|
First opinions in the European Commission’s consultation on the auctioning |
 |
 |
|
Saturday, 18 July 2009 14:49 |
|
We remind, that it is now running the period for submission to the European Commission of opinions and remarks in respect of the future shape of the auctioning system.
Their opinions expressed inter alia the Danish Energy Association and the the Association of the Austrian Electricity Companies.
According to both opinions, a single-round sealed-bid auction is the most appropriate auction format for auctioning EU allowances. In the views of the stakeholders, the most appropriate pricing rule for the auctioning of EU allowances is uniform-pricing.
Rationale for this is the view that such a formula gives a clear price signal for the value of an EUA, thereby increasing predictability. It also ensures that every successful participant pays the same price, meaning that the auction price will be fair and minimises the risk of distorting the secondary market.
Both organisations also consider, that the rule for solving ties in the future Regulation should be pro-rata re-scaling of bids.
The opinions of both stakeholders are also consistent in that there should no reserve price apply.
|
|
|
Polish national and sectoral plans of emissions reduction – is this risk manageable? |
|
|
|
Sunday, 12 July 2009 13:33 |
|
On the 19 of June 2009 the lower house of the Polish Parliament (Sejm) has adopted the bill on the management system of GHG emissions and other substances.
The bill provides inter alia for legal framework for national and sectoral plans of emissions reduction.
During the course of the legislatory proceedings the main controversy was the position of forests as a sinks of a carbon.
But, paradoxically, the legal basis for national and sectoral plans of emissions reduction evoke no questions or discussions. This is surprising, because these plans are actually real threat for Polish companies and entrepreneurs.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
An error in the definition of Delivering Party’s Replacement Cost (Emissions Trading Master Agreement for the EU Scheme version 3.0)? |
|
|
|
Monday, 06 July 2009 10:29 |
|
It seems to be an error in the definition of Delivering Party’s Replacement Cost in the Emissions Trading Master Agreement for the EU Scheme version 3.0.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Thirty days for a withdrawal of the petition to declare bankruptcy - an Event of Default in the IETA Master Agreement |
|
|
|
Tuesday, 07 July 2009 21:50 |
|
Under the point 12.2 (d) (iv) of the IETA Master Agreement (Emissions Trading Master Agreement for the EU Scheme version 3.0) a party to the IETA agreement has only 30 days to cause the withdrawal of the petition to declare bankruptcy, filed to the court with respect to it. If it fails to do so, the other party of the IETA agreement is entitled to terminate the agreement as a consequence of an Event of Default.
Taking into account, that in some countries of the European Union judicial procedures are not so efficient and the period of 30 days is far too short to do anything in this respect, it may be the considerable risk . Let’s see, how it is working on the Polish market.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
The method of accruing interest under the IETA Master Agreement and the Polish Civil Code |
|
|
|
Sunday, 05 July 2009 19:40 |
|
The method for accruing interest under the Emissions Trading Master Agreement for the EU Scheme Version 3.0 2008 can evoke some problems and be a little embarrassing for a companies operating on a Polish market. We point at some possible solutions.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 7 of 8 |
