Renewables portfolio standards (RPS) could be an important policy instrument for 3P and 4P control. We examine the costs of renewable power, accounting for the federal production tax credit, the market value of a renewable credit, and the value of producing electricity without emissions of SO2, NOx, mercury, and CO2. We focus on Texas, which has a large RPS and is the largest U.S. electricity producer and one of the largest emitters of pollutants and CO2. We estimate the private and social costs of wind generation in an RPS compared with the current cost of fossil generation, accounting for the pollution and CO2 emissions. We find that society paid about 5.7 cent/kWh more for wind power, counting the additional generation, transmission, intermittency, and other costs. The higher cost includes credits amounting to 1.1 cent/kWh in reduced SO2, NOx, and Hg emissions. These pollution reductions and lower CO2 emissions could be attained at about the same cost using pulverized coal (PC) or natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) plants with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS); the reductions could be obtained more cheaply with an integrated coal gasification combined cycle (IGCC) plant with CCS.
[1]
R. Wiser,et al.
The renewables portfolio standard in Texas: an early assessment
,
2001
.
[2]
Goran Strbac,et al.
QUANTIFYING THE SYSTEM COSTS OF ADDITIONAL RENEWABLES IN 2020
,
2002
.
[3]
Mark Jaccard,et al.
The renewable portfolio standard:: design considerations and an implementation survey
,
2001
.
[4]
R. Norgaard,et al.
Efficiency and sustainability in restructured electricity markets: the renewables portfolio standard
,
1996
.
[5]
Edward S. Rubin,et al.
Comparative assessments of fossil fuel power plants with CO2 capture and storage
,
2005
.
[6]
K. Palmer,et al.
COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY POLICIES
,
2005
.
[7]
Joseph F. DeCarolis,et al.
The economics of large-scale wind power in a carbon constrained world
,
2006
.