4.7 Article

Integration between electricity and renewable energy certificate (REC) markets: Factors influencing the solar and non-solar REC in India

期刊

RENEWABLE ENERGY
卷 179, 期 -, 页码 65-74

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2021.07.020

关键词

Renewable energy certificate; Solar and non-solar; Wholesale electricity price; Cointegration; Autoregressive distributed lag model

资金

  1. Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines) [FRS (133) /2019-2020/MS.]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The paper examines the integration between electricity and renewable energy certificate (REC) markets for India, finding that solar and non-solar REC markets are influenced by a variety of factors. Suggestions are proposed to strengthen the REC market in India for promoting renewable energy development.
The paper examines the integration between electricity and renewable energy certificate (REC) markets for India. The empirical investigation covers the factors influencing solar and non-solar REC markets, using an autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) modeling approach. The variables used in this study are the traded volume of solar and non-solar RECs, the traded volume of electricity, wholesale electricity price, and prices of solar and non-solar RECs. The dataset contains monthly time series for the period January 2013eJuly 2020. The ARDL bounds test results show that the variables are cointegrated. The long-run ARDL estimates indicate that the traded volume of solar REC is influenced by the traded volume of electricity (positive effect), wholesale electricity price (negative effect), the traded volume of non-solar REC (positive effect), and price of solar REC (negative effect). However, the traded volume of non-solar REC is influenced by only traded volume (positive effect) and price (positive effect) of solar REC. Based on the findings of this study, few suggestions are discussed to strengthen the REC market in India. (c) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据