IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rri/wpaper/2015wp02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cost-effectiveness as Energy Policy Mechanisms: The Paradox of Technology-neutral and Technology-specific Policies in the Short and Long Term

Author

Listed:
  • Paulo Henrique de Mello Santana

    () (Universidade Federal do ABC and Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University)

Abstract

When choosing policy mechanisms to design and deploy energy policies, policymakers typically seek cost-effective ones, linking cost effectiveness to the lowest cost of support for RES-E generation and/or consumer costs. The objectives of this paper are to analyze the cost-effectiveness of renewable portfolio standards (RPS), feed-in tariffs (FIT) and auctions in the short and long term, considering both technology-neutral and technology-specific approaches. Results show that RPS and auctions are more cost-effective than feed-in tariffs (FIT) in the short term if cost-effectiveness is defined as minimizing consumer costs. Also, if one or more emerging technologies with higher levelized life cycle costs (LCC), low cumulative production and high experience elasticity are considered in the pool of RES-E policy design, a technology-neutral approach in the short-term could lock out these emerging technologies, avoiding a long term LCC reduction. In this case, a technology-specific policy used in the short-term would reflect lower total generation policy costs in the long term if compared with a technology-neutral policy in both short and long term. This paper calls this phenomenon the paradox of technology-neutral and technology-specific policies in the long term. Considering the results, this paper suggests a mix of technology-neutral and technology-specific policies using RPS or auction mechanisms to promote RES-E.

Suggested Citation

  • Paulo Henrique de Mello Santana, 2015. "Cost-effectiveness as Energy Policy Mechanisms: The Paradox of Technology-neutral and Technology-specific Policies in the Short and Long Term," Working Papers Working Paper 2015-02, Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University.
  • Handle: RePEc:rri:wpaper:2015wp02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://rri.wvu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/SantAna_WP_2015-02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moreno, R. & Barroso, L.A. & Rudnick, H. & Mocarquer, S. & Bezerra, B., 2010. "Auction approaches of long-term contracts to ensure generation investment in electricity markets: Lessons from the Brazilian and Chilean experiences," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5758-5769, October.
    2. Ibenholt, Karin, 2002. "Explaining learning curves for wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(13), pages 1181-1189, October.
    3. Jenner, Steffen & Groba, Felix & Indvik, Joe, 2013. "Assessing the strength and effectiveness of renewable electricity feed-in tariffs in European Union countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 385-401.
    4. Verbruggen, Aviel & Lauber, Volkmar, 2012. "Assessing the performance of renewable electricity support instruments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 635-644.
    5. Farooq, Muhammad Khalid & Kumar, S. & Shrestha, Ram M., 2013. "Energy, environmental and economic effects of Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) in a Developing Country," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 989-1001.
    6. Tanaka, Makoto & Chen, Yihsu, 2013. "Market power in renewable portfolio standards," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 187-196.
    7. Nemet, Gregory F., 2006. "Beyond the learning curve: factors influencing cost reductions in photovoltaics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 3218-3232, November.
    8. Schmidt, J. & Lehecka, G. & Gass, V. & Schmid, E., 2013. "Where the wind blows: Assessing the effect of fixed and premium based feed-in tariffs on the spatial diversification of wind turbines," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 269-276.
    9. Muhammad-Sukki, Firdaus & Abu-Bakar, Siti Hawa & Munir, Abu Bakar & Mohd Yasin, Siti Hajar & Ramirez-Iniguez, Roberto & McMeekin, Scott G. & Stewart, Brian G. & Sarmah, Nabin & Mallick, Tapas Kumar & , 2014. "Feed-in tariff for solar photovoltaic: The rise of Japan," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 636-643.
    10. Mäkelä, Matti & Lintunen, Jussi & Kangas, Hanna-Liisa & Uusivuori, Jussi, 2011. "Pellet promotion in the Finnish sawmilling industry: The cost-effectiveness of different policy instruments," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 185-196, April.
    11. Stockmayer, Gabriella & Finch, Vanessa & Komor, Paul & Mignogna, Rich, 2012. "Limiting the costs of renewable portfolio standards: A review and critique of current methods," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 155-163.
    12. Kung, Harold H., 2012. "Impact of deployment of renewable portfolio standard on the electricity price in the State of Illinois and implications on policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 425-430.
    13. Ferioli, F. & Schoots, K. & van der Zwaan, B.C.C., 2009. "Use and limitations of learning curves for energy technology policy: A component-learning hypothesis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2525-2535, July.
    14. Nielsen, Steffen & Sorknæs, Peter & Østergaard, Poul Alberg, 2011. "Electricity market auction settings in a future Danish electricity system with a high penetration of renewable energy sources – A comparison of marginal pricing and pay-as-bid," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 4434-4444.
    15. Buckman, Greg & Sibley, Jon & Bourne, Richard, 2014. "The large-scale solar feed-in tariff reverse auction in the Australian Capital Territory, Australia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 14-22.
    16. Aslani, Alireza & Wong, Kau-Fui V., 2014. "Analysis of renewable energy development to power generation in the United States," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 153-161.
    17. Schelly, Chelsea, 2014. "Implementing renewable energy portfolio standards: The good, the bad, and the ugly in a two state comparison," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 543-551.
    18. Chowdhury, Sanjeeda & Sumita, Ushio & Islam, Ashraful & Bedja, Idriss, 2014. "Importance of policy for energy system transformation: Diffusion of PV technology in Japan and Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 285-293.
    19. Rego, Erik Eduardo, 2013. "Reserve price: Lessons learned from Brazilian electricity procurement auctions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 217-223.
    20. Haas, Reinhard & Resch, Gustav & Panzer, Christian & Busch, Sebastian & Ragwitz, Mario & Held, Anne, 2011. "Efficiency and effectiveness of promotion systems for electricity generation from renewable energy sources – Lessons from EU countries," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 2186-2193.
    21. Richard Schmalensee, 2012. "Evaluating Policies to Increase Electricity Generation from Renewable Energy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(1), pages 45-64.
    22. Rego, Erik Eduardo & Parente, Virginia, 2013. "Brazilian experience in electricity auctions: Comparing outcomes from new and old energy auctions as well as the application of the hybrid Anglo-Dutch design," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 511-520.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    energy policy; feed-in tariff; auctions; renewable portfolio standard; cost-effectiveness;

    JEL classification:

    • Q49 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Other
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • Q29 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Other
    • Q52 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Pollution Control Adoption and Costs; Distributional Effects; Employment Effects

    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:rri:wpaper:2015wp02. 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: (Randall Jackson). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/rrwvuus.html .

    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.