Reliable carbon price forecasts support compliance planning and transition risk management, but multi-source backtests can appear accurate when observations are aligned by calendar date rather than actual availability. We develop a point-in-time framework for China’s Hubei, Guangdong, and national emissions trading markets from July 2021 to December 2025. The design explicitly recognizes that the national ETS was power-sector-dominated through 2024 and entered a multi-sector transition during 2025. Every market, energy, policy, macroeconomic, weather, and news observation receives a first-usable timestamp and a market-specific cutoff. Matched Temporal Fusion Transformer (TFT) forecasts isolate the incremental value of audited news under nested rolling-origin estimation, dependence-aware inference, and past-only conformal calibration. Relative to the same learner using the same structured information, eligible news reduces RMSE by 4.8% (95% stationary-block-bootstrap interval: 1.2–8.3%) and WIS by 3.6% (0.5–6.8%). The gain is conditional: it is strongest at one day, in Hubei and the national ETS, and during high-volatility, compliance, policy-intensive, and energy-shock states; five-day effects are imprecise. Random Forest also produces a positive matched news gain of 3.9%, indicating that the information result is not unique to TFT. National-ETS event-window exclusions leave gains of 4.6–4.9%, while excluding reform-tagged news leaves 4.4%. Rolling conformal adjustment reduces mean absolute coverage error from 8.7 to 2.1 percentage points and normalized interval width by 9.7%. A combined invalid alignment instead reports an apparent 10.9% gain. Information reliability therefore changes both measured forecast performance and its energy transition interpretation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: