增加风能和太阳能份额的资源充足性:欧洲和美国电力市场设计的比较

A. Botterud, H. Auer
{"title":"增加风能和太阳能份额的资源充足性:欧洲和美国电力市场设计的比较","authors":"A. Botterud, H. Auer","doi":"10.5547/2160-5890.9.1.abot","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We raise the question if improvements to current energy-only markets are sufficient to maintain resource adequacy in electricity markets or whether the rapid increase in wind and solar power gives stronger arguments for additional capacity mechanisms. A comparative analysis between Europe and the United States reveals some fundamental differences, but also many similarities in electricity market design on the two continents. We provide a list of general and specific recommendations for improved electricity markets and argue that lessons can and should be learned in both directions. The key to achieve a market-compatible integration of renewable energy is to focus on correct price formation in the shortterm. Increased demand-side participation, improved pricing during scarcity conditions, and a transition from technology-specific subsidies of renewables towards adequate pricing of carbon emissions are important measures towards this end. In contrast, an increasing reliance on administrative capacity mechanisms would bring the industry back towards the centralized integrated resource planning that prevailed at the outset of electricity restructuring more than 25 years ago.","PeriodicalId":385400,"journal":{"name":"Economics of Energy and Environmental Policy","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resource Adequacy with Increasing Shares of Wind and Solar Power: A Comparison of European and U.S. Electricity Market Designs\",\"authors\":\"A. Botterud, H. Auer\",\"doi\":\"10.5547/2160-5890.9.1.abot\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We raise the question if improvements to current energy-only markets are sufficient to maintain resource adequacy in electricity markets or whether the rapid increase in wind and solar power gives stronger arguments for additional capacity mechanisms. A comparative analysis between Europe and the United States reveals some fundamental differences, but also many similarities in electricity market design on the two continents. We provide a list of general and specific recommendations for improved electricity markets and argue that lessons can and should be learned in both directions. The key to achieve a market-compatible integration of renewable energy is to focus on correct price formation in the shortterm. Increased demand-side participation, improved pricing during scarcity conditions, and a transition from technology-specific subsidies of renewables towards adequate pricing of carbon emissions are important measures towards this end. In contrast, an increasing reliance on administrative capacity mechanisms would bring the industry back towards the centralized integrated resource planning that prevailed at the outset of electricity restructuring more than 25 years ago.\",\"PeriodicalId\":385400,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economics of Energy and Environmental Policy\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economics of Energy and Environmental Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5547/2160-5890.9.1.abot\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economics of Energy and Environmental Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5547/2160-5890.9.1.abot","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

我们提出的问题是,当前能源市场的改善是否足以维持电力市场的资源充足性,或者风能和太阳能的快速增长是否为额外的产能机制提供了更有力的论据。通过对欧洲和美国电力市场设计的比较分析,可以发现两大洲在电力市场设计上既有一些根本性的差异,也有许多相似之处。我们为改善电力市场提供了一系列一般和具体的建议,并认为可以而且应该在两个方向上吸取经验教训。实现与市场兼容的可再生能源整合的关键是关注短期内正确的价格形成。增加需求方参与,改善稀缺条件下的定价,以及从对可再生能源的技术补贴转向对碳排放进行适当定价,都是实现这一目标的重要措施。相比之下,日益依赖行政能力机制将使该行业重新回到25年前电力结构调整开始时普遍采用的集中综合资源规划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Resource Adequacy with Increasing Shares of Wind and Solar Power: A Comparison of European and U.S. Electricity Market Designs
We raise the question if improvements to current energy-only markets are sufficient to maintain resource adequacy in electricity markets or whether the rapid increase in wind and solar power gives stronger arguments for additional capacity mechanisms. A comparative analysis between Europe and the United States reveals some fundamental differences, but also many similarities in electricity market design on the two continents. We provide a list of general and specific recommendations for improved electricity markets and argue that lessons can and should be learned in both directions. The key to achieve a market-compatible integration of renewable energy is to focus on correct price formation in the shortterm. Increased demand-side participation, improved pricing during scarcity conditions, and a transition from technology-specific subsidies of renewables towards adequate pricing of carbon emissions are important measures towards this end. In contrast, an increasing reliance on administrative capacity mechanisms would bring the industry back towards the centralized integrated resource planning that prevailed at the outset of electricity restructuring more than 25 years ago.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信