IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea15/205449.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economic and Policy Evaluation of Solar Energy for Indiana Business and Residential Applications

Author

Listed:
  • Jung, Jinho
  • Tyner, Wallace E.

Abstract

Solar energy is expanding in the US and globally recently in part because of policies encouraging its adoption such as net metering, financing tax benefits, or federal tax credits. Indiana is also expanding solar energy with other renewables to protect its environment because 95% of electricity is generated from coal (U.S. Energy Information Administration (U.S. EIA), 2014). Much of the attention to date on the expansion of solar energy has been on adopting solar PV systems in residential sectors. However, farm businesses offer an important opportunity as energy expenses account for 6% of total farm expenses on nationwide average (Brown and Elliot, 2005). As this analysis will show, the ability of farm and other businesses to depreciate the solar investment makes it much more economically attractive. In this analysis, we examine the economics of solar PV systems in Indiana in farm businesses and residential areas. We also compare these two sectors under different policy combinations so that we can see how they are different from an economic perspective. If adopting solar PV systems is shown to be cost competitive, it may be helpful for farm businesses to reduce energy expenses. We use stochastic benefit-cost analysis to evaluate the economics of solar PV systems under operating conditions in Indiana. A key indicator of economic viability is a comparison between the annualized cost of installing a solar PV system in each sector, a residence and a farm business, and the expected annualized electricity price from grids per kWh. We use the stochastic analysis to capture uncertainties in some key uncertain variables, and this makes the annualized costs probability distributions, not just a single deterministic value, so that our analysis can be more realistic. Through the distributions of the annualized costs, we also can calculate the probability that solar can be cheaper than grid electricity under different policy combinations in each sector. The analysis is done using Excel spreadsheets with the @Risk add-in to handle uncertainty. The uncertain variables were future grid electricity price, solar panel output rate of reduction over time, and solar panel failure rate. In addition, we conduct sensitivity analysis on several variables to see how changes in variables may affect the robustness of our results. The output is distributions of annualized costs of grid electricity, solar electricity, and the difference between the two. With the difference distribution, we are able to calculate the probability that solar electricity will be less expensive than grid electricity. Thus we can also evaluate how the economics of the solar PV system differs between a residence and a farm business. We do the analysis under three different combinations of policies: 1) Current policy set – federal tax credit, net metering, interest deduction for initial investment, and for the farm business depreciation of the solar investment 2) Level playing field policy set – carbon tax on grid electricity, no federal tax credit, net metering, interest deduction, and depreciation for both business and residential cases 3) No net metering – here we remove net metering from cases 1 and 2 We find that there is a 92% probability that a solar system in farm businesses is less expensive than grid electricity under current policy. Residential solar has a 50% chance of being less expensive than the grid under current policy. Under the level playing field case, residential and farm solar both show an 84% chance of being less expensive than the grid. Should net metering be removed, residential solar becomes un-economic while farm solar is still attractive even if it is not as much as with net metering in place. We did the analysis for two system sizes, and as would be expected, removing net metering causes more loss for the larger installation. The solar PV system may become a good option for farm businesses due largely to the added depreciation deduction. Another important result is that the level playing field case with carbon tax and depreciation allowed for all provides greater benefits than the current federal solar tax credit. From the sensitivity analysis, panel lifetime and discount rate are shown to be quite important in driving solar economics as would be expected. O&M costs are much less important. This analysis shows that the economics of solar energy are driven by policy considerations, which comes as no surprise. However, the difference in results under current policy between business and residential installations will be of interest to many. The fact that under current policy, solar is quite attractive to farm businesses will generate discussion. We will provide some case examples in the discussion. Also, the level the playing field case will be of significant interest. For profit electric companies can depreciate their capital investment, but homeowners cannot depreciate their solar investment. Also grid electricity imposes a carbon cost on society that solar does not. The federal tax credit is available for renewable energy but not fossil. Once we correct for these differences, we find that solar is more attractive than grid electricity, and this result will be of considerable interest.

Suggested Citation

  • Jung, Jinho & Tyner, Wallace E., 2015. "Economic and Policy Evaluation of Solar Energy for Indiana Business and Residential Applications," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205449, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea15:205449
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.205449
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/205449/files/Economic%20and%20Policy%20Evaluation%20of%20Solar%20Energy%20for%20Indiana%20Business%20and%20Residential_final.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.205449?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Branker, K. & Pathak, M.J.M. & Pearce, J.M., 2011. "A review of solar photovoltaic levelized cost of electricity," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(9), pages 4470-4482.
    2. Cai, Desmond W.H. & Adlakha, Sachin & Low, Steven H. & De Martini, Paul & Mani Chandy, K., 2013. "Impact of residential PV adoption on Retail Electricity Rates," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 830-843.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mayr, Dieter & Schmid, Erwin & Trollip, Hilton & Zeyringer, Marianne & Schmidt, Johannes, 2015. "The impact of residential photovoltaic power on electricity sales revenues in Cape Town, South Africa," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 10-23.
    2. Jung, Jinho & Tyner, Wallace E., 2014. "Economic and policy analysis for solar PV systems in Indiana," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 123-133.
    3. Sommerfeldt, Nelson & Madani, Hatef, 2017. "Revisiting the techno-economic analysis process for building-mounted, grid-connected solar photovoltaic systems: Part one – Review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 1379-1393.
    4. Castaneda, Monica & Franco, Carlos J. & Dyner, Isaac, 2017. "Evaluating the effect of technology transformation on the electricity utility industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 341-351.
    5. Plain, N. & Hingray, B. & Mathy, S., 2019. "Accounting for low solar resource days to size 100% solar microgrids power systems in Africa," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 448-458.
    6. Arnaud de La Tour & Matthieu Glachant & Yann Ménière, 2013. "What cost for photovoltaic modules in 2020? Lessons from experience curve models," Working Papers hal-00805668, HAL.
    7. Abolhosseini, Shahrouz & Heshmati, Almas & Altmann, Jörn, 2014. "A Review of Renewable Energy Supply and Energy Efficiency Technologies," IZA Discussion Papers 8145, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Joshua M. Pearce, 2012. "Limitations of Nuclear Power as a Sustainable Energy Source," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-15, June.
    9. Ndala Y. Mulongo & Pule A. Kholopane, 2018. "Cost Assessment: Electricity Generating Sources Against Energy Efficiency Measures," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(01), pages 1-28, March.
    10. Zimmerman, Ryan & Panda, Anurag & Bulović, Vladimir, 2020. "Techno-economic assessment and deployment strategies for vertically-mounted photovoltaic panels," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    11. Spiros Papaefthimiou, Manolis Souliotis, and Kostas Andriosopoulos, 2016. "Grid parity of solar energy: imminent fact or future's fiction," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Bollino-M).
    12. Angenendt, Georg & Zurmühlen, Sebastian & Axelsen, Hendrik & Sauer, Dirk Uwe, 2018. "Comparison of different operation strategies for PV battery home storage systems including forecast-based operation strategies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 884-899.
    13. Marina Moreira & Ivan Felipe Silva Santos & Lilian Ferreira Freitas & Flávio Ferreira Freitas & Regina Mambeli Barros & Geraldo Lúcio Tiago Filho, 2022. "Energy and economic analysis for a desalination plant powered by municipal solid waste incineration and natural gas in Brazil," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 1799-1826, February.
    14. Vimpari, Jussi & Junnila, Seppo, 2017. "Evaluating decentralized energy investments: Spatial value of on-site PV electricity," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 1217-1222.
    15. Ondraczek, Janosch, 2014. "Are we there yet? Improving solar PV economics and power planning in developing countries: The case of Kenya," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 604-615.
    16. Hao Cai & Ling Liang & Jing Tang & Qianxian Wang & Lihong Wei & Jiaping Xie, 2019. "An Empirical Study on the Efficiency and Influencing Factors of the Photovoltaic Industry in China and an Analysis of Its Influencing Factors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-22, November.
    17. Ohijeagbon, O.D. & Ajayi, Oluseyi O., 2015. "Solar regime and LVOE of PV embedded generation systems in Nigeria," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 226-235.
    18. Bertolini, Marina & D'Alpaos, Chiara & Moretto, Michele, 2018. "Do Smart Grids boost investments in domestic PV plants? Evidence from the Italian electricity market," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 890-902.
    19. Kukkikatte Ramamurthy Rao, Harshadeep & Gemechu, Eskinder & Thakur, Ujwal & Shankar, Karthik & Kumar, Amit, 2021. "Techno-economic assessment of titanium dioxide nanorod-based perovskite solar cells: From lab-scale to large-scale manufacturing," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 298(C).
    20. Ahmed S. Alahmed & Lang Tong, 2022. "Integrating Distributed Energy Resources: Optimal Prosumer Decisions and Impacts of Net Metering Tariffs," Papers 2204.06115, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy; Farm Management;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:aaea15:205449. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.