31 October 2007

Today (good, productive!):
Finished draft of Germany report and began Spain report


Next time:
Complete energy efficiency comparison charts in Excel
Continue working on Spain draft
Move on to Japan

PV Manufacturer Websites

http://www2.dupont.com/Photovoltaics/en_US/assets/downloads/pdf/SEIA_StateofSolarIndustry2006.pdf

http://www.solarbuzz.com/Marketbuzz2007-intro.htm

http://www.enf.cn/database/panels.html

26 October 2007

Today:

• Spent most of day filling in Comparative Study Data spreadsheet with policies for Denmark and Germany. Struggled a bit with how much detail to include - probably included too much.
• Met with Bob. Agreed to create a report for Thursday, November 8.
  

Schedule for production of the comparative study:

• Monday: Denmark (4) and Japan (4)
• Wednesday: Germany (4) and Spain (4)
• Friday: UK (4) and US (4)
• Monday: Finish up country things (4); Synthesize (4)
• Wednesday: Synthesize (4)

24 October 2007

Today:
Made outline - will divide by subject and have paragraph(s) for each country under each subject heading
Worked on filling in excel spreadsheet with data on countries' energy use and policies
Found a few more documents that might be useful from the European RE Council and a paper on RE policy in Germany

Next time:
Fill in more of the policy table in the spreadsheet
Interested in costs and benefits - who gets each. Possible to find more information on this?

Shum (2007) PV in Japan and U.S.

Kwok L. Shum and Chihiro Watanabe (2007). "Photovoltaic deployment strategy in Japan and the USA--an institutional appraisal," Energy Policy 35, 1186-1195.

• Asks why Japan has been roughly 3 times as successful (as of 2003) in PV deployment as U.S.
• Combination of awareness, price supports, prospect of selling electricity back to grid
• 90% of Japanese PV applications are grid-connected, compared to 30% in U.S.
• System cost (doesn't include module, but does include balancing costs and construction costs) has dropped rapidly in Japan, initially higher than U.S. but dropped below in 1994
• Authors think this has to do with Japan's "close" model of deployment (more standard) versus U.S.'s model of deployment (application-specific)
• Recommends highly vertically integrated PV companies (the "manufacturing" model) to facilitate learning and bring down costs.

del Rio 2007 C-B assessment of FIT in Spain

Pablo del Rio and Miguel A. Gual (2007), "An integrated assessment of the feed-in tariff system in Spain," Energy Policy 35, 994-1012.

• Time period assessed is 1999-2003
• Attempts a cost-benefit analysis of FITs for various technologies during this time period. Finds that the support costs outweigh the avoided external costs in all cases. Generation costs of wind and small hydro do not outweigh the avoided external costs. Caution against doing too much with these results, though, as many assumptions must be made to come up with the total avoided external costs.
• 1006 Table 7 has amount of electricity generated by solar, wind, sm. hydro, biomass; price of generation and average electricity prcie
• Additional burden for consumer in 2003 was 0.26 eurocents per kWh (final electricity price 3.02 eurocents per kWh)
• Despite negative cost-benefit finding, says the FIT has led to significant environmental benefits and doesn't represent excessive consumer cost - comparable to those in other countries.
• Low transaction costs
• 1007 Cost reductions since 1980s in Spain, Denmark, Sweden
• In 2003, 5000 direct jobs in wind sector, 12000 indirect.
• Worries about cost increases to consumers if RE become very widespread.

Lipp 2007 RES-E in DK, DE, UK

Judith Lipp (2007). "Lessons for effective renewable electricity policy from Denmark, Germany and the United Kingdom," Energy Policy 35, 5481-5495.

Uses personal interviews from Spring 2006 w/ eight RE policy experts in each country
40 jurisdictions (38 countries and 5 subnational entities) have some form of FIT; RPS in 38 jurisdictions (8 national gov'ts)
Identifies US PURPA as first FIT policy. Second wave started in DK and DE in mid-1990s
Arguments for and against FITs
3 main policy objectives: FF independence, environment, economic development and job creating + least cost
Reviews history of RE policy in each country, then examines how well objectives were met.
Finds that FIT more COST EFFECTIVE!

17 October 2007

Today:
Finished reading RE sections of IEA Energy Policy documents for DK, JP, UK, SP. Very pro-market (especially the Denmark report, for some reason), but includes some potentially useful information on costs.
Read country case studies from Mallon book on Germany, Spain and U.S.
Printed Energy Policy article on RES-E from DK, DE, UK.

Next time:
Read above Energy Policy article.
Lots of interesting-looking articles in Nov 2007 edition of Energy Policy. Search the journal for other articles on focus countries.

IEA Energy Policy DK 06, UK 06, SP 05, JP 03

Denmark (2006)
Renewable energy section of this report VERY pro-market. Despite the previous meteoric rise of wind power under FITs and almost complete stagnation under new, more market-based regime, the authors commend the new approach. Box on Vestas, however, attributes rise of company to domestic demand created by financial incentive policies. New system is confusing and applies different rules to turbines depending on when they were installed, but upshot is that premium is now less than it used to be. Clearly not high enough for new turbines to support market introduction. Lots of information on cost, including a table on p. 104 comparing renewables support in DK, FR, DE, and SP. Renewable energy now supported through a Public Service Obligation (like a public benefits fund) that assesses a surcharge on electricity purchased. Study by Denmark's Economic Council in 2002 concluded that all the RE investment in the 1990s was actually a negative social cost, even after attributing relatively high costs to CO2. Discusses high costs of grid integration; reliance on other forms of electricity and power from other countries to balance intermittant RE supply. Shows high costs of CO2 reduction through RE (PV esp) compared to efficiency and CHP. Report says that government hasn't committed to RE targets, but I thought I read somewhere that they had. Offshore wind, unlike onshore, part of competitive tender syste with predetermined tariff for 12 years. Government also supports decommissioning of older, smaller turbines, and report expects lots of decommissioning in end of 2009, when this program expires, since the owners of older turbines can get higher premium until then.

Spain (2005)
Spain's renewables primarily from large hydro, but wind growing rapidly, and plans for expansion of small hydro, solar, biomass. Low heating requirements and high penetration of CHP leave little room for expansion of RE into heat. Growing demand for electricity swamping gains of RE. Report reviews status in achieving goals of Plan for Promotion of RE in Spain (2000-2010). Wind has exceeded goals, but sm hydro, solar, and bio-energy all falling behind targets. Says regulated price, calculated on basis of market price, may become too high when cost of CO2 incorporated in market price unless calculation method changed. Gov't can change premium amt in annual review, which creates uncertainty for RE operators. New method for calculating premium: can either sell to distributor for premium that is fixed % of avg electric rate or sell to market at market price + incentive for market participation + premium. Generators who opt for new system can switch to old after one year if they prefer. Mentions preferential tax treatment for RE, but no specifics. Direct support include new building regulations (including mandatory solar water heating systems), R&D. Says "public subsidies are oriented to the interest rates...[for] renewable energy projects and efficiency projects." Also, "the subsidy has led to private investment of about five times the subsidy volume." Recommends, as usual, more market determination. Fair point that FIT/premium scheme should apply for predetermined time, so projects aren't subsidized past point of amortization. Suggests green certs scheme.

UK (2006)
Low levels of RE but rapid growth. Describes Renewables Obligation (RO) system; table on p. 96 with supplier obligation levels. Since program started, the obligation has yet to meet target; consequently, ROC prices are high. UK Energy Review report of July 2006 recommended technology banding, removing risk of oversupply of ROCs (how? - perhaps by maintaining obligation levels above actual level of RE production), removing increases of buy-out price with inflation after 2015 (bad!). Capital grants for offshore wind and biomass. Capital grants, R&D money, demonstration programs for PV. Obligation for RE in transport fuel beginning April 2008, plus already-existing tax incentives. Assessment: ROC not yet generating RE intended, not keeping costs down for consumers, more expensive per unit of CO2 reduced than efficiency. Recommends looking to Australia and Sweden for good cert schemes. For siting/planning issues, recommends looking at Denmark example, where citizens own shares in turbines.

Japan (2003)
Japan not ideal for wind, since resources relatively low, space is scarce, and grids not set up for it. Leads world in PV production and is second in PV power generation; about 1.5 times cost of wind energy in Europe and US. Documents cost decline of 260yet per kWh in 1993 to 66yen per kWh in 1999. Discusses policies to promote RE very vaguely. Says RPS adopted in 2002, launched in April 2003 is most significant policy. Quite similar to UK, but non-compliance fines high (up to 1 million yen). Budget for promotion of "new energy" (excludes large-scale hydro and geothermal) doubled from 1997-2002. In 2002, 38.8 billion yen spent on technology development, 10 billion on demonstration, 96.1 billoion on promotion of introduction. In critique section, "Its [RPS] pitfall is that it maximises short-term benefits at the cost of the development of technologies and energies which may be more promoising in the longer term." Recommends enhanced R&D and demonstration funds.

15 October 2007

Today:

• Saved IEA policy reports for Denmark, Germany, Japan, Spain, U.K. and U.S. to the Z:// drive.
• Read through most of the German report - interesting, but thought it was too slow going. Printed out just the Renewable Energy chapters and read Denmark's.
• IEA (an OECD organiation) is very pro-market, so while they acknowledge the success of feed-in tariffs, they strongly suggest moving toward quota systems. Denmark report seems even more hostile. References report showing that Denmark's subsidies for renewable energy provided negative social benefit, even after generous allowances for carbon costs were taken into account.
• On RenewableEnergyAccess.com, learned that NY has just implemented $10 million grant program to lure RE manufacturers.
  
• In jobs section, focus on broad-brush portraits of the various RE industries. In cost section, focus on who pays for various financial incentive programs (tax dollars or surcharge to consumers).

Next time:

• Continue reading RE sections of country reports.
• Read country outlines of Mallon book.
• Begin writing before doing too much more preliminary research. It will help to know exactly what information is necessary.
  

IEA Germany Energy Policy Review - 2007

Saved to Z:// drive.

• Commends Germany for getting so far with RE, while suggesting that they move toward market-based mechanisms, citing high price of solar.
• Criticizes decision to phase out nuclear by 2022, saying it should be included in mix to achieve CO2 reductions.
• Commends plan to end subsidization of coal by 2018
• Recommends functional access to electricity transmission line networks for all market participants on equal basis (but isn't it already assured for RE?)
• Critcizes plan to provide carbon allowances to new coal and lignite power plants under EU GHG trading scheme
• Estimates show that between 2000 and 2012, the feed-in tariff will cost EUR 68 billion in total. 12 "In particular, the subsidies provided to solar photovoltaics are very high in relation to output; they will eat up 20% of the budget but contribute less than 5% of the resulting generation. In comparison, many energy efficiency measures cost multiples less in terms of their reductions in carbon dioxide emissions."
• 22 Projections for energy usage and price (residential and commercial) 2000-2030.
• 26-7 "Investment decisions, for example, lie solely in the hands of private energy suppliers. Nevertheless, the government believes that it remains one of its responsibilities to create conditions in which market forces can produce economically desirable outcomes. These conditions include the regulation of natural monopolies (such as gas and electricity grids), the development of market-based instruments for climate change mitigation (such as emissions trading) and the provision of subsidies for certain technologies that are not yet ready for the market (such as renewables)."
• 28-9 "Germany’s rapid development of its renewables sector has been driven by its renewables promotion policy, a differentiated feed-in tariff. Under the differentiated feed-in tariff scheme, guaranteed rates range from a low of 3.78 eurocents per kWh for biomass to a high of 56.8 eurocents per kWh for photovoltaics, and are, in general, guaranteed for 20 years. The feed-in tariff rates are set so that all technologies are elevated to a level playing field; in (PFCs) and sulphur hexafluroride (SF6) against either a 1990 or a 1995 baseline. terms of profit, an investor should be indifferent between the various renewable energy technologies. Annual degression rates between 1% and 5% are also applied to all technologies (except small hydropower), such that renewables installations going on line in future years receive progressively lower rates in order to account for technological and market learning. Erneuerbare-Energien-Gesetz (EEG), the Renewable Energy Act, guides the programme and mandates that the feed-in tariff programme be reviewed every four years in order to ensure that individual technologies are not oversubsidised."
• 34-5 Ecotax policy and tax rates on motor fuels, heating fuels, and electricity. Discusses tax exemptions, but not clear whether renewable electricity is exempt, as in Belgium. (I guess not.)
• 36 Intermittancy of wind prevents it from becoming a primary energy supply - evidence in Mallon book to the contrary.
• 40 - Second full paragraph sums up IEA's perspective on feed-in tariffs. Say tariffs for PVs are very high, and need to be compared to other methods of reducing CO2, such as efficiency measures. R&D funding should be used to reduce cost of technology.
• 47 - Emissions trading sector covers 55% of country's CO2 emissions. National allocation plan for 2005-07 (NAPI) capped CO2 at 495 MtCO2/yr for those installations covered. NAPII for 2008-2012, as revised by EC, caps it at 425.
• 49 - Plans for emissions reductions in sectors not covered by emissions trading (households, small business, transport) include Ecological tax reform making energy more expensive and employment cheaper, strengthening public transport, promotion of renewables through EEG, Expansion and modernisation of combined heat and power (CHP) plants through the April 2002 enactment of the law on CHP, and Improved energy efficiency in buildings through streamlined regulations, the introduction of energy certificates, financial assistance for energysaving measures and other measures.
• 52 - Rightly criticizes government's essential giveaway of emission permits to new plants for 14 years of operation. Also promotes auctioning of emission permits with revenue recycling back to gov't or consumers.
• 54- IEA seems to question whether goal of doubling energy productivity by 2020 from 1990 levels is possible. Plan includes increasing funding for CO2 Building Rehabilitation Program by EUR 1.5 billion per year (more on this on p. 58); modernizing power plans, promoting distributed gen and CHP plants; step up initiatives for energy conservation in buildings, electricity consumption, and transport. Energy Efficiency Action Plan released in June 2007.
• 56 - Says total of EUR 1.4 billion per year now available for energy rehabilitation in buildings.
• 59 - Technical efficiency gains in vehicle gas mileage since 2000 have been cancelled by increased driving.
• 59-60 - EU voluntary agreement with auto industry to reduce passenger car emissions to 140 g CO2 per km (avg) by 2008
• 60 - On a daily basis, about 27 million passengers use public transportation in Germany, resulting in about 19 million avoided individual vehicle trips. In 2005, public transport use increased to over 10 billion trips, an increase that can be attributed to easy access to public transport facilities: 86% of all households take less than 10 minutes to reach the closest public transport stop on foot.
• 66 - Table of renewables supply, 1970-2005
• 68 - Renewable promotion objectives: According to the EEG, Germany works to promote renewables to facilitate a sustainable development of energy supply, particularly for the sake of protecting the climate, nature and the environment; to reduce the costs of energy supply for the national economy, in part by incorporating long-term external effects; to contribute towards avoiding conflicts over fossil fuels; and to promote the further development of technologies for the generation of electricity from renewable energy sources.
• 68 - Major RE policies: Germany’s primary tool to promote renewables in the electricity sector is the EEG, enacted in 2000, and amended in 2004. The EEG replaced electricity feed-in legislation (Stromeinspeisungsgesetz, StrEG) enacted in 1990. The other major policies are a programme to provide financial incentives for installations that produce heat from renewables and the promotion of biofuels in transport.
• 68 - Under original feed-in law, power companies obliged to pay 65-86% of market price to renewables producers. Replaced with guaranteed rate, differentiated by source, location, size of installation, and technology. Idea is that producers should make same profit regardless of technology. The amount paid depends on the year in which the installation is built, with rates guaranteed for a term between 15 and 30 years, depending on technology. Tariffs decline annually to take into account technical development.
• 69 - Table of Feed-in tariffs by technology for 2006
• 69 - Under EEG, RE installations guaranteed priority grid access, transmission and distribution. Some detrimental transmission effects (?) occurred within Germany and at Netherlands border due to system not designed properly to handle significant wind integration.

At this point, I stopped reading the entire report, printed out the Renewable Energy section, and highlighted things in the document. Some info on costs for FITs, financial incentives for renewable heat, and biofuel tax exemptions, but not complete. IEA suggests that Germany should switch to renewables obligation (quota) or premium (a la wind PTC in U.S.) system now that RE market is relatively well-developed. Especially dislikes the large tariff attached to PV. Says R&D, rather than market deployment, should be subsidized.

12 October 2007

Today:

• Tried to fill in sources for "job" component of report. Ann was right - not much out there on actual employment figures for different industries. Really, for the purposes of this report, I think it will be adequate to show that the countries that were early leaders in RE (Denmark and Germany), and later adopters that focused on domestic job creation (Spain), have the most companies and create the most jobs.
  
• Heidi's presentation. Lots of good feedback and questions. See notebook.
• Two issues that I'd be interested in looking at more. 1) Is RE vs. FF job creation comparing apples to apples, since RE involves building infrastructure, while FF is mostly just extraction of energy source? 2) When costs come down, will employment and wages come down too?
• Also, JB convinced it's better to operate on quantity axis for carbon emissions. Most RE literature says price access is better for RE promotion to operate on price axis. Are both right? Differences between carbon (bad) and RE (good) lead to different appropriate policies? Also, need to look at interactions between carbon caps and renewable energy promotion. Any literature on this? JB and MA said Europe's carbon trading system is a disgrace.
  
• Metcalf (1999) article in National Tax Journal on distributional effects of green taxation
• Jim Manuel at UMASS - expert on FITs
• How does size of public investment in energy sector compare to private investment? JB says private must dominate, so may be most important to get private investment out of FF and into RE.
• Justifications for government may not be just (or even primarily) promotion of renewable energy. Other important components: energy security, domestic job creation, quality jobs, regionally-targeted jobs, energy prices don't rise too much for low-income families.
• "The Policy Paradox" by Debra Stone. Discusses bundling policy objectives.
• May look at transitional assistance programs (TAAs) instituted after Clean Air Act Amendments in 1990. Probably not done well, but lessons.
• Mankiw editorial in NYT advocating carbon tax (not quota - but still good for Mankiw).

Next up:

• File loose papers
• Continue researching for paper - need to avoid getting caught up in details and decide what level of specificity is appropriate for this paper. E.g., finding exact job stats might be too time consuming, instead, show where companies are, where money is flowing.
  

10 October 2007

Today:

• Long discussion(s) with Heidi about public investment. Had been starting with perspective that public investment in RE was the right way to go, and needed to show why it was good for economy and jobs. Now considering an analysis of whether public investment is best way to promote renewable energy. Talked about what public investment in RE meant - decided on a bid process similar to highway construction. Seems to me that role of economist here is to figure out how to meet GHG reduction targets most equitably and efficiently. May be through government regulation, incentives, direct investment.
• Made outline of "Comparative Study Ideas - 10.10.07" with categories that I think report should include. Should outline the goals of renewable energy policy: emissions reduction, job creation, equity and efficiency. Use decided-upon measures to show how the comparison countries are doing in these areas. Discuss policies that have been used to get countries to where they are now. Which ones succeeded? Which ones failed?
• Copied the Mallon book and returned to library.
• Began looking at http://cait.wri.org/ the Climate Analysis Indicators Tool from WRI to see, based on emissions, which other country/countries should be included in report. Poor countries, obviously, have the lowest emissions per capita. But the countries I'm planning to include in the report don't have the lowest emissions per capita among developed countries. They've simply made bigger strides in new renewables than other countries.
• Began a spreadsheet "Comparative Study Data 10 10 07" with data relevant to study. Spent a bit too much time looking at CO2 emission data.
  
• Read a report from CEPR on four economic issues that environmentalists should consider. Fourth one was the cost of carbon emissions. Made the point that no one has done an analysis of how much foregone GDP has resulted from military spending. All the debate on the cost of carbon abatement, given the commitment to military spending, seems silly.
  

Next time:

• Begin with looking for/filling in information on job creation in the new spreadsheet.
• If possible, research cost and distribution too.
• Stats on energy usage and RE are relatively readily available. Can fill this in last.
  

Carbon I-O Tables

Do something like what Heidi is doing, but instead of looking at job multipliers of RE, look at carbon multipliers. (Inspired by the Hillebrand study that suggested that increase in renewable energy jobs would lead to more car buying, which would lead to higher carbon emissions.)

3 October 2007

Today:

• Read through the IEA Renewables Information 2007 report. As expected, not much analysis as to how countries' are in RE situation they are in. Emphasized that worldwide renewable usage is largely biomass in developing countries. Majority of report are 6-page country mini-reports, with data on energy usage over time. Printed off sections for Denmark, Germany, Japan, Spain, U.S. Confirmed that Denmark hasn't been moving or shaking much in last couple years. Data on solar PV seems off/difficult to compare.
• Began looking at Energy Policy 2006 publication (set up just like 2005 version that I looked at last week). Printed off some tables on energy R&D for renewables and for the countries listed above.
• Skimmed last month of RenewableEnergyAccess.com news headlines. Indicative of who players are, what is being invested in (algae for biofuel!), policy changes that may affect RE industry, etc.
• Read Heidi's lit review. Has overview of 6 I-O studies on employment impact of various REEE scenarios. Not much lit out there on job quality in REEE industry. Will probably use Medoff methodology.

Next time:

• Write reflection post on anything learned at conference
• Go through pertinent sections of Energy Policy 2006
• Pick one or two countries besides those listed to analyze. (A less-industrialized country with rapid RE growth - China, India, or Korea? Maybe U.K. for unique experience with tender system.)
• Make outline for report. Be sure to look at RE capacity in countries versus jobs in the RE sector. What influenced latter?

IEA Renewables Information 2007

Accessed via http://puck.sourceoecd.org/vl=2629902/cl=14/nw=1/rpsv/~6673/v2007n21/s1/p1l

• 11 Calculation of primary energy equivalent: First, primary energy source of a given source. IEA uses heat for geothermal and solar thermal. Electricity for hydro, wind, tidal/wave/ocean, solar PV. Then, physical energy content method. E.g., for geothermal and solar thermal, primary energy equivalent is amount of heat generated. For others, it is amount of electricity generated. Equivalent to assuming 100% efficiency.
• 31 (3) 12.7% of TPES in world in 2005 was renewables. Large majority is solid biomass (developing countries, esp) - 75.6%. "New" renewables (solar, wind, tide) represent less than 0.1% of TPES and 0.9% of renewables. Non-OECD countries responsible for 77.4% of world renewables supply (biomass). However, OECD responsible for 87.5% of "new" renewables. Hydro provides 89.3% of total renewable electricity.
• 6 Countries with large share of "new" renewables, not often discussed: Costa Rica, El Salvador, Iceland (geothermal), Mexico (looks like its mostly geothermal), New Zealand,
  
• 10 Stats on biggest OECD producers of various forms of RE. Geothermal: US, Mex, It, Jap, Ice, NZ. Solar thermal: US, Japan, Turkey. Solar PV: Germany, Spain, Mex, Neth. Wind: Germ, Spain, Denmark, US. The US is the OECD's largest producer of RE, contributing 31.5% in 2005. US gets 4% of TPES from renewables. US LEADS MANY CATEGORIES. BUT AS SHARE OF OUR TPES, RE is SMALL.
  
• 13 Solid biomass makes up 11.5% of US's RE. WHAT KIND OF BIOMASS IS BEING USED? COFIRING?
• 13 Highest growth rate for wind 1990-2005 in Portugal: 64.7% per year, from 0.001TWH to 1.8 TWh.
  
• p. 83-350 contain country-by-country data tables on total energy supply (GDP and population), net generating capacity of renewable and waste products, gross electricity generation from renewables, heat production from renewables in the transformation sector, energy balances of renewables (doesn't include wind)
• LEARN MORE ABOUT GEOTHERMAL. WHY DOESN'T IT GET MUCH ATTENTION?
• Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, UK and Greece have had a good deal of wind growth
  

Printed out country profiles for Denmark, Germany, Japan, Spain, U.S.

• Share of renewables in TPES rose in Denmark and Germany between 1990-2005; fell in Japan, Spain, U.S.
• TPES/population in U.S. between 1990-2006e was 7.70 to 7.76. Denmark 3.48 to 3.73. Germany 4.49 to 4.24. Japan 3.60 to 4.13. Spain 2.33 to 3.29.
• TPES/GDP (in 2000USD) in U.S. between 1990-2006e was 0.27 to 0.20. Denmark 0.14 to 0.11. Germany 0.23 to 0.17. Japan 0.11 to 0.10. Spain 0.21 to 0.20.
• Denmark wind capacity has stagnated in recent years: 3117 in 2003, 3125 in 2004, 3129 in 2005. Capacity of solar collectors has also been relatively stagnant.
• Germany has had strong and consistent growth in both wind and solar PV over period.
• Japan has had strong growth in solar PV over period, but solar collectors surface area and "capacity of solar collectors" shrank from 8878 in 2003 to 4899 in 2005. Country notes don't explain discrepancy. Wind started late, but has grown strongly in recent years.
• Spain wind capacity grew strongly to 2004 (2MW in 1990 to 8220 in 2004), but stagnated at 8317 in 2005.
• U.S. wind capacity grew steadily from 1911MW in 1990 to 8706MW in 2005. Same trend with solar PV as in Japan. Numbers for net generating capacity rise over period, but both surface area and capacity declined over period.
• Appear to be discrepancies in measurement of solar PV electricity generation measurements among countries. Germany has 2000 GWh in 2006, while Japan has 7. Due to distributed vs. centralized?? Germany shows very strong growth by these tables, and Spain's appears quite strong. Japan and U.S., on other hand, appear to have relatively small amount of PV capacity, though U.S. grew from 6 GWh to 16 between 2004-2005.
  
• Shows Denmark's stagnation in wind electric generation 2004-2006. Germany shows strong growth, and jump between 2003 and 2004. Spain also appears to stagnate somewhat 2005-2006. U.S. shows jump between 2005 and 2006.
• Curiosities: Industrial waste used for electricity falls of between 2004 and 2005 in Germany. Regulation? Electricity generation from renewable and non-renewable municipal waste appears to be equal for many countries - must give total mun waste used and divide in half. U.S. does more CHP than I would have guessed. Total electricity generation from them has dropped from 62000 GWh in 1990 to around 40000 in 2000-2005.
  

1 October 2007

Today:

• Took notes on RE policies in EU from Energy Policy 32 (2006) 5-pager and the UK chapter in Mallon's RE policy book
• Read the Meyer (2003) paper comparing government incentives/support for renewable energy. Author definitely favors feed-in mechanisms to quota/trade systems, for price security.
• Meyer's paper spurred some questions on current state of Danish wind industry especially. Seems that after shift to more conservative gov't in 2001, subsidies for wind were reduced, and domestic installation of wind has fallen off in past few years.
  
• Spent latter part of day trying to figure out exactly what happened in Denmark, without much success. Looked at Danish newspapers that publish in English (Borsen and Copenhagen Times), GWEC website, Google news search. Not much analysis. Also didn't find anything with Google Scholar.
  

Next up:

• Find numbers for capacity added in Denmark for last 10 years or so. Also, look at IEA for policies. Need to find more up-to-date information.
• Begin outline of what I could put into a report at this point. Would probably focus on success of feed-in tariffs. Need some more recent information on certificate programs. Discuss features of successful and unsuccessful policies.
• Learn more about how big wind manufacturing companies got that way. Where are they located? How did government policies affect their existence/growth?
  

Why is Denmark installing less wind?

Meyer (2003) indicated that Denmark was having problems transitioning from feed-in tariff system to tradable certificates.
REN21 shows that Denmark, while still a world leader in wind capacity, installed relatively little in the year 2005. Are conditions for investment so uncertain?

According to the Danish Wind Industry Association (http://www.windpower.org/en/market.htm), "Previously Denmark had a fixed feed-in tariff for wind power, but today all power is sold on the liberalised electricity market. In addition to the market price, which is set by the Nordic power exchange, Nord Pool, wind power investors get an environmental premium of 0.10 DDK/kWh (approx. 0.013 EUR/kWh). This development from fixed to market based prices is natural in a liberalised market system. But the Danish Wind Industry Association deems the current premium too low – considering the environmental benefits and the necessary rate of return for the investors in wind power." MAY NOT BE RECENTLY UPDATED.

Having a hard time finding information on current state of RE investment in Denmark.

Copenhagen Post article: "Diminished growth worries wind industry" from 2 August 2007. http://www.cphpost.dk/print.jsp?o_id=102916

• Also printed a copy.
• Denmark not on Global Wind Energy Council Top 20 list for capacity expansion in 2006.
• Rosa Andersen, advisor for Danish Wind Energy Association, said country only installed 6 turbines in 2006.
• Article doesn't explain why.
  

Copenhagen Post article: "Nation not so green after all, says EU" from 14 June 2007. http://www.cphpost.dk/get/102200.html

• Rows of windmills and international praise for our use of green energy sources create a picture at odds with the European Union's own version of the country's energy efforts, reported Nyhedsavisen newspaper Monday.
• EU data on sustainable energy casts a shadow over Denmark’s image as a global green leader, as the country was at the bottom of the 27-member union list for funding towards sustainable energy sources.
• Denmark’s dominant energy symbol, the wind turbine, has suffered under the current government, with the country losing 19 turbines last year - 28 were junked while only nine new ones were raised. The total wind energy produced nationwide was only 11 megawatts in 2006 compared with 600 megawatts in 2000.
• ONLY 11 MW IN 2006? JUST NOT RUNNING THE WINDMILLS? WHAT IS GOING ON?

Borsen (Danish Financial daily) article: "The Danish wind turbine market has come to a standstill" from 12 Feb 2007.
http://borsen.dk/nyhed/103814/

• Says virtual standstill in wind turbine installation since 2003
• Vestas spokesman says investors are going to more profitable places, like Germany
• As to why, article just says Danish government has removed incentives for wind turbines

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article: "Danish island touts clean energy, but reality sets in" from 9 Feb 2006
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06040/652715.stm

• Denmark's cutting-edge wind industry, for instance, has flourished on the back of Danish businesses and consumers who pay government-mandated premiums for wind power and other alternative energies.
• Such premiums, which are used in most of the EU's 25 member countries to spur alternative-energy development, have made Denmark a leader in wind power. The Nordic country of 5.4 million today gets 20 percent of its electricity from wind, more than any other country in Europe.
• Now, though, the Danish government is pulling back on energy incentives, arguing that they are a drag on the economy. The effect won't be felt fully until 2010, when current fixed-price contracts for wind power expire and turbine owners are thrown into the free market.
• ...Then in 2001, conservatives ousted Denmark's social democrats amid an economic slump. The new government began phasing out the contracts that guaranteed high income for producers of wind energy. It also ended tax credits and subsidies for solar panels and heating systems fueled by wood, straw and other organic "biomass."
• "It was a shift in philosophy, a belief that the market will give more cost-effective solutions," says Ture Falbe-Hansen, a spokesman for the Danish Energy Authority.
• The result was a collapse of the overall domestic Danish market for wind turbines. Although the market is small and largely saturated, it had been a laboratory for Danish turbine makers like Vestas Wind Systems A/S to hone their technology. Now, Vestas is depending on China, the U.S. and other markets for growth, but it must compete with large companies that also make turbines, including General Electric Co. of the U.S. and Siemens AG of Germany, for business.

At end of day, Monday, Oct 1, still not sure exactly what current situation is in Denmark regarding renewables policies. Seems that shift to more conservative government in 2001 led to cutting back of subsidies, but hard to find information.

Legal Conditions for RE: Comparison of National Legislation

Niels I. Meyer. "Legal Conditions for RE: A Comparison of National Legislation." Paper for Berlin Conference, May 2003. Paper date: 10 June 2003.

• Says short-term goals of market not in line with long-term planning needed for energy infrastructure development. Disagrees with liberalization of electricity market in EU 1996 - says based on ideological principles, not rational evaluation.
• Ways wind capacity is ranked: total MW, percent of electricit, capacity per area, capacity per capita, capacity per GNP. Top ranked are Germany, Denmark, Denmark, Denmark, Denmark.
• 6 Top environmental concerns are noise and visual - but varies from place to place. Denmark cooperative ownership structure renders wind turbines more acceptable.
• 6 Some issues with variable supply of wind resources. Says most promising solutions involve using excess wind power to produce hydrogen and charging batteries for electric cars.
• 8 Offshore wind farms just beginning to penetrate Europe. Mostly in Denmark so far. At end of 2002, 279MW of offshore wind in Europe, 233MW of which in DK.
• 8 Author favors feed-in model. Cost can be passed on to consumers. Possibility for windfall profits can be remedied by a stepped reduction of tariffs.
• 10 Tender (offer of a bid for contract) system used in UK: winners get fixed price per kWh for length of contract period. Blames local opposition to wind farms and bureaucratic planning procedures for lack of success - less than 1/3 of winning bids realized.
• 11 Dutch system combines elements of certs and FIM (feed-in model). Old model: green electricity producers got certificates, which could be traded for 6 cent eco-tax exemption, plus got subsidy of 2 cents per kWh. New system has 2.9 cent exemption with higher subsidy, guaranteed for 10 years, but with new subsidy rates determined every year by gov't.
• 12 Danish system in flux at time of writing. Switching from successful FIM sytem to CTM, but created uncertainty. Present tariff was market price plus premium of 0.1DKK/kWh, not to exceed specified cap. Reduction of premium calculated on hourly basis - not transparent and does not create friendly environment for investment. Also, 450 MW of offshore wind being divided into three farms in international public tender process. HOW DID THIS GO?
• 13 Sweden has straight up certificate trading model (CTM). In beginning, gov't offered minimum cert price, linearly reduced to 0 by 2008. Maximum price corresponds to penalty for not fulfilling quota, 150% of avg cert price during year, with specified max.
• 13 Brief discussion of Belgium, Italy (gov't decides price of certs for specified amount of RES-E once a year), Britain.
• 13 Author dislikes CTM - price fluctuation leads to investment uncertainty.
• 13 Says electric companies wishing to buy more than quota should get special certificates, so as to not release others from their obligation
• 14 Table shows 16 European countries and whether they are using FIM, tender, green pricing (voluntary), or CTM
• 14 Possibility of international trading through Renewable Energy Certificate System between group of utilities in Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Denmark, Germany, Holland, Italy, Norway, Sweden, UK. IS THIS WORKING?
• 14 Interplay between trading of RE certs and GHG certs? Cites Morthorst 2003 article in Energy Policy on National Targets.
• 15 Says neither CTM nor FIM are fully market conforming; one sets quantity while other sets price. Further, after wind turbines are installed, they have no flexibility to compete in a market where prices are fluctuating.

NREL head calls for increased RE goal (Feb 2007)

Current U.S. renewable energy goal too low, says head of national lab. Alvin Powell, Harvard News Office, 7 Feb 2007. http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2007/02.08/09-energy.html

• Says government needs to set more ambitious target: biofuels should make up 30 percent of fuel supply by 2030, wind should generate 20% of electricity, and solar should be market competitive by 2015
• The National Lab's budget has been stuck at $200 million for the past four years, he said, while its operating budget has actually declined.

RE Policy and Politics, Mallon, 2006 - Country Case Studies

Gordon Edge (2006). "A Harsh Environment: The Non-Fossil Fuel Obligation and the UK Renewables Industry," in Renewable Energy Policy and Politics, Karl Mallon, ed. London: Earthscan.

• The Non-Fossil Fuel Obligation (NFFO): In early 1990s, government sold power generators to private interests, but could not sell nuclear because risks were too high. To force distribution companies to buy higher-priced nuclear power, instituted fossil fuel levy (FFL) to make fossil fuels comparable in price to nuclear.
• Eventually (not clear when this happened), NFFO covered only RE, and dropped from 10% to 1%.
• Tender system: Government would bid out renewable energy capacity and would buy largest amt possible with available FFL funds. Technology banding guaranteed a given portion of the funds to each of 5 technologies: large wind, small wind, small hydro, landfill gas, biomass.
• What this system didn't do well: 1) get capacity installed, due to planning boards blocking construction of the facilities; 2) generate domestic development or manufacturing, since Denmark and Germany had lowest-cost technology; 3) engender confidence in bidders, since no one knew when next round would be or how many contracts would be awarded
• NFFO ended in 1998 - the Renewables Obligation came into force in 2002: mandates electricity suppliers to supply set proportion of sales from RE or trade in certificates to meet quota.
• Downsides of RO: 1) Technology-blind, so promotes least cost technology - mostly wind right now; 2) potential for market in certificates to crash if more RE is produced than is mandated (supply for certs will outweigh demand and very little would be paid for certificates, apparently haven't had this problem yet); 3) Has attracted foreign manufacturers to set up operations in UK, but not domestic industry
• Need coordination in policymaking, including planning, transmission, grid connection
• Declared Net Capacity: nameplate capacity multiplied by capacity factor. Wind 0.43; Solar 0.17; Tidal 0.33; Small hydro 0.55; 1 for all others

Randall Swisher and Kevin Porter (2006). "Renewable Policy Lessons from the US: The Need for Consistent and Stable Policies," in Renewable Energy Policy and Politics, Karl Mallon, ed. London: Earthscan.

• On policies for wind energy production in U.S. Good, concise description of experiences with PURPA and PTC. Says PTC is not a market maker, but RPSs are. Description of success of TX's RPS. Describes success of wind production under FITs DE and DK, but ascribes success to consistency rather than the policy, per se. Concludes that FITs would not be politically feasible in US, so well-designed RPS way to go. Points to large number of top-10 wind turbine manufacturers in DK, DE, SP (7) as evidence of success of policies there. US only has 1.

Jose Luis Garcia Ortega and Emilio Menendez Perez (2006). "Spanish Renewable Energy: Successes and Untapped Potential," in Renewable Energy Policy and Politics, Karl Mallon, ed. London: Earthscan.

• Energy demand outpacing additions of RE; lack of energy efficiency programs. GHG emission permitted to rise by 15% for 2008-12 Kyoto commitment period (above 1990 levels?) reached 40% above by 2003. Emissions from transport sector fastest growing. Highly dependent on oil imports, and nuclear generates 1/3 of electricity.
• Objectives for RE are 1) energy independence, 2) jobs, 3) environmental concerns.
• Advocates of RE included independent developers that had formed an umbrella association to make their voice heard and environmental groups. In 1992, an agreement formed between a nationwide environmental organization and two major national unions, calling for 750MW target for wind when a gov't energy institute was calling for 175MW (not sure by when). Legislation enacted in 1994, updated in 1998 and 2004, guarantees premium payments for RE.
• Spanish states have various initiatives and targets of their own. Galicia has 2300MW wind target, w/ aim of ensuring 70 percent of investment spent within the state. Resulted in 5000 direct and indirect jobs, numerous factories. Twenty percent of Spanish population lives in cities that require solar thermal for hot water in new buildings.
• Approxiately 10,000 jobs in Spanish wind industry. Blade manufacture creates 1000 direct jobs in seven factories. 1000 jobs in small O&M enterprises all over country. Solar power employs about 4000 people, with 3/4 in small O&M enterprises. PV module manufacturing requires more than 1000 workers, 15% grads of higher ed. Biomass generation requires equivalent of 5000 full time workers, but most labor complementary to work collecting agricultural waste in rural areas.
• Missing 2 pages (224-225) here
• Spain now world leader in solar thermal electric - incentives not in place in 1994/1998, but industry growing now.
• Gap between R&D institutes and industry - companies seek technology from outside the country. Holds up Solar Energy Institute as example of successful R&D/industry integration. Spanish mkt uses 4% of PV modules made in Europe; 95% of PV module output is exported.

Sven Teske and Volker U. Hoffman (2006). "A History of Support for Solar Photovoltaics in Germany," in Renewable Energy Policy and Politics, Karl Mallon, ed. London: Earthscan.

• Spending on energy research between 1974-1995 displays assumption that nuclear power would be energy source of 21st century. Nuclear fusion failed to deliver anything approaching commercial power applications.
• Thousand roofs program began 1991 - solar generators with capacities of 1 to 5 KW eligible for 70% investment cost subsidy. Of 4000 applications, 2100 installations in operation at end of 1995. Program was chance to prove concept, raise awareness, facilitate cost reductions, demonstrate what needed to be changed in future (subsidy tied to output rather than capacity).
• No successor program when it ended in 1995. Author calls 1995-1999 "the dark ages." Uninterupted subsidy program in North Rhine-Westphalia, and mixture of less steady support in other regions, prevented market from collapsing altogether. Market for PV tripled in two years following 1995 - authors owes this to state supports and campaigns of environmental groups and solar manufacturers.
• 100,000 solar roofs program began in Nov 1999 w/ no-interest loan for 100% of total investment. Not impetus enough until Renewable Energy Law in 2000 included solar PV in portfolio of RE eligible for FITs. Target was met in June 2003, and no-interests loans not continued.
• New Renewable Energy Law came into force in 2004 guarantees prices to users solar PV high enough to attract installation. By this time, no separate state supports.
• Main message seems to be importance of stability, and this author believes the FITs is most effective option.

Renewable energy policies in the EU

"Renewable energy policies in the European Union," Energy Policy (Guest editorial), 34 (2006) 251-255. 5pp. Saved to hard disk.

• Policy emphasis in 70s and 80s was on R&D.
• In 90s, emphasis shifted to implementation. EU has done this most, but other examples are 1999 RPS in TX and PV investment subsidy in Japan.
• Other articles in this issue discuss: success of wind and PV in Germany; limited success in Sweden due to policy programs that are inflexible, non-continuous, and too focused;
• R&D vs. market introduction: former leads to more cost-effective tech, latter facilitates learning process that helps technological and institutional learning
• Subsidies vs quota systems: find that feed-in systems' big advantage is risk reduction in terms of price and guaranteed sold volume
• Direct impact of green electricity schemes limited so far (voluntary market for renewables)
• Biomass deserves more attention in policy studies - important RE source in terms of current contribution and expected growth in absolute terms
• Success in meeting policy goals limited to specific countries and specific RE sources