A Multi-objective Perspective for Operator Scheduling using Fine-grained DVS Architecture

The stringent power budget of fine grained power managed digital integrated circuits have driven chip designers to optimize power at the cost of area and delay, which were the traditional cost criteria for circuit optimization. The emerging scenario motivates us to revisit the classical operator scheduling problem under the availability of DVFS enabled functional units that can trade-off cycles with power. We study the design space defined due to this trade-off and present a branch-and-bound(B/B) algorithm to explore this state space and report the pareto-optimal front with respect to area and power. The scheduling also aims at maximum resource sharing and is able to attain sufficient area and power gains for complex benchmarks when timing constraints are relaxed by sufficient amount. Experimental results show that the algorithm that operates without any user constraint(area/power) is able to solve the problem for most available benchmarks, and the use of power budget or area budget constraints leads to significant performance gain.Comment: 18 pages, 6 figures, International journal of VLSI design & Communication Systems (VLSICS

Policy Design for International Greenhouse Gas Control

In this heart-searching, process based thesis, I want to find out who I am in the field of Architecture. Trough my urge to create, I am discovering and searching by making and producing objects by hand to feel and be present with the materiality, construction and art of architecture. My production of objects are divided in three parts based on scale, context and time, giving me a richer understanding about my will, intent and qualities.   "Two truths approach each other, one comes from within, one coming from the outside and where they meet there is a chance to see yourself” Tomas Tranströmer, Preludium II I detta hjärtsökande, processbaserade Xjobb, vill jag ta reda på vem jag är inom området arkitektur. Genom min lust att skapa, upptäcker och söker jag genom att göra och producera objekt för hand för att känna och vara närvarande med materialiteten, konstruktionen och konsten i arkitekturen. Min produktion av objekt är uppdelad i tre delar baserad på skala, kontext och tid, vilket ger mig en rikare förståelse om min vilja, avsikt och kvaliteter.   “Två sanningar närmar sig varann, en kommer inifrån, en kommer utifrån och där de möts har man en chans att få se sig själv”     To­mas Tran­strö­mer, Pre­lu­dium I

Which economic model for a water-efficient Europe? Report of a CEPS Task Force. CEPS Task Force Report, 27 November 2012

This CEPS Task Force Report focuses on how to improve water efficiency in Europe, notably in public supply, households, agriculture, energy and manufacturing as well as across sectors. It presents a number of recommendations on how to make better use of economic policy instruments to sustainably manage the EU’s water resources. Published in the run-up to the European Commission’s “Blueprint to Safeguard Europe’s Waters”, the report contributes to the policy deliberations in two ways. First, by assessing the viability of economic policy instruments, it addresses a major shortcoming that has so far prevented the 2000 EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) from becoming fully effective in practice: the lack of appropriate, coherent and effective instruments in (some) member states. Second, as the Task Force report is the result of an interactive process involving a variety of stakeholders, it is able to point to the key differences in interpreting and applying WFD principles that have led to a lack of policy coherence across the EU and to offer some pragmatic advice on moving forward

Policy Instruments for Climate Change: How Can National Governments Address a Global Problem?

There continues to be great debate about the desirability of taking actions to limit carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gas emissions, but it is important to consider policy instruments that can be employed to meet targets that may eventually be forthcoming. The theoretical advantages of market-based instruments, such as carbon taxes and systems of tradable carbon rights, are striking. In the U.S. domestic context, grandfathered tradable permits will probably be the preferred approach (if any) in the short run, although revenue-neutral carbon taxes will hold greater promise in the long run. In the international context, a system of international tradable permits could provide important advantages over alternative approaches, but it is difficult to imagine what existing international institution could administer such a system. Hence, despite the great theoretical advantages of market-based approaches to addressing global climate change, neither domestic political barriers nor international institutional impediments to implementing these and other instruments should be underestimated.

The EU Emissions Trading System and Climate Policy towards 2050: Real incentives to reduce emissions and drive innovation? CEPS Special Reports, 12 January 2011

With the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) now entering in its seventh year of operation, this report takes stock of the largest multi-sector greenhouse gas trading scheme in the world. It reviews the experiences of the pilot phase from 2005-07, assesses the adjustments introduced in the second phase (2008-12) and looks ahead to the radical changes that will come into effect in the third phase starting in 2013. The assessment is based on a literature review of recently published ex-post analyses and ex-ante studies and draws as well on our own calculations. It investigates the main controversies surrounding the EU ETS, such as its environmental effectiveness, economic rents, windfall profits and fairness, the role of CDM and JI and its impact of on industrial competitiveness. It also evaluates the scheme’s ability to promote innovation and low-carbon technology deployment. Finally, the study addresses the fundamental question of whether the ETS has lived up to its promise to “promote reductions of greenhouse gas emissions in a cost-effective and economically efficient manner”, and if not, what are the prospects of its doing so in the future and what additional changes will be required

The Effect of Allowance Allocations on Cap-and-Trade System Performance

We examine an implication of the "Coase Theorem" which has had an important impact both on environmental economics and on public policy in the environmental domain. Under certain conditions, the market equilibrium in a cap-and-trade system will be cost-effective and independent of the initial allocation of tradable rights. That is, the overall cost of achieving a given aggregate emission reduction will be minimized, and the final allocation of permits will be independent of the initial allocation. We call this the independence property. This property is very important because it allows equity and efficiency concerns to be separated in a relatively straightforward manner. In particular, the property means that the government can establish the overall pollution-reduction goal for a cap-and-trade system by setting the cap, and leave it up to the legislature--such as the U.S. Congress--to construct a constituency in support of the program by allocating the allowances to various interests without affecting either the environmental performance of the system or its aggregate social costs. Our primary objective in this paper is to examine the conditions under which the independence property is likely to hold--both in theory and in practice. A number of factors can call the independence property into question theoretically, including market power, transaction costs, non-cost-minimizing behavior, and conditional allowance allocations. We find that, in practice, there is support for the independence property in some, but not all cap-and-trade applications.

The U.S. Proposed Carbon Tariffs, WTO Scrutiny and China’s Responses

With countries from around the world set to meet in Copenhagen to try to hammer out a post-2012 climate change agreement, no one would disagree that a U.S. commitment to cut greenhouse gas emissions is essential to such a global pact. However, despite U.S. president Obama’s recent announcement to push for a commitment to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 17% by 2020, in reality it is questionable whether U.S. Congress will agree to specific emissions cuts, although they are not ambitious at all from the perspectives of both the EU and developing countries, without the imposition of carbon tariffs on Chinese products to the U.S. market, even given China’s own recent announcement to voluntarily seek to reduce its carbon intensity by 40-45% over the same period. This dilemma is partly attributed to flaws in current international climate negotiations, which have been focused on commitments on the two targeted dates of 2020 and 2050. However, if the international climate change negotiations continue on their current course without extending the commitment period to 2030, which would really open the possibility for the U.S. and China to make the commitments that each wants from the other, the inclusion of border carbon adjustment measures seems essential to secure passage of any U.S. legislation capping its own greenhouse gas emissions. Moreover, the joint WTO-UNEP report indicates that border carbon adjustment measures might be allowed under the existing WTO rules, depending on their specific design features and the specific conditions for implementing them. Against this background, this paper argues that, on the U.S. side, there is a need to minimize the potential conflicts with WTO provisions in designing such border carbon adjustment measures. The U.S. also needs to explore, with its trading partners, cooperative sectoral approaches to advancing low-carbon technologies and/or concerted mitigation efforts in a given sector at the international level. Moreover, to increase the prospects for a successful WTO defence of the Waxman-Markey type of border adjustment provision, there should be: 1) a period of good faith efforts to reach agreements among the countries concerned before imposing such trade measures; 2) consideration of alternatives to trade provisions that could reasonably be expected to fulfill the same function but are not inconsistent or less inconsistent with the relevant WTO provisions; and 3) trade provisions that should allow importers to submit equivalent emission reduction units that are recognized by international treaties to cover the carbon contents of imported products. Meanwhile, being targeted by such border carbon adjustment measures, China needs to, at the right time, indicate a serious commitment to address climate change issues to challenge the legitimacy of the U.S. imposing carbon tariffs by signaling well ahead that it will take on binding absolute emission caps around the year 2030, and needs the three transitional periods of increasing climate obligations before taking on absolute emissions caps. This paper argues that there is a clear need within a climate regime to define comparable efforts towards climate mitigation and adaptation to discipline the use of unilateral trade measures at the international level. As exemplified by export tariffs that China applied on its own during 2006-08, the paper shows that defining the comparability of climate efforts can be to China’s advantage. Furthermore, given the fact that, in volume terms, energy-intensive manufacturing in China values 7 to 8 times that of India, and thus carbon tariffs have a greater impact on China than on India, the paper questions whether China should hold the same stance on this issue as India as it does now, although the two largest developing countries should continue to take a common position on other key issues in international climate change negotiations.Post-2012 Climate Negotiations, Border Carbon Adjustments, Carbon Tariffs, Emissions Allowance Requirements, Cap-And-Trade Regime, Lieberman-Warner Bill, Waxman-Markey Bill, World Trade Organization, Kyoto Protocol, China, United States

The Effect of Allowance Allocations on Cap-and-Trade System Performance

We examine an implication of the “Coase Theorem” which has had an important impact both on environmental economics and on public policy in the environmental domain. Under certain conditions, the market equilibrium in a cap-and-trade system will be cost-effective and independent of the initial allocation of tradable rights. That is, the overall cost of achieving a given aggregate emission reduction will be minimized, and the final allocation of permits will be independent of the initial allocation. We call this the independence property. This property is very important because it allows equity and efficiency concerns to be separated in a relatively straightforward manner. In particular, the property means that the government can establish the overall pollution-reduction goal for a cap-and-trade system by setting the cap, and leave it up to the legislature – such as the U.S. Congress – to construct a constituency in support of the program by allocating the allowances to various interests without affecting either the environmental performance of the system or its aggregate social costs. Our primary objective in this paper is to examine the conditions under which the independence property is likely to hold – both in theory and in practice. A number of factors can call the independence property into question theoretically, including market power, transaction costs, non-cost-minimizing behavior, and conditional allowance allocations. We find that, in practice, there is support for the independence property in some, but not all cap-and-trade applications.Cap-and-Trade System, Tradable Permits, Coase Theorem, Allowance Allocation