{"title":"A Reexamination of Renewable Electricity Policy in Sweden","authors":"S. Fridolfsson, Thomas P. Tangerås","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2094159","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Green certificates are the main instrument for promoting renewable electricity (RES-E) in Sweden. But certificates cover only a limited share of total RES-E production. Under partial coverage, crowding out may arise whereby costly new RES-E replaces inexpensive old RES-E. Granting certificates to all of RES-E production improves efficiency, but leaves windfall rent to otherwise profitable facilities. We also analyze transaction costs in the permit process for new RES-E in Sweden. Municipalities veto socially desirable projects because of asymmetrically distributed investment costs and benefits. We propose market-based permit fees rather than limited veto rights as a solution to this NIMBY problem.","PeriodicalId":250628,"journal":{"name":"INTL: Social & Cultural Issues (Topic)","volume":"535 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INTL: Social & Cultural Issues (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2094159","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20
Abstract
Green certificates are the main instrument for promoting renewable electricity (RES-E) in Sweden. But certificates cover only a limited share of total RES-E production. Under partial coverage, crowding out may arise whereby costly new RES-E replaces inexpensive old RES-E. Granting certificates to all of RES-E production improves efficiency, but leaves windfall rent to otherwise profitable facilities. We also analyze transaction costs in the permit process for new RES-E in Sweden. Municipalities veto socially desirable projects because of asymmetrically distributed investment costs and benefits. We propose market-based permit fees rather than limited veto rights as a solution to this NIMBY problem.