Closure rules

In addition, most countries, with the exception of Sweden and The Netherlands, explicitly include closure rules within their NAPs. For example, in Germany, entities that close down operations (defined as emitting less than 10% of its average annual baseline emissions) will not receive allowances from the following year. Such formal closure rules further discourage the closure of inefficient plants within a trading period, as allocation essentially becomes a subsidy for continued production (Ahman et al., 2005). 

These closure rules have two consequences for the power system. First, with more plants staying on the system, there is more electricity supply and therefore prices can initially be reduced. Secondly, as inefficient old plants are artificially retained on the system, investment in more efficient new plants is delayed. This increases power prices and C02 emissions. 

We quantify the impact of the implicit closure rules for the Great Britain electricity system if a power plant closes, it does not receive any allocation in the following compliance period. Table 1 lists the initial annual allocation of allowances to the different technologies. We assume that this is the allowance allocation for the period 2005-2008 and will be linearly phased out until 2028. We again fix the C02 price at 20/tCO2. 

This article illustrates the set of distortions that can result from allocation of C02 allowances to existing facilities and new entrants in the form of closure rules where allocation is lost once the facility shuts down, updating where allocation in forthcoming compliance periods is a function of generation or emissions levels today, and allocations to new entrants based on different benchmarks. 

Finally the allocation method - notably the updating criteria, the treatment of new entrants and the closure rules - turns out to be a variable of importance to determine the competitiveness impacts and the C02 emissions reduction achieved at the world level under the EU ETS. 

The rotational factor is further reduced to the matrix element of the operator product (TV2) (TV2) by the closure rule. The contribution can then be expressed in terms of an operator of the form... 

Another major challenge in designing the first plans relates to new entrants and closure rules. Again on this aspect the Directive does not give much guidance and leaves it to national discretion whether to build a new entrants reserve and how to do so as well as whether to continue to allocate allowances to installations closed during the trading period. 

Figure 3.10a. Wood ward-Hoffmann ring closure rules ...

In the preresonance region, one (or a few) relevant (0) value(s) is (are) much smaller than the others, so that approximate closure rules cease to apply to the sum over electronic states. However, these rules remain applicable... 

It should be mentioned here that attempts to use the matrix sum rule to evaluate vibronic intensities introduces unnecessary errors. The sum rule can only he applied when one is dealing with a complete set of wave functions. The use of approximate wave functions, incomplete sets, etc., invalidates the matrix closure rules. This statement applies to both the electronic and vibrational problems separately and jointly (see, e.g., reference 1). 

As is evident, the three closure rules which must be satisfied by a true self-replicator— energy closure, material closure, and the information closure—place an extraordinary burden onto the design and implementation of self-replicating objects. The SSR must be able to produce and distribute energy, ingest raw materials to fabricate parts, and contain a complete technical description of itself, its processes, and its assembly instructions. Additionally, the environment for the SSR must also be considered, and perhaps specially designed, in order to make available all of the necessary raw materials for self-replication. 

---