IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ekd/002625/2958.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The no cost emission saving policy

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Christian Schinke

Abstract

The EU is enthusiastically proposing climate saving policies that place Europe as the innovator in reducing emissions and increasing the share of renewable energy sources (RES). However, the application of suitable instruments appears to create problems with differences between the approaches that seek to achieve the objectives. The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS) and national support regimes such as renewable energy feed-in tariffs (REFIT) in particular are often not well integrated. Whilst the first aim is to price carbon emissions, the second is to increase the market share of green energy, however coordination of the two is lacking. This paper analyses literature addressing the two instruments of EU-ETS and REFITs and shows how when jointly applied they can interact with one another. If interaction is possible, what potential to reduce emissions at a faster rate without increasing costs is created? The legal options in addition to economic efficiencies enable a new policy that can faster reach the ambitious climate saving goals of the EU. Market based trading emissions trading scheme and non-market based support regimes for renewable energy sources are linked to each other. What are the economical benefits?The effects of both instruments jointly implemented could have an enhancing effect if contemporaneous renewable energy sources (RES) support regimes would be accepted not as a cost intensive instrument, but as one that optimise inter-system conditions. The targeted support of selected technologies at selected places or regions would lead to cost-optimising use of spending, higher outputs and lower costs per unit. The quantification of the potential remains open at this point and requires deeper research. What can be mentioned is the missing pragmatism to calculate the full effects through RES capacities. The separation of conventional and RES source grid loads would be the first step for the future accreditation of unrealised intra-system emission reductions. It is an unpopular result for EU-ETS participants, especially from the energy sector, as they would lose their economic advantage, while the community and the environment would profit highly from additional carbon savings at zero costs. Ecologically, it would enable an enormous step forward in European climate saving policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Christian Schinke, 2011. "The no cost emission saving policy," EcoMod2011 2958, EcoMod.
    • Handle: RePEc:ekd:002625:2958
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ecomod.net/system/files/Schinke.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Regina Betz & Misato Sato, 2006. "Emissions trading: lessons learnt from the 1st phase of the EU ETS and prospects for the 2nd phase," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(4), pages 351-359, July.
    2. repec:dau:papers:123456789/4222 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Abrell, Jan & Weigt, Hannes, 2008. "The Interaction of Emissions Trading and Renewable Energy Promotion," MPRA Paper 65658, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Alberola, Emilie & Chevallier, Julien & Cheze, Benoi^t, 2008. "Price drivers and structural breaks in European carbon prices 2005-2007," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 787-797, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eyckmans, Johan & Rousseau, Sandra, 2009. "The European Emissions Trading System in Belgium," Working Papers 2009/26, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    2. Lehmann, Paul & Gawel, Erik, 2013. "Why should support schemes for renewable electricity complement the EU emissions trading scheme?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 597-607.
    3. Jia, Jun-Jun & Xu, Jin-Hua & Fan, Ying, 2016. "The impact of verified emissions announcements on the European Union emissions trading scheme: A bilaterally modified dummy variable modelling analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 567-577.
    4. repec:dau:papers:123456789/4223 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Cummins, Mark, 2013. "EU ETS market interactions: The case for multiple hypothesis testing approaches," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 701-709.
    6. Jos Sijm, 2012. "Tradable Carbon Allowances: The Experience of the European Union and Lessons Learned," Chapters, in: Chin Hee Hahn & Sang-Hyop Lee & Kyoung-Soo Yoon (ed.), Responding to Climate Change, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Estelle Cantillon & Aurélie Slechten, 2018. "Information Aggregation in Emissions Markets with Abatement," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 132, pages 53-79.
    8. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    9. Fang, Sheng & Lu, Xinsheng & Li, Jianfeng & Qu, Ling, 2018. "Multifractal detrended cross-correlation analysis of carbon emission allowance and stock returns," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 509(C), pages 551-566.
    10. Jiongwen Chen & Jinsuo Zhang, 2022. "Effect Mechanism Research of Carbon Price Drivers in China—A Case Study of Shenzhen," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-17, August.
    11. Delarue, E.D. & Ellerman, A.D. & D'haeseleer, W.D., 2010. "Robust MACCs? The topography of abatement by fuel switching in the European power sector," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1465-1475.
    12. Emilie Alberola & Julien Chevallier & Benoît Chèze, 2008. "The EU Emissions Trading Scheme : Disentangling the Effects of Industrial Production and CO2 Emissions on Carbon Prices," Working Papers hal-04140795, HAL.
    13. Mo, Jian-Lei & Schleich, Joachim & Zhu, Lei & Fan, Ying, 2015. "Delaying the introduction of emissions trading systems—Implications for power plant investment and operation from a multi-stage decision model," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(PB), pages 255-264.
    14. repec:ipg:wpaper:2014-422 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Fan, Ying & Jia, Jun-Jun & Wang, Xin & Xu, Jin-Hua, 2017. "What policy adjustments in the EU ETS truly affected the carbon prices?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 145-164.
    16. Delarue, Erik & Van den Bergh, Kenneth, 2016. "Carbon mitigation in the electric power sector under cap-and-trade and renewables policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 34-44.
    17. Adekoya, Oluwasegun B. & Oliyide, Johnson A. & Noman, Ambreen, 2021. "The volatility connectedness of the EU carbon market with commodity and financial markets in time- and frequency-domain: The role of the U.S. economic policy uncertainty," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    18. Marc Gronwald & Janina Ketterer & Stefan Trück, 2011. "The Dependence Structure between Carbon Emission Allowances and Financial Markets - A Copula Analysis," CESifo Working Paper Series 3418, CESifo.
    19. Xu, Yingying & Salem, Sultan, 2021. "Explosive behaviors in Chinese carbon markets: are there price bubbles in eight pilots?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    20. Zachmann, Georg, 2013. "A stochastic fuel switching model for electricity prices," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 5-13.
    21. Lutz, Benjamin Johannes & Pigorsch, Uta & Rotfuß, Waldemar, 2013. "Nonlinearity in cap-and-trade systems: The EUA price and its fundamentals," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 222-232.
    22. Beat Hintermann, 2011. "Market Power, Permit Allocation and Efficiency in Emission Permit Markets," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(3), pages 327-349, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ekd:002625:2958. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Theresa Leary (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecomoea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.