Cash for Carbon: Carbon Markets and Regulatory Alternatives

1 / 18
About This Presentation
Title:

Cash for Carbon: Carbon Markets and Regulatory Alternatives

Description:

If emitters cannot meet cap internally, buy credits externally ... Florida in the process of examining / adopting CA CAFE standards for cars. Is this a good thing? ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:32
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 19
Provided by: stlucie

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Cash for Carbon: Carbon Markets and Regulatory Alternatives


1
Cash for Carbon Carbon Markets and Regulatory
Alternatives
  • The Florida Landscape
  • Carbon Costs and Opportunities
  • Michael D. Wallander
  • Greenberg Traurig, LLP

2
Disclaimer
  • Please note that these remarks are solely my
    personal views, and do not necessarily reflect
    the views of my employer, Greenberg Traurig,
    including any individual shareholders or clients
    of the firm.
  • Moreover, my statements are not intended to
    serve as and should not be construed as legal
    advice.

3
What Is A Carbon Market?
  • A market-based method of regulating carbon
    emissions (e.g., as compared to command and
    control regulation or a carbon tax)
  • Basics of a Cap and Trade Regulatory Scheme
  • Emitters Subject to Cap on Emissions
  • Cap can apply economy wide (e.g. Kyoto) or to
    discrete economic sectors like power,
    transportation, manufacturing, etc. (e.g., RGGI
    power sector).
  • If reduce emissions below the cap, entitled to
    Trade excess as credits
  • If emitters cannot meet cap internally, buy
    credits externally
  • Credits can also be created from recognized
    projects that reduce, avoid or sequester carbon
    emissions.

4
Sources of Direct U.S. GHG Emissions
5
Market Voluntary or Mandated
  • Mandated Markets
  • RGGI electricity production in Northeast US
    states
  • Kyoto International program to reduce global
    carbon emissions
  • Functions as a market but also as a subsidy and
    political mechanism1
  • United States signed but has not ratified
  • Will expire in 2012 if not renewed.
  • Voluntary Markets and Standards
  • Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) voluntary
    participation but contractually binding
  • Voluntary OTC Offset Market
  • Numerous Voluntary Standards (e.g., Voluntary
    Carbon Standard (VCS), Climate Community
    Biodiversity (CCB), Voluntary Offset Standard
    (VOS), Gold Standard, etc.)
  • In US, primary driver of voluntary trading is
    pre-compliance with prospective legislation
  • Credits from forestry renewable energy projects
    account for nearly 70 of all voluntary offsets
    (Ecosystem Marketplace 2007)
  • See Michael Wara, Measuring the Clean
    Development Mechanisms Performance and
    Potential, Working Paper 56 (July 2006)

6
Carbon Offset Requirements
  • Both regulated and voluntary markets generally
    require that a carbon offset credit be
  • Real
  • Measurable and Independently Verifiable
  • Additional
  • Permanent
  • Enforceable
  • Reduce / Avoid / Sequester 1 ton of CO2 (or
    equivalent) GHG emissions
  • Unique (no double counting)
  • Transparent
  • The devils in the details Stringency of these
    elements differs with each program

7
The Florida Landscape
  • Most direct emissions in Florida come from
    electric utilities (50) and transportation (41)
    (Source FDEP)
  • In 2004, Florida was second only to Texas in
    emissions from producing electricity
  • In 2004, Florida was third behind only California
    and Texas in emissions from transportation
  • Florida in the process of examining / adopting CA
    CAFE standards for cars
  • Is this a good thing?
  • Florida has potential for a wide range of carbon
    offset projects (solar, wind power, agriculture,
    land fill/wastewater gases, land use, green
    building, mass transit programs, etc.)
  • Query Can Florida produce a net surplus of
    offset credits?

8
CO2 Emissions from Electricity Production (Top
25 States Source EPA)
9
CO2 Emissions From Transportation(Top 25 States
Source EPA)
10
McKinsey Global Supply Curve (a Global
Opportunity Map)
11
Possible Project Types (per federal
Warner-Lieberman proposed legislation)
  • Agricultural sequestration and management
  • Altered tillage practices
  • Winter cover cropping, continuous cropping and
    other means that increase biomass return to soil
  • Conversion of cropland to rangeland or grassland
    (if in non-forest use for prior 10 years)
  • Reduction in nitrogen fertilizer use
  • Reduction in carbon emissions from organic soils
  • Land Use and Forestry
  • Afforestation, reforestation or forest management
  • Manure Management and Disposal
  • Other action that result in avoidance or
    reduction of GHG emissions
  • Does this catch-all phrase allow for carbon
    offsets from building efficiency, renewable
    energy, etc.?

12
Developing a Project Design Document (PDD)
  • Determine project baseline and timeline
  • Determine project scope and methodology
  • Additionality (simple definition) the project
    would not have occurred under a business as
    usual scenario without carbon offset credits
  • Limit leakage shift CO2 emissions from
    covered to uncovered sources
  • Subtract / Net-Out All Fugitive Emissions
  • Submit PDD for Approval / Validation /
    Registration
  • Monitor ongoing compliance with PDD
  • Verification (Audit / Management System)
  • Certification
  • Issuance

13
Key Contractual Issues
  • Define what is to be sold (CERs, CFIs, VERs,
    VCUs, etc.)
  • Determine and identify ownership of credits
  • Describe when and how credits to be sold and
    transferred allocate market risk structure
    unwind terms
  • Address short and long term verification program
  • Address project risk management quantify and
    allow for shortfalls / non-delivery / specific
    country and credit risks/ change of laws/ force
    majeure
  • Provide for warranties/ indemnities/ insurance
    coverages
  • Identify dispute resolution process/ venue /
    choice of law

14
Sale of Credits
  • Credits can only be used in year they mature / no
    carry-overs
  • Credits can, however, be sold on a spot, forward,
    option or derivative basis
  • Risk that forward/option carbon credits can not
    be delivered
  • Risk of non-delivery, etc. results in discount
    for present value
  • Significant administrative expense to achieve two
    primary goals
  • Establish the carbon offset credit (reduction in
    emissions)
  • Make it fungible / tradable / useable by third
    parties
  • How much money (per ton)? (Expressed in Euros
    vs. US Dollars)
  • EUAs (ETS) 22 - 24 (33 - 36)
  • CERs 10 - 17 (15 - 26)
  • VERs (Voluntary Mkts) 1 - 10 (2 - 15)

15
Securitization
  • Securitization is the transformation of an
    illiquid asset into a tradable security
  • Most emission reduction contracts are bilateral
  • Emission reduction contracts can be pooled by
    assigning them to an aggregator
  • To be attractive and available for pooling, the
    emission reduction contracts should be
    homogenous, stable, transferable and unencumbered.

16
Status of the Law
  • CFTC
  • Emission allowances are an exempt commercial
    market (ECM) under the Commodity Exchange Act.
  • Trading is still subject to anti-manipulation and
    antifraud provisions.
  • CCX subsidiary, the Chicago Climate Futures
    Exchange (CCFE), is registered and approved as a
    designated contract market (DCM), which gives the
    CFTC oversight authority.
  • FTC
  • Currently examining trends in marketing carbon
    offsets and RECs
  • the nature of these commodities
  • product marketing
  • consumer perception of carbon offset claims
  • potential market problems (double counting,
    etc.)
  • third-party certification and standards setting
  • the issue of additionality and potential for
    deception
  • state of substantiation and
  • the need for additional FTC guidance.
  • Proposed Legislation
  • Federal Warner-Lieberman Bill
  • Florida Governor Crists Action Team on Energy
    and Climate Change Phase 2 Report

17
Three Recommendations For Florida Regulators
  • Avoid governmental action that mandates a
    stringent baseline (e.g., strict building code
    stds.) because it frustrates potential
    development of market mechanisms
  • Broad-based, objective project standards,
    streamlined regulation and simplified
    verification would reduce up front costs and
    result in more feasible projects
  • Create competition by allowing importation of
    offsets from out of state (including other
    countries) - this reduces economic costs and
    prepares Florida for integration with national /
    supranational market

18
Thank You!
  • Always happy and available to answer questions
  • Michael D. Wallander, Esq.
  • GREENBERG TRAURIG, P.A.
  • 777 South Flagler Drive, Suite 300 East
  • West Palm Beach, FL 33401
  • Telephone (561) 650-7942
  • Email WallanderM_at_gtlaw.com
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)