No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Renewable energy policy has far-reaching implications for national and international economic, environmental, and political sustainability, but thus far within the United States it has been almost entirely the province of state governments. This article examines the factors motivating state-level policymakers to adopt different forms of a renewable portfolio standard (RPS), highlighting the distinction between degrees of policy stringency, ranging from entirely voluntary participation to rigorous and strictly enforced targets. In the process we introduce a new metric for assessing stringency, more precise and reliable than the various proxies used previously, and analyze its relationship to drivers of policy adoption. We find that policies of different stringencies are motivated by systematically different underlying factors. State-level citizen political ideology is a significant predictor of RPS policy adoption, particularly for "voluntary" and "weak" policy designs. "Strong" policy designs, on the other hand, are best predicted by ideology at the government level, i.e., the degree of institutional liberalism. These findings may inform current implementation and program evaluation efforts, and potentially point the way toward more effective policy choices if and when an RPS moves forward on the national policy agenda, while the stringency metric central to this analysis can be of use to other policy scholars concerned with topics both within and beyond the realm of energy policy.

U.S. energy and climate policy has evolved from the bottom‐up, led by state governments, and internationally recognized for the use of unconventional and innovative policy instruments. This study focuses on policy instruments adopted throughout the era of state energy policy innovation that aim to diversify, decentralize, and decarbonize the electricity sector. Specific attention is devoted to the renewable portfolio standard, net metering, interconnection standards, tax incentives, public benefit funds, and energy efficiency resource standards. This analysis synthesizes the findings from the energy policy literature and provides a summary of the current state of understanding about the effects of various state energy policy instruments, and concludes with a discussion of broader trends that have emerged from the use of policy instruments in the state energy policy innovation era.

No abstract

Energy-saving technologies have a difficult time being widely accepted and consumed in the marketplace when they have a high initial purchase price and deferred financial benefits. Consumers might not realize that, in the long-run, the financial benefits from reduced energy consumption offset much or all of the initial price premium. One strategy to address consumer misconception of this advantage is to supply information on the "total cost of ownership", a metric which accounts for the purchase price, the cost of the fuel, and other costs over the ownership period. In this article, we investigate how providing information on fiveyear fuel cost savings and total cost of ownership affects the stated preferences of consumers to purchase a gasoline, hybrid, plug-in hybrid, or battery electric vehicle. Through an online survey with an embedded experimental design using two distinct labels, we find that respondent rankings of vehicles are unaffected by information on five-year fuel cost savings only. However, adding information about total cost of ownership increases the probability that small/mid-sized car consumers express a preference to acquire a hybrid, plugin hybrid, or a battery-electric vehicle. No such effect is found for consumers of small sport utility vehicles. Our results are consistent with other findings in similar behavioral economics investigations on this topic and suggest that further evaluation of the effects of providing consumers with information on the total cost of ownership is warranted.