82,853
edits
Template:Emissions scope comp: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "====ISDA==== The {{emissionsannex}} is crafted not as an Appendix to the {{commoddefs}} — which is how it started — nor as a standalone definitions booklet, but rather as a “Part 7” to an ISDA {{isdaprov|Schedule}}. This explains its rather odd numbering system, and the uncomfortable fact that its main number, the 7 is square bracketed, since whether it is a 6, 7, 8 or 9 depends on whether you already have put something else as a Part 6 or 7 in your Schedule. Se...") |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
If it ''had'' its own booklet, you could integrate other similar “compliance” regimes UK Allowances, for example, and perhaps Californian ones, and you might be able to make it “master-agreement agnostic”. Just a thought. | If it ''had'' its own booklet, you could integrate other similar “compliance” regimes UK Allowances, for example, and perhaps Californian ones, and you might be able to make it “master-agreement agnostic”. Just a thought. | ||
====EFET=== | |||
The EFET Allowances Appendix is structured as an appendix to the EFET agreement, and you can take your pick — and it won’t matter much — whether you choose the EFET Power or Gas format. | |||
The Annex does its work by amending terms in the EFET Master Agreement itself to be relevant to emissions trading. The terms that are not amended we have labelled green. | |||
Power and Gas trading both involve connecting to a grid and trading a physical commodity with the attendant risks that implies: things can blow up, go off, be off-spec, and the grid needs to be balanced and so on. Emissions certificates are financial instruments and so are much easier. Much of the amendments is to overcome this difference. But some traces of the EFET’s “physical trading network” genealogy remain. | |||