2019年全球排放交易狀況報告信息圖表.pdf

Status Report 2019EMISSIONS TRADING WORLDWIDEInfographicsInternational Carbon Action Partnership2From Local to Supranational27 jurisdictions are implementing 20 ETSs across scales1/8of the global population lives under an ETS in force.Jurisdictions making up 37of global GHG emissions are covered by an ETS8 of global GDP are using emissions trading7Cities4Countries 1Supranational 15Provinces / States3EMISSIONS TRADING WORLDWIDEThe state of play of cap-and-trade in 2019The ICAP ETS world map depicts emissions trading systems currently in force, scheduled or under consideration. There are now 20 systems covering 27 jurisdic-tions with an ETS in force. Another six jurisdictions are putting in place their sys-tems that could be operating in the next few years, including China and Mexico. 12 jurisdictions are also considering the role an ETS can play in their climate change policy mix, including Chile, Thailand and Vietnam.A regularly updated, interactive version of the ICAP ETS map with detailed ina-tion on all systems is available at in forceETS scheduledETS consideredBrazilChileMexico concluded its ETS simulation in 2018 and is developing rules for a pilot ETS.Colombia adopted a law outlining provisions for a potential national ETS.California completed regulations for its post-2020 program design, following the re bill passed in 2017.QuébecMassachusettsNew JerseyVirginiaThe RGGI carbon market looks set to expand with the re-entry of New Jersey and the inclusion of Virginia.Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative RGGIOregonWashingtonIndonesiaIn the second phase of the Korean ETS, benchmarking has been ex-panded, auctioning has been intro-duced and international offsets are now allowed in the carbon market.With the responsibility of ETS transferred to the new Ministry of Ecology and Environment, China continues to develop the market in-frastructure for its national ETS and prepares for market simulation. Beijing Chongqing Fujian Guangdong Hubei Shanghai Shenzhen TianjinThe res of the NZ ETS are taking shape this year, with auctioning, a new cost containment instrument and a coordinated decision process for setting unit supply being developed. The government will also consider whether agriculture should enter the system.Republic of KoreaJapanTurkeyRussiaThe Market Stability Reserve started operation at the start of 2019 addressing the allowance surplus and improving the sys-tem’s resilience to major shocks.European UnionSwitzerlandChinese PilotsTokyo in fact, this is rarely the case due to limits like inclusion thresholds. In addition, not all sub-sectors, gasses, or processes of a given sector may be covered. The respective factsheets provide more ination on system coverage. 2 – Detailed definitions of each sector are provided in the disclaimer.The graphic shows sectors types of economic activity included in emissions trad-ing across all systems in force, as well as the point at which those emissions are regulated. Only sectors covered by at least one ETS are included.1,2* SECTOR COVERED UPSTREAMPOWERDOMESTICAVIATIONINDUSTRYWASTETRANSPORTBUILDINGSFORESTRYSectorsEU ETS*********SectorsSWITZERLANDKAZAKHSTAN CALIFORNIAQUéBECRGGIMASSACHUSETTS NOVA SCOTIANEW ZEALANDREPUBLIC OF KOREATOKYOSAITAMACHINA BEIJINGCHONGQINGFUJIANGUANGDONGHUBEI SHANGHAISHENZHENTIANJIN6DIFFERENT SHAPES OF CAP-AND-TRADEA comparative look at key metrics from carbon marketsCARBON PRICEThe average price for allowances across 2018, for one metric ton of CO2e emissions in USDCAP TRAJECTORYAverage annual rate of decline in newly available allowances between 2016 and 2020 in COVERAGEPercentage of jurisdiction s emissions covered under the system in 10010025 4SHARE OF ALLOWANCES NOT ALLOCATED FOR FREEProportion of allowances that is not allocated for free, but must be acquired either at auction or otherwise in RGGI 3.22WCI 3.18EU ETS 1.86KETS 0.54NZ ETS N.A.WCI 80KETS 70NZ ETS 51EU ETS 40RGGI 18RGGI 100NZ ETS 76EU ETS 57WCI 53KETS 3KETS 20.62EU ETS 18.76NZ ETS 15.71WCI 14.91RGGI 4.87This graphic shows five well-established systems along four key metrics. The cap reduction pathway indicates the average yearly decline between 2016 and 2020 in the number of allowances. The coverage shows the share of the jurisdiction’s econ-omy that falls under the ETS. The carbon price is the average allowance price per metric ton of CO2across 2018 in each of the systems. The share of allowances des-ignates allowances that are not allocated for free, e.g. those that must be acquired in auctions.EU ETS European Emissions Trading SystemKETS Korean Emissions Trading SystemNZ ETS New Zealand Emissions Trading SchemeRGGI Regional Greenhouse Gas InitiativeWCI Western Climate Initiative720172016 2018All values in million USDAUCTIONING REVENUEFunds raised by emissions trading systemsAuctioning allowances can generate public revenue that can be used in different ways depending on the priorities of the jurisdiction. Jurisdictions have tended to use auctioning revenue to fund additional climate programs, including energy efficiency and renewable energy programs. Auctioning revenue has also helped disadvantaged and low-income groups. The amount of revenue generated depends on many factors, including the size of the jurisdiction, the ETS coverage, the number of auctioned allowances and the carbon price. By the end of 2018, systems worldwide have raised over USD 57 billion, with rev-enue spent on different purposes such as renewable energy, innovation, compensation for disadvan-taged groups, and the general budget. QUéBECEUSWITZERLANDCALIFORNIA RGGI 64216,747 53,0182395,00010,00015,00020,0004456,234 51,819 1983364,193490126757.3billionin auction revenue.By the end of 2018,systems raised a total of8GROWING STABILITYThe spread and diversification of market stability instrumentsThis graphic shows the different types of market stability instruments operating in emissions trading systems around the world. These come into play when allowance prices or the number of allowances in circulation go below or above a certain level.200810010 550number of instrumentsnumber of instruments2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015California Page 2 Nahil Naseer on UnsplashDisclaimerThis report was prepared by the ICAP Secretariat. The findings and opinions expressed in this report are the sole responsibility of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect the views of ICAP or its members. Dupli-cation, processing, distribution or any of commercialization of such material beyond the scope of the respective copyright law requires the prior written consent of its author or creator.The data used in this report reflects the global state of play at the time of writing in March 2019. Although the ination contained in the report was assembled with the utmost care, updated and/or additional ination may have been released by the time of printing, the ICAP Secretariat cannot be held liable for the timeliness, correctness, or completeness of the ination provided. For any corrections, additions or other comments on the content of this report, including relevant citations, please contact the ICAP Secretariat at . IMPRINT