No abstract

Photovoltaic (PV) Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) estimates are widely utilized by decision makers to predict the long-term cost and benefits of solar PV installations, but fail to consider local climate, which impacts PV panel lifetime and performance. Specific types of solar PV panels are known to respond to climate factors differently. Mono-, poly-, and amorphous-silicon (Si) PV technologies are known to exhibit varying degradation rates and instantaneous power losses as a function of operating temperature, humidity, thermal cycling, and panel soiling. We formulate an extended LCOE calculation, which considers PV module performance and lifespan as a function of local climate. The LCOE is then calculated for crystalline and amorphous Si PV technologies across several climates. Finally, we assess the impact of various policy incentives on reducing the firm's cost of solar deployment when controlling for climate. This assessment is the first to quantify tradeoffs between technologies, geographies, and policies in a unified manner. Results suggest crystalline Si solar panels as the most promising candidate for commercial-scale PV systems due to their low degradation rates compared to amorphous technologies. Across technologies, we note the strong ability of investment subsidies in removing uncertainty and reducing the LCOE, compared to production incentives.

Pilot and demonstration (P&D) projects are commonly deployed to catalyze early adoption of technology but are poorly understood in terms of mechanism and impact. We conceptually distinguish unique functions of pilots and demonstrations, then examine whether they accelerate adoption in the case of green building technology. To identify effects on adoption, we develop a difference-indifference in differences strategy, exploiting variation in timing, location, and technologies of green building P&Ds. Results indicate local quarterly green building adoption rates double following completion of a P&D project. Further analyses examine mechanisms driving this effect. The results suggest green building demonstration projects create learning externalities, proliferating technology diffusion in local markets and through building owner networks. Together, these results suggest that investments in P&D projects by public and private actors can lower costs for subsequent adoption.

Does voluntary participation in eco‐certification become more substantive over time, or less? Although past research on voluntary programs suggests that later participants are more likely to greenwash by only symbolically adopting voluntary standards, theories of regulatory competition suggest a possible “race to the top.” We argue that participation in voluntary programs can facilitate competition that enables a race, and we advance a theory of self‐regulatory competition to explain dynamics of participation in voluntary environmental programs. Under this perspective, environmental self‐regulation may facilitate a race to the top, despite possibilities for purely symbolic adoption. Analyzing data from a voluntary green building certification program in the United States, we introduce a methodology to distinguish propensities for symbolic certification from more substantive environmental performance. Data demonstrate that later adopters invest additional resources to attain higher certification, becoming greener and suggesting a race to the top in a voluntary greenbuilding certification program.

In a case study that examines the outcomes of a flexible information-based policy, we observe how organizations obtain Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design certification. We use a regression discontinuity analysis to identify practices used to upgrade certification tiers. This analysis reveals preferences for green certification strategies and, we argue, intimates the perceived motivations for green certification. We distinguish practices that potentially confer private gains through returns to efficiency and productivity investments, from practices that only provide public benefits. Data show that organizations strategically certify to avoid high-cost resource use, appeal to key stakeholders, and communicate building and organization quality. Builders upgrading to the highest tiers are more likely to deploy practices with private gains. Results suggest a willingness to extend short time horizons associated with energy-efficiency investments in exchange for marketing benefits. Our discussion notes the capacity for certifications to mitigate market barriers associated with the energy-efficiency gap.