The market for tradable renewable energy credits

Ecological Economics

Volumn 42, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 369-379

  Berry, David ^a  

^a Land and Water Fund of the Rockies   (United States)

Author keywords

Renewable energy; Risk; Risk management; Tradable credits

Indexed keywords

CREDIT PROVISION; ENERGY MARKET; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT; RISK ASSESSMENT;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 0036747211     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00128-3     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Applied Decision Analysis, Inc. 1994. EPRI Investment Strategies Project, Volume 1: Value of Flexibility and Modularity of Distributed Generation. Electric Power Research Institute, TR-104171.
2. Arizona Administrative Code, 2001. R14-2-1618, Environmental Portfolio Standard, adopted by the Arizona Corporation Commission in Decision No. 63364.
3. Arizona Tradable Credits Committee, 2001. Memorandum on Final Wording: Tradable Credits. Submitted to the Arizona Corporation Commission Staff.
4. Automated Power Exchange, 1999. Automated Power Exchange announces prices for APX green tickets in first five months of trading, Cupertino, CA.
5. Berry, D., Steiker, G., 1977. An economic analysis of transfer of development rights. Natural Resources Journal 17, 55-80.
6. Burtraw, D., 2000. Innovation under the tradable sulfur dioxide emission permits program in the U.S. Electricity sector. Resources for the future discussion paper 00-38, Washington, DC.
7. Center for Resource Solutions, 2001. Summary report on tradable renewable certificates (TRC): The potential and the pitfalls, San Francisco, CA.
8. Clemmer, S., Paulos, B., Nogee, A., 2000. Clean power surge: ranking the states. Union of Concerned Scientists, Cambridge, MA.
9. CO2e.com, 2001. Greenhouse gas market overview. Available from www.co2e.com.
10. Colby, B., 2000. Cap and trade policy challenges: a tale of three markets. Land Economics 76, 638-658.
11. Crocker, K., Masten, S., 1991. Pretia ex machina? Prices and process in long-term contracts. Journal of Law and Economics 34, 69-99.
12. Dahl, C., Matson, T., 1998. Evolution of the US natural gas industry in response to changes in transaction costs. Land Economics 74, 390-408.
13. ERCOT (Electric Reliability Council of Texas), 2001. ERCOT protocols, section 14, renewable energy credit trading program.
14. Espey, S., 2001. Renewables portfolio standard: a means for trade with electricity from renewable energy sources? Energy Policy 29, 557-566.
15. Goldberg, V., Erickson, J., 1987. Quantity and price adjustment in long-term contracts: a case study of petroleum coke. Journal of Law and Economics 30, 369-398.
16. Hawaii, 2001. Act 272 (H.B. No. 173).
17. Joskow, P., 1987. Contract duration and relationship-specific investments: empirical evidence from coal markets. American Economic Review 77, 168-185.
18. Kaslow, T., Pindyck, R., 1994. Valuing flexibility in utility planning. The Electricity Journal 7 (March), 60-65.
19. Kutscher, C., 2000. The status and future of geothermal electric power. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Conference Paper NREL/CP-550-28204.
20. Little, A.D., 1998. Profiles of leading renewable energy technologies for the massachusetts renewable energy trust fund, Cambridge, MA.
21. McVeigh, J., Burtraw, D., Darmstadter, J., Palmer, K., 1999. Winner, loser, or innocent victim: has renewable energy performed as expected? Resources for the Future Renewable Energy Project, Discussion Paper 99-28, Washington, DC.
22. National Independent Energy Producers, 1992. Negotiating risk: efficiency and risk sharing in electric power markets, Washington, DC.
23. Nevada Senate, 2001. Senate Bill No. 372.
24. New Mexico Public Regulation Commission, 2002. Notice of proposed rulemaking, in the matter of an inquiry into renewable energy as a source of electricity, Utility Case No. 3619.
25. OECD/International Energy Agency, 2000. Experience curves for energy technology policy, Paris.
26. Pirrong, S., 1993. Contracting practices in bulk shipping markets: a transactions cost explanation. Journal of Law and Economics 36, 937-976.
27. Public Utility Commission of Texas, Rule 25.173.
28. Rader, N., Hempling, S., 2001. The Renewables Portfolio Standard: A Practical Guide. National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, Washington, DC.
29. Shelanski, H., Klein, P., 1995. Empirical research in transaction cost economics: a review and assessment. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 11, 335-361.
30. Solar Electric Power Association, 2001. Large Systems Cost Report 2001 Update, Washington, DC.
31. Solomon, B., 1999. New directions in emissions trading: the potential contribution of new institutional economics. Ecological Economics 30, 371-387.
32. Starrs, T., 2001. Green tags: a new way to support renewable energy. Solar Today, 15 (July-August), available from www.solartoday.org/2001/july-aug/feature3.html.
33. Tietenberg, T., 1985. Emissions trading: an exercise in reforming pollution policy. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.
34. Tietenberg, T., 2000. Tradable permit approaches to pollution control: Faustian bargain or paradise regained? In: Kaplowitz, M. (Ed.), Property Rights, Economics and the Environment. JAI Press, Stamford, CT, pp. 175-199.
35. Tucker, M., 2001. Trading carbon tradable offsets under Kyoto's clean development mechanism: the economic advantages to buyers and sellers of using call options. Ecological Economics 37, 173-182.
36. United States General Accounting Office, 1994. Air pollution: allowance trading offers an opportunity to reduce emissions at less cost, Washington, DC, GAO/RCED-95-30.
37. Williamson, R., 1998. Portfolio approach to developing renewable resources. Renewable Energy Policy Project, Washington, DC.
38. Wisconsin Administrative Code, 2001. Chapter PSC 118.
39. Wisconsin Statutes and Annotations, 196.378.
40. Wiser, R., Porter, K., Bolinger, M., 2000. Comparing state portfolio standards and system-benefits charges under restructuring. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and National Renewable Energy Laboratory.