providing too little incentive for innovative new competition to provide clean, renewable energy. To address these problems, [ citation needed ] the European Commission proposed various changes in a January package, including the abolishment of NAPs from and auctioning a far greater share ca. From the start emissions Phase III January there will be a centralised allocation of permits, not National Allocation Plans, with a greater share of auctioning of permits. Allocation can act as a means of addressing concerns over loss of competitivenessand possible "leakage" carbon leakage of emissions outside the EU. Leakage is the effect of emissions increasing in countries or sectors that have weaker regulation of emissions than the regulation in another country or sector. Correcting for leakage by allocating permits acts as a temporary subsidy for affected industries, but does not fix the underlying problem. Border adjustments would overview the economically efficient choice, where imports are taxed according to their carbon content. Within a certain trading period, banking and borrowing is allowed. For example, a EUA can be used in Banking or in Borrowing. Interperiod borrowing is not allowed. Member states had the discretion to decide if banking EUA's from Phase I to Overview II was allowed or not. However, the prior existence of the UK Emissions Trading Scheme brunner that market participants systems already in place and ready. Incarbon prices for the trial phase dropped to near zero for most of the year. Meanwhile, prices for Phase II remained significantly higher throughout, reflecting the fact that allowances for the trial phase were set to expire by 31 December Verified emissions show a net increase over the first phase of the trading. For the countries for which data was available, emissions increased by 1. Consequently, observers have accused national governments of abusing the system under industry pressure, and have urged for far stricter caps in the second phase — The second phase —12 expanded the scope of the scheme significantly. Inthree non-EU members, Norway, Icelandand Liechtenstein joined the scheme. Although this was a brunner possibility in phase I, the over-allocation of permits combined with the inability to bank them for use in the second phase meant it was not taken up. On 27 Aprilthe European Commission announced the full activation of the EU Emissions Trading System single registry. The full activation process will include the migration of over 30, EU ETS accounts from national registries. The EC has further stated that the single registry to be activated in June will not contain all the required functionalities for phase III of the EU ETS. Aviation emissions were to be included from According to DEFRA, an increased use of JI credits from projects in Russia and Ukrainewould offset any increase in prices so there would be no discernible impact on average annual CO 2 prices. The airline industry and other countries including China, India, Russia, and the United States reacted adversely to the inclusion of the aviation sector. On 27 November the United States enacted the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition Act of which prohibits U. In the absence of a global agreement on airline emissions, the EU argued that it was forced to go ahead with its own scheme which included an exemption clause for countries with "equivalent measures". Ultimately, the Commission intended that the third trading period should cover all greenhouse gases and all sectors, including aviation, maritime transport, and forestry. In lateEuropean Commission started infringement proceedings against Austria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Italy and Spain, for failure to submit their proposed National Allocation Plans on time. The annual Member State CO 2 yearly allowances in million tonnes are shown in the table:. Additional installations and emissions included in the second trading period are not included in this table but are given in the sources. Prices emissions EU allowances for December delivery dropped trading. In Marchaccording to the periodical Economistthe EUA permit price under the EU ETS had "tanked" and was too low to provide incentives for firms to reduce emissions. The market had been oversupplied with permits. In JulyThomson Reuters Point Carbon stated that it considered that without intervention to reduce the supply of allowances, the price of allowances would fall to four Euros. For Phase III — the European Commission has proposed a number of changes, including CCC, p. As well as more sectors and gases included in Phase III. Also, millions of allowances set aside in the New Entrants Reserve NER to fund the deployment of innovative renewable energy technologies and carbon capture and storage through the NER programme, one of the world's largest funding programmes for innovative low-carbon energy demonstration projects. Ahead of its accession to the EU, Croatia joined the ETS at the start of Phase III on 1 Trading On 4 JanuaryEuropean Union allowances for traded on London's ICE Futures Europe exchange for between 6. Phase IV will commence on 1 January and finish on 31 December The European Commission plans a full review of the Directive by Connie Hedegaard, the EU Commissioner for Climate Change, hoped "to link up the ETS with compatible systems around the world to form the backbone of a global carbon market" with Australia cited as an example. Before the European Council summit on 20 March[69] the European Commission decided to propose a change in the functioning of the carbon market CO2 permits. The submitted legislation on the Market Stability Reserve system MSR would change the amount of annually auctioned CO2 permits based on the amount of CO2 permits in circulation. The reserve would trading on predefined rules with no discretion for the Commission or Member States. The European Parliament and the European council informally agreed on an adapted version of this proposal, which sets the starting date of the MSR to so already in Phase IIIputs the million backloaded allowances in the reserve and reduces the reaction time of the MSR to one year. This adapted proposal has already passed the European parliament and is to be approved by the Council of ministers in September Emissions in the EU have been reduced at costs that are significantly lower overview projected, [26] though transaction costs are related to economies of scale and can be significant for smaller installations. It was suggested that if permits were auctioned, and the revenues used effectively, e. Currently, the EU does not allow CO 2 credits under ETS to be obtained from sinks e. However, some governments and industry representatives lobby for their inclusion. The inclusion is currently opposed by NGOs as well as the EU commission itself, arguing that emissions are surrounded by too many scientific uncertainties over their permanence and that they have inferior long-term contribution to climate change compared to reducing emissions from industrial sources. A phishing scam is suspected to have enabled hackers to log into unsuspecting companies' carbon credit accounts and transfer the allowances to themselves, allowing them to then be sold. The European Commission said it would "proceed to determine together with national authorities what minimum security measures need to be put in place before the suspension of a registry can be lifted". Maria Kokkonen, EC spokeswoman for climate issues, said that national registries can be reopened once sufficient security measures have been enacted and member countries submit to the EC a report of their IT security protocol. The Czech registry said there are still legal and administrative hurdles to be overcome and Jiri Stastny, chairman of OTE AS, the Czech registry operator, said that until there is recourse for victims of such theft, and a system is in place to return allowances to their rightful owners, the Czech registry will remain closed. Registry officials in Germany and Estonia have confirmed they have locatedallowances stolen from the Czech registry, according to Mr. Anotherof the stolen Czech allowances are thought to be in accounts in the UK, according to the OTE. The security breaches raised fears among some traders that they might have unknowingly purchased stolen allowances which they might later have to forfeit. In December a German court sentenced six people to jail terms of between three years and seven years and 10 months in a trial involving systems of taxes on carbon permits. A French court sentenced five people to one to five years in jail, and to pay massive fines for evading tax through carbon trading. In the UK a first trial over VAT fraud in the carbon market is put on track to start in February Different people and organizations have responded differently to the EU ETS. Mr Anne Theo Seinen, of the EC's Directorate-General for the Environment, described Phase I as a "learning phase", where, for example, the infrastructure and institutions for the ETS were set up UK Parliament, Seinen also commented that the EU ETS needed to be supported by other policies for technology and renewable energy. According to CCCp. In the World Wildlife Fund commented that there was no indication that the EU ETS had influenced longer-term investment decisions. The EU ETS has been criticized [87] for several failings, including: In addition, the EU ETS has been criticized as having caused a disruptive spike in energy prices. Researchers Preston Teeter and Jorgen Sandberg have argued that it is largely the uncertainty behind the EU's scheme that has resulted in such a tepid and informal response by regulated organizations. Their research has revealed a similar outcome in Australia, where organizations saw little incentive to innovate and even comply with cap and trade regulations. There was an oversupply of emissions allowances for EU ETS Phase I. This drove the carbon price down to zero in CCC, p. This problem naturally diminishes as the cap tightens. Over-allocation does not imply that no abatement occurred. Even with over-allocation, there was theoretically a price on carbon except for installations that received emissions of thousands of free allowances. For some installations, the price had a some effect on emitters' behavior. In September Thomson Reuters Point Carbon calculated that the first Kyoto Protocol commitment period had been oversupplied by about 13 billion tonnes According to Newberythe price of EUAs was included in the final price of electricity. Newbery wrote that "[there] is no case for repeating such a wilful misuse of the value of a common property resource that should be owned by the country". In the view of 4CMRall permits in the EU ETS should be auctioned. The price of emissions permits tripled in the first six months of Phase I, collapsed by half in a one-week period inand declined to zero over the next twelve months. Such movements and the implied volatility raise questions about the viability of this trading system to provide stable incentives to emitters. This criticism has face emissions. In future phases, measures such as banking of allowances and price floors may be used to mitigate volatility. Nonetheless, producers and consumers in those markets respond rationally and effectively to price signals. Newbery commented that the EU ETS was not delivering the stable carbon price necessary for long-term, low-carbon investment decisions. The EU Systems is 'linked' to the Joint Implementation and Clean Development Mechanism projects as it allows the limited use of 'offset credits' from them. Participating firms were systems to use some Certified Emission Reduction units CERs from and Emission Reduction Units ERUs from Each Member State's National Allocation Plan must specify a percentage of the national allocation that will be the cap on the CERs and ERUs that may be used. CERs and ERUs from nuclear facilities and from land use, land use change and forestry may not be used. The main theoretical advantage of brunner free trading of credits is that it allows mitigation to be done at least-cost CCC, p. In terms of the UK's climate change policy, CCCnoted three arguments against too great a reliance on credits:. In Januarythe EU Climate Change Committee banned the use of CDM Certified Emission Reduction units from HFC destruction in the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme from 1 May The ban includes nitrous oxide N2O from adipic acid production. The reasons given were the perverse incentives, the lack of additionality, the lack of environmental integrity, the under-mining of the Montreal Protocol, costs and ineffectiveness and the distorting effect of a few projects in advanced developing countries getting too many CERs. As an alternative to CDM and JI projects, emissions can be offset directly by buying and deleting emissions allowances inside the ETS. This is a way to avoid several problems of Overview and JI such as additionality, measurement, leakage, permanence, and verification. Furthermore, it reduces the available allowances in the cap-and-trade system, which means that it reduces the emissions that can be produced by covered sources. The EU is negotiating a link with Switzerland's domestic trading system. Linking [] systems creates a larger carbon market, which can reduce overall compliance costs, increase market liquidity and generate a more stable carbon market. Some scholars have argued that linking may provide a starting point for developing a new, bottom-up international climate policy architecture whereby multiple unique systems successively link their various systems. 무료 백과 사전, 위키피디아에서. Origins, Allocation, and Early Results". Review of Environmental Economics and Policy. Retrieved 5 June Corporate Energy Management Strategies overview Address Climate Change and GHG Emissions in the European Union. Centre for Sustainability Management, p. How Policy Uncertainty Affects Organizational Responses to Flexible Environmental Regulations". 영국 경영 학회지 Memorandum submitted by David Newbery, Research Director, Electric Policy Research Group University trading Cambridge. The role of carbon markets in preventing dangerous climate change. The fourth report of the —10 session. UK Parliament House of Commons Environmental Audit Select Committee. Retrieved 30 April Oxford Review of Economic Policy. Retrieved 30 August Retrieved 6 June ILEX Energy Consulting Ltd. Climate Action Network Europe. Memorandum submitted by Karsten Neuhoff, Assistant Director, Electric Policy Research Group, University of Cambridge. Retrieved 1 May Minutes of Evidence, Tuesday 21 April Produced by the UK Parliament House of Commons Environmental Audit Select Committee. The fourth report of the —10 session". Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangePrint version: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U. Ten Insights from Europe on the EU Emissions Trading System". Retrieved 28 June overview Lessons to be learned". Massachusetts Institute of Technology Energy Initiative. Retrieved 25 October Europe's carbon trading scheme". A Preliminary Analysis of the EU ETS Based on the Emissions Data" PDF. Environmental and Resource Economics. Unethical, Unjust and Ineffective? Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement. Retrieved 26 April European Commission Press Release. Retrieved 25 March Retrieved 28 October Linking in the EU ETS Bulletin. International Institute for Sustainable Development IISD. Retrieved 10 August The National Law Review. Retrieved overview June Retrieved 10 February Impact on EU allowance prices" PDF. ICF Consulting for DEFRA. Archived from the original PDF on 15 February Retrieved 27 January An Act To prohibit operators of civil aircraft of the Systems States from participating in the European Union's emissions trading scheme, and for other purposes. 뉴욕 타임즈. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. Commission decides on first set of national allocation plans for the — trading period". Carbon markets and carbon prices". The First Report of the Committee on Climate Change. EU Europa Environment Committee. EU-wide cap for — set at 2. Retrieved 24 January Meeting Carbon Budgets — the need for a step change PDF. Progress report to Parliament Committee on Climate Change. Presented to Parliament pursuant to section 36 1 of the Climate Change Act The Stationery Office TSO. Retrieved 3 April Retrieved emissions January Retrieved 14 January The European Union's flagship climate policy, its emissions trading scheme ETSsaw the price of carbon crash to a record low on Thursday after a vote in Brussels against a proposal to support the struggling market. Retrieved 18 February Transaction Costs and Tradable Permits: Empirical Evidence from the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. Retrieved 8 August The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 16 April Oral and Written Evidence, Tuesday, 12 May Oral and Written Evidence, Tuesday 31 March Recent Emission-Reduction Policy Initiatives. Climate Change and the Global Economy N. World Economic and Financial Surveys: Housing and the Business Cycle". Retrieved 21 April Frankfurt am Overview, Germany: KfW Bankengruppe and Centre for European Economic Research ZEW. Kyoto and Beyond U. Thomson Reuters Point Carbon. Retrieved 28 November Retrieved 16 February Commission welcomes vote to ban certain industrial gas credits". Retrieved 18 September Opening negotiations with Switzerland on linking Emissions Trading Systems. Incremental Alignment of Cap-and-Trade Markets. To link or not to link: Climate Policy, 9 4— Linkage of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Systems - Learning from Experience. Discussion Paper Resources For The Future, No. Linking emissions trading systems. Retrieved from " https: Carbon emissions in the European Union Carbon finance Climate change in the European Union Climate change policy Emissions emissions Energy policies and initiatives of the European Union Energy brunner Renewable energy law. Navigation menu Personal tools Not logged in Talk Contributions Create account Log in. Views Read Edit View history. Navigation Main page Contents Featured content Current events Random article Donate to Wikipedia Wikipedia store. Interaction Help About Wikipedia Community portal Recent changes Contact page. Tools What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Permanent link Page information Wikidata item Cite this page. This page was last edited on 10 Aprilat Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License ; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers Contact Wikipedia Developers Cookie statement Mobile view . This section's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions. May Learn how and when to remove this template message. This article's Criticism or Controversy section may compromise the article's neutral emissions of view of the subject. Please integrate the section's contents into the article as a whole, or rewrite the material.
The Emissions Trading System.
3 thoughts on “Emissions trading systems an overview brunner”
For, since all truth is eternal, its nature can never be altered by.
Describe the problem using terms built from the genitourinary medical word elements in your text.
If you are unfamiliar with regular expressions, consider reading an earlier article of mine, An Introduction to Regular Expressions.

Greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes: A global perspective.
An overview of rules and developments in major jurisdictions globally, including the US, Canada, Mexico, Japan, the UK and the EU.
Navigating greenhouse gas emissions schemes worldwide.
As global emissions trading systems undergo fundamental changes, understanding the policies and rules around them can alert you to opportunities as well as challenges.
The impacts of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions continue to be of great concern globally. Innovations have occurred in market-based solutions, technology development and international law, and there are 17 GHG emissions trading schemes that have been established globally, operating in 35 countries, 12 states and seven cities.
These trading schemes present a market-based approach to controlling GHG emissions and mitigating the effects of climate change by limiting the quantity of industrial discharges of GHGs, either through the allocation or purchase of emissions allowances from a central authority or the purchase of emissions credits from market participants. For example, a company that emits more GHGs than its permits allow can buy credits from others willing to sell them. GHG emissions credit units are often known as carbon credits or GHG emission-reduction credits.
With the 2013 – 2020 Kyoto Protocol compliance period coming to an end, meeting intended nationally determined contributions under the Paris Agreement has opened up new challenges, and the resulting changes are confronting GHG emissions trading globally. These changes include economic dynamics, which have lowered the value of emission-reduction credits and have affected the marketplace, potential political opposition to the policies underlying GHG emissions trading and the rise of cost-effective innovations in fnancing GHG emissions reductions.
This report offers readers an overview of the status of GHG emissions trading schemes in major jurisdictions globally, including the United States, Canada, Mexico, Japan, the United Kingdom and the European Union. It illustrates the current status of global GHG emissions trading systems and also offers insights into where the global GHG emissions trading system is headed, alerting readers to potential opportunities and challenges.
미국.
Individual states are expected to take the lead in regulating greenhouse gas emissions.
United States: Greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes.
Individual states are expected to take the lead in regulating greenhouse gas emissions.
Stay current on your favorite topics.
In the US, the trading of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission-reduction credits is underway in a large group of states on the East Coast and in California. In the northeast US, New England states and a group of Mid-Atlantic states joined together to set up a carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) cap-and-trade regime that covers CO 2 emissions from power plants in those states. On the West Coast, California's broader trading regime, which covers a wide range of GHGs from a variety of California emitters, is looking to expand to markets outside of the state.
On the federal level however, signs are pointing to lighter regulation of GHG emissions. This results from a combination of factors, including the actions of the Trump administration and pending legal challenges to the federal Environmental Protection Agency’s plans for regulation of GHG emissions. Therefore, individual states—rather than the federal government—are expected to take the lead with the development of GHG emissions regulation over the next four years.
The trading of greenhouse gas emission reduction credits is underway in a large group of states on the East Coast and in California.
NEW ENGLAND, NEW YORK, MARYLAND AND DELAWARE.
The nine states of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont jointly operate a regional CO 2 cap-and-trade system known as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). This system was the frst US mandatory cap-and-trade program for GHG emissions.
The RGGI trading scheme, which became effective in 2009, applies only to CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel-fred power plants with capacities to generate 25 MWs or more in the nine RGGI states. The RGGI system is therefore narrower than some other regional GHG emissions trading systems that cover GHGs other than CO 2 and that apply to emitters other than power plants.
RGGI applies to emissions reductions within a regional framework, consistent with how the power system in the US operates. Together, the RGGI states set a cap for total emissions of CO 2 from covered power plants in the region. Each state implements the program through emissions caps in individual RGGI-participating states that are equal to shares of the region-wide cap. The RGGI cap declines over time, gradually tightening emissions limits. Covered power plants in participating states must obtain an allowance for each ton of CO 2 emitted annually (RGGI auctions allowances, rather than allocating them for free). Power plants within the region may comply by purchasing allowances at quarterly auctions, purchasing allowances from other generators within the region that have excess allowances or supporting offset projects. RGGI administered its frst auction of CO 2 allowances in 2008.
By 2020, the RGGI CO 2 cap is projected to contribute to a 45 percent reduction in the region's annual power-sector CO 2 emissions from 2005 levels. The RGGI states recently proposed changes to the program after 2020, whereby the region's CO 2 cap would decline by 2.275 million tons of CO 2 per year after 2021, resulting in a reduction in the regional CO 2 cap by 30 percent relative to 2020 levels through 2030. The RGGI states will host a public meeting on this proposal on September 25, 2017. Although Virginia is not an RGGI member, its governor recently directed environmental regulators in that state to cap power plant GHG emissions in Virginia and establish a GHG emissions trading system in the state where credits can be used in, and traded across, similar trading systems in other states. This could potentially include RGGI states. Whether Virginia establishes its trading connection with its East Coast RGGI neighbors or California's regional trading system remains to be seen. Additionally, both major political party gubernatorial candidates competing in New Jersey's upcoming election favor New Jersey's return to RGGI. New Jersey's current governor pulled the state out of the program in 2011.
CALIFORNIA.
The State of California operates one of the most active GHG trading markets in the world, covering a signifcant portion of the state's economy. California's program is second in size to the European Union's Emissions Trading System. The California cap-and-trade rules came into effect in 2013.
Following a 2015 expansion, California's GHG trading scheme applies to power plants and industrial facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of Co 2 - equivalent, and fuel distributors that meet the 25,000 metric ton threshold. The covered emissions include weighted equivalent values of methane, nitrous oxide, sulfur hexafluoride, perfluorocarbons and nitrogen trifluoride, along with Co 2 . This makes the California cap-and-trade system broader than the East Coast's RGGI system because the California system covers emitters other than power plants and GHGs other than CO 2 .
Covered emitters in California must hold enough emissions allowances to cover their emissions, and are free to buy and sell allowances on the open market. Under the California program, some allowances are auctioned, while others are allocated or given away for free. Covered entities in California can also use offsets rather than allowances to cover a limited percentage of their emissions limits. The percentage of free allowances allocated to emitters has been reduced over time.
California's cap-and-trade program is one element of the state's larger climate change initiative, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which aims to reduce the state's GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. On July 25, 2017, California Governor Jerry Brown signed into law legislation extending the state's GHG trading program through 2030. Notably, the extension law includes price ceilings and floors and new limits on the use of offsets. Furthermore, it prohibits local air districts from imposing additional limits on CO 2 emissions from facilities subject to the cap-and-trade rules.
California's GHG cap-and-trade system also recently overcame a legal challenge in court. A split panel of judges in California's Third District Court of Appeals recently upheld the program, rejected claims that the state’s auction revenues equate to an unconstitutional tax, and instead found that the costs of buying or selling emissions allowances are property rights that can be traded. Had the court found the revenues to be taxes, the system would have been invalidated because tax increases must be approved by a two-thirds majority of the state Legislature, and the program did not have that level of support when it passed. The California Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of this decision.
California's cap-and-trade system is connected to a similar carbon reduction scheme in Québec, Canada, which is discussed in the Canada section on page 4. This connection represents the first multi-sector cap-and-trade program connection in North America. Under it, allowances can be traded across jurisdictions. Ontario plans to join the program by next year as well.
Nevertheless, some environmental non-governmental organizations oppose cross-border trading system connections because of their belief that GHG emissions reductions should occur directly at the source of the emissions, rather than outside of the jurisdiction where the source is located.
Greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes: A global perspective.
이 간행물은 귀하의 편의를 위해 제공되며 법률 자문을 구성하지 않습니다. 이 간행물은 저작권에 의해 보호됩니다.
© 2017 White & Case LLP.
관련된 컨텐츠.
서비스.
환경 & amp; 기후 변화.
Ontario and Québec lead the way in developing trading schemes.
Canada: Greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes.
Ontario and Québec lead the way in developing trading schemes.
Canada's federal government recently entered into an agreement with eight Canadian provinces and three Canadian territories that is likely to accelerate the development of provincial and territorial greenhouse gas (GHG) trading systems. The December 2016 Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change Framework outlines a federal benchmark for carbon pricing in Canada. Signatory jurisdictions can implement either (1) an explicit price-based system like a carbon tax or (2) a GHG cap-and-trade system similar to the Québec-California connection, as discussed on page 3. Ontario is following Québec's lead with the development of its own GHG emissions trading scheme.
The Province of Québec's GHG emissions trading scheme is more similar to the California system than it is to the RGGI cap-and-trade initiative. As a result, the Québec scheme has been harmonized with the California system since 2014.
Following an expansion in 2015, Québec's cap-and-trade system now applies to power plants, industrial facilities and fuel distributors. While fuel distributors are subject to a lower threshold, power plants and industrial facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of carbon dioxide (CO 2 )-equivalent are subject to the provincial regime.
The Québec system covers the same broad suite of GHGs that the California system covers. Covered entities must surrender equivalent allowances to their emissions. Generally, power plants and fuel distributors have to buy 100 percent of their allowances at auction or on the secondary market. Allowances are auctioned jointly with California through the California Cap-and-Trade Program and the Québec Cap-and-Trade System Joint Auction of Greenhouse Gas Allowances. Certain industrial sectors subject to international competition—such as aluminum, cement, chemical, petrochemicals, mining, pulp and paper, and refning—receive some free allowances. However, this allocation of free allowances will continue to diminish over time. Offsets are allowed, subject to quantitative and qualitative limitations. Examples of Québec program offsets include landfll gas collection and destruction of ozone-depleting substances in insulating foam or used as refrigerants removed from refrigeration, freezer and air-conditioning appliances.
By 2020, Québec's system is intended to support a 20 percent provincial reduction in GHG emissions from 1990 levels.
Offsets issued by California, and any jurisdiction connected with Québec in the future, are recognized for compliance.
The Ontario Cap and Trade Program is relatively new, having only come into effect in January 2017.
The Ontario GHG emissions trading scheme applies to natural gas distributors and industrial emitters that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of CO 2 - equivalent, fuel supplies that supply 200 liters or more of petroleum products, and electricity importers who frst import electricity into Ontario for consumption in cases where generation facilities receive fuel directly from inter-provincial or international gas pipelines.
The Ontario system covers the same broad suite of GHGs that the California and Québec systems cover. Emitters must cover their emissions in each compliance period with an equivalent number of emissions credits. These credits can be obtained through provincial allocations or auctions, or through purchases in the secondary market. Credits can be traded among emitters and other market participants. Offsets can be used to help meet part of a covered entity’s emission requirements under the cap-and-trade program.
The first auction of Ontario emissions allowances was in March 2017. In the first compliance period (January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2020), most large emitters will receive most of the allowances they require free of charge. Following 2017, the number of credits issued by the province will decrease over a three-year period to support a reduction of Ontario's GHG emissions to 15 percent below 1990 levels by the end of 2020.
As discussed above, Ontario intends to connect its GHG trading scheme with the California and Québec regimes by 2018. Once this connection occurs, the three jurisdictions will hold joint auctions of emissions allowances. Emitters in any of the three jurisdictions will be able to purchase credits on the secondary market from covered entities in any of the three jurisdictions.
Greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes: A global perspective.
이 간행물은 귀하의 편의를 위해 제공되며 법률 자문을 구성하지 않습니다. 이 간행물은 저작권에 의해 보호됩니다.
© 2017 White & Case LLP.
관련된 컨텐츠.
서비스.
환경 & amp; 기후 변화.
Implementation of a cap-and-trade program and compliance market is expected by 2021.
Mexico: Greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes.
Implementation of a cap-and-trade program and compliance market is expected by 2021.
Stay current on your favorite topics.
In 2012, Mexico enacted the General Law on Climate Change (GCCL), which required the creation of a national registry for greenhouse gases and provided orientation to federal, state and municipal authorities toward the authority to establish a voluntary emissions trading scheme (ETS).
In 2014, the Regulations of the GCCL for the Creation and Operation of the Emissions Registry (the GCCL Regulations) were published, followed by an implementing decree in 2015, recognizing that the first step in establishing an effcient compliance market was implementing an accurate registry of emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and compounds.
The GCCL Regulations establish a reporting threshold of 25,000 tons of carbon dioxide (CO 2 )-equivalent, generated annually in all covered facilities operated by a company. Covered facilities include emitters in the energy, industrial, transport, agricultural, waste, commercial and services sectors. Although reports must be filed per facility, the sum of all covered facilities is considered for determining if reporting is required. For example, if a company has six different covered facilities emitting only 5,000 tons/CO 2 - equivalent, it must file a report for each facility, since their total emissions (30,000 tons/CO 2 - equivalent) would exceed the 25,000 tons/ CO 2 - equivalent threshold.
The governments of California, Québec and Ontario are expected to participate as observers during the pilot ETS.
The GCCL Regulations list the GHGs and compounds that must be recorded. This includes the following:
CO 2 Methane Nitrous oxide Carbon black Chlorofluorocarbons Hydrochlorofluorocarbons Hydrofluorocarbons Perfluorocarbons Sulphur hexafluoride Nitrogen trifluoride Halogenated ethers Halocarbons Mixtures of the above GHGs and compounds that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change lists as such and that Mexico's Federal Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT) may further publish.
In 2016, SEMARNAT, the Mexican Stock Exchange (BMV) and MexiCO 2 (a voluntary carbon platform of the BMV) signed an agreement to implement a voluntary pilot ETS for several major companies pertaining to the power generation, manufacturing and transport sectors. Implementation of such a pilot project is currently being discussed, and its purpose is to prepare companies to create a draft ETS regulation by 2018, which would lead to a cap-and-trade program and compliance market (expected to be implemented by 2021).
The governments of California, Québec and Ontario are expected to participate as observers during the pilot ETS, with the purpose of collaborating in the potential linkage between these ETSs. Mexico signed a Memorandum of Understanding in 2015 with Québec that includes cooperation on emissions trading, and in 2016, Mexico, Québec and Ontario issued a joint declaration on carbon markets collaboration. This collaboration would be attractive for implementing emission-reduction projects with potential lower costs in Mexico, which may be recognized for compliance in these Canadian provinces, and it is already a possibility in the voluntary market of California, managed by the Climate Action Reserve, which has implemented several protocols for projects that may be implemented in Mexico.
Greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes: A global perspective.
이 간행물은 귀하의 편의를 위해 제공되며 법률 자문을 구성하지 않습니다. 이 간행물은 저작권에 의해 보호됩니다.
© 2017 White & Case LLP.
관련된 컨텐츠.
서비스.
환경 & amp; 기후 변화.
영국.
EU's trading scheme framework dominates, but Brexit brings uncertainty.
United Kingdom: Greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes.
EU's trading scheme framework dominates, but Brexit brings uncertainty.
Stay current on your favorite topics.
As early as 2002, the UK began preparing for international emissions trading. It initiated a pilot emissions trading scheme (UK ETS) in anticipation of its mandatory contribution toward the EU Kyoto Protocol targets.
The UK ETS was the first cross-industry cap-and-trade greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions trading scheme of its kind in the world. It applied to certain named installations that were given caps on emissions and allowed these installations to purchase emissions in the event of a shortfall, or sell any excess to those installations that needed them to comply with their obligations under the UK ETS. By the time the EU Emissions Trading Directive came into effect in 2003, the UK had ample experience with pricing, auctions and other mechanics of emissions trading. Today, emissions trading in the UK is predominantly refected in the EU framework, as incorporated into domestic law by the UK Climate Change Act 2008 (CCA) and the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme Regulations 2009, which have been updated for the current trading period of 2013 to 2020.
The CCA is the core UK statutory basis for climate change mitigation measures. It commits the UK to a target of lowering GHG emissions by the year 2050 to 80 percent below 1990 levels (which translates to 160 MtCO 2 - equivalent emissions). From 2008 to 2012, the UK was capped at 3,018 MtCO 2 , decreasing to 2,782 MtCO 2 between 2013 and 2017. This will further decrease to 2,544 MtCO 2 between 2018 and 2022, and it provides mechanisms by which this target can be achieved. Specifcally, it confers powers to establish trading schemes for the purposes of limiting GHG emissions and encouraging activities that reduce emissions or remove GHG from the atmosphere. In theory, therefore, the UK could participate in any, or multiple, emissions trading schemes worldwide.
In November 2015, the UK reaffirmed its commitment to mitigating climate change on the world stage as a signatory to the Paris Agreement. The UK has developed and submitted its Nationally Developed Contribution (NDC) to achieving the targets of the Paris Agreement.
The Market Stability Reserve is another mechanism introduced to solve the problem of surplus EUAs causing a disincentive to reduce GHG emissions.
What is covered.
The CCA caps the UK's total net GHG emissions each year, and national authorities issue a fixed number of emissions allowances (EUAs) that may be used or traded as required and entitle relevant installations to emit a corresponding quantity of GHG. The UK ETS applies to a range of GHGs—CO 2 methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride. Regardless of the specifc GHG, EUAs are calculated as CO 2 - equivalent emissions, so volumes of each GHG are converted to one ton of CO 2 . One EUA entitles the holder to emit one ton of GHG.
Installations that carry out "regulated activities" beyond a threshold amount must obtain a permit and either buy or be allocated EUAs under the ETS. The threshold for covered installations is thermal input in excess of 20 MWs (i. e., through the combustion of fossil fuel), or the production of certain listed substances such as ammonia or nitric acid, given that GHG is inherently released during the production of such substances.
Covered activities are listed in Annex A of the Regulatory Guidance for Installations. One thousand of the 11,000 covered installations participating in the EU ETS are in the UK. These include power stations, oil refneries, offshore platforms and industries that produce iron and steel, cement and lime, paper, glass, ceramics and chemicals.
What is required.
The "polluter pays" principle applies to environmental protection requirements in the UK. For air emissions permits, the release of GHGs is permitted so long as the "polluting" installations pay for the right to create GHG emissions; that is, installations may only carry out regulated activities up to the number of their allocated EUAs. A proportion of those EUAs are allocated for free, and others must be purchased by auction. EUAs must be used for compliance or may be traded if the installation has a surplus of them.
Given that the aim of the ETS is to progressively reduce GHG emissions, the default position is that EUAs must be acquired at auction, with concessions being made for certain sectors to continue to have a free allocation. Under the UK ETS, each year fewer EUAs are allocated for free and more must be bought at auction. In 2013, installations that received an allocation received 80 percent of it for free. In 2020, covered installations will receive only 30 percent of their EUAs for free, and by 2027 all EUAs must be purchased at auction. Auctions are conducted through an agent (ICE Futures Europe is currently the exchange appointed by the government as the auction agent).
Installations must be able to surrender EUAs corresponding to the amount of GHG they emit each year. If they have insuffcient EUAs to match their emissions, they must either cut their emissions or acquire more EUAs on the open "carbon market." If they have excess, they may save the EUAs for future accounting periods or sell them to other installations. This ensures that emissions are reduced where it costs the least to do so.
Future outlook.
The UK introduced the Carbon Price Floor in 2013 to complement the effectiveness of its emissions trading system. Since the global financial crisis in 2007/2008, industrial output in the UK markedly decreased and, as a result, many of the covered installations ended up with surplus EUAs. These surpluses caused the market price for allowances to plummet, in addition to taking the pressure off installations to shift toward reducing GHG. The Carbon Price Floor scheme, which came into effect April 1, 2013, ensures that it does not become cheaper for installations to pollute rather than improve energy effciency and cleanliness by imposing an annually increasing surcharge on top of the market price of EUAs for installations that are fossil fuel-burning power stations. By most accounts, the UK’s carbon price floor has been successful in producing cost-effective emissions reductions. By facilitating the switch from oil to gas, it has also contributed to large-scale emissions reductions (80 percent from 2012 to 2016).
The Market Stability Reserve is another mechanism introduced to solve the problem of surplus EUAs causing a disincentive to reduce GHG emissions. This mechanism, which will be in force from 2019, is designed to automatically withdraw a proportion of EUAs available on the carbon market and place them into a reserve once the number of freely available allowances reaches a certain threshold. In theory, this will increase the demand for allowances and stabilize their price. If the number of available allowances should drop below a set threshold, some allowances will be released from the reserve.
The Paris Agreement will also likely have a considerable impact on the future of emissions trading in the UK and around the world. The agreement provides for the international connection of emission trading systems to facilitate the meeting of each country’s commitment under the Agreement via so-called "internationally transferred mitigation outcomes." The Paris Agreement provides no detail, however, on how such a mechanism would be developed, and at present emissions trading around the world lacks the uniformity for the various systems to become interconnected.
Trading across borders.
The UK ETS is inextricably linked to, and indeed a branch of, the EU-wide scheme provided for in the EU ETS Directive. As the carbon market is EU-wide and there is mutual recognition of EUAs across the EU, UK ETS allowances may be freely traded by installations throughout the EU.
Having one of the biggest economies in the EU, the UK is a major player in the EU ETS both in terms of influencing policy and market activity. The EU ETS is in essence a vehicle that helps both the UK and the EU as a whole reduce their GHG emissions and meet international commitments, in particular the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement. Through the 2004 Linking Directive, the EU ETS is linked to other emissions reduction schemes provided for under the Kyoto Protocol, namely Joint Implementation and the Clean Development Mechanism. Credits earned under these schemes (emission reduction units (ERUs) and certifed emission reductions (CERs) respectively) may be used in lieu of EUAs for compliance with the EU ETS.
It is unclear what the effect of Brexit will be on the UK ETS.
Effect of Brexit.
It is unclear what the effect of Brexit will be on the UK ETS given its connection to the wider EU scheme. If, upon leaving the EU, the UK chooses to leave the EU ETS but seeks continued access to the EU carbon market, this would need to be negotiated. The terms of access may be contained in a free trade agreement (should one be agreed to) with the EU.
Although Brexit's immediate effects are not known, it is predicted that for the UK ETS, the effects are not likely to be dramatic, as many of the legal bases for the UK ETS are now derived directly from domestic law. Nonetheless, new policies will be needed to ensure continued efforts at reducing GHG emissions where previous policies were mandated through the EU, and the government has declared its intention to do this. The UK's targets as part of the global transition to a low-carbon economy and to combat the effects of climate change will remain independent of the EU stance. The UK is a participant in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement in its own capacity as well as in its role as part of the EU; therefore, its obligations under these agreements are not dependent on its membership in the EU.
Through the 2008 Climate Change Act, the UK is required to establish carbon budgets to ensure progress in GHG emissions reduction and other climate change-related commitments. Although the UK's 2050 GHG reduction targets and the legislated carbon budgets (including the recent fifth carbon budget, which runs from 2028 to 2032) remain intact, going forward the UK's carbon budgets need to be adaptable to the reality of an uncertain future if the UK is to meet its global commitments. This includes addressing the prediction that one of Brexit's consequences and the uncertainty during negotiations will be an economic downturn for the UK. This may potentially lead to a reduction in GHG emissions, simply as a result of reductions in industrial output, lower energy consumption and other economic consequences. Having ratifed the Paris Agreement, the UK will need to submit its own commitments and targets for carbon reduction actions into 2050. The UK's access to the low-cost emission reduction market of the EU ETS is an important mechanism for achieving targets set by the UK. Whether Brexit means that the UK cannot continue to participate in the EU ETS after leaving the EU is an open question.
Greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes: A global perspective.
이 간행물은 귀하의 편의를 위해 제공되며 법률 자문을 구성하지 않습니다. 이 간행물은 저작권에 의해 보호됩니다.
© 2017 White & Case LLP.
관련된 컨텐츠.
서비스.
환경 & amp; 기후 변화.
European Union.
The world’s biggest trading scheme sees proposals intended to stabilize the market and links to Switzerland.
European Union: Greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes.
The world's biggest trading scheme sees proposals intended to stabilize the market and links to Switzerland.
Stay current on your favorite topics.
The European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) is the world's first and biggest international emissions trading scheme, accounting for trading of almost 50 percent of Europe's emissions. It came into effect in 2005 and since has developed in three phases. The frst phase was the testing or "learning by doing phase" (2005 – 2007), followed by Phase II, coinciding with the Kyoto Protocol's frst compliance period of 2008 to 2012. The current and third phase started in 2013 and will end in 2020 when Phase IV will take over.
What is covered.
The EU ETS currently operates in 31 countries—the 28 EU Member States (while the UK's connection to the EU ETS post-Brexit remains to be resolved), plus Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. It applies to carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions from power and heat generation equal to or more than 20 MWs of capacity and energy-intensive industry sectors (including oil refineries, steel works and production of iron, aluminum, metals, cement, lime, glass, ceramics, pulp, paper, cardboard, acids and bulk organic chemicals). The EU ETS also applies to nitrous oxide from production of nitric, adipic and glyoxylic acids and glyoxal, as well as perfuorocarbons from aluminum production. All in all, approximately 11,000 energy-intensive installations, as well as intra-European Economic Area (EEA) civil aviation, are included, covering approximately 45 percent of EEA's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
From 2012 to 2016, emissions from fights between airports located in the EEA fell within the EU ETS's scope. The EU legislature is currently considering extension of the EU ETS's coverage of intra-EEA fights for the 2017 to 2021 period. The EU Aviation Resolution sets the trajectory for all EU countries to join the International Civil Aviation Organization's Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA), which is a global market-based measure to address CO 2 emissions from international aviation as of 2021, with the goal of stabilizing CO 2 emissions at 2020 levels by requiring airlines to offset the growth of their emissions after 2020. Under CORSIA, airlines will be required to monitor emissions on all international routes and offset emissions from routes included in the scheme (e. g., airlines will be permitted to purchase eligible emission units generated by projects that reduce emissions in sectors such as renewable energy). Although the implementation mechanics for the scheme will be developed at the International Civil Aviation Organization level, to make CORSIA effective national measures will need to be developed, and ultimately enforced, at national domestic levels.
A market stability reserve will be established in 2018 to start operating in January 2019, to address the current surfeit of allowances and make the EU ETS resilient to shocks.
What is required.
The EU ETS is a "cap-and-trade" system. It works by setting limits on overall emissions from high GHG-emitting industry sectors, with the limit reduced over time. Within that limit, companies may buy and sell emission allowances as needed for their production purposes. Each allowance represents the right to emit one ton of CO 2 - equivalent emissions. The overall number of allowances issued determines the volume of emissions permitted, and in that way emissions are "capped." The idea is that the cap is reduced over time, thereby reducing emissions. In the current (third) phase of the EU ETS, the number of allowances issued is declining annually. Allowances are distributed to installations by allocation and increasingly by auction. The allowances can be freely traded on the market or between covered entities. Each year, installations must surrender allowances equivalent to the amount of CO 2 - equivalent emissions they emit. If installations produce more emissions than covered by allowances, they face signifcant financial penalties amounting to €100/tCO2 (rising with EU infation from 2013); if they produce less, they can trade the surplus allowances.
For installations to receive free allocation, they must meet the relevant sector's benchmarks. For those installations that are not at a signifcant risk of carbon leakage (i. e., where, for reasons of costs related to climate policies, businesses transfer production to other countries with fewer constraints on GHG emissions), the scheme provides that free allowances decline annually, to 30 percent of all allowances in 2020. In principle, no free allowances will be available from 2027. To safeguard the competitiveness of industries, installations in sectors and sub-sectors deemed to be exposed to a signifcant risk of carbon leakage will continue to receive a higher share of free allowances in Phase IV compared to the other industrial installations, so long as they meet the relevant sector benchmark.
The power generation sector is not eligible for free allocation, except under special conditions in a few lower-income EU countries in order to modernize their power sectors.
Future outlook.
The EU has committed under the Paris Agreement and for its 2030 Climate and Energy Policy Framework to reduce GHG emissions by at least 40 percent domestically by 2030. To accomplish this, it proposes to increase the pace of emissions cuts, address carbon leakage and fund low-carbon innovation. A market stability reserve will be established in 2018 to start operating in January 2019, to address the current surfeit of allowances and make the EU ETS resilient to shocks by introducing an adjustment to the supply of allowances that are to be auctioned. According to the EU's legislative proposal for the EU ETS (2021 to 2030), the annual rate of decline of total allowances would accelerate to 2.2 percent from the current 1.74 percent.
The proposal also aims to update sector benchmarks to refect technological progress, provide a more targeted carbon leakage classification (and develop "predictable, robust and fair rules" to address the risk of carbon leakage), and more closely align free allocation with production levels. The proposal puts in place two new funds—an innovation fund and a modernization fund—to help industry and power sectors meet the innovation and investment challenges inherent in reducing their emissions.
Linking with others.
The EU ETS is linked with the Kyoto Protocol's international emissions trading system. Emission-reduction credits generated from Kyoto Protocol Clean Development Mechanism and Joint Implementation projects could be used for EU ETS compliance (with quantitative restrictions). This was designed to cover reductions in sectors not included in the EU ETS as well as help expand market access to low-cost emissions reductions and support technology transfer. The EU ETS adopts this through the 2004 EU Linking Directive, allowing operators to use Kyoto Protocol credits for compliance with the EU ETS on a one-for-one basis.
Additionally, the EU and Switzerland have finalized technical negotiations and in principle have agreed to link their systems. However, the final conclusion of the Linking Agreement is dependent on negotiations on a broader package of issues with Switzerland. Once the agreement has entered into force, linking will result in the mutual recognition of EU and Swiss emissions allowances.
Greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes: A global perspective.
이 간행물은 귀하의 편의를 위해 제공되며 법률 자문을 구성하지 않습니다. 이 간행물은 저작권에 의해 보호됩니다.
© 2017 White & Case LLP.
관련된 컨텐츠.
서비스.
환경 & amp; 기후 변화.
Tokyo Metropolitan Government's and Saitama Prefecture's schemes are connected as Japan considers a national scheme.
Japan: Greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes.
Tokyo Metropolitan Government's and Saitama Prefecture's schemes are connected as Japan considers a national scheme.
Stay current on your favorite topics.
Similar in some ways to regional emissions trading schemes in the US and Canada, Japan has locally connected emissions trading regimes in the Tokyo Metropolitan Government and Saitama Prefecture. On the national level, although Japan’s Voluntary Emissions Trading Scheme has existed since 2005, after efforts to implement a mandatory national emissions trading system were postponed in December 2010, the stance of Japan’s government has been to carefully consider an emissions trading scheme, evaluating its burden on Japanese industry, associated impacts on employment, developments and effects of emissions trading schemes in other countries, and global warming countermeasures that are already implemented in Japan (e. g., voluntary actions by industry).
Emissions trading launched in April 2010, when the registry started to manage emissions trading records.
TOKYO METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT.
The Tokyo Metropolitan Government started the "Mandatory CO 2 Reduction and Emissions Trading Program" in April 2010. It requires mandatory reduction of absolute carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions and implements a cap-and-trade program by amending the Tokyo Metropolitan Environmental Security Ordinance.
What is covered.
The cap applies to large-scale facilities (buildings and factories) with a total consumption of fuels, heat and electricity of 1,500 kiloliters or larger per year in crude oil-equivalent. These facilities include large CO 2 emitters such as offce buildings and factories. The program targets only energy-related CO 2 in the frst stage; other gases will be added sequentially as necessary. The program covers approximately 1,300 facilities in Tokyo including 1,100 business facilities and 200 factories, and it covers approximately 40 percent of the total volume of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by industrial and commercial facilities in Tokyo. The program differs from that of its EU ETS and US RGGI counterparts since it also includes within its scope large-scale offce buildings.
What is required.
The program sets five-year compliance periods and targets for total emissions over each five-year period. The first compliance period covered fiscal year 2010 through fiscal year 2014; the second compliance period covers fiscal year 2015 to fiscal year 2019. Covered facilities in the program must reduce energy-related CO 2 emissions (i. e., consumption of fuels, heat and electricity).
During the first compliance period, 8 percent reductions were required for business facilities such as offce buildings, and 6 percent reductions were required for industrial facilities such as factories. The percentage of reductions are calculated using base-year emissions, which are the average emissions of three consecutive fiscal years selected between fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2007. Total emissions of the covered facilities for the fiscal year 2014 were reduced by 25 percent from base-year emissions, amounting to a 14 million ton reduction in the frst compliance period. For the second compliance period, the target has increased to a 17 percent reduction for business facilities and a 15 percent reduction for industrial facilities. Owners of covered facilities must report the previous fiscal year's emissions to the Tokyo Metropolitan Government by the end of November every year.
Emissions trading launched in April 2010, when the registry started to manage emissions trading records. A filing must be made with the registry when acquiring, transferring or using excess reduction or offset credits to fulfill the reduction obligation. Five types of credits—Excess Credits (excess emission reductions), Small and Midsize Facility Credits (emission reductions from small and midsize facilities in Tokyo), Renewable Energy Credits, Outside Tokyo Credits (emission reductions outside Tokyo area) and Saitama Credits—are under the cap-and-trade program. Of those credits, Small and Midsize Facility Credits, Renewable Energy Credits, Outside Tokyo Credits and Saitama Credits are offset credits, which may be used to fulfill obligations under the program.
Future outlook.
Looking forward to the Tokyo 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games and beyond, the Tokyo Metropolitan Government set up a new Environmental Master Plan in 2016 that showcases the environmental policies to be implemented by 2030, which include the target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent below 2000 levels.
사이.
Tokyo Metropolitan Government and Saitama Prefecture signed the agreement to connect their emissions trading programs in September 2010. Since April 2011, Tokyo Metropolitan Government’s cap-and-trade system has been connected to a similar reduction scheme in Saitama Prefecture. Excess Credits and Small and Midsize Facilities Credits issued by Saitama Prefecture are tradable under the Tokyo system.
SAITAMA PREFECTURE.
One year after Tokyo, Saitama Prefecture established and started the "Target-Setting Emissions Trading Program," in which the prefecture sets reduction targets of covered facilities and allows them to trade allowances, in accordance with the Saitama Prefecture Global Warming Strategy Promoting Ordinance of April 2011.
What is covered.
The coverage is basically the same as Tokyo's. It covers large-scale facilities (buildings and factories) with total consumption of fuels, heat and electricity of 1,500 kiloliters or more per year in crude oil-equivalent. Approximately 600 facilities are covered.
What is required.
The frst compliance period was a four-year term starting from fiscal year 2011 to fiscal year 2014 and now is in the middle of the fve-year second compliance period starting from fiscal year 2015 to fiscal year 2019. For the frst compliance period, an 8 percent reduction below base-year emissions was required for business facilities such as offce buildings and commercial facilities and a 6 percent reduction was required for industrial facilities such as factories. As for the second compliance period, the target has increased to 15 percent for offce buildings and commercial facilities and 13 percent for factories. Unlike the Tokyo scheme, there is no penalty for unachieved facilities.
Six types of credits—Excess Credits (excess emission reductions), Small and Midsize Facility Credits (emission reductions from small and midsize facilities in Saitama), Renewable Energy Credits, Outside Saitama Credits (emission reductions outside Saitama Prefecture), Forest Absorption Credits (credits from forests inside the Saitama Prefecture) and Tokyo Credits—are tradable under the cap-and-trade program. The five credits other than Excess Credits are offset credits to be used to fulfill reduction obligations under the program.
Future outlook.
Saitama Prefecture revised its global warming strategy action plan—Stop Global Warming Saitama Navigation 2050—in 2015 and set a target greenhouse gas reduction of 21 percent below 2005 levels by 2020.
사이.
Saitama's cap-and-trade program is connected to the Tokyo Metropolitan Government's program. Excess Credits from Tokyo Metropolitan Government's emissions trading system and Small and Midsize Facility Credits issued by Tokyo Metropolitan Government are offcially eligible as offset credits.
KYOTO PREFECTURE.
The Kyoto Prefecture has a "Kyoto Verifed Emission Reduction" scheme managed by the "Kyoto CO 2 Reduction Bank," whose members are Kyoto Prefecture, Kyoto City, Kyoto Chamber of Commerce and Industry, The Kansai Electric Power Co., Inc., Osaka Gas, Co., Ltd., and four other industry associations and one environmental non-proft organization. It started in October 2011 and offers a unique credit system and emissions trading system. However, it does not impose any reduction obligation on facilities in Kyoto, like Tokyo, or set targeted reduction percentages on facilities in Kyoto, like Saitama, although the Kyoto Prefecture does have a target of 25 percent reduction below fiscal year 1990 levels by the fiscal year 2020.
Greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes: A global perspective.
이 간행물은 귀하의 편의를 위해 제공되며 법률 자문을 구성하지 않습니다. 이 간행물은 저작권에 의해 보호됩니다.
© 2017 White & Case LLP.
관련된 컨텐츠.
서비스.
환경 & amp; 기후 변화.
The global future.
Regional trading systems are expected to expand and increase their connections with one another.
The global future.
Regional trading systems are expected to expand and increase their connections with one another.
Carbon pricing and trading regimes are developing regionally in a bottom-up approach, rather than through a global top-down approach as some may have anticipated. As a result of this approach, regional trading programs are expected to expand in the coming years. For example, as the Canadian Province of Ontario intends to connect its emerging greenhouse gas (GHG) trading scheme with the California and Québec regimes by 2018, in the US, Oregon and Washington State are reportedly considering similar action.
However, the lack of an overarching global trading system leaves regional systems and those entities regulated by those systems in a slightly precarious position, as demonstrated by the litigation surrounding California's regional trading system. Other regional programs, such as the Australian emissions trading system, have already been disbanded due to political changes in the region.
The force of international cooperation, even in the form of "soft law" should not be underestimated though. With COP23 coming up in November 2017, those who see emissions trading as a potential solution for carbon reduction will be eager to see the development of rules and procedures for international carbon trading.
Regulated businesses in the industrial and electricity sectors developing or acquiring power generation and other regulated stationary sources that have or are developing carbon pricing and/or trading regimes should understand the scope and limitations of emissions trading. Carbon trading systems may present operators and acquirers of regulated facilities with unique local compliance obligations, along with potential opportunities to take advantage of connections between different regional systems.
Going forward, as regional trading markets emerge, disband, change and connect with other regions, it will be important for market participants to remain aware of the legal and political developments and opportunities surrounding these issues as they develop, finance, acquire, sell and operate regulated emissions sources.
Greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes: A global perspective.
이 간행물은 귀하의 편의를 위해 제공되며 법률 자문을 구성하지 않습니다. 이 간행물은 저작권에 의해 보호됩니다.