• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists >Environmental and Technology Policy Options in the Electricity Sector: Are We Deploying Too Many?
【24h】

Environmental and Technology Policy Options in the Electricity Sector: Are We Deploying Too Many?

机译：电力行业的环境和技术政策选择：我们部署的太多吗？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Myriad policy measures aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the electricity sector, promote generation from renewable sources, and encourage energy efficiency (EE). Prior literature has argued that overlapping policies reduce the efficiency of emissions markets, absent other market failures. We extend the model of Fischer and Newell to incorporate knowledge spillovers for both advanced and conventional renewable energy technologies, as well as imperfections in demand for EE investments. EE undervaluation can justify interventions and raises the importance of fully pricing the social costs of electricity, making policies (like renewable subsidies) that lower electricity prices less desirable. Innovation market failures justify some technology policies, particularly correcting R&D incentives, but aggressive deployment policies seem unlikely to enhance welfare when placed alongside sufficient emissions pricing. Even with multiple market failures, emissions pricing remains the most cost-effective option for reducing emissions. However, technology-oriented policies can involve less redistribution of surplus.
机译：无数的政策措施旨在减少电力部门的温室气体排放，促进可再生能源的发电，并鼓励能源效率（EE）。先前的文献认为，如果没有其他市场失灵，重叠的政策会降低排放市场的效率。我们扩展了Fischer和Newell的模型，以结合先进技术和传统可再生能源技术的知识溢出以及对EE投资需求的不完善。 EE的低估可以证明干预措施的合理性，并提高了对电力的社会成本进行充分定价的重要性，从而降低了降低电价的政策（如可再生能源补贴）的重要性。创新市场的失败证明了某些技术政策的合理性，尤其是纠正研发激励措施，但是，如果将积极的部署政策与足够的排放价格放在一起，似乎不太可能提高福利。即使出现多个市场失灵，排放定价仍然是减少排放的最具成本效益的选择。但是，以技术为导向的政策可以减少盈余的再分配。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号