  There is much disagreement concerning how best to control global carbon
emissions. We explore quantitatively how different control schemes affect the
collective emission dynamics of a population of emitting entities. We uncover a
complex trade-off which arises between average emissions (affecting the global
climate), peak pollution levels (affecting citizens' everyday health),
industrial efficiency (affecting the nation's economy), frequency of
institutional intervention (affecting governmental costs), common information
(affecting trading behavior) and market volatility (affecting financial
stability). Our findings predict that a self-organized free-market approach at
the level of a sector, state, country or continent, can provide better control
than a top-down regulated scheme in terms of market volatility and monthly
pollution peaks.
