Environment & Energy

kristopher

(29,798 posts)

115. Reference 2 for the "Merit Order Effect"

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 04:59 PM

Apr 2012

Energy Policy Volume 36, Issue 8, August 2008, Pages 3086–3094
The merit-order effect: A detailed analysis of the price effect of renewable electricity generation on spot market prices in Germany
Frank Sensfußa, , , Mario Ragwitza, Massimo Genoeseb, 1,
a Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research, Breslauer Str. 48, 76139 Karlsruhe, Germany
b Institute for Industrial Production, Universität Karlsruhe (TH), Hertzstr. 16, 76187 Karlsruhe, Germany
Received 18 January 2008. Accepted 25 March 2008. Available online 6 June 2008.

Abstract
The German feed-in support of electricity generation from renewable energy sources has led to high growth rates of the supported technologies. Critics state that the costs for consumers are too high. An important aspect to be considered in the discussion is the price effect created by renewable electricity generation. This paper seeks to analyse the impact of privileged renewable electricity generation on the electricity market in Germany. The central aspect to be analysed is the impact of renewable electricity generation on spot market prices. The results generated by an agent-based simulation platform indicate that the financial volume of the price reduction is considerable. In the short run, this gives rise to a distributional effect which creates savings for the demand side by reducing generator profits. In the case of the year 2006, the volume of the merit-order effect exceeds the volume of the net support payments for renewable electricity generation which have to be paid by consumers.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421508001717

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

136 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why (baseload) generators are terrified of solar [View all] kristopher Apr 2012 OP

If by "terrified" you mean "rolling around laughing," sure. TheWraith Apr 2012 #1

Then why do you spend so much time trying to undermine it? kristopher Apr 2012 #2

So Solar PV needs to be PV + Conservation programs + ? to meet/beat AND reduce demand? patrice Apr 2012 #3

You didn't get the memo? DCKit Apr 2012 #4

This message was self-deleted by its author joshcryer Apr 2012 #11

re Kazzzzon Apr 2012 #5

That must be why so many of their stock prices are down 90% FBaggins Apr 2012 #6

How does the current explosion in manufacturing capacity disprove the OP's thesis? kristopher Apr 2012 #7

That's an odd use of the word "current". FBaggins Apr 2012 #8

How does the current explosion in manufacturing capacity disprove the OP's thesis? kristopher Apr 2012 #9

Which "new entrants into the solar market" are you thinking of? FBaggins Apr 2012 #10

I'm sure that's the story ... kristopher Apr 2012 #12

Hey, That's a neat trick.... Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #13

Yes the homeowners and the local communities who are getting that money are pretty happy kristopher Apr 2012 #14

And the majority who aren't? Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #15

You think it is the rich in Germany that are buying the solar? kristopher Apr 2012 #16

This message was self-deleted by its author joshcryer Apr 2012 #17

I'm FOR nuclear in the way that I'm FOR abortion. XemaSab Apr 2012 #18

Nuclear is a lesser evil than renewables? kristopher Apr 2012 #20

Keeping our existing nuclear open XemaSab Apr 2012 #22

That is a fairly tale scenario kristopher Apr 2012 #24

How many years do you think it will take XemaSab Apr 2012 #25

So you think people should be forced to live around nuclear plants they believe are unsafe? kristopher Apr 2012 #28

I'd much rather live near a nuclear plant than a coal plant XemaSab Apr 2012 #30

Less radiation near a nuclear plant than coal. joshcryer Apr 2012 #31

And how much lead, mercury, Sox, and Nox do the nuclear plants put out? XemaSab Apr 2012 #32

A standard false choice favored by the nuclear industry. kristopher Apr 2012 #36

You didn't answer my question XemaSab Apr 2012 #38

If you actually cared you'd have already looked for the report yourself. kristopher Apr 2012 #41

I did some googling for a few minutes XemaSab Apr 2012 #48

Google Vermont PIRG, vt yankee energy plan kristopher Apr 2012 #52

In 2004, this is what they visualized happening by 2025: XemaSab Apr 2012 #54

try this fm 2011 kristopher Apr 2012 #58

It's certainly an ambitious goal for 20 years from now XemaSab Apr 2012 #62

Yeah, to you everything is too bad except nuclear. kristopher Apr 2012 #65

I hate fossil fuels XemaSab Apr 2012 #68

Yeah, sure you do. kristopher Apr 2012 #69

See, I think you come off as someone who is more motivated by being anti-nuclear XemaSab Apr 2012 #72

Telling the truth about nuclear is "bashing"? kristopher Apr 2012 #76

I've been on a crusade to run you off the forum? XemaSab Apr 2012 #79

Sure it is - tell that to the Kea. kristopher Apr 2012 #81

If I had been trying to run you off the forum XemaSab Apr 2012 #90

Don't feed the Kea... kristopher Apr 2012 #92

Good call. XemaSab Apr 2012 #93

Got a link to the actual study? joshcryer Apr 2012 #19

Can you access google on your computer? kristopher Apr 2012 #21

The fucking report is $500. joshcryer Apr 2012 #23

Yes kris Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #26

I totally deleted my other post because I fell for it hook line and sinker. joshcryer Apr 2012 #27

Don't worry, I missed it. Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #29

I didn't change the subject. kristopher Apr 2012 #35

Fell for what? kristopher Apr 2012 #34

No, merely exaggerating. joshcryer Apr 2012 #37

Are you saying they are lying? kristopher Apr 2012 #39

I was referring to the OP. joshcryer Apr 2012 #42

Your posts lack specificity, don't blame me for your sloppy communication skills. kristopher Apr 2012 #44

Perhaps you didn't see my post to TheWraith where I derided them... joshcryer Apr 2012 #45

What do you mean "general pricing in Germany" kristopher Apr 2012 #46

Their claim "what is happening now" is not the graphic I see on any given day today. joshcryer Apr 2012 #47

And your proof of that is... kristopher Apr 2012 #49

Post #13. joshcryer Apr 2012 #53

In other words you have no proof kristopher Apr 2012 #56

The graphic appears to have a lower overall price than the 2008 graphic. joshcryer Apr 2012 #57

You are comparing apples to oranges - you know it and... kristopher Apr 2012 #59

No, I am not. If that graphic was representive of overall pricing between 2008 and 2012... joshcryer Apr 2012 #61

Like I said, another version will be coming within a few minutes. kristopher Apr 2012 #64

For it to have been in line with my comment to TheWraith yes. joshcryer Apr 2012 #74

I'm very sure your self deleted comment to wraith is not relevant to our conversation. kristopher Apr 2012 #77

You're not following the conversation, to be sure. joshcryer Apr 2012 #80

Considering the article is about none of that kristopher Apr 2012 #83

lol, it says "electricity prices in Germany" right there in the fucking OP. joshcryer Apr 2012 #84

More *willful* confusion? kristopher Apr 2012 #88

He doesn't say "wholesale electricity prices." joshcryer Apr 2012 #94

In a discussion specifically about sources of generation being put under pricing pressure kristopher Apr 2012 #96

He doesn't say "wholesale electricity prices." joshcryer Apr 2012 #98

The article does actually weasel around consumer pricing with capitalism verbiage. joshcryer Apr 2012 #99

In a discussion about wholesale electricity. kristopher Apr 2012 #101

Which has little relevance to polluters who are still getting paid. joshcryer Apr 2012 #103

Once more let's review kristopher Apr 2012 #106

Gas ain't baseload. joshcryer Apr 2012 #107

Poor little nuclear lovers just can't catch a break... kristopher Apr 2012 #33

Wait, you always said that renewables were cheaper XemaSab Apr 2012 #40

Seriously? kristopher Apr 2012 #43

I was quoting your post XemaSab Apr 2012 #50

Your post was not "an exact quote" from me. kristopher Apr 2012 #51

You said: XemaSab Apr 2012 #55

By linking it to other statements about the long term price of renewables kristopher Apr 2012 #60

So if the bottom has fallen out for renewables XemaSab Apr 2012 #63

Because they signed 20 year contracts. kristopher Apr 2012 #66

Ok, there's an answer XemaSab Apr 2012 #67

Please research "Feed In Tariffs" FiTs kristopher Apr 2012 #70

"inane nuisance posts" - That's rich! oldhippie Apr 2012 #135

Pointing out your OP is bullshit is 'nit-picking'? Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #71

You *claimed falsely* that the OP is bullshit. kristopher Apr 2012 #73

The OP makes claims about "the impact that solar is having on electricity prices in Germany." joshcryer Apr 2012 #75

The OP supports the claims it makes as opposed to the strawman you are creating kristopher Apr 2012 #78

You're a liar when it comes to accusing me of having a "quest to protect the nuclear industry." joshcryer Apr 2012 #82

You consistently take positions that further the agenda of the nuclear industry. kristopher Apr 2012 #85

I take a position against misrepresentations in text. I take positions against being fooled. joshcryer Apr 2012 #86

Stop making up things about the information being posted. kristopher Apr 2012 #89

He doesn't say "wholesale electricity prices." joshcryer Apr 2012 #97

No, he just discusses the wholesale market. kristopher Apr 2012 #102

Which he calls "electricity prices." joshcryer Apr 2012 #104

You've gone completely off the rails. kristopher Apr 2012 #109

The OP claims renewables are reducing the cost. Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #87

No the OP claims that: kristopher Apr 2012 #91

Kris, you seem to forget I've linked to the actual end prices Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #95

That isn't a meaningful piece of information. kristopher Apr 2012 #100

Like wholesale electricity prices aren't meaningful to polluters? joshcryer Apr 2012 #105

He isn't talking about wholesale prices and their impact on polluters kristopher Apr 2012 #108

I think I can prove that 26 > 15 quite nicely, thank you Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #110

So what? It's a point with no relevance. kristopher Apr 2012 #111

Nuclear is a boondongle, and will not stop catastrophic climate change. joshcryer Apr 2012 #112

The price of electricity has no relevance to electricity prices? Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #113

kick kristopher Apr 2012 #117

What is the actual mechanism by which nuclear power shuts down a coal plant? kristopher Apr 2012 #118

Build a nuclear plant, and shut down a coal one Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #119

Because it doesn't happen. Nuclear plants DO NOT shut down coal plants. kristopher Apr 2012 #120

Nobody already burning coal has ever built a nuclear plant? Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #121

How does a nuclear plant shut down a coal plant? kristopher Apr 2012 #122

Ah, as opposed to the market contraction... Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #123

So you do not want to shut down coal plants and you want to expand energy consumption. kristopher Apr 2012 #124

You're still not answering, kris Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #125

Remarkable! You accuse me of "not answering" when I've waited 2 days for your reply. kristopher Apr 2012 #126

Still too hard? Ignorance it is, then. Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #128

A tacit admission that you don't have an answer is still an admission... kristopher Apr 2012 #129

You had your chance to talk about it like a grown-up kris. You chose the way of... Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #130

Tell that to the industrial revolution. XemaSab Apr 2012 #127

lolwut? Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #131

If every society that built coal plants XemaSab Apr 2012 #133

Unless they built them without building coal plants, grasshopper Dead_Parrot Apr 2012 #134

There is no market path for a nuclear plant to shut down a coal plant kristopher Apr 2012 #132

Just to demonstrate how long this same conversation has been going on... nt kristopher Feb 2013 #136

Reference 1 for the "merit order effect" kristopher Apr 2012 #114

Reference 2 for the "Merit Order Effect" kristopher Apr 2012 #115

Reference 3 for the "Merit Order Effect" kristopher Apr 2012 #116