IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/nbaece/307016.html

Market and Welfare Effects of Renewable Portfolio Standards in United States Electricity Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Bhattacharya, Suparna
  • Giannakas, Konstantinos
  • Schoengold, Karina

Abstract

This study analyzes the market and welfare effects of the introduction of Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) while considering the empirically relevant (a) interaction of compliance with voluntary green power markets, (b) differences in consumer preferences, and (c) imperfect competition among electricity suppliers. The study accounts for both the supply and demand effects of RPS — i.e., increased costs and a higher consumer valuation for regular power. Our analysis shows that the regular power price always increases after the introduction of RPS, while the effect of RPS on the equilibrium price of green power, the quantities of regular and green power, the welfare of consumers, and suppliers' profits is case-specific and dependent on the relative magnitude of the cost and utility effects, the strength of consumer preference for green power, the suppliers' costs before RPS, the impact of RPS on green power costs, and the degree of competition among power suppliers. While the introduction of RPS aims at increasing the use of green energy in electricity production, our analysis shows that the introduction of the policy can end up reducing the total quantity of green power used. Intriguingly, this adverse policy impact will occur under seemingly optimal conditions for the green power sector; i.e., a high consumer valuation of green energy and/or low cost difference between the green power and its conventional counterpart. Finally, the analysis shows that the policy design can play a key role in determining the incidence of RPS, while the identification of the winners and losers of the policy can provide insights on the political economy of RPS and the positions held by different groups in policy negotiations.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Bhattacharya, Suparna & Giannakas, Konstantinos & Schoengold, Karina, "undated". "Market and Welfare Effects of Renewable Portfolio Standards in United States Electricity Markets," Cornhusker Economics 307016, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Department of Agricultural Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:nbaece:307016
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.307016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/307016/files/market-welfare-effects-renewable-portfolio-standards.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.307016?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Catherine D. Wolfram, 1999. "Measuring Duopoly Power in the British Electricity Spot Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(4), pages 805-826, September.
    2. Carley, Sanya, 2009. "State renewable energy electricity policies: An empirical evaluation of effectiveness," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 3071-3081, August.
    3. Perloff,Jeffrey M. & Karp,Larry S. & Golan,Amos, 2007. "Estimating Market Power and Strategies," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521011143, November.
    4. Dae‐Wook Kim & Christopher R. Knittel, 2006. "Biases In Static Oligopoly Models? Evidence From The California Electricity Market," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 451-470, December.
    5. Delmas, Magali A. & Montes-Sancho, Maria J., 2011. "U.S. state policies for renewable energy: Context and effectiveness," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2273-2288, May.
    6. Zarnikau, Jay, 2003. "Consumer demand for `green power' and energy efficiency," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(15), pages 1661-1672, December.
    7. Bhattacharya, Suparna & Giannakas, Konstantinos & Schoengold, Karina, 2017. "Market and welfare effects of renewable portfolio standards in United States electricity markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 384-401.
    8. Lusk, Jayson L. & Roosen, Jutta & Shogren, Jason (ed.), 2011. "The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Food Consumption and Policy," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199569441.
    9. Fischer, Carolyn, 2006. "How Can Renewable Portfolio Standards Lower Electricity Prices?," RFF Working Paper Series dp-06-20, Resources for the Future.
    10. Jensen, S. G. & Skytte, K., 2002. "Interactions between the power and green certificate markets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 425-435, April.
    11. Patricia Champ & Richard Bishop, 2001. "Donation Payment Mechanisms and Contingent Valuation: An Empirical Study of Hypothetical Bias," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(4), pages 383-402, August.
    12. 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.
    13. repec:aen:journl:2010v31-03-a07 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Wiser, Ryan & Porter, Kevin & Bolinger, Mark & Raitt, Heather, 2005. "Does It Have To Be This Hard? Implementing the Nation's Most Complex Renewables Portfolio Standard," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 18(8), pages 55-67, October.
    15. Hansla, Andre & Gamble, Amelie & Juliusson, Asgeir & Garling, Tommy, 2008. "Psychological determinants of attitude towards and willingness to pay for green electricity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 768-774, February.
    16. 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.
    17. Palmer, Karen & Burtraw, Dallas, 2005. "Cost-effectiveness of renewable electricity policies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 873-894, November.
    18. Borchers, Allison M. & Duke, Joshua M. & Parsons, George R., 2007. "Does willingness to pay for green energy differ by source?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 3327-3334, June.
    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. Nicolini, Marcella & Tavoni, Massimo, 2017. "Are renewable energy subsidies effective? Evidence from Europe," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 412-423.
    2. Karen Maguire & Abdul Munasib, 2013. "Do Renewables Portfolio Standards Increase Electricity Prices? A Synthetic Control Approach," Economics Working Paper Series 1403, Oklahoma State University, Department of Economics and Legal Studies in Business, revised Aug 2013.
    3. Prasad, Monica & Munch, Steven, 2012. "State-level renewable electricity policies and reductions in carbon emissions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 237-242.
    4. Kahia, Montassar & Ben Aissa, Mohamed Safouane & kadria, Mohamed, 2014. "Do renewable energy policies promote economic growth? A nonparametric approach," MPRA Paper 80751, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Bhattacharya, Suparna & Giannakas, Konstantinos & Schoengold, Karina, 2013. "Market and Welfare Effects of Renewable Portfolio Standard in the Vertically Differentiated U.S. Energy Markets," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 151216, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Delmas, Magali A. & Montes-Sancho, Maria J., 2011. "U.S. state policies for renewable energy: Context and effectiveness," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2273-2288, May.
    7. Ebers Broughel, Anna, 2019. "Impact of state policies on generating capacity for production of electricity and combined heat and power from forest biomass in the United States," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 1163-1172.
    8. Zhao, Xiaoli & Li, Shujie & Zhang, Sufang & Yang, Rui & Liu, Suwei, 2016. "The effectiveness of China's wind power policy: An empirical analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 269-279.
    9. Degirmenci, Tunahan & Yavuz, Hakan, 2024. "Environmental taxes, R&D expenditures and renewable energy consumption in EU countries: Are fiscal instruments effective in the expansion of clean energy?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 299(C).
    10. Schumacher, Kim & Yang, Zhuoxiang, 2018. "The determinants of wind energy growth in the United States: Drivers and barriers to state-level development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 1-13.
    11. Johnson, Sean D. & Moyer, Elisabeth J., 2012. "Feasibility of U.S. renewable portfolio standards under cost caps and case study for Illinois," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 499-514.
    12. Rahdar, Mohammad & Wang, Lizhi & Hu, Guiping, 2014. "Potential competition for biomass between biopower and biofuel under RPS and RFS2," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 10-20.
    13. Shrimali, Gireesh & Lynes, Melissa & Indvik, Joe, 2015. "Wind energy deployment in the U.S.: An empirical analysis of the role of federal and state policies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 796-806.
    14. Kim, Jung Eun & Tang, Tian, 2020. "Preventing early lock-in with technology-specific policy designs: The Renewable Portfolio Standards and diversity in renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    15. Soon, Jan-Jan & Ahmad, Siti-Aznor, 2015. "Willingly or grudgingly? A meta-analysis on the willingness-to-pay for renewable energy use," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 877-887.
    16. Wei, Shuni & Yuan, Peng & Yu, Renjie, 2025. "Can renewable portfolio standard promote renewable energy capacity utilization? Empirical evidence from China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    17. Daniel J Pastor, 2020. "The effects of renewables portfolio standards on renewable energy generation," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 40(3), pages 2121-2133.
    18. Rountree, Valerie, 2019. "Nevada's experience with the Renewable Portfolio Standard," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 279-291.
    19. Gosens, Jorrit & Hedenus, Fredrik & Sandén, Björn A., 2017. "Faster market growth of wind and PV in late adopters due to global experience build-up," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 267-278.
    20. Basher, Syed Abul & Masini, Andrea & Aflaki, Sam, 2015. "Time series properties of the renewable energy diffusion process: Implications for energy policy design and assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1680-1692.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q41 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Demand and Supply; Prices
    • Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
    • Q52 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Pollution Control Adoption and Costs; Distributional Effects; Employment Effects
    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
    • L94 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Electric Utilities

    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:nbaece:307016. 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/daunlus.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.