IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v38y2010i2p1140-1149.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Yin, Haitao
  • Powers, Nicholas

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Yin, Haitao & Powers, Nicholas, 2010. "Do state renewable portfolio standards promote in-state renewable generation[glottal stop]," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 1140-1149, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:2:p:1140-1149
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(09)00828-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Palmer, Karen & Burtraw, Dallas, 2005. "Cost-effectiveness of renewable electricity policies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 873-894, November.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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: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). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.