Search

Renewable portfolio standards (RPS) differ widely across US states. Prior research findings on the effectiveness of these policies to stimulate renewable electricity deployment are equally wide ranging. This study investigates patterns of RPS policy design and analyzes the effects on policy outcomes measured at the level of utility compliance. Measuring organizational outcomes of RPS corrects for the first time the challenges of prior research focused on state-level renewable capacity or generation outcomes. The quantitative analysis also takes into account the complexity of RPS design, by making use of a state-by-state database of RPS design characteristics developed for this study. Patterns of RPS design across states are compared, including the compliance schedule, scope, eligibility of resources, quotas and subsidies, renewable energy credit provisions, as well as enforcement and penalties. Together, the map of state RPS design and the new approach to RPS outcome analysis illuminate the diversity of RPS policy practice across the United States. They suggest the need to both account for the variety of design characteristics and accurately specify the policy outcomes in evaluations of these policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Over the past decade, the United States (US) has demonstrated strong and evolving interest in the development of carbon capture and storage (CCS), an emerging set of technologies with potential to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants. Given the many technical, economic, and environmental uncertainties about the future of CCS, the political salience of this technology is high. In the US, states make key decisions about deploying energy technology projects, but variation in state-level energy context (both technical and socio-political) is substantial. This research assesses variation in the state-level energy context for CCS development by exploring energy policy stakeholders' perceptions of CCS in four geographically and demographically diverse states. Policy stakeholders have different degrees of familiarity with CCS, and the goal of this research is to understand and compare the perceptions of CCS among stakeholders who shape state-level energy policy. Semi-structured interviews with 84 energy policy stakeholders across government, industry, academia, and non-governmental organizations active in four different states (Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana and Texas) were analyzed to compare perceptions of CCS risks and benefits. Negative associations of CCS were mentioned more frequently than positive attributes in each state, and technical, political and economic risks are more dominant than environmental or health and safety risks. Content analysis of the interviews provides insight on emerging sub-national discourse regarding CCS, on state-level variation in familiarity with CCS, and on sub-national variation in the socio-political context for energy technologies. The variation in state and stakeholder energy priorities and perceptions revealed in this study highlights challenges in the development and implementation of national-level energy policy and also specific challenges in the deployment of CCS. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: In the United States, electricity consumers are told that they can “buy” electricity from renewable energy projects, versus fossil fuel-fired facilities, through participation in voluntary green power markets. The marketing messages communicate to consumers that they are causing additional renewable energy generation and reducing emissions through their participation and premium payments for a green label. Using a spatial financial model and a database of registered Green-e wind power facilities, the analysis in this paper shows that the voluntary Renewable Energy Certificate (REC) market has a negligible influence on the economic feasibility of these facilities. Nevertheless, voluntary green power marketers at least implicitly claim that buying their products creates additional renewable energy. This study indicates the contrary. Participants in U.S. voluntary green power markets associated with wind power, therefore, appear to be receiving misleading marketing messages regarding the effect of their participation. In the process of completing this analysis, a potentially relevant factor in explaining investor behavior was identified: the potential for the overlap of voluntary REC markets with compliance REC markets that supply utilities need to meet their obligations of Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard (RPS). The majority of state RPS rules allow for regional or even national sourcing of RECs, meaning that projects are generally eligible to provide compliance RECs to utilities not only in their home states, but in several other states. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]