IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Learning from experience? The development of the Renewables Obligation in England and Wales 2002-2010

Listed author(s):
  • Woodman, B.
  • Mitchell, C.
Registered author(s):

    The UK has enviable renewable resources, both onshore (wind) and offshore (wind, wave and tidal) (The Offshore Valuation Group, 2010). The government has had policy mechanisms in place since 1990 to encourage these resources to be developed. The current mechanism, the Renewables Obligation (RO), was specifically designed to emphasise competition and therefore to fit in with the UK's overall strategic approach to energy policy. However, as yet, it has not delivered the capacity that it was designed to do, and as a result the UK faces a difficult challenge in attempting to meet European-wide renewable energy targets for 2020, as well as longer term decarbonisation targets. This paper explores some of the major reasons why the RO has performed so poorly to date and considers the prospects for improvement up to 2020. It concludes that the strategic emphasis on competition in the support mechanisms has played a key role in limiting renewables development, but that the mechanism has changed significantly since it was introduced. However, these changes, together with proposals for electricity market reform, still do not address important elements of risk in comparison with a standard Feed In Tariff.

    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: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421511002710
    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): 39 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 7 (July)
    Pages: 3914-3921

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:7:p:3914-3921
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol

    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.:

    as
    in new window


    1. Foxon, T. J. & Gross, R. & Chase, A. & Howes, J. & Arnall, A. & Anderson, D., 2005. "UK innovation systems for new and renewable energy technologies: drivers, barriers and systems failures," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(16), pages 2123-2137, November.
    2. Helm, Dieter, 2004. "Energy, the State, and the Market: British Energy Policy since 1979," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199270743.
    3. Mitchell, Catherine & Connor, Peter, 2004. "Renewable energy policy in the UK 1990-2003," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(17), pages 1935-1947, November.
    4. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:39:y:2011:i:7:p:3914-3921. 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.

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