Managing Energy Resources and Regulations

This article discusses managing energy resources and regulations, including carbon taxes and cap and trade systems. It also evaluates the effectiveness of the European Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). The article highlights the importance of renewable energy and the impact of carbon regulation on energy market fees.

Managing Energy Resources and Regulations1
MANAGING ENERGY RESOURCES AND REGULATIONS
Name:
Department:
School:
Date:

Managing Energy Resources and Regulations2
Managing Energy Resources and Regulations
Ever since the late 19th era, the globe’s average surface air temperature has increased by nearly
two degrees Fahrenheit. While the climate is naturally variable, these upsurges transcend
conventional annual, decadal, or even multidecadal variability. Globally, carbon dioxide releases
from fossil fuel burning and industrial practices are hugest sources of GHG discharges, about
65% of GHG release in 2010 (Carl and Fedor 2016). The climate concerns can appear,
ironically, quite easy. There are sequences of doings that create externalities and the above
should be valued according to the polluter-pays belief, which could be completed over cap and
trade or carbon taxes (Ellerman, Convery and De Perthuis 2010). There are complicating and
confounding elements such has non-carbon smokes and emission from land usage, but at its
central, the concern is modest. Nevertheless, there has been little advancement to date in
faltering the carbon release proportion. Portion of the motive is due to legislation as some of the
approaches are detested and thus legislators ought to procrastinate or repudiate the core concern.
Additionally, power fossil energy lobbies in numerous nations that impact politics in a
unswerving manner. The EU ETS is leading gear to accomplish carbon alleviation goals. It
remains the hugest instance of discharges trading in process currently, covering over 11,500
connections through 30 nations, and encompassing nearly 40% of entire EU releases. Its
ecological effect can be evaluated against two precise primary purposes: to lessen GHG
discharges competently, at a discussed balance of rate and ecological payback; to stimulate
corporate venture in low carbon tools (Blonz, Burtraw and Walls 2012).
Economists propose that if the marketplace is left to function liberally, GHG emission will be
extreme, as there are inadequate incentives for companies and families to minimise releases. As
such, they commended using the polluter pays attitude and substituting a rate on CO2. This can

Managing Energy Resources and Regulations3
be executed either over cap and trade system so-called quantity measurement or carbon tax also
known as price instrument (European Comission 2014).
A carbon tax enforces a levy on every component of GHG discharges and offers businesses and
families, reliant on the extent, an enticement to minimise contamination at any time doing so
would be inexpensive than repaying the duty (Paterson 2012). As such, the volume of effluence
minimised relies on the selected tax level. The tariff is set by evaluation of the harm and charge
linked with every element of contamination and the rates connected with the monitoring that
effluence. Accomplishing the duty level correct is important; too little and businesses and
household are probable to choose for paying the levy and remaining to contaminate, above and
over what is optimum for a community. Excessively great and the rates will increase greater than
needed to lessen emission, influencing jobs, profits and end users (Grantham Research Institute
2013).
On the other hand, cap and trade scheme sets an extreme contamination level, a cap, and
disperses discharges licenses among organisations that create releases. Firms ought to have a
license to encompass every part of effluence they generate, and they can get these certifications
either over auction, primary distribution or transaction with other companies. But, since other
companies discover inevitably easy or inexpensive to minimise contamination than others,
tradeoff happens. As the maximum effluence capacity is set in advance, the tradeoff rate of
licenses reduces, becoming costly when request is great comparative to supply and inexpensive
when demand is lesser. A rate on contamination is thus generated as a result of setting a upper
limit on the general volume of emission. In particular perfect situation, cap and trade and carbon
taxes have precisely the similar results, since they are both approaches to price carbon. But, in
certainty, they vary in numerous manners (Grantham Research Institute 2013).

Managing Energy Resources and Regulations4
One variance is the manner in which two plans allocate the cost of dropping contamination. In
the regard to cap and trade, it has frequently been the situation that licenses are offered for free
originally, well recognized as grandfathering (European Comission 2014). This denotes that low-
cost agreement for the sector in the initial phases of the system as they only pay for whichever
additional documents credited from other companies. This tactics is clearly famous with the
business and clarifies why grandfathering has been utilised ever since it assists get companies to
consent regulations on discharges (Paterson 2012). However, with a tariff, there is an instant
charge for trades to pay on each component of GHG-created. However, while grandfathering is
superior for near-term trade viability; it is not essentially the best results for the community
(Hammar, Sterner and Åkerfeldt 2013).
The mechanism also varies in what way they do under doubt about the benefits and costs of
minimizing releases. Beneath excise, the rate of producing an element of contamination is set,
but the entire volume of emission is not. Thus, a tax warrants everybody recognises the fee being
paid for all units of CO2 released, but doubt remains about the real capacity of discharges.
However, cap and trade offer confidence about the number of releases, but indecision about the
rate of getting these drops. If ecological harm level is more subtle, then it is crucial to be certain
what the volume of releases is, which themes to cap and trade. On the other hand, if the rate of
minimizing contamination is extremely delicate to variations in releases, it is better to be sure
about the rate of reducing releases, directing to a tax (Grantham Research Institute 2013).
Hybrid methods comprise packages that limit carbon releases but set boundaries on how much
the rate can differ. Additional hybrid tactic regulates the tax to make sure exact emission

Managing Energy Resources and Regulations5
decrease objectives are accomplished. A third tactic could be when an authority executes a
carbon cap and trade package for some segments and applies a carbon tax on other. Carbon
pricing packages can also function in a balancing fashion with other renewable energy and
energy efficacy plans such as energy efficiency standards, renewable power standard and vehicle
fuel economy rules (Toman 2015).
From an economic viewpoint, both cap and trade, and carbon tax system function in equal
manners. One sets a rate on emission which then defines the emission levels, while the other sets
the levels of emission, which defines a rate for those releases. The level of the cap or tax and its
degree of increases (for a tax) or reduction (for a cap) over a period motivates the extent to which
emission is cut. Planned appropriately, both of these tactics can offer on the key purpose of a
vigorous carbon pricing package, which is to assist cut emission cost-effectively in line with
energy and climate objectives. But, there may be crucial plan or political motives to favour one
or the other in a specific perspective; such has limits on regulatory or voter preferences (Toman
2015).
A carbon tax is the cost-effective approach in order to minimise carbon releases. It is typically
more effective than direct directive of merchandises, behaviour and skill, as it impacts use and
manufacture levels; it comprises all products and industries and offers vibrant motivations for
invention and extra discharges decreases. Similarly, the tax income can be utilised to aid the
change toward renewable power, managerial and execution charges, or lower duties on labour
(Toman 2015). A tax also unceasingly inspires the sector to minimise productions in contrast
with CAT that only incentivizes trade to lessen their emission to the point of the cap.

Managing Energy Resources and Regulations6
Several economists endorse a hybrid classical that may provide the finest of both realms. This
inclines to include of a cap on releases (to control the size of contamination), but with
modification tools such as ceiling, to preserve the rate of a license within satisfactory limits.
Hybrid systems have their own glitches, nonetheless, such as larger intricacy and more mediation
by the controller in the authorisation marketplace (European Comission 2014).
Energy markets and impacts the management of energy resources
Market-centred mechanisms that bound GHG releases can be subdivided into type sorts; cap and
trade (quality control) and carbon tax (price control). To some degree, a carbon tax and cap and
trade package would generate the same impacts. Both are projected to upsurge the rate of fossil
field, which would eventually be allowed by users, specifically family circle (West and Williams
III 2012). If the policymakers had suitable information concerning the marketplace, either charge
or quantity control instrument could be planned to accomplish the same outcomes. Because this
market perfect does not exist, inclination for a carbon tax or cap and trade package eventually
rely on which variable one want to regulate; emission or rates (European Comission 2014).
Growth on active plan instruments and on global agreements is in general deprived. Both CAT
and taxes are sturdily fought (Stavins 2015). Becoming carbon unbiased is not simply about
reducing carbon releases. It is also more importantly, conceivably, nearly generating a novel
energy structure made up of renewable sources such as wind, solar and hydro. Up to date,
renewables have required regime aid to be a feasible choice for industry and households, but the
rate gap between renewable energy and fossils is reducing very fast. The above issue is worth
discussing in mixture with taxes due to its vibrant effect of comparative rates between fossil
fuels and renewable drive. When renewable power becomes inexpensive than fossil energies the

Managing Energy Resources and Regulations7
marketplace takes over the shift. Since the rate gap is currently trivial, this can be prompted by
carbon taxes or grants on renewables or grouping of both (Toman 2015).
Evaluation of carbon policy proposal anticipates that carbon regulation would cause an upsurge
in an energy market crisis (West and Williams III 2012). Impacts on wholesale electricity
market rates are also crucial to account for in resource planning because various candidate
portfolios typically have diverse levels of exposure to wholesale market rates. Carbon regulation
could influence local energy market fees through various instruments, the most instant being to
add a release charge to the marginal cost of producers through the zones, thus raising market
rates.
Performance of European Emissions Trading System (EU ETS)
The EU emission trading scheme (ETS) is the leading carbon CAT programme in the globe,
encompassing approximately 45% of the EU’s whole GHG emission (European commission
2013). Projections of the release decreases accomplished by the first and second levels in 2005-
2007 and 2008 and 2018 respectively, calculated comparative to a projection of emissions, have
in general been modest (Anderson and Di Maria 2010; Ellerman et al. 2010). Currently, in the
third phase, more than 12,000 energy and manufacturing plants in 31 nations are taking portion
in the system. Whereas the third phase is arranged to close in 2020, some plans are currently set
that extends further than the scheme end. At the initial point of stage, the higher limit on entire
discharges was set to reduce at a level of 1.74% annually until 2020 and 2.2% per annual up to
2030 (European Comission 2014). According to the Bel and Joseph (2015), the key motive of
reducing releases was the international crisis in between 2008 and 2009 rather than the EU ETS.
The EU ETS effectiveness is frequently deliberated to be compromised due to a compassionate

Managing Energy Resources and Regulations8
distribution of permits in the first two stages. It appears to have been doctrinally hard to put in
place a constricted cap on the programme. But, in its third stage, the cap will be lessened by
1.74% yearly. Currently, licenses rates are still small; though those protect the CAT say that this
is largely due to additional rules (European Comission 2014).
Unlikely, the carbon CAT programme has not been triumph narrative numerous had anticipated
for. The caps have been fixed extremely high, and as a result, the fees of licenses have been too
low to realize adequate decreases. One of reasons for the above is substantial lobbying from the
business. The sector has also pushed for grandfathering (Barton and Bruder 2014). Allotting
more than around 10% for free causes windfalls paybacks. CAT has been established to be
reverting to a particular extension, but, at least in wealthier nations, poor individuals typically
have their rate offset by communal welfare programme (Blonz et al. 2012).
Legislators are concerned that constricted cap will upset their businesses. If they were to approve
to a fitted cap and the economy would thrive, the big challenge is that this would cause to high
costs of licenses. Such apprehensions lead to over-distribution due to firms and policies want to
avert very high rates. Several officials do not belief CAT to function or they are worried about
assenting on a control that is too constricted. In its place, they execute other sorts of regulations
such as renewable power certificate to supplement the approach and this, in turn, offers to the
low license rates. Thus, unlike carbon taxes that can be supplemented with other plans, CAT
systems cannot be simply perfected in this manner (Blonz et al. 2012).
A fascinating and crucial query is in what way various national mechanisms such as carbon taxes
and cap and trade will function within global pacts (Stavins 2015). Up to date, most discussions
have concentrated on quantifiable allocation by various nations. This might be accomplished

Managing Energy Resources and Regulations9
through a connecting, for example, of cap and trade systems. The concerns incorporated are
nevertheless far from open. It is hard to connect structures without a full treaty on forthcoming
aims. Thus, there are substitute proposals about organising global talks around minimum rates
(Nordhaus 2015, Weitzman 2014).
EU-ETS has illustrated that most huge emitting sectors of the economy can be covered with
comparatively low administrative burdens by concentrating on major emitting sources such as
industry and power generation. But, there have been hurdles in realising the projected reductions
due to a price being undermined by over-allocation and a key economic downturn (West and
Williams III 2012). According to West and Williams III (2012) raising the rate of carbon by
fiscal policy is important to state for executing carbon plant in a manner that will realise the mass
of decision makers over universe, sectors, times and states
Conclusion
The EU ETS remains to trigger the interest of investigators and the literature lingers to develop,
and a number of crucial programs for the scheme of emission trading schemes that are
developing from it. On discharges, over- distribution (phase 1) and in specific the slump (phase
11) have minimised the nonstop effect of the EU ETS on releases, but the blend of rigorous
checking and alertness, together with a confident carbon rate, has compelled some reduction. On
revenues, free provision combined with trading build the latent for windfall incomes. The proof
from phase 1 and 2 is that considerable windfall remunerations only stand for a limited period, as
plan can and will react once the suggestion is perfect. It remains uncertain whether the EU ETS
will have to on until phase 4 to resolve the unresolved concerns. Exertions from a researcher on

Managing Energy Resources and Regulations10
policy assessment are making a crucial contribution to offering proof to back these arguments
and expansions.
The main drawback of a carbon tax is that it would produce undefined release regulation. Some
contend that the prospective for permanent climate modification influences requires the
discharges inevitability that is only accessible with a quantity-founded device (e.g., cap-and-
trade). Although it may present execution trials, legislators may perhaps develop a tax package
that permits some short-term discharge variations, while continuing in the direction of a long-
term release decrease aim. Advocates claim that short-term release variations would be desirable
to the rate volatility that might be projected with a cap-and-trade system. Even though a carbon
tax could perhaps face more political problems than a cap-and-trade platform, some of these
problems may be grounded on mix-ups of the variances amid the two methods or on conventions
that the duty would be set too little to be real. Carbon tax supporters could probably address
these subjects to some notch, but there remains substantial political drive for a cap-and-trade
package

Managing Energy Resources and Regulations11
References
Anderson, B. and Di Maria, C., 2011. Abatement and Allocation in the Pilot Phase of the EU
ETS. Environmental and Resource Economics, 48(1), pp.83-103. [Online]. Retrieved from:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10640-010-9399-9, [Accessed on 4 December 2018].
Barton, H. and Bruder, N., 2014. A guide to local environmental auditing. Routledge. [Online].
Retrieved from: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781134167746, [Accessed on 4
December 2018].
Bel, G. and Joseph, S., 2015. Emission abatement: Untangling the impacts of the EU ETS and
the economic crisis. Energy Economics, 49, pp.531-539. [Online]. Retrieved from:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988315001061, [Accessed on 4
December 2018].
Blonz, J., Burtraw, D. and Walls, M., 2012. Social safety nets and US climate policy
costs. Climate Policy, 12(4), pp.474-490. [Online]. Retrieved from:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14693062.2011.644073, [Accessed on 4
December 2018].
Burtraw, D. and Palmer, K., 2008. Compensation rules for climate policy in the electricity
sector. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management: The Journal of the Association for Public
Policy Analysis and Management, 27(4), pp.819-847. [Online]. Retrieved from:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/pam.20378, [Accessed on 4 December 2018].
Carl, J. and Fedor, D., 2016. Tracking global carbon revenues: A survey of carbon taxes versus
cap-and-trade in the real world. Energy Policy, 96, pp.50-77. [Online]. Retrieved from:

Managing Energy Resources and Regulations12
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421516302531, [Accessed on 4
December 2018].
Ellerman, A.D., Convery, F.J. and De Perthuis, C., 2010. Pricing carbon: the European Union
emissions trading scheme. Cambridge University Press. [Online]. Retrieved from:
https://books.google.com/books?
hl=en&lr=&id=pigVprvX56QC&oi=fnd&pg=PR10&dq=Ellerman,+A.+D.,+F.J.
+Convery+and+C.+De+Perthuis+(2010),+Pricing+Carbon:
+The+European+Union+Emissions+Trading+Scheme,+Cambridge,+UK:
+Cambridge+University+Press&ots=Ct1FVcElWA&sig=F2Jar2M2Rv_WyDZxPyvWXea5B4Y
, [Accessed on 4 December 2018].
European Comission (2014), “Energy Efficiency and its contribution to energy security and the
2030 Framework for climate and energy policy”, Communication from the Commission to the
European Parliament and the Council, Brussels. [Online]. Retrieved from: https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52014SC0256, [Accessed on 4 December
2018].
European Commission (2013), “The EU Emission Trading System (EU ETS)”, Brussels.
[Online]. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/ets_en, [Accessed on 4 December
2018].
Grantham Research Institute., 2013. Carbon tax v cap-and-trade: which is better?. The Guardian.
[Online]. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jan/31/carbon-tax-
cap-and-trade, [Accessed on 4 December 2018].

Managing Energy Resources and Regulations13
Hammar, H., Sterner, T. and Åkerfeldt, S., 2013. Sweden's CO2 tax and taxation reform
experiences. Reducing inequalities: A sustainable development challenge. [Online]. Retrieved
from: http://lup.lub.lu.se/record/4357461, [Accessed on 4 December 2018].
Nordhaus, W., 2015. Climate clubs: Overcoming free-riding in international climate
policy. American Economic Review, 105(4), pp.1339-70. [Online]. Retrieved from:
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.15000001, [Accessed on 4 December 2018].
Paterson, M., 2012. Who and what are carbon markets for? Politics and the development of
climate policy. Climate Policy, 12(1), pp.82-97. [Online]. Retrieved from:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14693062.2011.579259, [Accessed on 4
December 2018].
Stavins, R.N., 2015. Linkage of regional, national, and sub-national policies in a future
international climate agreement. Towards a workable and effective climate regime, p.283.
[Online]. Retrieved from: http://www.dis.uniroma1.it/~fsr/CEPR15.pdf#page=297, [Accessed
on 4 December 2018].
Toman, M., 2015. International cooperation in advancing energy technologies for deep
decarbonisation. Towards a Workable and Effective Climate Regime, p.315. [Online]. Retrieved
from: http://voxeu.org/sites/default/files/image/FromMay2014/Climate%20change%20book
%20for%20web.pdf#page=329, [Accessed on 4 December 2018].
Weitzman, M.L., 2014. Can negotiating a uniform carbon price help to internalize the global
warming externality?. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource

Managing Energy Resources and Regulations14
Economists, 1(1/2), pp.29-49. [Online]. Retrieved from:
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/676039, [Accessed on 4 December 2018].
West, S.E. and Williams III, R.C., 2012. Estimates from a consumer demand system:
implications for the incidence of environmental taxes. In Fuel Taxes and the Poor (pp. 98-125).
RFF Press. [Online]. Retrieved from:
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781136521720/chapters/10.4324%2F9781936331925-
10, [Accessed on 4 December 2018].