M. Yessenamanova, A. Lukyanets, E. Golovina, Nikolai Topornin
The key objective of the study is to explain the contribution of environmental auditing in the improvement and protection of the environment while respecting the concept of sustainable development. The study describes the role and benefits of environmental auditing in organizations as part of the governance framework based on the adopted broad regulatory framework of international environmental agreements like Espoo Convention, International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standards and the impact of the community governance framework on EU sustainable development policies using relevant EU normative acts like Regulation No 1836/93, EnvironmentalManagement and Audit Scheme (EMAS) Regulation, Directive 2012/27/EU, Member- States legislation. The classification features of environmental auditing have been clarified and systematized in accordance with its role and functions in the environmental management system. There is information on the shift of purely environmental auditing to the audit of labour protection, ecology, industrial and fire safety (joint audit). The relationship between environmental auditing, certification and environmental management systems is shown. There is a comparison of financial audit and environmental auditing; their similarities and differences have been revealed. The research results can be put into practice to provide specific proposals for reducing pollution and improving environmental protection. EMAS, environmental audit, environmental management, environmental protection, international environmental agreements, sustainable development
{"title":"Environmental Auditing: The EU Practice in the Context of Pursuing Sustainable Development Policy","authors":"M. Yessenamanova, A. Lukyanets, E. Golovina, Nikolai Topornin","doi":"10.54648/eelr2022015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eelr2022015","url":null,"abstract":"The key objective of the study is to explain the contribution of environmental auditing in the improvement and protection of the environment while respecting the concept of sustainable development. The study describes the role and benefits of environmental auditing in organizations as part of the governance framework based on the adopted broad regulatory framework of international environmental agreements like Espoo Convention, International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standards and the impact of the community governance framework on EU sustainable development policies using relevant EU normative acts like Regulation No 1836/93, EnvironmentalManagement and Audit Scheme (EMAS) Regulation, Directive 2012/27/EU, Member- States legislation. The classification features of environmental auditing have been clarified and systematized in accordance with its role and functions in the environmental management system. There is information on the shift of purely environmental auditing to the audit of labour protection, ecology, industrial and fire safety (joint audit). The relationship between environmental auditing, certification and environmental management systems is shown. There is a comparison of financial audit and environmental auditing; their similarities and differences have been revealed. The research results can be put into practice to provide specific proposals for reducing pollution and improving environmental protection.\u0000EMAS, environmental audit, environmental management, environmental protection, international environmental agreements, sustainable development","PeriodicalId":53610,"journal":{"name":"European Energy and Environmental Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43004371","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In December 2019, the European Commission released a mechanism to fight climate change, namely the European Green Deal. This policy was put in place to materialize the goals of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change of 2015, that is, to combat the issue of climate change along the lines of sustainable development and fight poverty. In the context of the European Green Deal, one of the key instruments envisaged to achieve the ambitious plans of the European Union (EU) is the so-called Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), which is the focus of this article and has been described as an ‘extraterritorial outreach’ for attempting to regulate matters outside the EU borders. This article seeks to answer is whether the CBAM is justified in line with the need to protect the environment and address climate change as well as increasing global economic welfare and reducing poverty. This article provides an overview of CBAM, analyses the rationale behind CBAM as well as the various misgivings from third parties. It contextualizes CBAM in the context of free trade and examines whether CBAM is consistent with multilateral trade rules. It then provides the design of a CBAM based on the principles of international trade and sustainable development. The article concludes that, overall, the analysis of CBAMs, particularly regarding the fervency of the EU to make its CBAM compatible with both trade rules and climate change objectives, demonstrates states’ growing interest in protecting the planet, while preserving economic values; it also indicates the importance of trade in managing those interests. Carbon border adjustment mechanism, WTO, European Green Deal, international trade, GATT, sustainable development, Fit for 55
{"title":"A Legal Exploration of the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism","authors":"R. Leal-Arcas, Manuliza Faktaufon, Anna Kyprianou","doi":"10.54648/eelr2022016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eelr2022016","url":null,"abstract":"In December 2019, the European Commission released a mechanism to fight climate change, namely the European Green Deal. This policy was put in place to materialize the goals of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change of 2015, that is, to combat the issue of climate change along the lines of sustainable development and fight poverty. In the context of the European Green Deal, one of the key instruments envisaged to achieve the ambitious plans of the European Union (EU) is the so-called Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), which is the focus of this article and has been described as an ‘extraterritorial outreach’ for attempting to regulate matters outside the EU borders. This article seeks to answer is whether the CBAM is justified in line with the need to protect the environment and address climate change as well as increasing global economic welfare and reducing poverty. This article provides an overview of CBAM, analyses the rationale behind CBAM as well as the various misgivings from third parties. It contextualizes CBAM in the context of free trade and examines whether CBAM is consistent with multilateral trade rules. It then provides the design of a CBAM based on the principles of international trade and sustainable development. The article concludes that, overall, the analysis of CBAMs, particularly regarding the fervency of the EU to make its CBAM compatible with both trade rules and climate change objectives, demonstrates states’ growing interest in protecting the planet, while preserving economic values; it also indicates the importance of trade in managing those interests.\u0000Carbon border adjustment mechanism, WTO, European Green Deal, international trade, GATT, sustainable development, Fit for 55","PeriodicalId":53610,"journal":{"name":"European Energy and Environmental Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42118691","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
To reach climate goals, there is a need for large scale changes to the energy system. This requires speedy permitting procedures. However, permitting procedures are everything else but speedy. Thus, there is a need to simplify the rules to accelerate the permit procedures. While permitting procedures are largely governed by national law, the central issue for large scale infrastructure projects is to handle the high standards of EU Environmental law. Enlarged rights of individuals and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) to bring any mistaken application of these rules to court and thus stop projects from realization for years, represent the major risks of delay for the realization of infrastructure projects. Shortcomings on the application of EU Environmental law in permitting procedures are not only caused by narrow time schedules and stingy project promoters, but mainly by an overcomplex system of partly unclear rules that is evolving in the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) only in one direction: Making every single rule even stricter case by case before the ECJ. This is reality. To cut on the duration of permit procedures for reaching climate goals in time, European environmental law needs to be adapted. Without streamlining and simplifying EU environmental law, all efforts to accelerate permit procedures are doomed to failure. This article suggests adaptations of the European Habitats and Birds Directives, Water Framework Directive and Environmental Impact Assessments Directive to significantly accelerate permit procedures. IMO Sulphur Regulation, Shipowner, Charterer, EGCS, Low Sulphur Fuel
{"title":"The Reality Gap: Simplification of Environmental Law as Key for the Acceleration of Permit Procedures for Europe’s Green Deal","authors":"Reinhard Ruge","doi":"10.54648/eelr2022018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eelr2022018","url":null,"abstract":"To reach climate goals, there is a need for large scale changes to the energy system. This requires speedy permitting procedures. However, permitting procedures are everything else but speedy. Thus, there is a need to simplify the rules to accelerate the permit procedures. While permitting procedures are largely governed by national law, the central issue for large scale infrastructure projects is to handle the high standards of EU Environmental law. Enlarged rights of individuals and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) to bring any mistaken application of these rules to court and thus stop projects from realization for years, represent the major risks of delay for the realization of infrastructure projects. Shortcomings on the application of EU Environmental law in permitting procedures are not only caused by narrow time schedules and stingy project promoters, but mainly by an overcomplex system of partly unclear rules that is evolving in the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) only in one direction: Making every single rule even stricter case by case before the ECJ. This is reality. To cut on the duration of permit procedures for reaching climate goals in time, European environmental law needs to be adapted. Without streamlining and simplifying EU environmental law, all efforts to accelerate permit procedures are doomed to failure. This article suggests adaptations of the European Habitats and Birds Directives, Water Framework Directive and Environmental Impact Assessments Directive to significantly accelerate permit procedures.\u0000IMO Sulphur Regulation, Shipowner, Charterer, EGCS, Low Sulphur Fuel","PeriodicalId":53610,"journal":{"name":"European Energy and Environmental Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47095207","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Crop diversity results from farmers’ selection and exchange of seeds. The crop diversity erosion observed over the last century can be attributed to the transition from traditional to industrial farming practices. Farmers’ seed varieties have been replaced by a few privately owned, high-yielding varieties. The resulting uniformity is jeopardizing food security, further exacerbated by climate change. Both the international framework and the EU legislation perpetuate the root cause of crop diversity erosion. The EU only authorizes on the internal market varieties that are distinct, uniform, stable, and of ‘satisfactory value for cultivation and use’. Non-complying seeds, meaning traditional heterogeneous varieties, are banned. Furthermore, the few authorized varieties are open to privatization through either a Community Plant Variety Right or patents on biotechnological inventions. The exchange, access, and use of these seeds are strictly restricted. Although the EU provides derogations in certain cases, the legal space created is too narrow to ensure the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture (PGRFA). seed, plant reproductive material, intellectual property, commons, agriculture, food security, EU.
{"title":"Impact of the European Union’s Seed Legislation and Intellectual Property Rights on Crop Diversity","authors":"Joséphine de Mévius","doi":"10.54648/eelr2022010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eelr2022010","url":null,"abstract":"Crop diversity results from farmers’ selection and exchange of seeds. The crop diversity erosion observed over the last century can be attributed to the transition from traditional to industrial farming practices. Farmers’ seed varieties have been replaced by a few privately owned, high-yielding varieties. The resulting uniformity is jeopardizing food security, further exacerbated by climate change. Both the international framework and the EU legislation perpetuate the root cause of crop diversity erosion. The EU only authorizes on the internal market varieties that are distinct, uniform, stable, and of ‘satisfactory value for cultivation and use’. Non-complying seeds, meaning traditional heterogeneous varieties, are banned. Furthermore, the few authorized varieties are open to privatization through either a Community Plant Variety Right or patents on biotechnological inventions. The exchange, access, and use of these seeds are strictly restricted. Although the EU provides derogations in certain cases, the legal space created is too narrow to ensure the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture (PGRFA).\u0000seed, plant reproductive material, intellectual property, commons, agriculture, food security, EU.","PeriodicalId":53610,"journal":{"name":"European Energy and Environmental Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48511314","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The aim of this article is to track through and offer some reflections on the efforts by the European Union (EU) to ensure that EU law adequately implements the access to environmental justice obligations set down in the 1998 Aarhus Convention (AC) with respect to activities carried out by its supranational institutions and other Union bodies. For a number of years the EU has struggled to ensure its legal framework is in conformity with the Convention’s requirements concerning access to justice, not least in the wake of adverse findings expressed by the Convention’s Compliance Committee responding to complaints from members of the public. However, matters appear to have improved significantly in October 2021 with the adoption of EU Regulation 2021/1767 amending the Union’s legislative rules on an internal review mechanism of EU administrative acts or omissions alleged by members of the public to contravene EU environmental law (namely the ‘Aarhus Regulation’ 1367/2006). Whilst this article considers that most of the key issues relating to noncompliance have now been addressed satisfactorily, much of the credit for this ultimately lies with the European Parliament and Council of the EU as primary co-legislators rather than other key Union institutional actors such as the European Commission or the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU). At the same time, this recent legislative innovation has not enabled the EU to reach its destination of achieving full compliance with the Convention over access to environmental justice, with some important administrative activities affecting the environment still remaining exempt from the Union’s internal review system such as EU decisions on state aid.
{"title":"Access to Environmental Justice and European Union Institutional Compliance With the Aarhus Convention: A Rather Longer and More Winding Road than Anticipated","authors":"Martin Hedemann-Robinson","doi":"10.54648/eelr2022012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eelr2022012","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this article is to track through and offer some reflections on the efforts by the European Union (EU) to ensure that EU law adequately implements the access to environmental justice obligations set down in the 1998 Aarhus Convention (AC) with respect to activities carried out by its supranational institutions and other Union bodies. For a number of years the EU has struggled to ensure its legal framework is in conformity with the Convention’s requirements concerning access to justice, not least in the wake of adverse findings expressed by the Convention’s Compliance Committee responding to complaints from members of the public. However, matters appear to have improved significantly in October 2021 with the adoption of EU Regulation 2021/1767 amending the Union’s legislative rules on an internal review mechanism of EU administrative acts or omissions alleged by members of the public to contravene EU environmental law (namely the ‘Aarhus Regulation’ 1367/2006). Whilst this article considers that most of the key issues relating to noncompliance have now been addressed satisfactorily, much of the credit for this ultimately lies with the European Parliament and Council of the EU as primary co-legislators rather than other key Union institutional actors such as the European Commission or the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU). At the same time, this recent legislative innovation has not enabled the EU to reach its destination of achieving full compliance with the Convention over access to environmental justice, with some important administrative activities affecting the environment still remaining exempt from the Union’s internal review system such as EU decisions on state aid.","PeriodicalId":53610,"journal":{"name":"European Energy and Environmental Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45859537","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Regulatory Models of Community Energy (CE) in a Multi-Regulatory Approach: Juxtaposing the Global, the EU, the Japanese and Swedish Cases","authors":"Sandra Cassotta, Maciej M. Sokolowski","doi":"10.54648/eelr2022013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eelr2022013","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53610,"journal":{"name":"European Energy and Environmental Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43559795","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Emissions trading schemes (ETSs) have emerged as stable components of a fragmented climate governance landscape. Yet the proliferation of ETSs raises critical questions concerning their design, the development of conflicting norms, and how such schemes might link. This Article engages with these concerns by advancing a linkage framework based on a series of core convergence criteria which are considered necessary to assess the compatibility of candidate partner schemes. For the EU, the search for a candidate linkage partner has seemed a Sisyphean undertaking, but it is suggested that South Korea offers the prospect of stable climate settings. The critical design features of South Korea’s Emissions Trading Scheme (KETS) are evaluated before applying core convergence criteria to evaluate compatibility. This Article identifies a degree of alignment between the design features of the EU’s flagship Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) and the KETS, but also uncovers divergences where detailed negotiation will prove necessary. European Union emissions trading scheme, Korea emissions trading scheme, linkage, climate governance
{"title":"Linking Emissions Trading Schemes: Assessing the Potential for EU-South Korea Linkage","authors":"Gerard Kelly","doi":"10.54648/eelr2022009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eelr2022009","url":null,"abstract":"Emissions trading schemes (ETSs) have emerged as stable components of a fragmented climate governance landscape. Yet the proliferation of ETSs raises critical questions concerning their design, the development of conflicting norms, and how such schemes might link. This Article engages with these concerns by advancing a linkage framework based on a series of core convergence criteria which are considered necessary to assess the compatibility of candidate partner schemes. For the EU, the search for a candidate linkage partner has seemed a Sisyphean undertaking, but it is suggested that South Korea offers the prospect of stable climate settings. The critical design features of South Korea’s Emissions Trading Scheme (KETS) are evaluated before applying core convergence criteria to evaluate compatibility. This Article identifies a degree of alignment between the design features of the EU’s flagship Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) and the KETS, but also uncovers divergences where detailed negotiation will prove necessary.\u0000European Union emissions trading scheme, Korea emissions trading scheme, linkage, climate governance","PeriodicalId":53610,"journal":{"name":"European Energy and Environmental Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45612081","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The EU emission trading system (ETS) is the primary tool for reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and combating climate change. Free allocation of emission allowances plays an important role within this system, and will continue to do so, also after the European Commission’s ‘Fit for 55’ proposal package. This article discusses the determination of free allocation by use of product benchmarks, and the assessment of substitutability under the product benchmark system, and how they relate to the legitimacy and proper functioning of the ETS. It is argued that a coherent, ETS-specific test should be applied when the Commission assesses the substitutability that underpins the product benchmarks, and that full judicial review is warranted going forward, akin to that deployed by the EU courts in competition cases. Emission trading system, EU ETS, free allocation, benchmark, substitute
{"title":"Legitimacy and Consistency of Free Allocation in the EU ETS: The Role of Substitutes in Product Benchmarks","authors":"Andreas Johansson, Alexander Derelius","doi":"10.54648/eelr2022011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eelr2022011","url":null,"abstract":"The EU emission trading system (ETS) is the primary tool for reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and combating climate change. Free allocation of emission allowances plays an important role within this system, and will continue to do so, also after the European Commission’s ‘Fit for 55’ proposal package. This article discusses the determination of free allocation by use of product benchmarks, and the assessment of substitutability under the product benchmark system, and how they relate to the legitimacy and proper functioning of the ETS. It is argued that a coherent, ETS-specific test should be applied when the Commission assesses the substitutability that underpins the product benchmarks, and that full judicial review is warranted going forward, akin to that deployed by the EU courts in competition cases.\u0000Emission trading system, EU ETS, free allocation, benchmark, substitute","PeriodicalId":53610,"journal":{"name":"European Energy and Environmental Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44635968","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The break-even principle (a cost-based regulation approach) has been a fundamental principle for the price regulation of the Danish utilities for several decades. Following the liberalization of parts of the energy sector, this regulation has been supplemented with new instruments to regulate monopoly areas. This form of regulation was introduced in connection with a new electricity supply regulation from 1999. The detailed design of the income-cap regulation has been left to the Minister responsible for the energy sector and the supervisory authority (currently the Danish Utility Regulator (DUR)). Income-cap regulation of power grids has given rise to several challenges. Thus, the specific design of the revenue framework has been changed several times. At the same time, however, some experience has been gained with the administrative handling of this form of regulation. Several cases have, in the absence of administrative courts in Denmark, been dealt with by the Danish Energy Board of Appeals (EBA). Since the introduction of revenue frameworks, the power (electricity) sector has changed. Furthermore, the sector must now adapt to the green transition, which will require capacity expansion at both transmission and distribution levels, or other measures to be taken to prevent bottlenecks in the system. In this article the income-cap experience will be discussed. Income-cap, grid companies, green transition, electricity, power supply, utilities
{"title":"The Danish Income-Cap Regulation in the Power Supply Sector","authors":"Bent Ole Gram Mortensen","doi":"10.54648/eelr2022006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eelr2022006","url":null,"abstract":"The break-even principle (a cost-based regulation approach) has been a fundamental principle for the price regulation of the Danish utilities for several decades. Following the liberalization of parts of the energy sector, this regulation has been supplemented with new instruments to regulate monopoly areas.\u0000This form of regulation was introduced in connection with a new electricity supply regulation from 1999. The detailed design of the income-cap regulation has been left to the Minister responsible for the energy sector and the supervisory authority (currently the Danish Utility Regulator (DUR)).\u0000Income-cap regulation of power grids has given rise to several challenges. Thus, the specific design of the revenue framework has been changed several times. At the same time, however, some experience has been gained with the administrative handling of this form of regulation. Several cases have, in the absence of administrative courts in Denmark, been dealt with by the Danish Energy Board of Appeals (EBA).\u0000Since the introduction of revenue frameworks, the power (electricity) sector has changed. Furthermore, the sector must now adapt to the green transition, which will require capacity expansion at both transmission and distribution levels, or other measures to be taken to prevent bottlenecks in the system. In this article the income-cap experience will be discussed.\u0000Income-cap, grid companies, green transition, electricity, power supply, utilities","PeriodicalId":53610,"journal":{"name":"European Energy and Environmental Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48478154","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Cyprus is an island situated in the Easter Mediterranean and member of the European Union. Cyprus maintains an effective monopoly in electrifying the island chiefly by entrusting the electrification to the Cyprus Electricity Authority, a semi-governmental organization. The Electricity Authority aggregates all key functions for generating and ultimately matching the load. The electricity is mainly produced by burning petrol, mazut, at the power plants. Cyprus has recently passed Laws to enable liberalization of its electric industry. In the body of this research paper, we will unveil the current state of the electricity industry in Cyprus by expanding on the electricity state owned company, the regulatory Authority and the new Laws enabling the liberalization pathway. Then we focus on key ingredients in liberalizing electricity industry. The key focus of this article will be to appraise the Cyprus new Laws, outlining the positive conditions and stress the persisting barriers and provide recommendations.
{"title":"The Advent of Electricity Liberalization in Cyprus. Critical Analysis of the Current State and Charting a Path to Liberalization","authors":"Costas Michail","doi":"10.54648/eelr2022007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eelr2022007","url":null,"abstract":"Cyprus is an island situated in the Easter Mediterranean and member of the European Union. Cyprus maintains an effective monopoly in electrifying the island chiefly by entrusting the electrification to the Cyprus Electricity Authority, a semi-governmental organization. The Electricity Authority aggregates all key functions for generating and ultimately matching the load. The electricity is mainly produced by burning petrol, mazut, at the power plants. Cyprus has recently passed Laws to enable liberalization of its electric industry. In the body of this research paper, we will unveil the current state of the electricity industry in Cyprus by expanding on the electricity state owned company, the regulatory Authority and the new Laws enabling the liberalization pathway. Then we focus on key ingredients in liberalizing electricity industry. The key focus of this article will be to appraise the Cyprus new Laws, outlining the positive conditions and stress the persisting barriers and provide recommendations.","PeriodicalId":53610,"journal":{"name":"European Energy and Environmental Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47843736","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：