Evolution from the renewable portfolio standards to feed-in tariff for the deployment of renewable energy in Japan

Following the dominant firm-competitive fringe model, this paper analyses the response of Japan’s nonrenewable electricity utilities to the renewable portfolio standards (RPS) and feed-in tariff (FIT) scheme. The output of electricity from renewable energy sources (RES-E) is primarily correlated with the magnitude of the RPS requirement and the fixed tariff. Nonrenewable firms suffer a reduction in revenue due to increased RES-E production under both schemes. The RPS requirement has direct impact on the renewable energy certificate (NEC) price. If the incumbent nonrenewable electricity utilities gain market power in both electricity and NEC markets, they can suppress the RPS quota to preserve their vested benefits. In the FIT scheme, the above-market RES-E generation cost is passed on to consumers via a surcharge. Since grid-connected RES-E accelerated rapidly under FIT, nonrenewable electricity utilities would face a substantial increase in costs to maintain network reliability due to the intermittent and variable nature of RES-E technologies. The Japanese government should therefore take measures to ensure variable renewable power occupies a higher share of the electricity system, and to do so in a cost-effective manner.

[1]  Danny Pudjianto,et al.  Impact of wind generation on the operation and development of the UK electricity systems , 2007 .

[2]  Anatole Boute Review of F. R. Aune, R. Golombek, S. Kittelsen and K. E. Rosendahl, Liberalizing European Energy Markets – An Economic Analysis (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2008) , 2012 .

[3]  C. Fischer,et al.  Renewable Portfolio Standards: When Do They Lower Energy Prices? , 2010 .

[4]  S. Kittelsen,et al.  Liberalizing European Energy Markets: An Economic Analysis , 2008 .

[5]  T. Johansson,et al.  European renewable energy policy at crossroads--Focus on electricity support mechanisms , 2008 .

[6]  Y. Gagnon,et al.  An analysis of feed-in tariff remuneration models: Implications for renewable energy investment , 2010 .

[7]  Makoto Tanaka,et al.  Market power in renewable portfolio standards , 2013 .

[8]  Judith Lipp,et al.  Lessons for effective renewable electricity policy from Denmark, Germany and the United Kingdom , 2007 .

[9]  Huizhong Zhou,et al.  Feed-in tariff and tradable green certificate in oligopoly , 2010 .

[10]  Dave Toke,et al.  Comparing Market-Based Renewable Energy Regimes: The Cases of the UK and Japan , 2007 .

[11]  Richard L. Ottinger,et al.  Compendium of Sustainable Energy Laws: Directive 2001/77/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2001 on the Promotion of Electricity Produced from Renewable Energy Sources in the Internal Electricity Market , 2005 .

[12]  V. Lauber,et al.  Assessing the performance of renewable electricity support instruments , 2012 .

[13]  Staffan Jacobsson,et al.  EU renewable energy support policy: Faith or facts? , 2009 .

[14]  Catherine Mitchell,et al.  Renewable energy policy in the UK 1990-2003 , 2004 .

[15]  Jay Zarnikau Successful renewable energy development in a competitive electricity market: A Texas case study , 2011 .

[16]  J. Perloff,et al.  Modern Industrial Organization , 1990 .

[17]  T. Schmidt,et al.  Japan's post-Fukushima Challenge - Implications from the German Experience on Renewable Energy Policy , 2012 .