The recent agreement by European environment ministers on the ground rules for an EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) represents a landmark in the evolution of EU climate policy. But this scheme will be introduced into a crowded ‘policy space’ within each Member State in which complex interactions between the EU ETS and existing instruments appear unavoidable. This paper explores one aspect of the problems created by the EU ETS for the UK – namely the potential interactions with the UK Renewables Obligation and the UK Energy Efficiency Commitment. Both these instruments have objectives which go beyond the least-cost abatement of carbon emissions and both utilise trading arrangements in which the trading commodity is denominated in MWh rather than tonnes of carbon. The paper explores the potential interactions between the EU ETS and the UK instruments by comparing in turn their scope, timing, objectives and operation. The coexistence of the EU ETS with the RO and EEC is shown to raise three important issues, namely target setting and double counting, double regulation of electricity and the fungibility of trading commodities. The paper concludes that the coexistence of the RO and EEC with the EU ETS is both possible and justifiable, but more attention should be paid to the non-CO2 objectives of each instrument.
ArrowK. (1962), ‘The economic implications of learning by doing’, Review of Economic Studies, 29: 155–173.
2.
BeggK.GaastW. v. d.HostD. v. d.JacksonT.JepmaC.SmithA.SorrellS. (2002), Guidance for UK Emissions Trading Projects: Phase 1 report — advice to policymakers, A report to the Department of Trade and Industry, University of Surrey, Guildford.
3.
CalderF.HoughC. (2001), Potential interactions between new emissions trading related policies: Minimising conflicts, maximising synergies and maximising consistent valuation of carbon savings, Energy for Sustainable Development Ltd.
4.
CaprosP.MantzosL. (2000), The Economic Effects of EU-Wide Industry-Level Emissions Trading to Reduce Greenhouse Gases, a report to DG Environment by the Institute of Communication and Computer Systems of the National Technical University of Athens, Athens.
5.
Climate Action Network Europe (2003) Letter from CAN Europe regarding CDM/JI and ET draft proposal, Brussels, 28 February.
6.
CEC (Council of the European Union) (2002), Amended proposal for a Directive establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96//61/EC, Institutional file 2001/0245 (COD), Brussels.
7.
CramtonP.KerrS. (1997), Tradable carbon permit auctions: How and why to auction and not to grandfather, Resources for the Future, Discussion Paper 98—34, Washington DC.
8.
DEFRA (2003), Development of the National Allocation Plan under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme: Phase 1 Research, Specification of Requirements for Tender, DEFRA, London.
9.
DEFRA (Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) (2001), Energy Efficiency Commitment 2002—2005: Consultation Proposals, The Stationery Office, London.
10.
DETR (Department of the Environment Transport and the Regions) (2000), Climate Change: The UK Programme, The Stationery Office, London.
11.
DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) (2001), New and Renewable energy: Prospects for the 21st century. The Renewables Obligation Statutory Consultation, The Stationery Office, London.
12.
DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) (2003a), Our Energy Future: Creating a Lower Carbon Economy, The Stationery Office, London.
13.
DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) (2003b), Guarantees of origin for renewable electricity: Implementing Article 5 of the EU Renewables Directive (2001/77/EC), The Stationery Office, London.
14.
DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) (2003c), Quarterly Energy Prices March 2003, The Stationery Office, London.
15.
EkinsP.CottonR.RussellA.HargreavesC. (2001), Sustainable energy for the UK: The economic and environmental implications to 2020 of a sustainable energy strategy for the UK, Technical Report at TR5/01, Forum for the Future, London.
16.
ENDS (Environmental Data Services) (2002), ‘EST pulls plug on green electricity accreditation scheme’, The ENDS Report, 334.
17.
EST (Energy Savings Trust) (2001), Energy Saving Trust's Response to DEFRA's Consultation on the Energy Efficiency Commitment 2002—2005, Energy Savings Trust, London.
18.
European Parliament (2002), European Parliament legislative resolution on the Proposal for a Directive establishing a framework for greenhouse gas emissions trading within European Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC, Institutional file P5_TA-PROV(2002)0461, Brussels.
19.
GrossR.FoxonT. (2002), Policy support for innovation to secure improvements in resource productivity, EPMG Working Paper, Imperial College, London.
20.
GrubbM.KoehlerJ.AndersonD. (2002), ‘Induced technical change in energy/environmental modelling: Analytic approaches and policy implications.’Annual Review of Energy and Environment, 27: 271–308.
21.
HaasR. (2002), ‘Survey on and review of promotion strategies for RES in Europe.’ENER Bulletin, 25:02.
22.
HaitesE.MullinsF. (2001), Linking domestic and industry greenhouse gas emissions trading systems, International Emissions Trading Association, Toronto.
23.
HarrisonD.RadovD.B. (2002), Evaluation of Alternative Initial Allocation Mechanisms in a European Union Greenhouse Gas Emissions Allowance Trading Scheme, National Economic Research Associates, prepared for the DG Environment, European Commission.
24.
HelmD. (2002), ‘A critique of renewables policy in the UK.’Energy Policy, 30 (3), 185–188.
25.
HoffT. E.WengerH. J.FarmerB. K. (1996), ‘Distributed generation: An alternative to electric utility investments in system capacity.’Energy Policy, 24 (2): 137–147.
26.
HuberC.HaasR.FaberT.ReschG. (2002), ‘Efficiency criteria for promoting electricity generation from renewables.’ENER Bulletin, 25:02.
27.
JensenS. G.SkytteK. (2002), ‘Simultaneous attainment of energy goals by means of green certificates and emission permits.’Energy Policy, 31 (1): 63–71.
28.
JohnsonPMcKayS.SmithS. (1990), The Distributional Consequences of Environmental Taxes, IFS Commentary No. 23, Institute for Fiscal Studies, London.
29.
JohnstoneN. (2003), ‘Efficient and effective use of tradable permits in combination with other policy instruments’, paper presented at theOECD Global Forum on Sustainable Development: Emissions Trading, OECD, Paris, 17—18 March.
30.
MajoneG. (1989), Evidence, argument, and persuasion in the policy process, Yale University Press, New Haven, London.
31.
MenantauP.FinonD.LamyM.L.2003), ‘Feed-in tariffs versus quotas: How to promote renewables and stimulate technical progress for cost decrease, ENER Bulletin, 25:02.
32.
MitchellC. (1995), ‘The Renewables NFFO: A Review’, Energy Policy, 23 (12), 1077–1090.
33.
MorthorstP.E. (2001), ‘Interactions of a tradable green certificate market with a tradable permits market, Energy Policy, 29 (5), 345–353.
34.
NERA (National Economic Research Associates) (2003), Security in Gas and Electricity Markets, final report for the Department of Trade and Industry, Reference 003/08SGEM/DH, London.
35.
OFGEM (Office of Gas and Electricity Market) (2001), Guidelines on green supply offerings: Consultation document, London.
36.
RobertsM.J.SpenceA.M. (1976), ‘Effluent Charges and Licences and Uncertainty’, Journal of Public Economics, 5 (3—4), 193–208.
37.
SijmJ. (2003), ‘The interaction between the EU Emissions Trading Scheme and national energy policies: A general framework’, paper submitted to Climate Policy, April.
38.
SmaleR. (2002), ‘Renewable Energy’, in HelmD. (eds) Towards an Energy Policy, OXERA Publications, Oxford.
39.
SmithA. (2002), Implications of the EU Emissions Trading Directive for IPPC, the Renewables Obligation and the Energy Efficiency Commitment, a report to DG Research under the project ‘Interaction in EU Climate Policy’, SPRU (Science and Technology Policy Research), University of Sussex, Brighton.
SmithK. (1991), ‘Innovation Policy in an Evolutionary Context’, in SaviottiP.Stanley MetcalfJ. (eds.) Evolutionary theories of economic and technological change: Present status and future prospects, Harwood Academic Publishers, Reading.
43.
SorrellS. (2001b), Policy design and policy interaction: Literature review and methodological issues, a report to DG Research under the project ‘Interaction in EU Climate Policy’, SPRU (Science and Technology Policy), University of Sussex, Brighton, available from: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/environment/research/interact.html.
44.
SorrellS. (2002), The Climate Confusion: Implications of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme for the UK Climate Change Levy and Climate Change Agreements, SPRU (Science and Technology Policy), University of Sussex, Brighton, available from: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/environment/research/interact.html.
45.
SorrellS. (2003), Back to the Drawing Board: Implications of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme for UK Climate Policy, SPRU (Science and Technology Policy), University of Sussex, Brighton, available from: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/environment/research/interact.html.
StirlingA. (1994), ‘Diversity and ignorance in electricity supply investment: Addressing the solution rather than the problem’, Energy Policy, 23 (3).
48.
UKACE (UK Association for the Conservation of Energy) (2000), RS06: Employment impacts of energy efficiency investment programmes, UKACE, London.
49.
WoerdmanE. (2001), ‘Developing a the European carbon trading market: Will permit allocation distort competition and lead to state aid?’, paper presented at the workshop on ‘Trade and the Environment in the Perspective of European Enlargement’, May 17—18, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM), Milan, Italy.
