Design of an economically efficient feed-in tariff structure for renewable energy development
Evidence suggests, albeit tentatively, that feed-in tariffs (FITs) are more effective than alternative support schemes in promoting renewable energy technologies (RETs). FITs provide long-term financial stability for investors in RETs, which, at the prevailing market price of electricity, are not currently cost-efficient enough to compete with traditional fossil fuel technologies. On the other hand, if not properly designed, FITs can be economically inefficient, as is widely regarded to have been the case under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA). Under PURPA, too high a guaranteed price led to the creation of so-called "PURPA machines"--poorly performing generating units that could survive financially only because of heavy subsidies that came at the expense of retail customers. Similarly, because of their adverse impacts on retail electricity rates, German FITs have been subject to increasing political pressure from utilities and customers. In this paper, we propose an innovative two-part FIT, consisting of both a capacity payment and a market-based energy payment, which can be used to meet the renewables policy goals of regulators. Our two-part tariff design draws on the strengths of traditional FITs, relies on market mechanisms, is easy to implement, and avoids the problems caused by distorting wholesale energy markets through above-market energy payments. The approach is modeled on forward capacity market designs that have been recently implemented by several regional transmission organizations in the USA to address needs for new generating capacity to ensure system reliability.
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.:
- Menanteau, Philippe & Finon, Dominique & Lamy, Marie-Laure, 2003. "Prices versus quantities: choosing policies for promoting the development of renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8), pages 799-812, June.
- Mitchell, C. & Bauknecht, D. & Connor, P.M., 2006. "Effectiveness through risk reduction: a comparison of the renewable obligation in England and Wales and the feed-in system in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 297-305, February.
- Reiche, Danyel & Bechberger, Mischa, 2004. "Policy differences in the promotion of renewable energies in the EU member states," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 843-849, May.
- Madlener, Reinhard & Stagl, Sigrid, 2005. "Sustainability-guided promotion of renewable electricity generation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 147-167, April.
- Barclay, Paulette & Gegax, Douglas & Tschirhart, John, 1989. "Industrial Cogeneration and Regulatory Policy," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 225-40, September.
- Awerbuch, Shimon & Yang, Spencer, 2007. "Efficient electricity generating portfolios for Europe: maximising energy security and climate change mitigation," EIB Papers 7/2007, European Investment Bank, Economics Department.
- Ian H. Rowlands, 2007. "The Development of Renewable Electricity Policy in the Province of Ontario: The Influence of Ideas and Timing," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 24(3), pages 185-207, 05.
- Salant, David, 2000. "Auctions and Regulation: Reengineering of Regulatory Mechanisms," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 195-204, May.
- Meyer, Niels I., 2003. "European schemes for promoting renewables in liberalised markets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 665-676, June.
- Rowlands, Ian H., 2005. "Envisaging feed-in tariffs for solar photovoltaic electricity: European lessons for Canada," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 51-68, February.
- Mitchell, Catherine & Connor, Peter, 2004. "Renewable energy policy in the UK 1990-2003," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(17), pages 1935-1947, November.
- Hobbs, Benjamin F, et al, 2000. "Evaluation of a Truthful Revelation Auction in the Context of Energy Markets with Nonconcave Benefits," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 5-32, July.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:36:y:2008:i:3:p:981-990. 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: (Zhang, Lei)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.