Blog Post

Making the carbon market wider and deeper

A drastic change in the way we produce and consume energy is necessary to contain the risk of a global environmental catastrophe. For its part, the EU has set targets for reduction of GHG emissions by up to 80-95% of 1990 levels by 2050 to keep global temperature increases below 2°C. One key policy for […]

By: Date: February 9, 2012 Topic: Energy & Climate

A drastic change in the way we produce and consume energy is necessary to contain the risk of a global environmental catastrophe. For its part, the EU has set targets for reduction of GHG emissions by up to 80-95% of 1990 levels by 2050 to keep global temperature increases below 2°C. One key policy for achieving this target cost-effectively is the European Emission Trading System (EU ETS). However, the only partial coverage of important emitting sectors (namely transport) creates economic inefficiency. While the ETS has succeeded in containing carbon emissions in the power sector, it has not provided sufficient signals for incentivising low-carbon investments. Thus, we suggest making the EU ETS wider and deeper.

Widening the ETS: Inclusion of (all forms of) transport in the EU ETS

As vehicles become more fuel-efficient, a rebound effect might arise. Consumers might use cars more often as fuel savings lead to lower driving costs relative to other modes of transport. Lower fuel bills may also mean more money available to be spent on transport. A price on carbon for fossil fuels is necessary for stimulating efficient emissions-mitigation behaviour on the part of consumers. An arbitrary price on carbon is, however, not efficient. The proposed carbon component in the fuel tax is insufficient for ensuring efficient economy-wide greenhouse gas mitigation. A carbon tax would be different from the volatile marginal abatement costs in ETS-regulated sectors. Transport fuels produced in different sectors would then face different carbon costs. For example, the electricity used in electric vehicles (or for electrolysis to produce hydrogen) is covered by the ETS, while gasoline production is not covered by the ETS. Hence, fossil fuelled transport would abate too much/little if the carbon tax is higher/lower than the ETS price. In addition, taxes are a less good incentive for long-term investment decisions because they can easily be changed by policymakers. Only a broad scheme providing a single carbon price across sectors would ensure cost-optimal abatement. Including transport in the ETS could achieve this. Furthermore, inclusion of transport in the ETS would increase the depth of the carbon market and make the system more resilient. Implementation could take the form of obliging fuel outlets to buy emission allowances for the fuel they sell. This would result in the harmonisation of the carbon price across sectors and create an incentive for the use of the cheapest available abatement options.

Deepening the ETS: Lock-in of a long-term carbon price (Government credibility)

In addition to aligning the carbon cost across the different transport sectors, governments can reduce uncertainty for investors by providing assurance that carbon would be sensibly priced beyond 2020. Currently, the EU emission cap for 2020, the sectoral coverage, the institutional setting beyond 2020 and other key elements of the ETS, are subject to change. As investors cannot predict the direction that likely political changes will have, the ETS lacks credibility in the long-run and thus fails to provide clear long-term investment signals. As it might be politically and institutionally impossible to lock-in a credible long-term commitment to a tight emissions trading system, in the absence of an international agreement, second-best options for creating investment certainty should be considered. A carbon floor price might seem attractive to today’s low-carbon investors. However a general floor price is a rather inflexible tool. In case future carbon reduction potential turns out to be much cheaper than anticipated (eg because of new technologies or lower economic growth) a high floor price could result in carbon reductions becoming needlessly expensive. In addition, a politically set floor is subject to change and hence not credible either, in the long term. A more targeted alternative would be the establishment of bilateral option contracts between public institutions and investors. The public institutions would guarantee a certain carbon price to an investor through such a contract. In case the realised carbon price is below the guaranteed price, the public institution (the option writer) would pay the difference to the investor (the option holder). Hence, in case of a low carbon price, potentially detrimental to the competitiveness of low-carbon investments, the investor gets some compensation. This would reduce the investor’s risk. At the same time, if the public institution issues a large volume of option contracts, it creates an incentive for policymakers not to water down climate policies in the future. Policies that reduce the carbon price will have a direct budget impact through increasing the value of the outstanding options. This would increase the long-term credibility of the ETS.

Georg Zachmann is the author of the policy contribution Cutting carbon, not the economy.

A version of this comment was also published in EU Energy Policy Blog

Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

View comments
Read article More on this topic


Four pillars to make or break the European Green Deal

The recipe for a successful European Green Deal is as simple as it is breath-taking: to intelligently promote deep decarbonisation by accompanying the economic and industrial transformation this necessarily implies, and by ensuring the social inclusiveness of the overall process.

By: Simone Tagliapietra, Grégory Claeys and Georg Zachmann Topic: Energy & Climate Date: November 14, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Demystifying carbon border adjustment for Europe’s green deal

From carbon leakage to “green protectionism”, the European Green Deal envisioned by the incoming Commission has many critics. But some adjustments to the deal could make domestic manufacturers more carbon efficient while simultaneously encouraging foreign producers to become more environmentally friendly.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Energy & Climate Date: October 31, 2019
Read article More by this author


EU should pay member states to get rid of coal

The European Union should act to ensure the continued transformation of its energy system, and encourage member states to overcome their dependence on coal for supplying electricity. Helping coal-mining regions with the transition should require €150 million per year – a mere 0.1% of the total EU budget – and the EU would not even need to establish a new fund to support it.

By: Simone Tagliapietra Topic: Energy & Climate, European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: December 5, 2017
Read article Download PDF More on this topic More by this author

Policy Brief

The carbon buyers’ club: international emissions trading beyond Paris

The effort to define rules for international emissions trading faces the strong desire of nation states to develop their own climate policies, which collides with the need for tradable units in one country to be equivalent to tradable units in another country. To overcome this dilemma Georg Zachmann proposes a club of carbon-buying countries that would regulate only imported mitigation outcomes.

By: Georg Zachmann Topic: Energy & Climate Date: April 4, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Could Europe come up short in the race to the Marrakesh climate conference?

One year after the Paris climate conference, Europe struggles to advance its own ratification process of the agreement. However, a fast-track EU ratification procedure could enable the Paris Agreement to enter into force in time for the Marrakesh climate conference.

By: Simone Tagliapietra Topic: Energy & Climate Date: September 28, 2016
Read article Download PDF More on this topic

Policy Brief

Financial risks and opportunities in the time of climate change

The current unsustainable use of our environment can lead to financial crisis. To address this risk, financial institutions should measure their exposure to ecological imbalances using methodologies such as carbon and natural capital accounting.

By: Dirk Schoenmaker and Rens van Tilburg Topic: Energy & Climate Date: April 22, 2016
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Speech by Miguel Arias Cañete on EU’s climate and energy policies after COP21

Speech held at Bruegel event on "How will the Paris agreement impact EU climate and energy policies?", on 8 February 2016.

By: Miguel Arias Cañete Topic: Energy & Climate Date: February 8, 2016
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

When will the EU switch away from coal?

In the US, electricity producers are switching from coal to less polluting natural gas thanks to lower gas prices. However in the EU, the carbon price has been too low to make natural gas competitive with coal.

By: Georg Zachmann Topic: Energy & Climate Date: December 21, 2015
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Too early to celebrate: What markets tell us about the credibility of the Paris climate agreement

The price of carbon emissions has decreased markedly since the first draft of the Paris Agreement has been released. The decrease in the price of futures is the largest observed over the last two months.

By: Domenico Favoino and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Energy & Climate Date: December 15, 2015
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

COP21: An important turn on a long journey

The Paris Agreement has been hailed as a turning point and a huge success in the international fight against climate change. Its big achievement is that it brings tackling climate change back into the sphere of the politically possible. But implementation will be by no means easy. I base my optimism on four observations:

By: Georg Zachmann Topic: Energy & Climate Date: December 14, 2015
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

What to expect from COP21?

As the COP21 conference approaches, what are the political and economic considerations?

Speakers: Jos Delbeke, Simone Mori, Thomas Spencer and Simone Tagliapietra Topic: Energy & Climate Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: November 26, 2015
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

COP21: Climate action needs a new global architecture

A strong political momentum on climate action has arisen worldwide on the way to Paris. However private and public investors will only conduct the necessary long-term investments if COP21 manages to put in place a sustained political commitment of all relevant parties to the 2°C pathway. Such a commitment requires a new global architecture for climate action.

By: Simone Tagliapietra and Georg Zachmann Topic: Energy & Climate Date: November 26, 2015
Load more posts