Kathy Araujo, PhD Candidate MIT - EWEC 2010, Warsaw, Poland

1. Comparative Policy FrameworksA Study of Wind Power Advance in Brazil, China, Germany, India, Spain and the US Kathy Araujo, PhD Candidate MIT - EWEC 2010, Warsaw, Poland Photo: Courtesy of the Spanish Wind Energy Association

2. Wind Potential Worldwide Estimate: 40x the current power consumption or more than 5 times global use of all energy forms (Lu et al, 2009) Source: NREL

3. Overview • Study Phase 1: 1995-2007 Countries Questions/Areas Considered Research Approach Data and Policies Findings Study Phase 2: 2008-2009 Updates (ongoing) Questions

4. 6 Country Study • 50% Industrialized and 50% Industrializing Countries • Selected from 3 regions – Asia, Europe and the Americas • All Hold High Wind Potential with Wind Development Evident

5. Countries Selected

6. Areas considered(1) Policy frameworks that have been more/less effective in spurring greater integration of wind power (2) Key factors that explain differing levels of wind power development (3) The relevance of industrialization level (4) The role of natural resource endowments or geography

7. Research Approach Hypothesis: Countries with Robust Wind Policies (i.e. grid access guarantees, performance standards and adaptation) + Stable Policy Horizon of at least 10 Years = Greatest % of Wind in Power Generation • Data Analysis and Historical Document Review • Field Research: Interviews

8. Electric Generation by Country (Twh) Stages 1 & 2 Source: BP (2009), based on gross output.

9. Installed Wind Capacity (MW) Source: UN, 2008; GWEC 2006, 2007, 2008; Wind Power Monthly, 2010; IDAE, 2009;

10. Wind-Related Characteristics Non-Annex 1 Countries Annex 1 Countries Brazil China India Germany Spain US Total Installed Capacity 634 20,000 10,742 25,030 17,940 32,919 (2009) % of Global Installed Cap <1 14 7 17 12 23 (2009) Factor Increase in Total Installed Capacity 211 524 52 22 598 19 1995-2009 (growth by a factor of x) Wind, % of Total <1 to <1 <1 to 1 <1 to 2 <1 to 9 <1 to 12 <1 to <2 Electricity (GWh) 1995 and 2008 Source: Wind Power Monthly, 2010; IEA, GWEC and UN, 2009; AEE, 2009; Dutra, 2001;

11. Wind-Related Characteristics Non-Annex 1 Countries Annex 1 Countries Brazil China India Germany Spain US Total Installed Capacity 634 20,000 10,742 25,030 17,940 32,919 (2009) % of Global Installed Cap <1 14 7 17 12 23 (2009) Factor Increase in Total Installed Capacity 211 524 52 22 598 19 1995-2009 (growth by a factor of x) Wind, % of Total <1 to <1 <1 to 1 <1 to 2** <1 to 9 <1 to<12 <1 to <1 Electricity (GWh) 1995 and 2009 Source: Wind Power Monthly, 2010;

12. National Wind Policy Instruments 1995-2007 *Sub-national policy

13. Wind Manufacturing Sector Spanish Companies Yes Yes German … Yes Yes Indian … Yes Yes Brazil … Negligible No China … Yes Emergent United States … Yes Yes Native Company Engagement Domestic MarketInternational

14. Findings • Brazil, Germany, Spain and the US have relied upon production-based policies with FIT or PTC instruments. In contrast, India and China have been more investment-based, relying on tendering auctions or investment instruments like rapid depreciation and VAT reductions as their wind-related policy instruments. • The US and India appear to have fewer national wind/RET policies, leaving policy space for states/regions or for market dynamics to operate. Like the US and India, Brazil’s policy path is currently less robust than in German, Spain and China. The choice of policy instruments seems to blur the distinction between industrialized and industrializing countries.

15. Findings • Although considered a strong policy instrument, the presence of an FIT absent adaption to conditions or a more comprehensive policy package can result in limited scale-up. • The need for grid investment was a common and at times a pressing theme in every country. • Germany and Spain share not only policy frameworks and EU mechanisms, but a need to diversify.

16. Stage 1 Conclusions: (1) Key factors that explain differing levels of wind power development - Interplay of generation costs, environmental stewardship, availability of rival fuels and fuel price levels/volatility factor prominently (2) Policy frameworks that have been more/less effective in spurring greater integration of wind power - Top-down market-based and regulatory policies including advanced feed-in tariffs, targets and carbon trading (3) The relevance of industrialization level -Levels of industrialization appear to be related to country-level installed capacities and the share of the global market that each country represents, but not the rate of wind power development (4) The role of natural resource endowments or geography - The existence of an abundance of a rival fuel source leaves wind power to be considered more marginally

17. Updates • India - currently is adopting a national FIT • China - adopted regional FITs • Brazil - shifted to wind power auctions • US - extended its FIT for 3 years - additionally, a key governmental decision on an offshore wind project is imminent • Additional

18. Questions –Thank you!