国内可再生能源新闻

综合类我国拟实施《可再生能源电力配额制》据悉,我国能源部门正研究制定《可再生能源电力配额管理办法》(下称《办法》),以解决可再生能源面临的发电、上网和市场消纳三大问题。发改委相关能源专家表示,可再生能源配额制的基本思路是:国家对发电企业、电网企业、地方政府三大主体提出约束性的可再生能源电力配     

我国可再生能源配额制政策的实施对生物质发电产生的影响

可再生能源配额制(RPS)是国际上为促进可再生能源开发而实行的一种强制性能源政策。介绍了RPS的发展历程和一般特征以及我国生物质发电行业现状,并分析了我国可再生能源配额制实施后对生物质发电产生的影响,旨在为生物质发电行业实现规模化和产业化发展提供参考。     

韩国明年全面实施可再生能源配额制

据韩联社报道．韩国政府明年将全面实施可再生能源配额制。配额制要求电网企业的总发电量中．可再生能源的发电量必须达到一定比例。韩国知识经济部近日与能源管理公团、韩国电力公社、韩国电力交易所等13家电力公司签订了有关实施配额制的协议。全面实施配额制后．上述13家电力公司每年要保障发电量的2％来自水力、风力等可再生能源．而且,配额将分阶段上升,到2022年达到10％。     

美国加州可再生能源配额制及对我国的启示

配额制本质上是一种对可再生能源开发的激励机制,它的实施需要具备一定的前提条件,目前仍处于不断探索和发展阶段。配额制的实质是以最低成本开发可再生能源,它通常需要依托一个绿色证书市场。任何配额制基本上都包含了配额承担主体及合格的发电类型、配额目标的确定及分解、运作机制、成本分摊与惩罚措施等内容。世界上没有任何两个国家或地区的配额制是完全一致的,均是根据本国或本地区的实际情况而制定。加利福尼亚州是美国可再生能源发展较快,也是最早实施配额制的联邦州之一。加州配额制的配额承担主体主要是为终端用户供电的电力企业;运作机制是通过绿色证书来代替物理计量,以证书数量来反映配额承担主体的履约情况;实现配额义务的成本是通过终端销售电价疏导出去的。这些与英国和日本的配额制相同,而差异性体现在配额目标形式不同、指标分解原则不同以及对不同类型可再生能源的激励程度不同。我国在可再生能源配额制设计中需要关注与现行可再生能源政策的衔接、地区配额指标的差异化设计、地方政府的责任、可再生能源电量的计量以及保障措施等问题。     

先进国家可再生能源发展补贴政策动向及对我国的启示

本文总结了具有国际可再生能源发展领先水平的代表性国家的可再生能源补贴政策机制及其最新动向。德国形成了成熟的固定电价降价机制和电价附加征收联动体系;丹麦采取以电力市场交易为基础的固定补贴制度;意大利最新的政策变化是非光伏项目逐渐实施固定电价政策替代配额制;美国沿用联邦税收抵免和可再生能源配额制。基于国际经验,提出对我国目前面临的可再生能源补贴资金不足问题的一些建议。     

国家发改委:中国年内实施可再生能源配额制

据2012年2月28日《中国新闻网》报道,中国国家发改委能源研究所可再生能源发展中心主任任东明27日在天津表示,中国2012年将实施可再生能源配额制。任东明在出席此间举行的"2012天津风电产业创新论坛"时说,可再生能源配额制将对中国各省(区、市)总电力消     

论我国可再生能源配额制的法制建构

可再生能源配额制是推动可再生能源发展的有效制度,是实现可再生能源发展目标的量化、强制性以及与之配套的市场化措施。2006年制定的《可再生能源法》及2009年修改的《可再生能源法》已经为可再生能源配额制在我国立足生根营造制度环境。我国先后草拟可再生能源配额制的若干文件,但是迟迟未能完全落实。我国应当全面设计可再生能源配额义务的承担主体、配额分配机制、配额考核、监管以及基于配额制的绿色证书交易制度,从而保障我国可再生能源的可持续发展。     

可再生能源配额制的思考

文章分析了世界可再生能源配额制的几种模式，总结了其成功的经验，结合我国的可再生能源资源情况及现状，提出了中国推行可再生能源配额制的一些思考和建议。     

可以作为我国配额制制度基础的文件

正我国在设计配额制时可以参考国际上的一般做法,但同时应体现自己的国情特点。目前可作为我国配额制制度基础的文件包括《可再生能源法》及修正案、《可再生能源中长期发展规划》、《关于加快培育和发展战略性新兴产业的决定》等。此外,《可再生能源发展"十二五"规划》明确提出要实施可再生能源配额制度。《可再生能源发展"十三五"规划》提出四项保障     

国家发展计划委员会/中国环境与发展国际合作委员会(CCICED) "可再生能源发电配额制政策设计与实施--国际交流会”总结

国家发展计划委员会同中国环境与发展国际合作委员会(CCICED)能源战略与技术专家工作组于2000年1月20～21日联合在北京举办了"可再生能源发电配额制政策设计与实施--国际交流会”.这次会议是第一次为我国相关政府部门、专家与学者、各级电力公司、可再生能源企业系统地介绍了在欧洲部分国家与美国可再生能源发电配额制(RPS)政策的设计与实施经验,取得了很好的效果.会议原计划邀请代表为40人,实际与会代表为70人.     

Do state renewable portfolio standards promote in-state renewable generation?

Several US states have passed renewable portfolio standard (RPS) policies in order to encourage investment in renewable energy technologies. Existing research on their effectiveness has either employed a cross-sectional approach or has ignored heterogeneity among RPS policies. In this paper, we introduce a new measure for the stringency of an RPS that explicitly accounts for some RPS design features that may have a significant impact on the strength of an RPS. We also investigate the impacts of renewable portfolio standards on in-state renewable electricity development using panel data and our new measure of RPS stringency, and compare the results with those when alternative measures are used. Using our new measure, the results suggest that RPS policies have had a significant and positive effect on in-state renewable energy development, a finding which is masked when design differences among RPS policies are ignored. We also find that another important design feature – allowing “free trade” of REC’s – can significantly weaken the impact of an RPS. These results should prove instructive to policy makers, whether considering the development of a federal-level RPS or the development or redesign of a state-level RPS.     

关于引入可再生能源配额制若干问题的讨论

对于当前我国引入可再生能源配额制政策(RPS)存在诸多争议,主要是源于对于配额制认识方面的差异。因此,必须明确几个关键问题,包括配额制的内涵,配额制的运行机制,配额制与总量目标的关系,我国引入配额制的必要性,如何认识各方面对配额制的置疑,配额制政策的制度基础和配额制需要体现的主要方面。     

可再生能源配额制(RPS)在中国应用探讨

我国政府近些年来一直积极探索以强制性手段保障可再生能源发展的有效机制。2003年可再生能源立法开始列入议程,这是我国可再生能源发展史上的一项重要举措。为可再生能源电力入网提供强制性保障机制是此次立法工作中初步设想的一项内容,引入可再生能源配额制(RPS)成为可供考虑的选择方案之一。如果引入,对该政策进行细致周密的设计和保证有效实施是至关重要的。文章重点探讨了RPS政策设计和管理中应注意的几个主要问题,包括确立适用范围和责任主体、制定可再生能源目标、确定有效的可再生能源种类、建立绿色证书制度、制定处罚措施等。期望本文能为我国建立可再生能源法律和政策体系提供相关信息。     

Renewable energy and policy options in an integrated ASEAN electricity market: Quantitative assessments and policy implications

Energy market integration (EMI) in the ASEAN region is a promising solution to relieve the current immobilization of its renewable energy resources and would serve the fast increasing demand for electricity in the region. EMI could be further extended with coordinated policies in carbon pricing, renewable energy portfolio standards (RPS), and feed-in-tariffs (FIT) in the ASEAN countries. Using a linear dynamic programming model, this study quantitatively assesses the impacts of EMI and the above-mentioned policies on the development of renewable energy in the power generation sector of the region, and the carbon emissions reduction achievable with these policies. According to our results, EMI is expected to significantly promote the adoption of renewable energy. Along with EMI, FIT appears to be more cost-effective than RPS and is recommended for the ASEAN region, albeit political barriers for policy coordination among the countries might be a practical concern. In addition, an RPS of 30% electricity from renewable sources by 2030, which is considered politically a “low-hanging fruit”, would achieve moderate improvements in carbon emissions reductions and renewable energy development, while incurring negligible increases in the total cost of electricity.     

The economic costs of reducing greenhouse gas emissions under a U.S. national renewable electricity mandate

The electricity sector is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) in the U.S. Many states have passed and Congress has considered Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS), mandates that specific percentages of electricity be generated from renewable resources. We perform a technical and economic assessment and estimate the economic costs and net GHG reductions from a national 25 percent RPS by 2025 relative to coal-based electricity. This policy would reduce GHG emissions by about 670 million metric tons per year, 11 percent of 2008 U.S. emissions. The first 100 million metric tons could be abated for less than $36/metric ton. However, marginal costs climb to $50 for 300 million metric tons and to as much as $70/metric ton to fulfill the RPS. The total economic costs of such a policy are about $35 billion annually. We also examine the cost sensitivity to favorable and unfavorable technology development assumptions. We find that a 25 percent RPS would likely be an economically efficient method for utilities to substantially reduce GHG emissions only under the favorable scenario. These estimates can be compared with other approaches, including increased R&D funding for renewables or deployment of efficiency and/or other low-carbon generation technologies.     

Weighing the costs and benefits of state renewables portfolio standards in the United States: A comparative analysis of state-level policy impact projections

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 1%. Nonetheless, there is considerable room for improving the analytic methods, and therefore accuracy of these estimates.     

Market and welfare effects of renewable portfolio standards in United States electricity markets

This study analyzes the market and welfare effects of the introduction of Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) while considering the empirically relevant (a) interaction of compliance with voluntary green power markets, (b) differences in consumer preferences, and (c) imperfect competition among electricity suppliers. The study accounts for both the supply and demand effects of RPS — i.e., increased costs and a higher consumer valuation for regular power. Our analysis shows that the regular power price always increases after the introduction of RPS, while the effect of RPS on the equilibrium price of green power, the quantities of regular and green power, the welfare of consumers, and suppliers' profits is case-specific and dependent on the relative magnitude of the cost and utility effects, the strength of consumer preference for green power, the suppliers' costs before RPS, the impact of RPS on green power costs, and the degree of competition among power suppliers. While the introduction of RPS aims at increasing the use of green energy in electricity production, our analysis shows that the introduction of the policy can end up reducing the total quantity of green power used. Intriguingly, this adverse policy impact will occur under seemingly optimal conditions for the green power sector; i.e., a high consumer valuation of green energy and/or low cost difference between the green power and its conventional counterpart. Finally, the analysis shows that the policy design can play a key role in determining the incidence of RPS, while the identification of the winners and losers of the policy can provide insights on the political economy of RPS and the positions held by different groups in policy negotiations.     

Supporting solar power in renewables portfolio standards: Experience from the United States

Renewables portfolio standards (RPS) have become an increasingly popular option for encouraging the deployment of renewable electricity. It is a relatively new policy mechanism, however, and experience with its use is only beginning to emerge. One key concern is whether RPS policies offer adequate support to a wide range of renewable energy technologies and applications or whether, alternatively, they will favor a small number of the currently least-cost forms of renewable energy. This article documents the design of and early experience with state-level RPS programs in the United States that have been specifically tailored to encourage a wider diversity of renewable energy technologies, and solar energy in particular. As shown here, state-level RPS programs specifically designed to support solar have already proven to be an important driver for solar energy deployment, and those impacts are projected to build in the coming years. State experience in supporting solar energy with RPS programs is mixed, however, and full compliance with existing requirements has not been achieved. The comparative experiences described herein highlight the opportunities and challenges of applying an RPS to specifically support solar energy, as well as the importance of policy design details to ensuring that program goals are achieved.     

A retrospective analysis of benefits and impacts of U.S. renewable portfolio standards

As states consider revising or developing renewable portfolio standards (RPS), they are evaluating policy costs, benefits, and other impacts. We present the first U. S. national-level assessment of state RPS program benefits and impacts, focusing on new renewable electricity resources used to meet RPS compliance obligations in 2013. In our central-case scenario, reductions in life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions from displaced fossil fuel-generated electricity resulted in $2.2 billion of global benefits. Health and environmental benefits from reductions in criteria air pollutants (sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter 2.5) were even greater, estimated at $5.2 billion in the central case. Further benefits accrued in the form of reductions in water withdrawals and consumption for power generation. Finally, although best considered resource transfers rather than net societal benefits, new renewable electricity generation used for RPS compliance in 2013 also supported nearly 200,000 U. S.-based gross jobs and reduced wholesale electricity prices and natural gas prices, saving consumers a combined $1.3–$4.9 billion. In total, the estimated benefits and impacts well-exceed previous estimates of RPS compliance costs.     

Impacts of a renewable portfolio generation standard on US energy markets

This paper analyzes the impacts of imposing a Federal 20 percent non-hydropower renewable generation portfolio standard (RPS) on US energy markets by 2020. The US currently has no RPS requirement although some state RPS regulations have been adopted but not uniformly enforced (see http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/analysispaper/rps/index.html for a recent summary on RPSs in the US). The renewable portfolio standard (RPS) requires that 20 percent of the power sold must come from qualifying renewable facilities. The analysis of the 20 percent RPS was developed by using the December 2001 version of the National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) of the Energy Information Administration (EIA) and the assumptions and results of the Annual Energy Outlook 2002 (AEO2002) reference case. ² A policy that requires a 20 percent non-hydro-electric RPS by 2020 appears to be effective in promoting the adoption of renewable generation technologies while also reducing emissions of nitrogen oxides by 6 percent, mercury by 4 percent and carbon dioxide by about 16.5 percent relative to the reference case in 2020. Electricity prices are expected to rise about 3 percent while the cost to the electric power industry could rise between 35 and 60 billion dollars (in year 2000 dollars in net present value terms).