Weighing the Costs and Benefits of State Renewables Portfolio Standards in the United States: A Comparative Analysis of State-Level Policy Impact Projections Cliff Chen, Ryan Wiser * , Andrew Mills, and Mark Bolinger Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 1 Cyclotron Road, MS 90R4000, Berkeley CA 94720, USA 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. 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 cost impacts, but sometimes also estimating macroeconomic, risk reduction, and environmental effects. This article synthesizes and analyzes the results and methodologies of 31 distinct state or utility-level RPS cost-impact analyses completed since 1998. Together, these studies model proposed or adopted RPS policies in 20 different states. We highlight the key findings of these studies on the projected costs of state RPS policies, examine the sensitivity of projected costs to model assumptions, evaluate the reasonableness of key input assumptions, and suggest possible areas of improvement for future RPS analyses. We conclude that while there is considerable uncertainty in the study results, the majority of the studies project modest cost impacts. Seventy percent of the state RPS cost studies project retail electricity rate increases of no greater than one percent. Nonetheless, there is considerable room for improving the analytic methods, and therefore accuracy, of these estimates. Keywords: Renewables Portfolio Standards, Meta-Analysis, Energy Market Projections Corresponding author. Tel.: +1510 486 5474; fax: +1510 486 6996. E-mail addresses: rhwiser@lbl.gov (R. Wiser), cchen@ucsusarg (C. Chen), admills@lbl.gov (A. Mills), mabolinger@lbl.gov (M. Bolinger)
[1]
Brian Parsons,et al.
Wind Power Impacts on Electric Power System Operating Costs: Summary and Perspective on Work to Date; Preprint
,
2004
.
[2]
Michael Lazarus,et al.
Turning the Corner on Global Warming Emissions: An Analysis of Ten Strategies for California, Oregon, and Washington
,
2004
.
[3]
Ryan Wiser,et al.
Balancing Cost and Risk: The Treatment of Renewable Energy in Western Utility Resource Plans
,
2006
.
[4]
Ryan Wiser,et al.
Weighing the Costs and Benefits of Renewables Portfolio Standards: A Comparative Analysis of State-Level Policy Impact Projections
,
2007
.
[5]
R. Wiser,et al.
Annual Report on U.S. Wind Power Installation, Cost, and Performance Trends: 2007 (Revised)
,
2008
.
[6]
Ryan Wiser,et al.
The Experience with Renewable Portfolio Standards in the United States
,
2007
.
[7]
R. Wiser,et al.
Can Deployment of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency PutDownward Pressure on Natural Gas Prices
,
2005
.
[8]
G. Giebel.
Wind power has a capacity credit. A catalogue of 50+ supporting studies
,
2005
.
[9]
Ryan Wiser,et al.
Can deployment of renewable energy put downward pressure on natural gas prices
,
2007
.
[10]
S. Awerbuch.
The surprising role of risk in utility integrated resource planning
,
1993
.
[11]
R. Wiser,et al.
Accounting for fuel price risk when comparing renewable to gas-fired generation: the role of forward natural gas prices
,
2004
.