The impact of CO2 emissions trading on firm profits and market prices

By R. Smale, M. Hartley, Cameron Hepburn, J. Ward, Michael Grubb. 2006

339 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6becf5436087bcdc477ec3d2c423b3bac0bec1d8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

Citations in the corpus

Price and Market Behavior in Phase II of the EU ETS: A Review of the Literature (2014, background): “…contain the full carbon (opportunity) cost (Fell 2010; Sijm et al. 2010; Fell et al. 2014), and the same appears to be true for other sectors (Smale et al. 2006, de Bruyn et al. 2010).6 The combination of free allocation 6 Note that cost pass-through is not a sign of market failure but…”
On the empirical content of carbon leakage criteria in the EU emissions trading scheme (2014, background): “These studies also show that free permit allocation offsets negative profit impacts in most industries, and can even lead to overcompensation (Smale et al., 2006).”
Interaction of European Carbon Trading and Energy Prices (2007, background): “…but also to other countries and regions which are considering the introduction of a similar scheme, its progress has been subject to intense scrutiny, even before substantial empirical evidence has accumulated (European Commission, 2005; Smale et al. 2006, Sijm et al. 2006, Bentz and Trück 2006).”
On the Economics of a Carbon Tax for the United States (2019, neutral): “Regression analysis finds that the carbon tax played a significant role in explaining this improvement in emissions intensity. The electric, chemical, and motor vehicles sectors had the highest improvements in emissions intensity while paper and pulp had the lowest improvements in emissions intensi”
Emissions trading: lessons learnt from the 1st phase of the EU ETS and prospects for the 2nd phase (2006, background): “…concerns in cases of high trade exposure and very price-sensitive demand, in aggregate, most sectors, including cement, iron and steel, refining, and pulp and paper, have the potential to profit from free allocation on aggregate sector levels, by adjusting output and pricing (Smale et al., 2006).”
European Emission Trading Scheme and competitiveness: A case study on the iron and steel industry (2008, background): “Conversely most of these studies do not address the second aspect of competitiveness, i.e., profitability, one exception being Smale et al. (2006) who finds a positive impact.”
EU emissions trading and the cement sector: a spatial competition analysis (2008, background): “…of this limitation (and various others which we discuss in Section 6), we believe that our model contributes to a better understanding of the issues by introducing transportation, plant ownership and capacity constraints into the Cournot framework developed by Oxera (2004) and Smale et al. (2006).”
Profiting from Regulation: Evidence from the European Carbon Market (2013, methodology): “Smale et al. (2006) simulate several industries under a carbon cap in Europe using an assumption of Cournot competition.”
Capital market response to emission rights returns: Evidence from the European power sector☆ (2009, background): “Even though the EU Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) is the world's largestmarket-based environmental regulation, only a few studies have so far tried to quantify its economic effects (e. g. Sijm et al., 2006; Smale et al., 2006; Demailly and Quirion, 2008).”