IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v36y2019i2p195-216.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Renewable Portfolio Standards and Policy Stringency: An Assessment of Implementation and Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Nikolay Anguelov
  • William F. Dooley

Abstract

This research examines the impact of increasing the stringency of renewable portfolio standards (RPS) on the consumption of energy produced from renewable sources. Putting prior findings in the context of policy learning, first we focus on technological innovation, factor endowments, and economic energy dependence of American states to track how RPS have proliferated and strengthened. Next, we look at the net effect of this RPS evolution on state fossil fuel energy divestment. To evaluate the interplay between: a) the political desire to lower fossil fuel use, b) technological feasibility to do so, and c) the economic trade‐offs and risks, we focus on the industrial sector dependence on energy security and affordability. Our results indicate that energy security is a priority and even in light of increasing RPS stringency, states with relatively weak but mandatory RPS are leaders in aggregate renewable energy consumption. This fact is due to favoring biofuel and hydro generation rather than solar and wind because of lower deployment costs. 本文探讨了严格可再生能源组合标准(RPS)对可再生能源产生的能源消耗所产生的影响。在政策学习的背景下结合之前的研究结果,笔者首先将重点放在美国各州的技术创新、要素禀赋和经济能源依赖上,从而追踪RPS是如何扩散和加强的。接下来笔者将关注此次RPS改革对国家化石燃料能源撤资所产生的净影响。为评估以下三者:a) 减少使用化石燃料的政治愿望;b) 减少使用化石燃料的技术可行性;c) 经济权衡和风险之间的相互作用,笔者重点聚焦于工业部门对能源安全和负担能力的依赖。结果表明,能源安全是重中之重,即使考虑到严格RPS,RPS相对较弱但强制性较强的国家在可再生能源消费总量方面也处于领先地位。这是因为政府更倾向于消费配置成本较低的生物燃料和水力发电,而不是太阳能和风能。 Esta investigación examina el impacto de incrementar la rigurosidad de los estándares de portafolio renovables (RPS) sobre el consumo de energía generada a través de recursos renovables. Al ubicar los hallazgos anteriores en el contexto del aprendizaje de políticas, primero nos enfocamos en la innovación tecnológica, las dotaciones de factores y la dependencia económica de la energía de los estados de EE. UU. para rastrear cómo las RPS han proliferado y fortalecido. A continuación, observamos el efecto neto de esta evolución de RPS en la venta de energía de combustibles fósiles del estado. Para evaluar la interacción entre a) el deseo político de reducir el uso de combustibles fósiles, b) la viabilidad tecnológica para hacerlo y c) las compensaciones y los riesgos económicos, nos centramos en la dependencia del sector industrial de la seguridad energética y la asequibilidad. Nuestros resultados indican que la seguridad energética es una prioridad e incluso en vista del aumento de la exigencia de RPS, los estados con RPS relativamente débiles pero obligatorios son líderes en el consumo agregado de energía renovable. Este hecho se debe a favorecer la generación de biocombustibles e hidroeléctricas en lugar de la energía solar y eólica debido a los menores costos de implementación.

Suggested Citation

  • Nikolay Anguelov & William F. Dooley, 2019. "Renewable Portfolio Standards and Policy Stringency: An Assessment of Implementation and Outcomes," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 36(2), pages 195-216, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:36:y:2019:i:2:p:195-216
    DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12322
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12322
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ropr.12322?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Zhou, Shan & Solomon, Barry D., 2020. "Do renewable portfolio standards in the United States stunt renewable electricity development beyond mandatory targets?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    2. Zhou, Shan & Solomon, Barry D., 2021. "The interplay between renewable portfolio standards and voluntary green power markets in the United States," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 720-729.
    3. Fugui Dong & Lei Shi & Xiaohui Ding & Yuan Li & Yongpeng Shi, 2019. "Study on China’s Renewable Energy Policy Reform and Improved Design of Renewable Portfolio Standard," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-23, June.
    4. Barry D. Solomon & Shan Zhou, 2021. "Renewable Portfolio Standards: Do Voluntary Goals vs. Mandatory Standards Make a Difference?," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(2), pages 146-163, March.
    5. Parrish Bergquist & Christopher Warshaw, 2023. "How climate policy commitments influence energy systems and the economies of US states," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-9, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:36:y:2019:i:2:p:195-216. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.