It is premature to include non-CO2 effects of aviation in emission trading schemes

The recent G8 Gleneagles climate statement signed on 8 July 2005 specifically mentions a determination to lessen the impact of aviation on climate [Gleneagles, 2005. The Gleneagles communique: climate change, energy and sustainable development. http://www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/PostG8_Gleneagles_Communique.pdf]. In January 2005 the European Union Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) commenced operation as the largest multi-country, multi-sector ETS in the world, albeit currently limited only to CO2 emissions. At present the scheme makes no provision for aircraft emissions. However, the UK Government would like to see aircraft included in the ETS and plans to use its Presidencies of both the EU and G8 in 2005 to implement these schemes within the EU and perhaps internationally. Non-CO2 effects have been included in some policy-orientated studies of the impact of aviation but we argue that the inclusion of such effects in any such ETS scheme is premature; we specifically argue that use of the Radiative Forcing Index for comparing emissions from different sources is inappropriate and that there is currently no metric for such a purpose that is likely to enable their inclusion in the near future. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The financial and environmental performance of firms exposed to the EU Emissions Trading Scheme

This thesis is an empirical-based study of the European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) and its implications in terms of corporate environmental and financial performance. The novelty of this study includes the extended scope of the data coverage, as most previous studies have examined only the power sector. The use of verified emissions data of ETS-regulated firms as the environmental compliance measure and as the potential differentiating criteria that concern the valuation of EU ETS-exposed firms in the stock market is also an original aspect of this study. The study begins in Chapter 2 by introducing the background information on the emission trading system (ETS), which focuses on (i) the adoption of ETS as an environmental management instrument and (ii) the adoption of ETS by the European Union as one of its central climate policies. Chapter 3 surveys four databases that provide carbon emissions data in order to determine the most suitable source of the data to be used in the later empirical chapters. The first empirical chapter, which is also Chapter 4 of this thesis, investigates the determinants of the emissions compliance performance of the EU ETS-exposed firms through constructing the best possible performance ratio from verified emissions data and self-configuring models for a panel regression analysis. Chapter 5 examines the impacts on the EU ETS-exposed firms in terms of their equity valuation with customised portfolios and multi-factor market models. The research design takes into account the emissions allowance (EUA) price as an additional factor, as it has the most direct association with the EU ETS to control for the exposure. The final empirical Chapter 6 takes the investigation one step further, by specifically testing the degree of ETS exposure facing different sectors with sector-based portfolios and an extended multi-factor market model. The findings from the emissions performance ratio analysis show that the business model of firms significantly influences emissions compliance, as the capital intensity has a positive association with the increasing emissions-to-emissions cap ratio. Furthermore, different sectors show different degrees of sensitivity towards the determining factors. The production factor influences the performance ratio of the Utilities sector, but not the Energy or Materials sectors. The results show that the capital intensity has a more profound influence on the utilities sector than on the materials sector. With regard to the financial performance impact, ETS-exposed firms as aggregate portfolios experienced a substantial underperformance during the 2001–2004 period, but not in the operating period of 2005–2011. The results of the sector-based portfolios show again the differentiating effect of the EU ETS on sectors, as one sector is priced indifferently against its benchmark, three sectors see a constant underperformance, and three sectors have altered outcomes.

Transport impacts on atmosphere and climate: metrics

The transport sector emits a wide variety of gases and aerosols, with distinctly different characteristics which influence climate directly and indirectly via chemical and physical processes. Tools that allow these emissions to be placed on some kind of common scale in terms of their impact on climate have a number of possible uses such as: in agreements and emission trading schemes; when considering potential trade-offs between changes in emissions resulting from technological or operational developments; and/or for comparing the impact of different environmental impacts of transport activities. Many of the non-CO2 emissions from the transport sector are short-lived substances, not currently covered by the Kyoto Protocol. There are formidable difficulties in developing metrics and these are particularly acute for such short-lived species. One difficulty concerns the choice of an appropriate structure for the metric (which may depend on, for example, the design of any climate policy it is intended to serve) and the associated value judgements on the appropriate time periods to consider; these choices affect the perception of the relative importance of short- and long-lived species. A second difficulty is the quantification of input parameters (due to underlying uncertainty in atmospheric processes). In addition, for some transport-related emissions, the values of metrics (unlike the gases included in the Kyoto Protocol) depend on where and when the emissions are introduced into the atmosphere – both the regional distribution and, for aircraft, the distribution as a function of altitude, are important. In this assessment of such metrics, we present Global Warming Potentials (GWPs) as these have traditionally been used in the implementation of climate policy. We also present Global Temperature Change Potentials (GTPs) as an alternative metric, as this, or a similar metric may be more appropriate for use in some circumstances. We use radiative forcings and lifetimes from the literature to derive GWPs and GTPs for the main transport-related emissions, and discuss the uncertainties in these estimates. We find large variations in metric (GWP and GTP) values for NOx, mainly due to the dependence on location of emissions but also because of inter-model differences and differences in experimental design. For aerosols we give only global-mean values due to an inconsistent picture amongst available studies regarding regional dependence. The uncertainty in the presented metric values reflects the current state of understanding; the ranking of the various components with respect to our confidence in the given metric values is also given. While the focus is mostly on metrics for comparing the climate impact of emissions, many of the issues are equally relevant for stratospheric ozone depletion metrics, which are also discussed.

Progress report on longitudinal and cross-sectional study of carbon disclosure strategies: evidence from UK listed companies

Global warming has attracted attention from all over the world and led to the concern about carbon emission. Kyoto Protocol, as the first major international regulatory emission trading scheme, was introduced in 1997 and outlined the strategies for reducing carbon emission (Ratnatunga et al., 2011). As the increased interest in carbon reduction the Protocol came into force in 2005, currently there are already 191 nations ratifying the Protocol(UNFCCC, 2012). Under the cap-and-trade schemes, each company has its carbon emission target. When company’s carbon emission exceeds the target the company will either face fines or buy emission allowance from other companies. Thus unlike most of the other social and environmental issues carbon emission could trigger cost for companies in introducing low-emission equipment and systems and also emission allowance cost when they emit more than their targets. Despite the importance of carbon emission to companies, carbon emission reporting is still operating under unregulated environment and companies are only required to disclose when it is material either in value or in substances (Miller, 2005, Deegan and Rankin, 1997). Even though there is still an increase in the volume of carbon emission disclosures in company’s financial reports and stand-alone social and environmental reports to show their concern of the environment and also their social responsibility (Peters and Romi, 2009), the motivations behind corporate carbon emission disclosures and whether carbon disclosures have impact on corporate environmental reputation and financial performance have not yet to explore. The problems with carbon emission lie on both the financial side and non-financial side of corporate governance. On one hand corporate needs to spend money in reducing carbon emission or paying penalties when they emit more than allowed. On the other hand as the public are more interested in environmental issues than before carbon emission could also impact on the image of corporate regarding to its environmental performance. The importance of carbon emission issue are beginning to be recognized by companies from different industries as one of the critical issues in supply chain management (Lee, 2011) and 80% of companies analysed are facing carbon risks resulting from emissions in the companies’ supply chain as shown in a study conducted by the Investor Responsibility Research Centre Institute for Corporate Responsibility (IRRCI) and over 80% of the companies analysed found that the majority of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission are from electricity and other direct suppliers (Trucost, 2009). The review of extant literature shows the increased importance of carbon emission issues and the gap in the study of carbon reporting and disclosures and also the study which links corporate environmental reputation and corporate financial performance with carbon reporting (Lohmann, 2009a, Ratnatunga and Balachandran, 2009, Bebbington and Larrinaga-Gonzalez, 2008). This study would focus on investigating the current status of UK carbon emission disclosures, the determinant factors of corporate carbon disclosure, and the relationship between carbon emission disclosures and corporate environmental reputation and financial performance of UK listed companies from 2004-2012 and explore the explanatory power of classical disclosure theories.