首页 | 主题 | 图库 | 问答 | 文摘 | 原创 | 百科

历史 | 地理 | 人物 | 艺术 | 体育 | 科学 | 音乐 | 电影 | 信息技术 | 世界遗产

 开放、中立，源自维基百科

个人工具


用搜狗搜索相关网站  Google Search

排污交易

维库，知识与思想的自由文库

跳转到: 导航, 搜索

翻譯標記 本條目仍然有文字尚未被翻譯成中文，條目是根據其他語言的維基百科內容進行翻譯。
歡迎您積極參與翻譯與修訂。

排污交易是一種以「獎勵」形式的經濟誘因，鼓勵私人企業致力減排的，控制污染經濟工具和政府行政門徑；以達致減少排放污染物目標。 [1] 仍發展中的減低排放溫室氣體的碳排放計畫，可令參與公司及人士產生可交易的碳排放牌照。 京都議定書內清潔發展機制(CDM)可提供這方面的排放指標規定。

諸如此類經濟工具，某地區環境保護或貿易政府機構立例排放污染物最高限度。 排放污染物的公司和組織被政府發放信用或允許排放明確特定排放數量。 排放總信用額永不可超出污染物最高限度，限制了排放總額至這程度。 排放過多污染物的公司和組織需要經過貿易，向其他公司購買未超額排放牌照；或會被法律起訴和檢控。 實際上，牌照買家因超額排放而被罰款，而賣家正在因減少排放污染物而被獎賞。 如此減排污染物的公司會繼續被獎賞，但是困難地減排污染物的公司需要排放牌照；來盡量減低對社會的溫室氣體負擔。

現時歐洲聯盟擁有全球最大的排放牌照貿易市場；大部分數量為碳排放市場。 許多商界人士歡迎排污交易為減輕全球暖化等氣候變化的最佳方法。 排放污染物最高限度的執法是一個大問題，但不像慣性法例，政府無須要監管污染來源的具體習慣；政府能夠容易執法排污交易巿場條例。 不管怎樣，實際污染排放率的昂貴監測、評估、查實仍然需要。 言論懷疑這些排污交易計劃是否行得通，因為像第一階段歐盟排放牌照市場，政府有權可發出過量排放牌照。 當排放牌照出現盈餘時會引致牌照市場價格暴跌；及污染排放並無顯著減少！[2]

目录

[编辑] 概要

排污交易的概要目標是減低排放造成全球變暖的殺手—溫室氣體。 The cap is usually lowered over time - aiming towards a national emissions reduction target. In other systems a portion of all traded credits must be retired, causing a net reduction in emissions each time a trade occurs. In many cap and trade systems, organizations which do not pollute may also buy credits. Environmental groups that purchase and retire pollution credits reduce emissions and raise the price of the remaining credits according to the law of demand. Corporations can also retire pollution credits by donating them to a nonprofit and then be eligible for a tax deduction. Allowances are accounted for in the balance sheet of the company as intangible assets, as recommended by the IAS 37 issued by IASB.

Because emissions trading uses markets to determine how to deal with the problem of pollution, it is often touted as an example of effective free market environmentalism. While the cap is usually set by a political process, individual companies are free to choose how or if they will reduce their emissions. In theory, firms will choose the least-cost way to comply with the pollution regulation, creating incentives that reduce the cost of achieving a pollution reduction goal.

[编辑] 最高限度、貿易 vs. 底線、信用牌照

課本上排污交易可被形容為“最高限度、貿易”，英語："cap & trade"方式；成立污染來源的總最高限度可以互相交易，來決定真正高量污染的源頭。 而“底線、信用牌照”，英語：“baseline & credit”是現時的替代方式。 [3] “底線、信用牌照”由一組非受限度的污染源頭set of polluters that are not under an aggregate cap can create credits by reducing their emissions below a baseline level of emissions. These credits can be purchased by polluters that are under a regulatory limit. Many of the criticisms of trading in general is targeted at baseline & credit programs rather than cap & trade type programs.

[编辑] 主要經濟體系

[编辑] 美國

Perhaps the most successful emission trading system to date is the SO2 trading system under the framework of the Acid Rain Program of the 1990 Clean Air Act in the USA. Under the program, which is essentially a cap-and-trade emissions trading system, SO2 emissions are expected to be reduced by 50% from 1980 to 2010.[4]

Some experts argue that the "cap and trade" system of SO2 emissions reduction reduced the cost of controlling acid rain by as much as 80% versus source-by-source reduction.

In 1997, the State of Illinois adopted a trading program for volatile organic compounds in most of the Chicago area, called the Emissions Reduction Market System.[5] Beginning in 2000, over 100 major sources of pollution in 8 Illinois counties began trading pollution credits.

In 2003, New York State proposed and attained commitments from 9 Northeast states to cap and trade carbon dioxide emissions. Also in 2003, corporations began voluntarily trading greenhouse gas emission allowances on the Chicago Climate Exchange.

In 2007, the California Legislature passed AB32, which was signed into law by Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger. This bill is aimed at curbing Carbon emissions.

[编辑] 歐洲聯盟

The European Union Emission Trading Scheme (or EU ETS) is the largest multi-national, greenhouse gas emissions trading scheme in the world and was created in conjunction with the Kyoto Protocol. It commenced operation in January 2005 with all 25 (now 27) member states of the European Union participating in it.[6] It contains the world's only mandatory carbon trading program. The program caps the amount of carbon dioxide that can be emitted from large installations, such as power plants and carbon intensive factories and covers almost half of the EU's Carbon Dioxide emissions.[7]

Whilst the first phase (2005 - 2007) has received much criticism due to oversupply of allowances and the distribution method of allowances (via grandfathering rather than auctioning), the European Commission have been tough on Member States' Plans for Phase II, dismissing many of them as being too loose again.[8] In addition, the first phase has established a strong carbon market. Compliance has also been high in 2006, increasing confidence in the scheme.

[编辑] 京都條約

The 京都條約 is a 1997 international treaty that took effect in 2005 which currently bind ratifying nations to a similar system, with the UNFCCC setting caps for each nation. Under the treaty, nations that emit less than their quota of greenhouse gases will be able to sell emissions credits to polluting nations.

[编辑] Green tags

Green tags are a kind of reverse carbon trading scheme, available in the U.S. A renewable energy provider is issued one green tag for each 1000KWh of energy it produces. The energy is sold into the electrical grid, and the green tag can be sold on the open market as additional profit.

[编辑] 大中華地區

[编辑] 碳排放市場

This section deals with carbon emissions trading between nations. For carbon trading schemes for individuals, see Personal carbon trading.

Carbon emissions trading is emissions trading specifically for carbon dioxide (calculated in tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent or tCO2e) and currently makes up the bulk of emissions trading. It is one of the ways countries can meet their obligations under the Kyoto Protocol to reduce carbon emissions and thereby mitigate global warming.

[编辑] 市場趨勢

Carbon emissions trading has been steadily increasing in recent years. According to the World Bank's Carbon Finance Unit, 374 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e) were exchanged through projects in 2005, a 240% increase relative to 2004 (110 mtCO2e)[9] which was itself a 41% increase relative to 2003 (78 mtCO2e)[10].

[编辑] 商界反應

With the creation of a market for trading carbon dioxide emissions within the Kyoto Protocol, the London financial markets has established itself as the centre of the carbon market: a potentially highly lucrative business; the New York and Chicago stock markets would like a share (which is unlikely as long as the current US administration rejects Kyoto).[11] The European Union Greenhouse Gas Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS) began operations on 1 January 2005.

23 multinational corporations have come together in the G8 Climate Change Roundtable, a business group formed at the January 2005 World Economic Forum. The group includes Ford, Toyota, British Airways and BP. On 9 June 2005 the Group published a statement stating that there was a need to act on climate change and stressing the importance of market-based solutions. It called on governments to establish "clear, transparent, and consistent price signals" through "creation of a long-term policy framework" that would include all major producers of greenhouse gases.[12]

Business in the UK have come out strongly in support of emissions trading as a key tool to mitigate climate change, supported by Green NGOs.[13]

[编辑] 排污交易的執行

Another critical part of the bargain is enforcement.[14] Without effective enforcement, the licenses have no value. Two basic schemes exist:

In one, the regulators measure facilities, and fine or sanction those that lack the licenses for their emissions. This scheme is quite expensive to enforce, and the burden falls on the agency, which then may need to collect special taxes. Another risk is that facilities may find it far less expensive to corrupt the inspectors than purchase emissions licenses. The net effect of a poorly financed or corrupt regulatory agency is a discount on emission licenses, and greater pollution.

In another, a third party agency certified or licensed by the government, verifies that polluting facilities have licenses equal or greater than their emissions. Inspection of the certificates is performed in some automated fashion by the regulators, perhaps over the Internet, or as part of tax collection. The regulators then audit licensed facilities chosen at random to verify that certifying agencies are acting correctly. This scheme is far less expensive, placing the cost of most regulation on the private sector. The transparency of this process helps act as a safeguard against corruption.

[编辑] 言論

There are critics of the schemes, mainly environmental justice NGOs and movements who see carbon trading as a proliferation of the free market into public spaces and environmental policy-making.[15] They point to failures in accounting, dubious science and destructive impacts of projects upon local peoples and environments as reasons why trading pollution rights should be avoided.[16] Instead they advocate making reductions at the source of pollution and energy policies that are justice-based and community-driven.[17] Most of the criticisms have been focused on the carbon market created through investment in Kyoto Mechanisms. Criticism of 'cap and trade' emissions trading has generally been more limited to lack of credibility in the first phase of the EU ETS.

Critics argue that emissions trading does little to solve pollution problems overall, as groups that do not pollute sell their conservation to the highest bidder. Overall reductions would need to come from a sufficient and challenging reduction of allowances available in the system. Likely this would occur over time through central regulation, though some environmental groups acted more immediately by buying credits and refusing to use or sell them. The National Allocation Plans by member governments of the European Union Emission Trading Scheme came under fire for this recently when some governments issued more carbon allowances than emissions during Phase I of the scheme. They have also been criticised for the widespread practice of grandfathering, where polluters are given carbon credits by governments, instead of being made to pay for them.[18] Nevertheless, the transfer of wealth from polluters to non-polluters provides incentives for polluting firms to change, especially if the market price for pollution credits is very high. Tight controls are necessary in order to establish a reverse commodity market like Green Tags as well. Regulatory agencies run the risk of issuing too many emission credits, diluting the effectiveness of regulation, and practically removing the cap. In this case instead of any net reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, beneficiaries of emissions trading simply do more of the polluting activity.

Many environmental activists and foundations consider Al Gore's strong advocation of carbon trading to be a denial of the imminence of climate change and a formalized failure of international policy to address the gravity of the carbon increase. Critics of carbon trading, such as Carbon Trade Watch argue that it places disproportionate emphasis on individual lifestyles and carbon footprints, distracting attention from the wider, systemic changes and collective political action that needs to be taken to tackle climate change.[19]

A mistake may also be made by giving away emission credits rather than auctioning them. Emission credits are, in effect, money and therefore should be treated as such. The giving away of emission credits may also have the negative result of turning down investment dollars that might have been spent on sustainable technologies, if the government chooses to.[20]

The authoritative British Newspaper the Financial Times argued on April 26th 2007 that "Carbon markets create a muddle". In the opinion of the FT these markets "...leave much room for unverifiable manipulation".[21]

[编辑] 參閱

Energy主題 Energy主題首頁

[编辑] 注意

  1. ↑ DEFRA - Emissions Trading Schemes
  2. ↑ Newsweek: The Carbon Folly - Emissions trading isn't working
  3. ↑ Tietenberg, Tom and Nick Johnstone. 2004. "ExPost Evaluation of Tradeable Permits: Methodological Issues and Literature Review" in Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Tradeable Permits: Policy Evaluation, Design And Reform.
  4. ↑ EPA's Efforts to Reduce SO2
  5. ↑ Illinois EPA - Emissions Reduction Market System
  6. ↑ Climate Change: The European Union's Emissions Trading System (EU ETS)
  7. ↑ http://www.washtimes.com/business/20060731-011601-7934r.htm (AP)
  8. ↑ http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/2nd_phase_ep.htm
  9. ↑ http://carbonfinance.org/docs/StateoftheCarbonMarket2006.pdf
  10. ↑ http://carbonfinance.org/docs/CarbonMarketStudy2005.pdf
  11. ↑ http://observer.guardian.co.uk/focus/story/0,,1509761,00.html
  12. ↑ http://www.weforum.org/pdf/g8_climatechange.pdf
  13. ↑ http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/trading/eu/pdf/manifesto-uk.pdf
  14. ↑ EMISSIONS TRADING IN THE KYOTO PROTOCOL - FINISHED AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
  15. ↑ http://www.carbontradewatch.org
  16. ↑ http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk/item.shtml?x=546606
  17. ↑ http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk/summary.shtml?x=544238
  18. ↑ http://www.climnet.org/EUenergy/ET/NAPsReport_Summary0306.pdf
  19. ↑ Carbon Trade Watch。
  20. ↑ http://economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_RVJTRQV
  21. ↑ http://www.ft.com/cms/s/4b80ee18-f393-11db-9845-000b5df10621.html

[编辑] 外部連結

[编辑] 關於排污交易

[编辑] 關於碳排放交易

Template:Global warming

来自“http://www.wikilib.com/wiki/%E6%8E%92%E6%B1%A1%E4%BA%A4%E6%98%93”
导航
其它语言
AD Links