This article analyses the implementation of emissions trading systems (ETSs) in eight jurisdictions: the EU, Switzerland, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) and California in the US, Québec in Canada, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea and pilot schemes in China. The article clarifies what is working, what isn't and why, when it comes to the practice of implementing an ETS. The eight ETSs are evaluated against five main criteria: environmental effectiveness, economic efficiency, market management, revenue management and stakeholder engagement. Within each of these categories, ETS attributes − including abatement cost, stringency of the cap, improved allocation practices over time and the trajectory of price stability − are assessed for each system. Institutional learning, administrative prudence, appropriate carbon revenue management and stakeholder engagement are identified as key ingredients for successful ETS regimes. Recent implementation of ETSs in regions including California, Québec and South Korea indicates significant institutional learning from prior systems, especially the EU ETS, with these regions implementing more robust administrative and regulatory structures suitable for handling unique national and sub-national opportunities and constraints. The analysis also shows that there is potential for a 'double dividend' in emissions reductions even with a modest carbon price, provided the cap tightens over time and a portion of the auctioned revenues are reinvested in other emissions-reduction activities. Knowledge gaps exist in understanding the interaction of pricing instruments with other climate policy instruments and how governments manage these policies to achieve optimum emissions reductions with lower administrative costs. Key policy insights. Countries are learning from each other on ETS implementation.. Administrative and regulatory structures of ETS jurisdictions appear to evolve and become more robust in every ETS analysed.. A 'double dividend' for emissions reductions may also exist in cases where mitigation occurs as a result of the ETS policy and when auction revenues are reinvested in other emissions-reduction activities.

In the US, over 400 state and local incentives have been issued to increase the adoption of plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) since 2008. This article quantifies the influence of key incentives and enabling factors like charging infrastructure and receptive demographics on PEV adoption. The study focuses on three central questions. First, do consumers respond to certain types of state level vehicle purchase incentives? Second, does the density of public charging infrastructure increase PEV purchases? Finally, does the impact of various factors differ for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV), battery electric vehicles (BEV) and vehicle attributes within each category? Based on a regression of vehicle purchase data from 2008-2016, we found that tax incentives and charging infrastructure significantly influence per capita PEV purchases. Within tax incentives, rebates are generally more effective than tax credits. BEV purchases are more affected by tax incentives than PHEVs. The correlation of public charging and vehicle purchases increases with the battery-only driving range of a PHEV, while decreasing with increasing driving range of BEVs. Results indicate that early investments in charging infrastructure, particularly along highways; tax incentives targeting affordable BEVs and PHEVs with higher battery only range, and better reflection of the environmental cost of owning gasoline vehicles are likely to increase PEV adoption in the US.

No abstract

Carbon taxes and emissions trading systems (ETSs) to limit emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) are increasingly common. At the end of 2015, 17 GHG ETSs were operational in 55 jurisdictions, and 18 jurisdictions collected at least one carbon tax. This paper assesses the performance of carbon taxes and ETSs with respect to environmental effectiveness (reduction of emissions regulated by the instrument), costeffectiveness (marginal abatement cost), economic efficiency, public finance, and administrative issues. Data on emissions subject to carbon taxes are rarely reported. We estimate the taxed emissions for 17 taxes in 12 jurisdictions from 1991 through the end of 2015. All 17 taxes have reduced emissions relative to

A review of global and national energy research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) investments between 2000 and 2018 reveals that global public energy RD&D and cleaner energy RD&D investments dramatically increased, but then plateaued after 2009. In absolute values, nuclear energy has held steady, fossil energy contracted, and clean energy RD&D quadrupled. As a percentage of overall investments, both fossil fuel and nuclear investments contracted during the period. This review compares the energy innovation priorities of the world's largest economies using the metric of public expenditures on energy RD&D. China and India have become important global public investors in energy innovation, now among the top five globally. Priorities set by the Chinese and Indian governments will thus influence new energy technology breakthroughs in the coming years. The US and Chinese governments are now competing for first place in clean energy RD&D, depending on whether or not nuclear and cross-cutting technologies are included. India has dedicated substantial funding to indigenizing nuclear power technologies.Energy RD&D by state-owned enterprises (SOEs) in major emerging economies remains skewed toward fossil fuels and nuclear. Reforming SOE expenditures to move away from fossil fuels could have a major impact on global energy technology trajectories, making a material difference in the quest to decarbonize the energy system.