Without entering into specific polemic with certain parts of the Court's reasoning, in any case a general conclusion comes to mind, namely that when designing any emission trading scheme such an important determination like the choice of reference fuel for the benchmarks-setting process should be done in primary legislation, and not in implementing acts. Such an approach would better serve democratic procedures.

Given the slight majority of votes, the preliminary character of the debate and legal challenges for the overall context of the problem, any optimism when it comes to the conclusions contained in point 91 of the resolution appears premature.

In times of economic crisis many economic operators temporarily cease production in order to withhold the slowdown. When the stoppage relates to production line covered by EU ETS some additional legal circumstances are to be considered.

The issue of a crucial financial weight is for how long the installation can be stopped so that the free emission allowances were not put at risk.

Another point for the carbon market revamp: interlinkages between the current valuation of carbon permits and the tiers monitoring framework.

Analyses for risk are as from 2013 a new mandatory element in the EU ETS emissions monitoring framework.

The administrative burden involved in the ensuring that the monitoring plan reflects accurately all legally required points depends on the assessment of the significance of the potential change as well as the way the procedures in the monitoring plan are described.