Upstream controls on emissions

• US carbon emissions trading: description of an upstream approach, Tim Hargrave, PROC A WASTE MANAGE ASSOC ANNU MEET EXHIB , pp. 14ppp. 1998.
  
• The importance of controlling carbon not emissions or mpg, KS Lackner1 and R Wilson2, Toxicology and Industrial Health 24, 573–580, 2008.
• Markets and global warming, Klaus Lackner and Richard Wilson, Regulation, Winter 2008, pp 3-4.
  

What may come after Kyoto 1

• Objections to carbon trading
  
• The Harvard Project on International Climate Agreements
• Economics of adaptation to climate change study (World Bank, September 2009).
  
• Global carbon trading: a framework for reducing emissions (PDF, 3.6 MB, Mark Lazarowicz MP, July 2009). This and related reports may also be downloaded from the DECC website.
• K2S comments on this report (PDF, 46 KB).
  
• Solving the climate dilemma: the budget approach (PDF, 2.3 MB, German Advisory Council on Climate Change (WBGU), November 2008).
• Submission by Mexico (PDF, 132 KB, 2008-08-13).

Carbon trading

• EU Emissions Trading System: failing at the third attempt (PDF, 372 KB, briefing from Corporate Europe Observatory, Carbon Trade Watch, April 2011).
• EU emissions trading scheme on course to make tiny savings, says report (The Guardian, 2010-09-10).
  
• The danger of carbon markets (Climate Justice Briefs, November 2010).
  

Climate policy

• Climate Economics: The State of the Art (Stockholme Environment Institute (SEI), November 2011).
  
• Energy emergence: rebound and backfire as emergent phenomena (PDF, February 2011) from the Breakthrough Institute. See also Could the rebound effect undermine climate efforts? (The Guardian, 2011-02-22) and Green idealists fail to make grade, says study (The Guardian, 2008-09-24).

Climate change

• Beyond 'dangerous' climate change: emission scenarios for a new world (Kevin Anderson and Alice Bows, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 369 (1934), 20-44, January 2011). "The analysis suggests that despite high-level statements to the contrary, there is now little to no chance of maintaining the global mean surface temperature at or below 2^°C. Moreover, the impacts associated with 2^°C have been revised upwards, sufficiently so that 2^°C now more appropriately represents the threshold between 'dangerous' and 'extremely dangerous' climate change."
• Reckless gamblers: How politicians’ inaction is ramping up the risk of dangerous climate change (Friends of the Earth England, Wales & Northern Ireland, December 2010). See also Climate change calculations put millions at risk, says new report (The Guardian, 2010-12-15).
• Theme Issue 'Four degrees and beyond: the potential for a global temperature increase of four degrees and its implications' compiled and edited by Mark G. New, Diana M. Liverman, Richard A. Betts, Kevin L. Anderson and Chris C. West (Transactions of the Royal Society A, January 13, 2011; 369 (1934)). In particular:
• Four degrees and beyond: the potential for a global temperature increase of four degrees and its implications, Mark New, Diana Liverman, Heike Schroder and Kevin Anderson: "The 2009 Copenhagen Accord recognized the scientific view ‘that the increase in global temperature should be below 2 degrees Celsius’ despite growing views that this might be too high. At the same time, the continued rise in greenhouse gas emissions in the past decade and the delays in a comprehensive global emissions reduction agreement have made achieving this target extremely difficult, arguably impossible, raising the likelihood of global temperature rises of 3^°C or 4^°C within this century. ... The potential severity of impacts and the behavioural, institutional, societal and economic challenges involved in coping with these impacts argue for renewed efforts to reduce emissions, using all available mechanisms, to minimize the chances of high-end climate change."
• Beyond 'dangerous' climate change: emission scenarios for a new world, Kevin Anderson and Alice Bows: "The analysis suggests that despite high-level statements to the contrary, there is now little to no chance of maintaining the global mean surface temperature at or below 2^°C. Moreover, the impacts associated with 2^°C have been revised upwards, sufficiently so that 2^°C now more appropriately represents the threshold between 'dangerous' and 'extremely dangerous' climate change."
• Report of the Secretary-General’s high-level advisory group on climate change financing (PDF, United Nations, November 2010). Recognises that money from selling allowances can be used to fight climate change (even though they seem to be assuming downstream controls). And it recognises the need for an international fund to fight climate change (even though it is a tenth of the size of what is proposed in Kyoto2 and would not be in place until 2020).
• Mitigating climate change through reductions in greenhouse gas emissions: is it possible to limit global warming to no more than 1.5°C? (PDF, 687 KB, Grantham Research Institute, Centre for
  Climate Change Economics and Policy, Met Office, August 2010).
• The process is dead (George Monbiot, 2010-09-20). "An analysis published a few days ago by the campaigning group Sandbag estimates the amount of carbon that will have been saved by the end of the second phase of the EU’s emissions trading system, in 2012(3). After the hopeless failure of the scheme’s first phase we were promised that the real carbon cuts would start to bite between 2008 and 2012. So how much carbon will it save by then? Less than one third of one per cent."