IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/diw/diwwob/79-45-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Erneuerbare Energien: Quotenmodell keine Alternative zum EEG

Author

Listed:
  • Jochen Diekmann
  • Claudia Kemfert
  • Karsten Neuhoff
  • Wolf-Peter Schill
  • Thure Traber

Abstract

The German Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) has proven to be an effective instrument in promoting electricity from renewable resources, and the same basic structure has been adopted by a large number of other countries. The support provided for in the EEG consists particularly of a guaranteed fixed feed-in tariff or, since 2012, an optional market premium which is almost identical to the fixed feed-in tariff. As an alternative to the EEG model, there is some discussion about a quota mechanism that would oblige energy companies to supply a certain percentage of their power from renewable energies. However, switching to a system of this type would not resolve the problems that are currently being debated which are mainly not directly related to the EEG, for example, in the field of network regulation, electricity market design, and the promotion of innovation. Rather the introduction of a quota model would result in a higher investment risk and, in turn, an increase in promotion costs which are ultimately borne by the end user. Furthermore, due to a lack of differentiation between technology sectors, the introduction of a quota system would also be associated with the risk that the long-term goals for use of renewable energies would not be attained and electricity costs for consumers would not fall but rise further. Thus, a radical change in the support system is not recommended. It would make more sense to step up efforts to develop the current model with a focus on cost reduction and system integration. Das Erneuerbare-Energien-Gesetz (EEG) hat sich als wirkungsvolles Instrument zur Förderung von Strom aus erneuerbaren Energien erwiesen und ist in seiner Grundstruktur von einer großen Anzahl anderer Länder übernommen worden. Beim EEG besteht die Förderung insbesondere aus einer garantierten festen Vergütung beziehungsweise seit 2012 aus einer optionalen Marktprämie, die nahezu äquivalent zur Festvergütung ist. Als Alternative zum Fördermodell des EEG wird ein Quotenmodell diskutiert, bei dem die Stromlieferanten zu einem bestimmten Anteil von Strom aus erneuerbaren Energien verpflichtet werden. Der Umstieg auf ein solches Fördermodell stellt jedoch keine Lösung für die derzeit diskutierten Probleme dar, die zu einem großen Teil außerhalb des EEG anzusiedeln sind, beispielsweise im Bereich der Netzregulierung, des Strommarktdesigns und der Innovationsförderung. Vielmehr würden mit der Einführung eines Quotenmodells das Investitionsrisiko und somit die letztlich vom Endkunden zu tragenden Förderkosten steigen. Aufgrund mangelnder Differenzierung nach Technologiebereichen wäre die Einführung eines Quotensystems zudem mit der Gefahr verbunden, dass die langfristigen Ziele zur Nutzung erneuerbarer Energien nicht erreicht werden und die Belastungen für die Stromverbraucher nicht sinken, sondern sich zusätzlich erhöhen. Ein grundlegender Wechsel des Fördersystems ist daher nicht zu empfehlen. Vielmehr sollten die Anstrengungen zur Weiterentwicklung des bisherigen Fördermodells in Richtung auf Kostensenkung und Systemintegration intensiviert werden.

Suggested Citation

  • Jochen Diekmann & Claudia Kemfert & Karsten Neuhoff & Wolf-Peter Schill & Thure Traber, 2012. "Erneuerbare Energien: Quotenmodell keine Alternative zum EEG," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 79(45), pages 15-20.
  • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwwob:79-45-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.411130.de/12-45-3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Tilmann Rave, 2013. "Policy Coordination in the Energy Turnaround – Illustrated by the Emissions Trading System and the Subsidy of Renewable Energies," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 66(12), pages 23-36, June.
    2. Pegels, Anna & Lütkenhorst, Wilfried, 2014. "Is Germany׳s energy transition a case of successful green industrial policy? Contrasting wind and solar PV," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 522-534.
    3. Klagge, Britta, 2013. "Governance-Prozesse für erneuerbare Energien: Akteure, Koordinations- und Steuerungsstrukturen," Arbeitsberichte der ARL: Aufsätze, in: Governance-Prozesse für erneuerbare Energien, pages 7-16, ARL – Akademie für Raumentwicklung in der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft.
    4. Erik Gawel & Alexandra Purkus & Klaas Korte & Paul Lehmann, 2013. "Förderung der Markt- und Systemintegration erneuerbarer Energien: Perspektiven einer instrumentellen Weiterentwicklung," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 82(3), pages 123-136.
    5. Projektgruppe Gemeinschaftsdiagnose, 2014. "Joint Economic Forecast Spring 2014: Upturn in German Economy, but Economic Policy Creates Headwind," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 67(08), pages 03-64, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    renewable energy; feed-in tariff; quota;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    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:diw:diwwob:79-45-3. 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: Bibliothek (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.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.