Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Winner, Loser, or Innocent Victim? Has Renewable Energy Performed As Expected?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Burtraw, Dallas

    ()
    (Resources for the Future)

  • Palmer, Karen

    ()
    (Resources for the Future)

  • Darmstadter, Joel

    ()
    (Resources for the Future)

  • McVeigh, James

Abstract

This study provides an evaluation of the performance of five renewable energy technologies used to generate electricity: biomass, geothermal, solar photovoltaics, solar thermal, and wind. The authors compared the actual performance of these technologies against stated projections that helped shape public policy goals over the last three decades. Their findings document a significant difference between the success of renewable technologies in penetrating the U.S. electricity generation market and in meeting cost-related goals, when compared with historic projections. In general, renewable technologies have failed to meet expectations with respect to market penetration. They have succeeded, however, in meeting or exceeding expectations with respect to their cost. To a significant degree, the difference in performance in meeting projections of penetration and cost stem from the declining price of conventional generation, which constitutes a moving baseline against which renewable technologies have had to compete.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.rff.org/RFF/documents/RFF-DP-99-28.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Resources For the Future in its series Discussion Papers with number dp-99-28.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 01 Mar 1999
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-99-28

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.rff.org
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Denny Ellerman, 1998. "Note on The Seemingly Indefinite Extension of Power Plant Lives, A Panel Contribution," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Berglund, Christer & Soderholm, Patrik, 2006. "Modeling technical change in energy system analysis: analyzing the introduction of learning-by-doing in bottom-up energy models," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(12), pages 1344-1356, August.
  2. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen, 2005. "Cost-Effectiveness of Renewable Electricity Policies," Discussion Papers dp-05-01, Resources For the Future.
  3. Macauley, Molly & Shih, Jhih-Shyang, 2003. "Effects of Carbon Policies and Technology Change," Discussion Papers dp-03-14, Resources For the Future.
  4. Christiansen, Atle Christer, 2002. "New renewable energy developments and the climate change issue: a case study of Norwegian politics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 235-243, February.
  5. Menz, Fredric C., 2005. "Green electricity policies in the United States: case study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(18), pages 2398-2410, December.
  6. Winston Harrington & Richard D. Morgenstern & Peter Nelson, 2000. "On the accuracy of regulatory cost estimates," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(2), pages 297-322.
  7. Klass, Donald L., 2003. "A critical assessment of renewable energy usage in the USA," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 353-367, March.
  8. Siddiqui, Afzal S. & Marnay, Chris & Wiser, Ryan H., 2007. "Real options valuation of US federal renewable energy research, development, demonstration, and deployment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 265-279, January.
  9. Austin, David & Macauley, Molly & Darmstadter, Joel & Shih, Jhih-Shyang & Aronow, Emily & Bath, Tom, 2002. "Measuring the Contribution to the Economy of Investments in Renewable Energy: Estimates of Future Consumer Gains," Discussion Papers dp-02-05-, Resources For the Future.
  10. Kobos, Peter H. & Erickson, Jon D. & Drennen, Thomas E., 2006. "Technological learning and renewable energy costs: implications for US renewable energy policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(13), pages 1645-1658, September.
  11. Berry, David, 2002. "The market for tradable renewable energy credits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 369-379, September.
  12. Patrik Söderholm & Ger Klaassen, 2007. "Wind Power in Europe: A Simultaneous Innovation–Diffusion Model," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 36(2), pages 163-190, February.
  13. Vajjhala, Shalini, 2006. "Siting Renewable Energy Facilities: A Spatial Analysis of Promises and Pitfalls," Discussion Papers dp-06-34, Resources For the Future.
  14. Jun, Eunju & Joon Kim, Won & Hoon Jeong, Yong & Heung Chang, Soon, 2010. "Measuring the social value of nuclear energy using contingent valuation methodology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1470-1476, March.
  15. Darmstadter, Joel, 2003. "The Economic and Policy Setting of Renewable Energy: Where Do Things Stand?," Discussion Papers dp-03-64, Resources For the Future.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-99-28. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Webmaster).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.