Safeguarding the energy transition against political backlash to carbon markets

1. Jansen, M. et al. Offshore wind competitiveness in mature markets without subsidy. Nat. Energy 5, 614–622 (2020).10.1038/s41560-020-0661-2 ↗

2. World Energy Outlook 2020 (International Energy Agency, 2020).

3. Hall, M. UK government asks how future renewables incentives should work. pv magazine (3 February 2021); https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021/02/03/uk-government-asks-how-future-renewables-incentives-should-work/

4. Das „3-Säulen-Modell“. Konkretisierung der BDEW-Vorschläge für einen Finanzierungsrahmen für Erneuerbare-Energien-Anlagen (Bundesverband der Energie- und Wasserwirtschaft, 2019); https://www.bdew.de/media/documents/Stn_20190531_Positionspapier-Konkretisierung-des-3-Saeulen-Modells.pdf

5. Burtraw, D., Palmer, K. & Kahn, D. A symmetric safety valve. Energy Policy 38, 4921–4932 (2010).10.1016/j.enpol.2010.03.068 ↗

6. Edenhofer, O. et al. Decarbonization and EU ETS Reform: Introducing a Price Floor to drive Low-Carbon Investments (Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change, 2017); https://www.mcc-berlin.net/fileadmin/data/C18_MCC_Publications/Decarbonization_EU_ETS_Reform_Policy_Paper.pdf

7. Borenstein, S., Bushnell, J., Wolak, F. A. & Zaragoza-Watkins, M. Expecting the unexpected: emissions uncertainty and environmental market design. Am. Econ. Rev. 109, 3953–3977 (2019).10.1257/aer.20161218 ↗

8. Rabe, B. G. The durability of carbon cap-and-trade policy. Governance 29, 103–119 (2016).10.1111/gove.12151 ↗

9. Wettestad, J. & Jevnaker, T. Smokescreen politics? Ratcheting up EU emissions trading in 2017. Rev. Policy Res. 36, 635–659 (2019).10.1111/ropr.12345 ↗

10. Pierson, P. Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 94, 251–267 (2000).10.2307/2586011 ↗

11. Béland, D. & Schlager, E. Varieties of policy feedback research: looking backward, moving forward. Policy Stud. J. 47, 184–205 (2019).10.1111/psj.12340 ↗

12. Skogstad, G. Policy feedback and self-reinforcing and self-undermining processes in EU biofuels policy. J. Eur. Public Policy 24, 21–41 (2017).10.1080/13501763.2015.1132752 ↗

13. Jacobs, A. M. & Weaver, R. K. When policies undo themselves: self-undermining feedback as a source of policy change. Governance 28, 441–457 (2015).10.1111/gove.12101 ↗

14. del Río, P. & Mir-Artigues, P. Support for solar PV deployment in Spain: some policy lessons. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16, 5557–5566 (2012).10.1016/j.rser.2012.05.011 ↗

15. Schmid, N., Sewerin, S. & Schmidt, T. S. Explaining advocacy coalition change with policy feedback. Policy Stud. J. 48, 1109–1134 (2020).10.1111/psj.12365 ↗

16. Rubin, J. D. A model of intertemporal emission trading, banking, and borrowing. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 31, 269–286 (1996).10.1006/jeem.1996.0044 ↗

17. Kling, C. & Rubin, J. Bankable permits for the control of environmental pollution. J. Public Econ. 64, 101–115 (1997).10.1016/S0047-2727(96)01600-3 ↗

18. Meckling, J., Kelsey, N., Biber, E. & Zysman, J. Winning coalitions for climate policy. Science 349, 1170–1171 (2015).10.1126/science.aab1336 ↗

19. Rozenberg, J., Vogt-Schilb, A. & Hallegatte, S. Instrument choice and stranded assets in the transition to clean capital. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 100, 102183 (2020).10.1016/j.jeem.2018.10.005 ↗

20. Cook, B. J. Arenas of power in climate change policymaking. Policy Stud. J. 38, 465–486 (2010).10.1111/j.1541-0072.2010.00370.x ↗

21. Salant, S. W. What ails the European Union’s Emissions Trading System? J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 80, 6–19 (2016).10.1016/j.jeem.2016.06.001 ↗

22. Kitzing, L. Risk implications of renewable support instruments: comparative analysis of feed-in tariffs and premiums using a mean–variance approach. Energy 64, 495–505 (2014).10.1016/j.energy.2013.10.008 ↗

23. Kitzing, L. & Weber, C. Support mechanisms for renewables: how risk exposure influences investment incentives. Int. J. Sustain. Energy Plan. Manage. 7, 113–130 (2015).

24. Tietjen, O., Pahle, M. & Fuss, S. Investment risks in power generation: a comparison of fossil fuel and renewable energy dominated markets. Energy Econ. 58, 174–185 (2016).10.1016/j.eneco.2016.07.005 ↗

25. Neuhoff, K., May, N. & Richstein, J. Renewable Energy Policy in the Age of Falling Technology Costs. (Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, 2018); https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.594384.de/dp1746.pdf

26. Ostrovnaya, A., Staffell, I., Donovan, C. & Gross, R. The high cost of electricity price uncertainty. SSRN Electron. J. SSRN Working Paper No. 3588288. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3588288 (2020).10.2139/ssrn.3588288 ↗

27. Schmidt, T. S. Low-carbon investment risks and de-risking. Nat. Clim. Chang. 4, 237–239 (2014).10.1038/nclimate2112 ↗

28. Schmidt, T. S. et al. Adverse effects of rising interest rates on sustainable energy transitions. Nat. Sustain. 2, 879–885 (2019).10.1038/s41893-019-0375-2 ↗

29. Grubb, M. et al. Induced innovation in energy technologies and systems: a review of evidence and potential implications for CO2 mitigation. Environ. Res. Lett. 16, 043007 (2021).10.1088/1748-9326/abde07 ↗

30. Perino, G. New EU ETS Phase 4 rules temporarily puncture waterbed. Nat. Clim. Chang. 8, 262–264 (2018).10.1038/s41558-018-0120-2 ↗

31. Friedrich, M., Fries, S., Pahle, M. & Edenhofer, O. Rules vs. Discretion in Cap-and-Trade Programs: Evidence from the EU Emission Trading System. CESifo Working Paper No. 8637. https://www.cesifo.org/en/publikationen/2020/working-paper/rules-vs-discretion-cap-and-trade-programs-evidence-eu-emission (2020).10.2139/ssrn.3718517 ↗

32. Pahle, M. & Schweizerhof, H. Time for tough love: towards gradual risk transfer to renewables in Germany. Econ. Energy Environ. Policy 5, 117–134 (2016).10.5547/2160-5890.5.2.mpah ↗

33. Egli, F., Steffen, B. & Schmidt, T. S. A dynamic analysis of financing conditions for renewable energy technologies. Nat. Energy 3, 1084–1092 (2018).10.1038/s41560-018-0277-y ↗

34. Egli, F. Renewable energy investment risk: an investigation of changes over time and the underlying drivers. Energy Policy 140, 111428 (2020).10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111428 ↗

35. Kitzing, L., Mitchell, C. & Morthorst, P. E. Renewable energy policies in Europe: converging or diverging? Energy Policy 51, 192–201 (2012).10.1016/j.enpol.2012.08.064 ↗

36. Stokes, L. C. Short Circuiting Policy: Interest Groups and the Battle Over Clean Energy and Climate Policy in the American States (Oxford Univ. Press, 2020).10.1093/oso/9780190074258.001.0001 ↗

37. Fuss, S. et al. A Framework for assessing the performance of cap-and-trade systems: insights from the European Union Emissions Trading System. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 12, 220–241 (2018).10.1093/reep/rey010 ↗

38. Edenhofer, O., Lessmann, K. & Tahri, I. Asset Pricing and the Carbon Beta of Externalities CESifo Working Paper 9269 (2021).10.2139/ssrn.3912379 ↗

39. Nahmmacher, P., Schmid, E., Hirth, L. & Knopf, B. Carpe diem: a novel approach to select representative days for long-term power system modeling. Energy 112, 430–442 (2016).10.1016/j.energy.2016.06.081 ↗

40. Osorio, S., Pietzcker, R. C. & Tietjen, O. Documentation of LIMES-EU—A Long-term Electricity System Model for Europe (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, 2020); https://www.pik-potsdam.de/research/transformation-pathways/models/limes/limes-documentation-april-2020

41. Zeyringer, M., Price, J., Fais, B., Li, P.-H. & Sharp, E. Designing low-carbon power systems for Great Britain in 2050 that are robust to the spatiotemporal and inter-annual variability of weather. Nat. Energy 3, 395–403 (2018).10.1038/s41560-018-0128-x ↗

42. Isik, M., Dodder, R. & Kaplan, P. O. Transportation emissions scenarios for New York City under different carbon intensities of electricity and electric vehicle adoption rates. Nat. Energy 6, 92–104 (2021).10.1038/s41560-020-00740-2 ↗

43. Pye, S., Li, F. G. N., Price, J. & Fais, B. Achieving net-zero emissions through the reframing of UK national targets in the post-Paris Agreement era. Nat. Energy 2, 17024 (2017).10.1038/nenergy.2017.24 ↗

44. E3Modelling. PRIMES Model. Version 2018. Detailed Model Description. https://e3modelling.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/The-PRIMES-MODEL-2018.pdf (2018).

45. Friedrich, M., Mauer, E.-M., Pahle, M. & Tietjen, O. From Fundamentals to Financial Assets: The Evolution of Understanding Price Formation in the EU ETS. ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics Working Paper. https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/216726 (2020).

46. Hintermann, B. Pass-through of CO2 emission costs to hourly electricity prices in Germany. J. Assoc. Environ. Resour. Econ. 3, 857–891 (2016).

47. Mosquera-López, S. & Nursimulu, A. Drivers of electricity price dynamics: comparative analysis of spot and futures markets. Energy Policy 126, 76–87 (2019).10.1016/j.enpol.2018.11.020 ↗

48. Pahle, M. et al. Safeguarding the energy transition against political backlash to carbon markets—figure raw data (Zenodo, 2021); https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.512839110.5281/zenodo.5128391 ↗