Do state renewable portfolio standards promote in-state renewable generation[glottal stop]
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.
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.
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.:
- Maxwell, John W & Lyon, Thomas P & Hackett, Steven C, 2000.
"Self-Regulation and Social Welfare: The Political Economy of Corporate Environmentalism,"
Journal of Law and Economics,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(2), pages 583-617, October.
- John W. Maxwell & Thomas P Lyon & Steven C.. Hackett, 1995. "Self-Regulation and Social Welfare: The Political Economy of Corporate Environmentalism," University of Chicago - George G. Stigler Center for Study of Economy and State 122, Chicago - Center for Study of Economy and State.
- Fischer, Carolyn & Newell, Richard G., 2008. "Environmental and technology policies for climate mitigation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 142-162, March.
- Fischer, Carolyn & Newell, Richard, 2004. "Environmental and Technology Policies for Climate Mitigation," Discussion Papers dp-04-05, Resources For the Future.
- Menz, Fredric C. & Vachon, Stephan, 2006. "The effectiveness of different policy regimes for promoting wind power: Experiences from the states," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(14), pages 1786-1796, September.
- Berry, Trent & Jaccard, Mark, 2001. "The renewable portfolio standard:: design considerations and an implementation survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 263-277, March.
- Palmer, Karen & Burtraw, Dallas, 2005. "Cost-effectiveness of renewable electricity policies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 873-894, November.
- Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen, 2005. "Cost-Effectiveness of Renewable Electricity Policies," Discussion Papers dp-05-01, Resources For the Future.
- Vajjhala, Shalini & Paul, Anthony & Sweeney, Richard & Palmer, Karen, 2008. "Green Corridors: Linking Interregional Transmission Expansion and Renewable Energy Policies," Discussion Papers dp-08-06, Resources For the Future.
- Wiser, Ryan & Namovicz, Christopher & Gielecki, Mark & Smith, Robert, 2007. "The Experience with Renewable Portfolio Standards in the United States," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 8-20, May.
- Ryan Wiser & Kevin Porter & Robert Grace, 2005. "Evaluating Experience with Renewables Portfolio Standards in the United States," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 237-263, April.
- James Bushnell & Carla Peterman & Catherine Wolfram, 2007. "Local Solutions to Global Problems: Policy Choice and Regulatory Jurisdiction," NBER Working Papers 13472, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. Full references (including those not matched with 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: (Dana Niculescu)
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.