IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Do state renewable portfolio standards promote in-state renewable generation[glottal stop]

  • Yin, Haitao
  • Powers, Nicholas
Registered author(s):

    Several US states have passed renewable portfolio standard (RPS) policies in order to encourage investment in renewable energy technologies. Existing research on their effectiveness has either employed a cross-sectional approach or has ignored heterogeneity among RPS policies. In this paper, we introduce a new measure for the stringency of an RPS that explicitly accounts for some RPS design features that may have a significant impact on the strength of an RPS. We also investigate the impacts of renewable portfolio standards on in-state renewable electricity development using panel data and our new measure of RPS stringency, and compare the results with those when alternative measures are used. Using our new measure, the results suggest that RPS policies have had a significant and positive effect on in-state renewable energy development, a finding which is masked when design differences among RPS policies are ignored. We also find that another important design feature - allowing "free trade" of REC's - can significantly weaken the impact of an RPS. These results should prove instructive to policy makers, whether considering the development of a federal-level RPS or the development or redesign of a state-level RPS.

    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:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Energy Policy.

    Volume (Year): 38 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 2 (February)
    Pages: 1140-1149

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:2:p:1140-1149
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

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

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:2:p:1140-1149. 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: (Shamier, Wendy)

    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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.