This document provides an overview and summary assessment of lessons and insights learned from various existing and presented domestic cap and trade schemes. For each scheme, a set of general characteristics (or issues) is considered. The characteristics (or issues) covered include the following: (i) coverage and scope; (ii) setting a cap; (iii) setting the points of obligation; (iv) allocation of allowances; (v) systems for domestic monitoring, reporting and verification, (MRV) and compliance; (vi) enabling trading and fostering stability; (vii) institutional arrangements, including technical and legal infrastructures; and (viii) use of offsets and linking. The domestic emissions trading schemes (ETS) included in this assessment are the following: (i) European Union (EU) ETS; (ii) New Zealand (NZ) ETS; (iii) United States (U.S.) northeast states regional greenhouse gas initiative (RGGI); (iv) California (Cal) ETS; (v) Australia clean energy future carbon pricing mechanism (Aus CPM); and (vi) Tokyo cap and trade program (C and T).
Due to the adverse impact of seaborne sulfur emissions on coastal areas, the Ministry of Transport of the People's Republic of China is planning to implement a 0.1% sulfur cap on bunker fuel in the domestic emission control area (DECA) on 1 January 2025. As the current DECA width is only 12 NM, ships can bypass the DECA to reduce the use of high-priced ultra-low sulfur fuel oil (ULSFO) and thus save on fuel costs. The purpose of this study is first to assess the effect of China's 12-NM-wide DECA policy and then to assist the government in determining the optimal DECA width. We develop a bi-level programming model to capture the relationship between the government policy and ship operators' operations. In the lower-level programming model, we capture ship operators' decisions regarding their ships' sailing routes and speeds while considering the time required for fuel switching, which aims to minimize the total fuel costs over a given voyage. The optimal solution to the lower-level programming model is then embedded in the upper-level programming model to determine the optimal DECA width for the government, with the aim of minimizing the impact of seaborne sulfur emissions on the coastal area environment. The final results, obtained from computational experiments, validate the idea that ships tend to bypass the 12-NM-wide DECA and reduce their sailing speeds inside the DECA to decrease their use of ULSFO. Therefore, we recommend that the government increase the current DECA width to at least 112 NM to prevent ships from bypassing it and to achieve the desired sulfur reduction target.
With the decline of the international market under the Clean Development Mechanism, China is establishing a national Emission Trading Scheme by setting up emission cap and trade rules for high emission industries in seven pilot areas. The shift from the international to domestic market and from an offset program to a true cap and trade mechanism requires several significant changes. This paper reviews the development and evolution of China's carbon trading market policy instruments. We find that there are substantial changes in both structure and policy. First, Emission Trading Scheme is a broad cap-and-trade mechanism with many new stakeholders added to those already involved in China's Clean Development Mechanism. Second, the administrative structure is decentralized compared to that of the Clean Development Mechanism. Third, while the Emission Trading Scheme is best thought of as a new policy, China's experience with the Clean Development Mechanism influences that policy. A large number of Clean Development Mechanism projects are being converted into offsets for the national Emission Trading Scheme market, and many institutional stakeholders that emerged during the Clean Development Mechanism are now involved in the Emission Trading Scheme. The combination of new policies and stakeholders, a decentralization of structure and the conversion of Clean Development Mechanism projects raise questions regarding the integrity of the cap and the enforcement of compliance as the Emission Trading Scheme is expanded into a nationwide system.
When clothes are worn and washed, they emit fibres into the ecosystem via discharges of sewage that have been linked to the global dispersion of clothing fibres. Facilities that treat sewage divert some fibres from sewage effluent to sludge, but no current methods of filtration eliminate their environmental release. While filters for washing-machines are sold to consumers with the argument they will reduce the emissions of fibres from clothes to the environment, there is insufficient scientific peer-reviewed evidence assessing their ability to retain fibres from washed clothes and reduce environmental contamination. To improve our understanding and develop more realistic methods to assess the efficiency of filters, we washed replicate cotton and polyester garments in replicate domestic front-loaded washing-machines with and without replicate filters (micro- and milli-meter-sized pores), and then quantified the masses of the fibres retained by the filters and those released in the effluent. Here we show micrometer-sized filters significantly reduced the mass of cotton by 67% (F-2,F-6= 11.69, P<0.01) compared to effluent from appliances with no filters, whilst filters in general reduced polyester fibres in their effluent by more than 65% (micrometer-sized pores) and 74% (millimeter-sized pores) compared to effluent from appliances with no filters (F-2,F-12= 5.20, P<0.05). While filters with micrometer-sized pores caught larger masses and total proportions of fibres than filters with millimeter-sized pores, the differences were only significant for the total proportions of cotton (t = 4.799 df = 4, P<0.01). For tests with garments of either types of polymer, the filtered effluent still contained up to a third of the original masses of fibres released from the garments. Given the diversity of clothes, polymers, appliances and filters currently sold to consumers, our work shows the value of increasing the rigour (e.g. more levels of replication) when testing filters and the need for further studies that test an even greater diversity of materials and methods in order to meet the growing demand for knowledge from governments, industry and the public.
Black carbon, a component of soot and particulate matter, competes closely with methane as the largest anthropogenic contributor to global warming after carbon dioxide. Regulation of black carbon has been identified as an affordable, politically feasible, fast-action means to mitigate the warming temperatures caused by climate change. With an emphasis on domestic mitigation, this Article examines how emissions are controlled under the CAA and what EPA, states, and municipalities can do to mitigate black carbon emissions further.
In early 2000, neither a comprehensive upstream system nor an all-encompassing downstream approach to CO2 emissions permit trading seems feasible in Poland. However, a pilot emissions trading system in the power and Combined Heat and Power (CHP) sector isthought to be a realistic option in the near future. A comprehensive upstream approach would require permits for the carbon contained in fossil fuels produced or imported in Poland. It is ruled out due to the perceived difficulties of the inclusion ofthe coal sector in such a system. While inclusion of the gas sector, and especially of the oil sector, seems possible within a relatively short time, relying on an upstream approach without the coal sector is not advisable. Once the restructuring of thecoal sector as well as the privatization of the gas and oil sector is advanced, an upstream approach might become an option again. A comprehensive downstream approach would regulate CO2 emissions at their source, that is mostly at point of combustion offossil fuels. A system which includes industry, households and transport can be assumed to be infeasible. Instead, a "core program" was examined, which would focus on power and heat generation as well as energy intensive industries. Such an approach wasfound feasible in principle. Currently, however, only the largest emitters could be easily integrated in a reliable system. Drawing the line between those included and those excluded from such a partial system requires careful analysis. Including allenterprises in the relevant sectors would require significant improvements in monitoring and reporting reliability. A pilot emissions permit trading system could be introduced in the professional power and heat sector. Here, awareness concerning theinstrument was found to be high and the system could be based on monitoring requirements already required by law. Gradual inclusion of more relevant sectors and eventual combination with an upstream component to include oil refineries, and with them thegrowing CO2 emissions from transport, seem possible. Such a pilot program would allow firms and the policy maker to gather relevant experiences for the possible future introduction of a comprehensive system and for the emerging international emissionstrading system.To determine whether a pilot system is desirable, however, an extensive and comparative analysis of different climate protection policy options is still needed for Poland. It should include a close look at the implications of EU climateprotection policies and the effects of the liberalization of international electricity markets on domestic policy options. ; In early 2000, neither a comprehensive upstream system nor an all-encompassing downstream approach to CO 2 emissions permit trading seems feasible in Poland. However, a pilot emissions trading system in the power and Combined Heat and Power (CHP) sector is thought to be a realistic option in the near future. A comprehensive upstream approach would require permits for the carbon contained in fossil fuels produced or imported in Poland. It is ruled out due to the perceived difficulties of the inclusion of the coal sector in such a system. While inclusion of the gas sector, and especially of the oil sector, seems possible within a relatively short time, relying on an upstream approach without the coal sector is not advisable. Once the restructuring of the coal sector as well as the privatization of the gas and oil sector is advanced, an upstream approach might become an option again. A comprehensive downstream approach would regulate CO 2 emissions at their source, that is mostly at point of combustion of fossil fuels. A system which includes industry, households and transport can be assumed to be infeasible. Instead, a "core program" was examined, which would focus on power and heat generation as well as energy intensive industries. Such an approach was found feasible in principle. Currently, however, only the largest emitters could be easily integrated in a reliable system. Drawing the line between those included and those excluded from such a partial system requires careful analysis. Including all enterprises in the relevant sectors would require significant improvements in monitoring and reporting reliability. For both the upstream and downstream approach, the issue of electricity imports from the liberalizing European power markets poses a serious challenge. A national permit system might discriminate against domestic power producers and the environmental goal might be undermined by imports from foreign producers, if these are not subject to carbon regulation in their home country. Unless internationally agreed solutions are found to solve this problem, trading systems are unlikely to become a binding policy tool with significant environmental effects. A pilot emissions permit trading system could be introduced in the professional power and heat sector. Here, awareness concerning the instrument was found to be high and the system could be based on monitoring requirements already required by law. Gradual inclusion of more relevant sectors and eventual combination with an upstream component to include oil refineries, and with them the growing CO 2 emissions from transport, seem possible. Such a pilot program would allow firms and the policy maker to gather relevant experiences for the possible future introduction of a comprehensive system and for the emerging international emissions trading system. To determine whether a pilot system is desirable, however, an extensive and comparative analysis of different climate protection policy options is still needed for Poland. It should include a close look at the implications of EU climate protection policies and the effects of the liberalization of international electricity markets on domestic policy options.
