Are carbon credits effective?

Is it possible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by assigning a value to CO2? That's the concept behind carbon credits. Their advantage: they set targets but let companies decide how to meet them. Of all the processes that can be used to reduce air pollution, the cap and trade system is the best way to meet global targets on a national or continental scale. The system's efficiency is based on setting a ceiling for emissions: this is the cap. The emissions quotas are negotiable goods that can be traded on a market: this is the 'trade'. No company can exceed its quotas, but it can choose how to meet them: decreasing its emissions by changing its production processes, buying carbon credits sold by companies that have exceeded their targets, or using clean development mechanisms. For a carbon credit system to function correctly on an economic level, it's essential to meet one condition: don't allocate too many emissions quotas to the companies involved. If they receive too many quotas, it's not hard for them to meet their objectives without changing their production processes. The supply of carbon credits currently exceeds demand. The price per ton of CO2 is collapsing, and companies that have exceeded their targets are not rewarded for their efforts. Efficient though it may be, the cap and trade system cannot be the only way to fight CO2 emissions. In Europe, it presently covers 40% of the CO2 emissions by targeting utilities and industries that consume the most fossil fuels. But it cannot be extended to some sectors where pollution is diffuse. In transportation, for example, it's not possible to impose such a requirement. For that sector, as well as for the building sector, a suitable system of taxes might be effective and incentive