IEEE Power & Energy Magazine - July/August 2015 - 35

As a percentage of final demand,
RES-E (without including large hydro)
and cogeneration have increased from
11% in 1998 to around 43% in 2013. In
terms of final generation, wind power
is the first source among RES-E, as
shown in Figure 5.

10,000
9,000

CHP

Solar

Wind

Hydro

Biomass

Waste

8,000
7,000
6,000

Effect on Wholesale Market Prices

5,000

Gelabert et al. found that, during the
period 2004-2009, a marginal increase
4,000
of 1 GW of RES-E (and cogeneration)
3,000
reduced wholesale electricity prices by
€2/MWh (around 4% of the average
2,000
price). In later years, this effect is not
1,000
clear as changes on hydro generation
and market regulations have signifi0
cantly impacted the wholesale prices.
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Figure 6 represents the total market
figure 8. The annual remuneration (in addition to the market revenues) for
price for Spain disaggregated in difRES-E in Spain 2005-2013 (million Euros). (Source: CNMC.)
ferent components. The increase of
were established for the premium option for wind, concenday-ahead prices from 2010 to 2011 is
mainly because of low hydro generation that decreased by trated solar power, biomass, biogas, and small hydro.
Figure 7 shows the average remuneration above the market
almost 30% due to a dry year. In addition, in 2011, a national
policy was introduced that established minimum genera- prices for RES-E and cogeneration units from 2004 to 2013.
tion quotas by national coal power plants with higher costs In that period, it is remarkable the FiT set in 2007 for solar
than imported coal or gas units. The costs of ancillary ser- PVs. This FiT led to a significant increase in PV installations
vices have increased mainly due to RES-E generation, but in in 2008, around ten times higher than the target set for 2010.
comparison with the total market price, this effect is limited. Despite the fact that there was a quantity limit for new installaFinally, changes in the capacity mechanism in 2011 have tions, to avoid overinvestment, local governments gave licenses
to installations that were not controlled in a timely manner by
increased that cost component.
Changes in the Spanish
Support Schemes

july/august 2015

0.18

3.5

0.16
0.14

0.12

2.5

0.1

0.08

1.5

0.06

0.5
0

Energy Charge (€/kWh)

Capacity Charge (€/kW/month)

0.04
Capacity Charge

0.02

Energy Charge

01
/2
01
2
04
/2
01
2
06
/2
01
2
07
/2
01
2
10
/2
01
2
01
/2
01
3
04
/2
01
3
07
/2
01
3
08
/2
01
3
10
/2
01
3
02
/2
01
4

Spain has changed in different ways
the design of support schemes and
the amount paid to RES-E and
cogeneration units. For instance,
in 1994 Spain put in place a feedin-tariff (FiT) scheme with the
requirement for distribution companies to buy all the generation
from these units with the priority
dispatch requirement. In 1998, the
feed-in-premium (FiP) option was
introduced. Later in 2004, some
modifications were included, e.g.,
a guaranteed support for the whole
lifetime of the installations (with a
decreasing factor), the introduction
of balance responsibility for some
units, and a limit to the maximum
size of photovoltaic (PV) units that
were able to receive support (5-10
MW). In 2007, price caps and floors

figure 9. Changes in the Spanish electricity tariffs for residential consumers in
2012-2014. [Source: Spanish Institute for Energy Diversification and Energy Saving
(IDAE).]
ieee power & energy magazine

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Power & Energy Magazine - July/August 2015