Comparison of Feed in Tariff, Quota and Auction Mechanisms to Support Wind Power Development
A comparison of policy instruments employed to support onshore wind projects suggests that in terms of capacity installed, policies adopted in Germany have been more effective than those adopted in the UK. Price comparisons have frequently neglected differences in resource base: once accounted for we find the cost of policies to be similar. A developer survey identifies planning constraints as only one reason why installed capacity is greater in Germany, and indicates that price support is also important. Information provided by developers also suggests that although the tendering process adopted in the UK is highly competitive in terms of price paid for energy delivered, competition in other areas of the market is significantly lower than in Germany.
|Date of creation:||Jan 2005|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/index.htm|
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.:
- Mitchell, Catherine & Connor, Peter, 2004. "Renewable energy policy in the UK 1990-2003," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(17), pages 1935-1947, November.
- 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.
- Finon, Dominique & Perez, Yannick, 2007.
"The social efficiency of instruments of promotion of renewable energies: A transaction-cost perspective,"
Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 77-92, April.
- D. Finon & Y. Perez, 2007. "The social efficiency of instruments of promotion of renewable energies: A transaction-cost perspective," Post-Print hal-00716667, HAL.
- Madlener, Reinhard & Stagl, Sigrid, 2005. "Sustainability-guided promotion of renewable electricity generation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 147-167, April.
- Gross, Robert, 2004. "Technologies and innovation for system change in the UK: status, prospects and system requirements of some leading renewable energy options," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(17), pages 1905-1919, November.
- Karsten Neuhoff, 2005.
"Large-Scale Deployment of Renewables for Electricity Generation,"
Oxford Review of Economic Policy,
Oxford University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 88-110, Spring.
- Neuhoff, K., 2004. "Large Scale Deployment of Renewables for Electricity Generation," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0460, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
- Keats, K. Martinez & Neuhoff, K., 2004.
"Allocation of Carbon Emission Certificates in the Power Sector: How generators profit from grandfathered rights,"
Cambridge Working Papers in Economics
0444, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
- Kim Keats Martinez & Karsten Neuhoff, 2005. "Allocation of carbon emission certificates in the power sector: how generators profit from grandfathered rights," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 61-78, January.
- Jensen, Stine Grenaa & Skytte, Klaus, 2003. "Simultaneous attainment of energy goals by means of green certificates and emission permits," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 63-71, January.
- Foxon, T.J. & Pearson, P.J.G., 2007. "Towards improved policy processes for promoting innovation in renewable electricity technologies in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1539-1550, March.
- Menanteau, Philippe & Finon, Dominique & Lamy, Marie-Laure, 2003. "Prices versus quantities: choosing policies for promoting the development of renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8), pages 799-812, June.
- Lauber, Volkmar, 2004. "REFIT and RPS: options for a harmonised Community framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(12), pages 1405-1414, August.
- Langniss, Ole & Wiser, Ryan, 2003. "The renewables portfolio standard in Texas: an early assessment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 527-535, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cam:camdae:0503. 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: (Jake Dyer)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.