Abstract
When it first launched in 2005, the European Union emissions
trading system (EU ETS) expected to see carbon dioxide prices of
around €30/ton and be a cornerstone of the EU's climate policy.
The reality was a cascade offalling prices, a ballooning privately
held emissions bank, and a decade of muted incentives for
investment in the technology and innovation necessary to achieve
long-term climate goals. The European Commission responded
with various administrative measures, including postponing the
introduction of allowances ("backloading") and using a quantitybased
criterion for regulating future allowance sales ("the market
stability reserve"). While prices have now begun to recover, it is
farfrom clear whether these measures are sufficient to adequately
support the price of carbon dioxide into the future...
trading system (EU ETS) expected to see carbon dioxide prices of
around €30/ton and be a cornerstone of the EU's climate policy.
The reality was a cascade offalling prices, a ballooning privately
held emissions bank, and a decade of muted incentives for
investment in the technology and innovation necessary to achieve
long-term climate goals. The European Commission responded
with various administrative measures, including postponing the
introduction of allowances ("backloading") and using a quantitybased
criterion for regulating future allowance sales ("the market
stability reserve"). While prices have now begun to recover, it is
farfrom clear whether these measures are sufficient to adequately
support the price of carbon dioxide into the future...
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1-35 |
| Number of pages | 35 |
| Journal | The Columbia Journal of European Law |
| Volume | 26 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Publication status | Published - Apr 2020 |
