Publications

The ETS: a residual market for carbon abatement in need of a structural reform

18 March 2012 - Carbon Trends - By : Fabien ROQUES

The EU ETS has moved from centerstage to the backseat of European decarbonization policy. Reform is needed in order to provide clarity on the long term emission reduction objectives (for phase 4 beyond 2020), but most importantly, to introduce some form of allowance supply management and thereby reduce the risk of future policy intervention.
Following the deterioration of the European macroeconomic outlook in the summer 2011, carbon prices have declined to levels below 10 €/tCO2. This initiated a political debate on whether the ETS should be reformed to bring carbon prices back into a higher range that would be more supportive of the European decarbonization agenda.
Let us first put things straight. The ETS market is working well and the current low carbon price simply reveals that the weak economic outlook and recent energy market developments have reduced the cost of complying with the predefined emission caps. If policy makers want to see a higher carbon price, they should commit to a more stringent cap for phase 4. But some argue that this would not be sufficient, given the lack of credibility of long term policy engagements and the short time horizon of many market participants. Hence the idea of an immediate tightening of the market through a set aside of allowances in phase 3 as part of the ongoing discussions on a new Energy Efficiency Directive.

The ETS: a residual market for carbon abatement in need of a structural reform Download
To learn more
  • 12/12/2025 Blog post Foreword of the week
    Paris +10: France and Europe must step up on climate – to protect our security, sovereignty, competitiveness, and public finances

    How distant December 12, 2015 now seems. All delegations at COP21 had then rallied behind Laurent Fabius’s little green hammer. Ten years later, the trend is closer to backlash. Climate action is now often portrayed in the public debate as too costly, because it requires major investment. Ineffective, since our share of global emissions is small. Unfair, because it cuts into purchasing power. Too divisive, supported only by part of the electorate. Too late, since keeping the planet below +2°C of warming now seems out of reach. Arguments that are partly true—yet require substantial nuance. 

  • 12/11/2025 Blog post
    Climate finance at COP30: Progress, pitfalls, persistent challenges and the path ahead

    A few weeks ago, COP30 concluded in Belém with all parties agreeing on a “global mobilization” (or mutirão) against climate change, proving that multilateralism remains a viable path for action, despite strong geopolitical and economic headwinds. However, Belém delivered underwhelming results: no roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels –despite a powerful push from President Lula, rallying over 80 countries, a lack of concrete decisions on deforestation –disappointing for an “Amazon COP”, and mixed results on the global goal on adaptation, among other outcomes.  

  • 12/05/2025 Foreword of the week
    Maintaining the 2035 target: Ensuring a viable future for Europe’s automotive industry

    In the run up to the publication of the European Commission’s proposals for an automotive package on 10 December, car manufactures have stepped up the calls to relax the CO2 standards and the 2035 phase-out of new combustion-engine vehicles by including some flexibilities. They highlight the challenges the industry has faced in recent years, growing competitive pressure from China, and insufficient demand for electric vehicles in Europe as reasons for the sector needing more time for the transition required to meet the targets.

See all publications
Press contact Amélie FRITZ Head of Communication and press relations Email
Subscribe to our mailing list :
I register !
Subscribe to our newsletter
Once a week, receive all the information on climate economics
I register !
Fermer