Regulatory and Mixed Policy Options for Reducing Energy Use and Carbon Emissions

This article discusses non-fiscal policy options to reduce energy demand and the resulting environmental impacts, and it reviews experiences with these options to date. Such policies include accelerating technology development and demonstration, stimulating product demand via procurement policies, applying efficiency standards to information-poor end-use sectors, and encouraging utility energy-efficiency programs. Efforts to implement such measures are underway in several industrialised countries and have begun in developing countries. Increasing energy efficiency is an important area for near-term carbon emission reductions, and a key strategy for cost-effective mitigation of global climate change. However, little of the energy-efficiency potential identified by technical studies will be realised in the absence of policies to reduce barriers to energy-efficiency investments. Performance standards can overcome the lack of information on the part of energy users, while technology procurement helps overcome the view of manufacturers that introducing efficient products is risky. The effects of these policy options on product markets are characterised, showing the synergy between different instruments and their potential to create and transform markets for energy-efficient products, systems and services. The existence of such energy-efficiency markets can stimulate new progress and innovation, providing the conditions in which the continuous process of technical improvement is significantly accelerated. Most policy analysis and discussions regarding climate-change mitigation have centred on various forms of carbon emission taxes and to some extent on tradable emission offsets or permits. This article concludes with an examination of why non-fiscal options are mostly absent from energy-economic models and climate-change policy studies, and we suggest approaches to include them more fully in energy-policy analysis and implementation.     

Joint Implementation Under the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change: Technical and Institutional Challenges

The U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) allows for the joint implementation (JI) of measures to mitigate the emissions of greenhouse gases. The concept of JI refers to the implementation of such measures in one country with partial or full financial and/or technical support from another country, potentially fulfilling some of the supporting country's emission-reduction commitment under the FCCC. At present, all JI transactions are voluntary, and no country has claimed JI credit against existing FCCC commitments. Nevertheless, JI could have important implications for both the economic efficiency and the international equity of the implementation of the FCCC. This paper discusses some of the information needs of JI projects and seeks to clarify some of the common assumptions and arguments about JI. Issues regarding JI are distinguished according to those that are specific to JI and those that apply to JI as well as other types of regimes and transactions. The focus is on the position of developing countries and their potential risks and benefits regarding JI.     

Numerical dating of the Eckfeld maar fossil site, Eifel, Germany: a calibration mark for the Eocene time scale

 Sediments of the Eckfeld maar (Eifel, Germany) bear a well-preserved Eocene fauna and flora. Biostratigraphically, Eckfeld corresponds to the Middle Eocene mammal reference level MP (Mammals Paleogene) 13 of the ELMA (European Land Mammal Age) Geiseltalian. In the maar crater, basalt fragments were drilled, representing explosion crater eruption products. By ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar dating of the basalt, for the first time a direct numerical calibration mark for an Eocene European mammal locality has been established. The Eckfeld basalt inverse isochron date of 44.3±0.4 Ma suggests an age for the Geiseltalian/Robiacian boundary at 44 Ma and, together with the 1995 time scale of Berggren et al., a time span ranging from 49 to 44 Ma for the Geiseltalian and from 44 to 37 Ma for the Robiacian, respectively. Additional ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar dating on a genetically related basalt occurrence close to the maar confirms a period of volcanism of ca. 0.6 m.y. in the Eckfeld area, matching the oldest Eocene volcanic activity of the Hocheifel volcanic field. Received: 27 December 1999 / Accepted in revised form: 6 April 2000