Local Utilities Under the EU Emission Trading Scheme: Innovation Impacts on Electricity Generation Portfolios

  • Katrin Ostertag
  • Nele Glienke
  • Karoline Rogge
  • Dorothea Jansen
  • Ulrike Stoll
  • Sven Barnekow
Part of the Sustainability and Innovation book series (SUSTAINABILITY)


In January 2005, the EU wide emission trading scheme (EU ETS) for large stationary emitters of CO2 started in its then 25 Member States. The general objective of this novel economic instrument is to help the EU cost-efficiently achieve its Kyoto commitment of reducing its greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by −8% by 2008–2012 (compared to 1990) and future – possibly more stringent – GHG reduction goals. With a view to the scale of long-term emission reduction requirements, climate protection innovations will have to play a major role. It is therefore of utmost importance to understand how the EU ETS influences activities in these technologies.


Allocation Rule Emission Trading Scheme Carbon Market Innovation Effect Local Utility 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the VW foundation (grant number AZ II/80 547) for carrying out this study.


  1. Anger N, Braun M, Duckat R, Santarius T, Schmid S, Schüle R (2005) Makroökonomische Wirkungen des Emissionshandels. Die Einführung von Emissionshandelssystemen als sozial-ökologischer Transformationsprozess. Hintergrundpapier I/05, JET-SET, WuppertalGoogle Scholar
  2. Arens M, Pfluger B, Bradke H, Eichhammer W, Fleiter T, Jochem E, Klobasa M et al (2009) Rationelle Energieverwendung. BWK Das Energie Fachmagazin 4:148–155Google Scholar
  3. Betz R, Eichhammer W, Schleich J (2004) Designing national allocation plans for EU emission trading - a first analysis of the outcome. Energy Environ 15(3):375–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Betz R, Rogge K Schleich J (2005a) Die Innovationswirkungen der Allokationsregeln im Treibhausgasemissionsrechtehandel. In: Edler J (Hrsg.) Politikbenchmarking – Nachfrageorientierte Innovationspolitik, TAB-Arbeitsbericht 99, Fraunhofer ISI, Karlsruhe, Kap. 4.5.2, S. 268–286Google Scholar
  5. Betz R, Rogge K, Schleich J (2005b) In: Umweltministerium Baden-Württemberg (ed) Flexible instrumente im Klimaschutz. Emissionsrechtehandel, joint implementation, clean development mechanism. Eine Anleitung für Unternehmen. Umweltministerium Baden-Württemberg, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  6. Betz R, Rogge K, Schleich J (2006) EU emissions trading: an early analysis of national allocation plans for 2008–2012. Climate Policy 6(4):361–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cames M (2007) Emissions trading and innovation incentives in the German electricity industry – an empirical investigation. Presentation in Berlin, 27/28 Nov 2007Google Scholar
  8. Cames M, Weidlich A (2006) Emissions trading and innovation in the German electricity industry. In: Antes R, Hansjürgens B, Letmathe P (Hrsg) Emissions trading and business. Proceedings of a workshop held in Wittenberg, Germany. Springer Physica Verlag, Heidelberg, 11–14 Nov 2003Google Scholar
  9. Creditreform e.V (2006) Marketing-DVD Marcus DVD – Marketingdatenbank Update 65/Juli 2006. Creditreform e.v. / Bureau van Dijk Neuss FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
  10. DEHSt (2005) Implementation of emissions trading in the EU: national allocation plans of all EU states. DEHSt, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  11. Edler J, Betz R, Rogge K, Schleich J et al (2007) Nachfrageorientierte innovationspolitik. Benchmarking-Studie für den Deutschen Bundestag, TAB-Arbeitsbericht, KarlsruheGoogle Scholar
  12. European Commission (2006) Community Independent Transaction Log (CITL). Accessed 6 Apr 2010
  13. European Commission (2007) National Allocation Plans: Second Phase (2008–2012). Accessed 1 Aug 2011
  14. Gagelmann F, Frondel M (2005) The impact of emission trading on innovation - Science fiction or reality? Eur Environ 15:203–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gagelmann F, Hansjürgens B (2002) Climate protection through tradable permits: the EU proposal for a CO2 emissions trading system in Europe. Eur Environ 12:185–202, gleichzeitig UFZ-Diskussionspapier 1/2002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Geels FW (2002) Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study. Res Policy 31(8–9):1257–1274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hoffmann V (2007) EU ETS and investment decisions: the case of the German electricity industry. Eur Manage J 25(6):464–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hoffmann VH, Trautmann T, Schneider M (2008) A taxonomy for regulatory uncertainty—application to the European emission trading scheme. Environ Sci Policy 11(8):712–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hoffmann VH, Trautmann T, Hamprecht J (2009) Regulatory uncertainty: A reason to postpone investments? Not necessarily. J Manage Stud 46(7):1227–1253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jaffe AB, Newell RG, Stavins RN (2002) Environmental policy and technological change. Environ Resour Econ 22:41–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jansen D, Barnekow S, Stoll U (2007) Innovationsstrategien von Stadtwerken – Lokale Stromversorger zwischen Liberalisierungsdruck und Nachhaltigkeitszielen. FÖV Discussion Papers 41, FÖV, SpeyerGoogle Scholar
  22. Markard J, Truffer B (2008) Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: towards an integrated framework. Res Policy 37(4):596–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McKinsey & Company; Ecofys (2006) Review of EU emissions trading scheme - survey results. European Commission, Directorate General for Environment, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  24. PriceWaterHouseCoopers (2007) Energy and efficiency. The changing power climate. Accessed 6 Apr 2010
  25. Requate T (2005) Dynamic incentives by environmental policy instruments - a survey. Ecol Econ 54:175–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rogge KS, Hoffmann V (2009) The impact of the EU ETS on the sectoral innovation system for power generation technologies - findings for Germany. S2/2009, working paper sustainability and innovation, Fraunhofer ISI, KarlsruheGoogle Scholar
  27. Rogge KS, Linden C, (2010) Cross-country comparison of the replacement incentives of the EU ETS in 2008–12: the case of the power sector. S1/2010, working paper sustainability and innovation, Fraunhofer ISI, KarlsruheGoogle Scholar
  28. Rogge KS, Schneider M, Hoffmann VH (2010) The innovation impact of EU emission trading – findings of company case studies in the German power sector. S2/2010, working paper sustainability and innovation, Fraunhofer ISI, KarlsruheGoogle Scholar
  29. Schleich J, Betz R (2005) Incentives for energy efficiency and innovation in the European emission trading system. In: ECEE 2005 summer study - what works & who delivers. pp 1495–1506Google Scholar
  30. Schleich J, Betz R (2007) EU emission trading – Better job second time around? In: ECEE 2007 summer study: saving energy - just do it, pp. 1469–1483Google Scholar
  31. Schleich J, Rogge K, Betz R (2009) Incentives for energy efficiency in the EU emissions trading scheme. Energ Effic 2(1):37–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Walz R (2005) Interaktion des EU Emissionshandels mit dem Erneuerbare Energien Gesetz. Z Energiewirtschaft 29(4):S. 261–S. 270Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag HD 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katrin Ostertag
    • 1
  • Nele Glienke
    • 2
  • Karoline Rogge
    • 1
  • Dorothea Jansen
    • 3
  • Ulrike Stoll
    • 4
  • Sven Barnekow
    • 5
  1. 1.Fraunhofer Institute Systems and Innovation ResearchKarlsruheGermany
  2. 2.EWE AG, EWE.CO2 SolutionsOldenburgGermany
  3. 3.German University of Administrative Sciences and German Research Institute for Public AdministrationSpeyerGermany
  4. 4.Statistisches Landesamt Baden-WürttembergStuttgartGermany
  5. 5.BDEWe.v., Landesgruppe NorddeutschlandHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations