skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Weighing the Costs and Benefits of Renewables Portfolio Standards:A Comparative Analysis of State-Level Policy Impact Projections

Abstract

State renewables portfolio standards (RPS) have emerged as one of the most important policy drivers of renewable energy capacity expansion in the U.S. Collectively, these policies now apply to roughly 40% of U.S. electricity load, and may have substantial impacts on electricity markets, ratepayers, and local economies. As RPS policies have been proposed or adopted in an increasing number of states, a growing number of studies have attempted to quantify the potential impacts of these policies, focusing primarily on projecting cost impacts, but sometimes also estimating macroeconomic and environmental effects. This report synthesizes and analyzes the results and methodologies of 28 distinct state or utility-level RPS cost impact analyses completed since 1998. Together, these studies model proposed or adopted RPS policies in 18 different states. We highlight the key findings of these studies on the costs and benefits of RPS policies, examine the sensitivity of projected costs to model assumptions, assess the attributes of different modeling approaches, and suggest possible areas of improvement for future RPS analysis.

Authors:
; ;
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley NationalLaboratory, Berkeley, CA (US)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE. Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency andRenewable Energy. Office of Wind and Hydropower Technology Program,Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. Permitting sitingand Analysis Division
OSTI Identifier:
901521
Report Number(s):
LBNL-61580
R&D Project: 574617; BnR: EB2502010; TRN: US200714%%243
DOE Contract Number:  
DE-AC02-05CH11231
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
29; CAPACITY; ELECTRICITY; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS; FOCUSING; SENSITIVITY; SIMULATION

Citation Formats

Chen, Cliff, Wiser, Ryan, and Bolinger, Mark. Weighing the Costs and Benefits of Renewables Portfolio Standards:A Comparative Analysis of State-Level Policy Impact Projections. United States: N. p., 2007. Web. doi:10.2172/901521.
Chen, Cliff, Wiser, Ryan, & Bolinger, Mark. Weighing the Costs and Benefits of Renewables Portfolio Standards:A Comparative Analysis of State-Level Policy Impact Projections. United States. doi:10.2172/901521.
Chen, Cliff, Wiser, Ryan, and Bolinger, Mark. Tue . "Weighing the Costs and Benefits of Renewables Portfolio Standards:A Comparative Analysis of State-Level Policy Impact Projections". United States. doi:10.2172/901521. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/901521.
@article{osti_901521,
title = {Weighing the Costs and Benefits of Renewables Portfolio Standards:A Comparative Analysis of State-Level Policy Impact Projections},
author = {Chen, Cliff and Wiser, Ryan and Bolinger, Mark},
abstractNote = {State renewables portfolio standards (RPS) have emerged as one of the most important policy drivers of renewable energy capacity expansion in the U.S. Collectively, these policies now apply to roughly 40% of U.S. electricity load, and may have substantial impacts on electricity markets, ratepayers, and local economies. As RPS policies have been proposed or adopted in an increasing number of states, a growing number of studies have attempted to quantify the potential impacts of these policies, focusing primarily on projecting cost impacts, but sometimes also estimating macroeconomic and environmental effects. This report synthesizes and analyzes the results and methodologies of 28 distinct state or utility-level RPS cost impact analyses completed since 1998. Together, these studies model proposed or adopted RPS policies in 18 different states. We highlight the key findings of these studies on the costs and benefits of RPS policies, examine the sensitivity of projected costs to model assumptions, assess the attributes of different modeling approaches, and suggest possible areas of improvement for future RPS analysis.},
doi = {10.2172/901521},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Tue Jan 16 00:00:00 EST 2007},
month = {Tue Jan 16 00:00:00 EST 2007}
}

Technical Report:

Save / Share: