Linking Russia with the European and global greenhouse gas emissions trading markets: three paths for greening the Russian assigned amount under the Kyoto Protocol

This article examines possibilities for linkage between the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) and Russia, with a view to enhancing cooperation on a broader scale than the project-based approaches that have been tested thus far. Three paths for possible EU-Russia linkage are presented by which the Russian Assigned Amount under the Kyoto Protocol can be greened in order to stimulate emissions trading: 1. Joint implementation—reductions earned via individual projects in Russia; 2. Greened allowances or green investment schemes; and 3. Linked cap-and-trade systems, in which a Russian domestic emissions trading system would link with the European Union Emissions Trading System. The authors conclude that the third option, emissions trading through linked domestic emissions trading systems, offers the best opportunities at the lowest transaction costs. The authors discuss useful innovative instruments like call options and slip level arrangements on government-to-government and business-to-business levels.

Emission inventory on company level: lessons from Russia

Developing a transparent,accurate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissionsinventory is the first step toward buildingan effective GHG management system. Todate, GHG inventories have been conductedprimarily at national levels. Theinternationally accepted inventorymethodology developed by theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC) is oriented to countrywideinventories. The electricity company RAOUESR is the largest single corporateemitter of GHG in the Russian Federation. The company is responsible for about 1/3 ofRussia's CO₂ emissions; RAO's fossil fuelemissions are comparable to the fossil fuelemissions of the United Kingdom. The GHGinventory prepared by RAO is the first suchcorporate emissions inventory undertaken ina non-OECD country. In this article wepresent a detailed independent examinationof the methodology RAO applied for theinventory. We identify the most importantsources of uncertainty and we estimate theuncertainty. The main conclusion of theindependent review is that the methodologyutilized by RAO and the informationsupporting the methodology are reliable andpresent a reasonably accurate company-widepicture of RAO's CO₂ emissions. The shareof other greenhouse gases is negligiblysmall and we did not focus on this fractionof RAO's GHG emissions. As a next step, RAOmay wish to conduct more precisefacility-by-facility inventories in orderto create a robust GHG emission managementsystem.