Which policy can promote renewable energy to achieve grid parity? Feed-in tariff vs. renewable portfolio standards

被引:47
作者
Zhao Xin-gang [1 ,2 ]
Li Pei-ling [1 ,2 ]
Zhou Ying [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] North China Elect Power Univ, Sch Econ & Management, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] North China Elect Power Univ, Beijing Key Lab New Energy & Low Carbon Dev, Beijing 102206, Peoples R China
关键词
Grid parity; Levelized cost of electricity; Renewable portfolio standards; Green certificate; Feed-in tariffs; LEVELIZED COST; GREEN CERTIFICATES; SYSTEM DYNAMICS; ONSHORE WIND; CHINA; POWER; ELECTRICITY; GENERATION; INDUSTRY; PRICE;
D O I
10.1016/j.renene.2020.08.058
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
China's electricity market reform poses an urgent demand for grid parity of renewable energy (RE), however, the high initial investment cost makes it difficult to achieve. Although feed-in tariff (FIT) and renewable portfolio standards (RPS) schemes are both practical policy tools to support the development of the RE industry, which policy is more consistent with the goal of grid parity? Accordingly, based on the system dynamic model, this research studies the levelized cost of RE (LCOE) under FIT and RPS, respectively. The results show that: First, under the current FIT scheme, wind (onshore) and photovoltaic (PV) power both cannot achieve grid parity. To realize it, extra payouts in four categories of areas should at least be 0.236, 0.244, 0.299 and 0.261 CNY/kWh. Similarly, additional subsidies for PV in Tibet and the northwest region except Tibet need to be 0.924 and 0.764 CNY/kWh. Second, under the RPS, wind (onshore) power can basically achieve grid parity, but PV cannot. Subsidies for PV need at least to be 0.525 and 0.364 CNY/kWh to achieve grid parity. Therefore, compared with the current FIT in China, the policy combination of FIT and RPS adjusted to local conditions is more conducive to realizing grid parity. (c) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:322 / 333
页数:12
相关论文
共 45 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2009, FEED IN TARIFF POLIC
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2014, Technology roadmap: solar photovoltaic energy - 2014 edition, DOI DOI 10.1007/SPRINGERREFERENCE_7300
[3]   Renewable energy investments under different support schemes: A real options approach [J].
Boomsma, Trine Krogh ;
Meade, Nigel ;
Fleten, Stein-Erik .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2012, 220 (01) :225-237
[4]   A review of solar photovoltaic levelized cost of electricity [J].
Branker, K. ;
Pathak, M. J. M. ;
Pearce, J. M. .
RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2011, 15 (09) :4470-4482
[5]   The grid parity analysis of onshore wind power in China: A system cost perspective [J].
Chen, Hao ;
Gao, Xin-Ya ;
Liu, Jian-Yu ;
Zhang, Qian ;
Yu, Shiwei ;
Kang, Jia-Tying ;
Yan, Rui ;
Wei, Yi-Ming .
RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2020, 148 :22-30
[6]   Is the concept of 'grid parity' defined appropriately to evaluate the cost-competitiveness of renewable energy technologies? [J].
Choi, Dong Gu ;
Park, Sang Yong ;
Park, Nyun-Bae ;
Hong, Jong Chul .
ENERGY POLICY, 2015, 86 :718-728
[7]   An analysis of feed-in tariff remuneration models: Implications for renewable energy investment [J].
Couture, Toby ;
Gagnon, Yves .
ENERGY POLICY, 2010, 38 (02) :955-965
[8]   Assumptions and the levelized cost of energy for photovoltaics [J].
Darling, Seth B. ;
You, Fengqi ;
Veselka, Thomas ;
Velosa, Alfonso .
ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, 2011, 4 (09) :3133-3139
[9]   How renewable energy consumption lower global CO2 emissions? Evidence from countries with different income levels [J].
Dong, Kangyin ;
Dong, Xiucheng ;
Jiang, Qingzhe .
WORLD ECONOMY, 2020, 43 (06) :1665-1698
[10]   Comparison of the LCOE between coal-fired power plants with CCS and main low-carbon generation technologies: Evidence from China [J].
Fan, Jing-Li ;
Wei, Shijie ;
Yang, Lin ;
Wang, Hang ;
Zhong, Ping ;
Zhang, Xian .
ENERGY, 2019, 176 :143-155