In this episode of the FSR Insights series, we will discuss the FSR research on Energy Systems Integration.

Watch the recording:

The coordinated planning and operation of the energy system “as a whole”, across multiple energy carriers, infrastructures, and consumption sectors – is the pathway to an effective, affordable and deep decarbonisation of our economies.

Together with the FSR researcher, Golnoush Soroush we will focus on this concept by defining different integration dimensions from technology to regulation, business models, and policy.

From this multidimensional perspective, we will move to identify different barriers to energy systems integration.

Academic discussants: 

• Anne Houtman, SciencesPo, Paris
• Tooraj Jamasb, Copenhagen School of Energy Infrastructure (CSEI)

FSR researcher:

Golnoush Soroush

Host:

Leonardo Meeus (FSR)

This interactive session will include a Q&A and polls for the audience.

The event will be recorded and live-streamed on our social media channels.

#FSRinsights

The series focuses on the insights from the FSR research.  These online events will give the FSR researchers the chance to share our research findings and to collect feedback on ongoing research by engaging with the audience and invited experts.

The Policy Advisory Council discusses the most topical regulatory and policy issues and debates the relevance and robustness of the latest FSR research findings.

The meeting gathers renowned academics, experts from the FSR Energy Major Donors, the European Commission, the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER), and National Regulatory Authorities.

The event will take place in hybrid form.

Please note this is a closed event and participation is by invitation only.

This Debate will aim at reviewing the experience with the implementation of dynamic price contracts and their ability to benefit both consumers and the system.

Dynamic electricity supply contracts are defined as electricity supply contracts between suppliers and final customers that reflect the price variation in the spot markets, including in the day-ahead and intraday markets, at intervals at least equal to the market settlement frequency [1].

The Clean Energy Package introduced provisions [2] entitling all final customers who have a smart meter installed to conclude a dynamic electricity price contract with at least one supplier in their market and with every supplier that has more than 200,000 final customers.

Dynamic prices benefit both the consumers and the electricity system. The former are able to reduce their electricity bills by managing and adjusting their consumption, in response to price signals. The latter will benefit from (implicit) demand response triggered by high prices, thus potentially reducing the need for additional investment in generation and networks.

At the beginning of 2019, dynamic pricing contracts were available in seven EU Member States [3], with other Member States expected to follow in introducing them to comply with the new requirements. In Spain, unique case in the EU, a regulated dynamic price contract is the default supply contract, in which only the margin charged on top of the wholesale prices is subject to regulation.

To support the implementation of dynamic prices, in March 2020 the Council of European Energy Regulators issued a set of recommendations.

In this context, the Debate will aim at discussing:

• To which extent consumers have taken up dynamic price contracts;
• The impact of dynamic price contracts on the consumption pattern of consumers;
• Which elements of the regulatory framework are key for supporting the penetration of dynamic price contracts.

[1] See article 2(15) of Directive (EU) 2019/944 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on common rules for the internal market for electricity and amending Directive 2012/27/EU (recast).
[2] Article 11 of Directive (EU) 2019/944.
[3] Commission Staff Working Document accompanying the document Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Energy prices and costs in Europe {COM(2019) 1 final}, p. 262

Draft Programme

Introduction to the Debate and Opening Presentations

14.00 – 14.05     Introduction to the Debate

Alberto Pototschnig | Florence School of Regulation

14.05 – 14.15     Dynamic price contracts for the European Green Deal

Adela Tesarova | European Commission, DG Energy

14.15 – 14.25     The regulatory challenges to promote the take-up of dynamic electricity prices

Anne Vadasz Nilsson | CEER

Panel Discussion: Introductory Remarks, Polls, and Comments

Moderator:        Alberto Pototschnig | Florence School of Regulation

14.25 – 14.45     Introductory remarks from the panellists

Gema Rico Rivas | CNMC

Jaume Loffredo | BEUC

Alain Taccoen | Eurelectric

Roberto Zangrandi | EDSO

14.45 – 14.50     Polls

14.50 – 15.20     Comments on the polls outcome and Q&A from the audience

Panellists

15.20 – 15.30     Concluding remarks

Alberto Pototschnig | Florence School of Regulation

Leigh Hancher | Florence School of Regulation and Tilburg University

#FSRDebates

The focus of the debate series is on recent court cases, regulatory decisions, EU legislation, or public consultations to be discussed by a panel of experts. Learn more about the FSR series.

The European Green Deal sets the objective of transforming Europe into the world’s first climate neutral continent by 2050. In order to place Europe on a responsible path to meeting this target, EU member states have subsequently committed to collectively reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by at least 55% from 1990 levels by 2030. The achievement of these ambitious targets will largely depend on our ability to make the transport system as a whole more sustainable.

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, aviation was one of the fastest-growing sources of greenhouse gas emissions, directly accounting for about 3% of the EU’s total emissions and more than 2% of global emissions. The emissions from departing flights in Europe (EU 28 and EFTA) increased by 10% between 2014 and 2017, and before the onset of COVID-19, were projected to grow by a further 21% by 2040. Despite the fact that the pandemic has caused a visible drop in air traffic and aviation emissions, the upward growth in emissions will likely resume unless the aviation sector and governments take further measures to ensure the aviation sector’s growth is compatible with set climate objectives.

A number of legislative processes are already underway at the EU level to support the aviation sector’s decarbonisation. A key measure in the “Basket of Measures” is increasing the use of Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAFs), such as advanced biofuels and electro-fuels, which hold significant potential to reduce aircraft emissions. To this end, the Commission’s recently launched ReFuelEU Aviation Initiative is currently assessing options to boost the production and uptake of SAFs in the EU, which today account only for 0.05% of total jet fuel consumption. Significant efforts will also be needed to develop disruptive technologies to bring zero-emission aircraft to the market.

For these low- and zero-emission fuels and technologies to be deployed in the aviation sector an enabling EU policy framework will need to be put into place, including through the enactment of adequate carbon pricing policies and research and innovation (R&I), in particular, through the partnerships under Horizon Europe (e.g., ‘Clean Aviation’ and ‘Clean Hydrogen’). The reduction of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) allowances allocated for free to airlines is another avenue the Commission will explore whilst closely coordinating with actions at the global level, notably with the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO).

In October 2016, ICAO agreed on a Resolution for a global market-based measure, the so-called Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation, or CORSIA, which is set to compensate the growth of CO₂ emissions from international aviation beyond 2019/2020 levels, as of 2021. More specifically, airlines will be required to monitor emissions on all international routes as well as to offset emissions from routes included in the scheme by purchasing eligible emission units generated by projects that reduce emissions in other sectors (e.g., renewable energy). In view of this, the Commission has initiated a revision of the EU ETS Directive, including how it will put CORSIA implementation by the EU into effect in a way that is consistent with the EU’s 2030 climate objectives.

The implementation of ambitious standards for the design and operation of aircraft can further improve energy efficiency and reduce aircraft emissions. What is more, operational measures, such as the establishment of more sustainable and efficient flightpaths, could reduce up to 10% of air transport emissions, while avoiding the unnecessary waste of jet fuel and related costs. The Commission’s recent proposal for the upgrade of the Single European Sky regulatory framework seeks to achieve this as part of its overarching objective of modernising the management of the European airspace.

Against this backdrop, the 16^th Florence Air Forum, jointly organised by the Transport Area of the Florence School of Regulation and the European Commission’s DG MOVE, will take the 2030 and 2050 perspectives on the progressive decarbonisation of civil aviation in the EU and globally. This, in particular, will involve the examination of the industry’s recently published Destination 2050 roadmap, the ongoing work in the ICAO on establishing a long-term aspirational CO₂ goal and the actions planned under the Commission’s Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy in relation to the European Green Deal.

More specifically, the forum will bring together key aviation stakeholders representing EU and national policymakers, airlines, airports, technology manufacturers, air traffic control, and civil society, among others, for a timely discussion on the following three questions:

1. How aligned are the EU Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy, the Aviation Roundtable Report, Destination 2050 Report and (upcoming revised) ACARE Flightpath 2050 in terms of aviation decarbonisation? Where are the interconnections and possible gaps?
2. What EU policy framework support is needed for the two major avenues, i.e. Sustainable Aviation Fuels and “zero emission” aircraft?
3. How to extend the EU framework and approach to the global level? How to drive ICAO towards decarbonisation?

SPEAKERS’ PRESENTATION SLIDES:

Matthias Finger – Florence School of Regulation Transport Area

Martina di Palma – European Regions Airline Association

Ron Van Manen – Clean Aviation

Tine Tomazic – Pipistrel

The INNOPATHS final conference “Innovation pathways, strategies and policies for the low-carbon transition in Europe” is scheduled on Monday 31^st May (10:00-16:15 CEST) and Tuesday 1^st June (10:15-16:15 CEST).

The transition to climate neutrality in Europe will require deep structural changes to the full range of energy, economic and societal systems. These changes, and their economic, social and environmental implications, must be examined and understood if policymakers are to take the best decisions possible to achieve this overarching objective.

For the last four years, the INNOPATHS project’s partners have been working with stakeholders from government, academia and civil society to understand issues ranging from the dynamics of low-carbon innovation, policy frameworks and finance, to the implications for labour markets and equity from the transition. Using this knowledge, new, state-of-the-art low-carbon pathways for the European Union have been created and modelled. This final conference will share key insights from the project with a wider audience, and discuss their meaning and implications for Europe and EU member states in the coming years.

The conference will be chaired by Paul Ekins – OBE (UCL Institute for Sustainable Resources & Project Coordinator) and by Simone Borghesi (Director of FSR Climate). The event will hold presentations and discussions on following topics:

• Technology development and innovation dynamics; their policy and other drivers, and co-benefits
• Decarbonisation and equity, with a focus on European labour markets and the broader social implications of the transition
• Financing the transition; including the role of public funds, low interest rates and the European Green Deal
• Key requirements and implications of our new pathways for a low-carbon Europe; and the differences implied depending on which pathway emerges from policy action and wider developments
• Policy priorities and knowledge gaps; including a panel session with a series of European policy experts and practitioners, to conclude the conference.

This event is part of the official All4Climate – Italy 2021 programme. 

The project INNOPATHS has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under Grant Agreement No. 730403.

A third of all humanity lacks access to reliable power and this blunt reality drives immense social inequities. Access to power determines whether you have modern healthcare, transportation, and telecommunications. Clean fuels for cooking and heating offer an escape from chronic respiratory illness. Reliable power opens the door to educational and economic opportunities. This year, the pandemic has driven home the urgent need to address the world’s most glaring inequities. The international response must be rapid and sizable, but also far-sighted and sustained.

Watch the recording:

The Global Commission to End Energy Poverty

The Global Commission to End Energy Poverty (GCEEP), comprising leaders from utilities, off-grid companies, multilateral development banks, academics, and others from across the electricity and development sectors, addresses the pressing challenge of achieving universal access to adequate, affordable, and reliable clean electricity.

The report on energy access

In the FSR talk, we will discuss the GCEEP 2020 report on electricity access, together with some of its authors. The report was prepared by the MIT research team with support from the Rockefeller Foundation and extensive feedback, engagement, and guidance from the Commission.

Download the report

Hosts:

Jean-Michel Glachant | FSR

Swetha Bhagwat | FSR

Panel:

Ignacio Perez-Arriaga | MIT, FSR

Robert Stoner | MIT Energy Initiative

Joseph Nganga | Rockefeller Foundation

#FSRTalks

FSR talks is a series of live interviews with experts from the wider network of the school to showcase and discuss a recent work (a book just published, interesting study, innovative project) in a light and interactive way.

The development of the EU’s future low and zero-carbon hydrogen market is moving ahead quickly; the need for a robust hydrogen regulation proposal is evident.

This online debate seeks to discuss which proposals should be included in the draft legislation that the Commission will table, for example on guarantees of origin, support schemes, and network regulation. The EU has rich experience in the regulation of gas sector. Which of these experiences are relevant to hydrogen regulation? What particularities apply to hydrogen? How to provide for fast and sustainable clean hydrogen demand and supply growth?

The drafting of legislative proposals for hydrogen is far from simple, but they are crucially important. Failure to get them right may limit the speed and scale of the market development and unnecessary costs on citizens and industry. Success could place the EU as technological leader of what promises to be a huge future global market.

The FSR debate will focus on the main challenges in this task.

The debate will be introduced and moderated by Prof. Christopher Jones and Prof. Andris Piebalgs.

Discussants:

J. Chatzimarkakis, Hydrogen Europe;

I. Conti, Head of FSR Gas.

J. Hansen, Fertilizers Europe;

J. Ingwersen, ENTSOG;

B. Nitzov, ACER

Background

The Agreement on the European Climate Law establishes the foundations for the Commission’s ‘Fit for 55’ proposals that will set out the concrete steps to put the EU on a path to carbon neutrality by 2050. Already in June, the Commission will table the revision of the RED II Directive; the first step in establishing Europe’s future Hydrogen Regulation. This will be completed in October with the proposed revision of the Gas Directive.

The European Commission has already published its Hydrogen Strategy in July 2020, establishing the objective of decarbonising existing ‘grey’ hydrogen demand, and progressively providing a low and zero-carbon energy source/vector to decarbonise a number of hard to electrify sectors that are currently using fossil fuels. The Council and Parliament have supported the broad lines of the Commission’s Strategy. Also in 2020, the European Clean Hydrogen Alliance was established, aimed at supporting the ambitious deployment of clean hydrogen technologies by 2030. On April 12th, the Commission launched an invitation to the members of Alliance to submit projects for renewable and low-carbon hydrogen technologies and solutions, which will give an indication of the scale and speed of projects under preparation.

Learn more

• A proposal for a regulatory framework for hydrogen guarantees of origin  by Andris Piebalgs,Christopher Jones
• FSR Cost-effective decarbonisation study
• A snapshot of clean hydrogen costs in 2030 and 2050

#FSRDebates

The focus of this debate series is on timely policy issues discussed by a panel of experts.

Cargo transport is an important sector for the European economy, representing 6% of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Roughly 75% of the transport operations (in terms of ton-kilometers) that make up the sector are currently performed by trucks on European roads, which, in turn, entail massive environmental and societal impacts. To put things into perspective, the freight sector is responsible for 75 million tons of CO₂ emissions and 50,000 premature deaths/fatalities each year. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the sector was expected to continue growing, and road freight transport, in particular, was projected to increase by around 40% by 2030 and by little over 80% by 2050.

To support the greening of cargo operations, the European Green Deal calls for a substantial part of the inland freight traffic to shift away from road towards cleaner modes such as rail, inland waterways and short-sea shipping. More specifically, the recently published Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy stipulates that rail freight traffic should increase by 50% by 2030 and double by 2050, whereas transport by inland waterways and short sea shipping should increase by 25% by 2030 and by 50% by 2050. In this context, the Commission has pledged to substantially revamp the existing framework for multimodal transport. The scarcity of transhipment infrastructure, and of inland multimodal terminals, in particular, which is pronounced in certain parts of Europe, would need to be addressed, and missing links in multimodal infrastructure closed. Ultimately, all transport modes for freight would have to come together in multimodal terminals. This, in turn, is to be further stressed in TEN-T and Rail Freight Corridor reviews and supported by EU funding and other policies, including R&I support. Important support measures, regulatory or economic, can be also foreseen in the revision of the Combined Transport Directive and other instruments. In addition, the review of the State aid rules, which already provide for a relatively flexible framework to publicly fund sustainable transport, can further contribute to the EU’s modal shift and multimodality objectives.

Not the least, both consumers and businesses need to be empowered to make more sustainable delivery and transport choices through the provision of adequate information on the climate footprint as well as on the available alternatives of their deliveries. To this end, the Commission has announced plans to establish a European framework for the harmonised measurement of transport and logistics-related greenhouse gas emissions, based on global standards. This initiative aims to overcome the existing fragmentation of various calculation methodologies, allow for reliable calculation of emissions, and enable a fair comparison of different transport options in the multimodal perspective, based on their GHG performance.

Against this background, the 8^th Florence Intermodal Forum, co-organised by the Transport Area of the Florence School of Regulation and the Commission’s DG MOVE, will bring together policy makers, operators and manufacturers among others, for a discussion on the various measures to foster the greening of cargo operations in Europe. More specifically, stakeholders will be invited to critically discuss the following questions in two dedicated thematic sessions:

1. Boosting the share of multimodal freight transport: How can the revision of the Combined Transport Directive help to revamp the regulatory framework for multimodal transport and boost the use of multimodal transport solutions? What is the role of economic incentives for both operations and infrastructure? How can State aid guidelines further support multimodality?
2. Towards a common European framework for the harmonised measurement of transport and logistics greenhouse gas emissions: What environmental information should businesses and end-users be provided with? How can common greenhouse gas indicators boost demand for more sustainable transport and delivery solutions while avoiding greenwashing? Should carbon footprint information be considered as a new right, applicable to all modes?

SPEAKERS SLIDES

Introduction

Matthias Finger – Florence School of Regulation Transport Area

Session A: Boosting the share of multimodal freight transport

Frank Andreesen – Covestro

Irmtraut Tonndorf – Hupac

Paul Hegge – Lineas

Session B: Towards a common European framework for the harmonised measurement of transport and logistics greenhouse gas emissions

Alan McKinnon – Kuehne Logistics University

Pietro DArpa – Procter & Gamble

Kathrin Brost – GoGreen Program DHL Global Forwarding

In this debate, we will discuss some of the following questions:

Who should bear the costs of repurposing or retiring these stranded gas assets?  And indeed how do we identify those costs?  How if at all should this process be reflected in tariff methodologies?  Should transition costs be borne by the taxpayer? Can we learn any useful lessons from the treatment of stranded electricity assets in Europe in the late 1990s?

Background

Stranded assets are physical assets recorded on a corporate balance sheet whose investment value cannot be recouped and must be written off.  The EU Hydrogen Strategy indicates that repurposing and re-using parts of the existing natural gas infrastructure may provide an opportunity for a cost-effective energy transition in combination with (relatively limited) newly built hydrogen dedicated infrastructure. Repurposing of ‘redundant’ gas assets for the transport of hydrogen might be beneficial to both gas and hydrogen end-users where there is an identified need for hydrogen infrastructure. In their recent White Paper ACER/CEER advise that this could only become clear from a detailed and sophisticated cost-benefit analysis (CBA) approach, taking into account that repurposing of the gas infrastructure comes at a cost as well.

As for cost allocation through tariffs, ACER/CEER also recommend that repurposed gas network assets should be removed from the RAB of the gas network operators and that unbundling rules should be applied in order to avoid cross-subsidies between users of the gas network infrastructure and of the hydrogen network infrastructure by, at least, separating activities, RABs, and costs (accounting unbundling) between the entities that own and operate the hydrogen infrastructure and the entities that own and operate the gas infrastructure.

Cross- subsidisation between users of different networks should be avoided, since it is not likely that all gas network users will become hydrogen networks users, or at least not at the same time.  This would mean that the users of today’s gas networks should not be paying towards a future hydrogen network. Some regulatory authorities may try to resolve this by prohibiting their gas TSOs from engaging in ancillary activities such as the roll out of a new hydrogen network, but this may not fully resolve the problem of how to deal with capital costs that gas TSOs already want to incur in order to cover the future process of network conversion to hydrogen, as the Dutch regulator has recognized in its recent gas tariff methodology decision.

Draft Programme

Introduction to the Debate and Opening Presentations

14.00 – 14.05   Introduction to the Debate

Leigh Hancher| Florence School of Regulation

14.05 – 14.15     Ilaria Conti  (FSR)

14.15 – 14.25    Dennis Hesseling (ACER)

Panel Discussion: Introductory Remarks, Polls, and Comments

Moderator:   Leigh Hancher: Florence School of Regulation

14.25 – 14.45  Introductory remarks from the panellists

Panellists:

Annegret  Groebel (CEER) , Catherine  Galano (Frontier Economics) ; Lisa Fischer,  (E3G ); Jan Ingwersen (ENTSOG)

14.45 – 14.50   Polls

14.50 – 15.20  Comments on the polls outcome and Q&A from the audience

15.20 – 15.30   Concluding remarks

Alberto Pototschnig | Florence School of Regulation 
Leigh Hancher | Florence School of Regulation and Tilburg University

#FSRDebates

The focus of the debate series is on recent court cases, regulatory decisions, EU legislation, or public consultations to be discussed by a panel of experts. Learn more about the FSR series.

The European Commission’s EU strategy to reduce methane emissions published on 14 October 2020 defines as a primary objective “[ensuring] that companies apply considerably more accurate measurement and reporting methodologies for methane emissions, across sectors, than it is currently the case.”

Such an approach is expected to lead to a better understanding of the problem and to guide subsequent mitigation measures. The mandatory measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) for all energy-related methane emissions, based on the voluntary will be one of the main elements of the legislative package expected in Q4 of 2021, with the enactment in 2023.

Any effective strategy to mitigate climate change requires a clear understanding of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and their sources. The “MRV” is a technical term, which integrates three autonomous, but related processes: measurement or monitoring (M), reporting (R), and verification (V)[1]. Measurement and monitoring incorporate not only direct physical measurement of GHG emissions but also calculation and modelling of emissions. Reporting refers to a process of aggregating emission data in an inventory or other standardised form, and public disclosure. Verification is a process of regular checks of completeness and reliability of data. The received feedback should be used to continuously improve the data quality and to minimise the uncertainties.

This research looks into the following questions:

• What are the main barriers and opportunities related to the establishment of an effective MRV system for methane emissions?
• How the policies could support more robust measurement and the reduction of methane emissions?

Moderator: Leonardo Meeus (FSR)

Speakers:

Maria Olczak (FSR)

Paul Balcombe (Queen Mary University of London)

Kate Konschnik (Duke University)

Lucija Muehlenbachs (University of Calgary)

[1] The EU Commission expands the concept of MRV by adding two other elements: integrity and validation (IV).

#FSRinsights

The series focuses on the insights from the FSR research.  These online events will give the FSR researchers the chance to share our research findings and to collect feedback on ongoing research by engaging with the audience and invited experts.

Subscribe to our newsletter to get notified about our upcoming events.

Following the EU Methane strategy’s adoption on 14 October 2020, the EU Commission will unveil the legislative proposal on measurement and mitigation of methane emissions.

Until 1 May 2021, all the stakeholders are invited to participate in public consultations by filling in a comprehensive questionnaire. The questionnaire aims to gather views on the range of issues, including the type and scope of regulation, leak detection, and repair programmes, venting and flaring, and on the actions to mitigate the emissions from biogas/biomethane production and the coal sector.

The companies and NGOs, both individually and in the industry groups, such as the Methane Guiding Principles, have been working to respond to the questions raised by the EU Commission in the questionnaire.

This event is an occasion to discuss the key challenges and considerations which arise from these discussions, as well as the way forward.  On which issues is there a consensus? Where are divergencies and controversies?

Hosts:

• Christopher Jones, FSR
• Andris Piebalgs, FSR

Speakers:

• Myriam Hammami, Shell
• Tania Meixus Fernandez, Enagás
• Stefan Schwietzke, Environmental Defense Fund
• Nicolas Jensen, Eurogas
• Manfredi Caltagirone, UN Environment Programme

Comments and conclusions:

Malcolm McDowell, European Commission

#FSRDebates

#FSRDebates

The focus of this debate series is on policy issues to be discussed by a panel of experts. Learn more about the FSR series.

Watch the recording:

Modern societies face many global challenges. Climate change is certainly among the most urgent and important ones. Europe has decided to address the widely diffused concern of public opinion on the effects of climate change by committing to reaching climate neutrality by 2050, an ambitious target that remains a top priority for the Von der Leyen Commission despite the difficulties raised by the COVID-19 crisis. Similar climate neutrality targets have been recently set by other jurisdictions, most notably the USA and China (the latter by 2060). The European Union can (and actually intends to) play a key leading role as regulator, negotiator and actor in the global climate challenge. While a unilateral European action will not be sufficient per se to stop global warming (as European emissions are only a relatively small part of total greenhouse gas emissions), the EU can lead the world by example in adopting more stringent climate regulations and hence influencing the others’ climate policies.

However, alternative climate policies and regulatory models might emerge at the world level possibly challenging the European leadership in the fight against climate change. Consider, for instance, the case of the European Emission Trading System (EU ETS). As it is frequently argued, the EU ETS represented a prototype for most other ETSs that have been rapidly emerging in the world. But ETSs might progressively diverge over time rather than converge towards a unique model to account for the different institutional frameworks characterising different jurisdictions. The same applies to other European climate measures and policies that might or might not fit other institutional contexts.

This raises some of the questions that we would like to address in the session, namely:

1. What are the lessons that other jurisdictions can take from the European climate policy experience? Can/should the European experience with climate regulation be replicated in non-European contexts? If so, how? If not, why?
2. How can other economies improve upon the European experience and how can Europe learn from others?
3. Will the climate neutrality implementation strategies converge or diverge across different countries?
4. Which policies will lead EU, US and China -the three main players in the global climate arena- towards the net-zero emissions target?
5. What will be the impact of the Biden administration on international cooperation and climate policy in the years to come?
6. Can international cooperation among Emission Trading Systems contribute to promoting a global climate policy?

FSR Climate, together with the Policy Outreach Committee of EAERE (European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists), and in collaboration with the School of Transnational Governance of the EUI, organises this session to promote a more integrated dialogue between academia and policy world, providing advice and support to EU policy makers and institutions in designing policy interventions.

The event builds upon the successful experience of policy debates organized by FSR Climate at State of the Union since 2018 and intends to continue the policy dialogue carried out by FSR Climate under the ongoing LIFE DICET (Deepening International Cooperation on Emissions Trading) project. The project LIFE DICET focuses on the international carbon market cooperation between the EC and the regulators of other major ETSs, namely, California-Quebec, China, Switzerland and New Zealand and intends to support EU and Member State policymakers in deepening international cooperation for the development and possible integration of carbon markets at the world level.

The event chaired by Simone Borghesi and Jos Delbeke is intended to address an audience of high-level policy makers, stakeholders and scholars such as those attending the SoU.

The project LIFE DICET is co-financed by the EU LIFE Programme of the European Commission.