3) A tender mechanism that is open & focused on all energy-intensive industries (instead of energy carriers). And which has the option to use bid levelling parameters to let sectors with different costs compete head-to-head, & thus achieve a more comprehensive coverage of sectors at lower costs. 4/6

1) Two-sided contracts that cover both carbon price, and energy price movements address the currently existing investment risk barrier – these price risks matter as this is where most of the cost and risks of clean energy-intensive industrial processes lie. 2/6

Our new commentary in Joule (authors.elsevier.com/a/1k9mf925JE...) describes the rationale behind the major design choices underlying Germany’s recently concluded 4-billion € tender of Carbon Contracts for Difference (CCfD) for emissions reductions in energy-intensive industry: 1/6 🔌💡 #climatesky

M.e. nicht wirklich. Bisherige Industriestrompreise in D zeichnen sich durch den Wegfall von Umlagen, und starker Reduktion der Netzentgelte aus. Der Energiebestandteil war immer gleich Großhandelspreis. Der ARENH ersetzt den Großhandelspreis durch 42 Euro/MWH (www.services-rte.com/en/learn-mor...)

The study of my colleagues might also be of interest. Given the big inter-decile spreads there can be quite a few (relative) "losers".
Imo, both non-per-head redistribution as well as complementary policies (also for other reasons) can and should help address that issue. www.diw.de/de/diw_01.c....