CleanTechies
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Clean Transportation
    • Energy Efficiency
    • Green Building
    • Renewable Energy
    • Recycling & Waste
    • Water & Conservation
  • Contact
    • Editorial
      • General Inquiries
      • Article Submission
    • Advertising
      • Advertising & Sponsorship
      • Guidelines
      • Media Kit
  • Are you a CleanTechie?

CleanTechies

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Clean Transportation
    • Energy Efficiency
    • Green Building
    • Renewable Energy
    • Recycling & Waste
    • Water & Conservation
  • Contact
    • Editorial
      • General Inquiries
      • Article Submission
    • Advertising
      • Advertising & Sponsorship
      • Guidelines
      • Media Kit
  • Are you a CleanTechie?
Tag:

colorado

Protecting Solar Rights in Colorado

Protecting Solar Rights in Colorado

written by The Vote Solar Initiative

Last fall we decided to intervene in a PURPA avoided cost docket in Colorado, opened by Xcel Energy, because we wanted to encourage the utility to improve the rates paid to solar generators. Instead we found ourselves in a battle over a fundamental protection that PURPA offers – the right to use the electricity that your solar energy system generates to power your property.

What’s a PURPA you ask? No, it’s not the larvae of a large insect. It’s the Public Utility Regulatory Policy Act, a Federal law that has been on the books since 1978.  The law requires electric utilities to purchase power from renewable generators, known as qualifying facilities or “QFs,” at a price equivalent to the cost the utility avoids by making an alternative purchase. This rate is known as an ‘avoided cost rate.’

The purpose of PURPA was to encourage the development of small, distributed clean generators across the U.S. However, in practice, avoided cost rates for QF facilities haven’t resulted in a lot of solar development outside of a few states. And that’s because each State in the U.S. is given the jurisdiction to set their own avoided cost rates under PURPA, and they’ve tended to set those rates below retail. Most ‘solar generators’ (i.e. rooftop solar customers) don’t even consider registering as a QF facilities, and instead use net metering – with its fair and simple retail credit  – as their compensation arrangement of choice.

Take a look at Colorado: after more than 30 years of having standard avoided cost rates in place for small QFs, the rate has encouraged the construction of a grand total of, wait for it, zero facilities.  So last fall, when Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo), the Colorado operating subsidiary of giant utility Xcel Energy, filed to take a fresh look and potentially change the calculation method for the QF rate for small-scale solar generators (100 kilowatt and smaller systems), we saw the potential opportunity for making this mechanism useful for actually deploying valuable solar.  A PURPA-based avoided cost rate that properly quantifies DG benefits could better serve to promote local solar growth.

Our optimism was short lived however as we were able to dig into the details of Xcel’s proposal (only after the judge denied the utility attempt to prevent us from having full access to that information, but that’s another story). Not only is Xcel continuing to undervalue QF generation, the utility is also taking aim at its customers fundamental solar rights.

Under a PURPA QF arrangement – as with net metering – the host customer should first and foremost be empowered to use their generation on-site and then sell any excess energy to the utility.  Yet in this new proposal, Xcel insists that the generator must sell 100% of its output to the utility, not allowing the owner to use his or her own power.  We fundamentally disagree with this interpretation of PURPA and are pushing back hard against this position at the Commission. Vote Solar firmly adheres to the principle that customers have the right to manage their energy consumption and produce their own power. Whatever happens on the customer side of the meter is the customer’s prerogative, not the business of any utility.  Xcel’s stance in this docket would give the utility too much power over a customer’s energy decisions, and take away a customer’s right to use their power onsite.

In addition to undermining customer solar rights, Xcel’s proposal also uses some questionable modeling techniques to undervalue rooftop solar in the resulting QF rate.  I’m going to get a little into the weeds here, bear with me.

On an annual basis, the marginal costs it models and wants the Commission to adopt as avoided are less than average costs 5 out of every 6 hours.  We take issue with the utility’s methodology.  Given that utility systems are run by operating the cheapest unit first, the next cheapest second, and so on (known as economic dispatch), the marginal cost – the cost of generating the next kWh – should be higher than the average of all the cheaper plants already running. When we dove a little deeper, it turned out that the Company‘s modeling finds coal generation on the margin more than half the time.  In the utility world, coal is known as a baseload resource meaning that it typically runs almost flat out nearly all the time.  Why?  Because it is expensive to start but cheap to run (at least if you don’t consider environmental impacts.) Call me crazy, but I am arguing that Xcel should use marginal costs that actually represent the costs that will be avoided when the QF is operating. 

So what’s next for the QF docket in Colorado?  We have just concluded the formal hearing on the small QF rates and have a couple more steps before we get a decision from the Commission in August or September.  We will also concurrently be examining the avoided costs, or to put it another way, the  ‘benefits’ of rooftop solar in another process at the Commission.

Our goals in these dockets are to protect the rights of customers to produce their own solar energy for on-site consumption – and to make sure that rooftop solar is properly and consistently valued in the various rate-related proceedings open before the Colorado Commission.  Stay tuned.



May 12, 2014 0 comment
0 Facebook Twitter Google + Pinterest

Xcel Looks Out for Number One, Tries to Stifle Public Participation

written by Walter Wang

Sometimes your opponents make your case even better than you can.

Vote Solar has intervened in a regulatory proceeding in Colorado to make sure that owners of solar systems get fair credit for their generation. We were concerned that the utility, Public Service Company of Colorado, and Xcel company, would use the proceeding to try to

Continue Reading


February 20, 2014 0 comment
0 Facebook Twitter Google + Pinterest

Colorado Solar Supporters Flood the PUC

written by The Vote Solar Initiative

Earlier this week, the Colorado Public Utilities Commission (PUC) invited the public to comment on Xcel’s proposal to rollback net metering. And boy did the public respond! Almost 100 solar supporters showed up, filling both PUC hearing rooms and over-flowing into the halls. The crowd was a diverse mix – ranchers, teachers, moms – but the

Continue Reading


February 5, 2014 0 comment
0 Facebook Twitter Google + Pinterest

Colorado Solar Customers Deliver $11 M in Annual Benefits to Xcel Energy Grid

written by The Vote Solar Initiative

Today we released new analysis indicating that customer investment in solar energy systems currently in the Xcel service area deliver as much as $11 million in annual benefits to Colorado ratepayers. Those findings are in stark contrast to the utility’s own cost-benefit analysis that was submitted to regulators at the PUC earlier this

Continue Reading


September 10, 2013 0 comment
0 Facebook Twitter Google + Pinterest

Xcel Energy Puts Rooftop Solar in Jeopardy in Colorado

written by The Vote Solar Initiative

Rooftop solar is helping Colorado families, schools and businesses take charge of their power supply and their electricity bills like never before. This private investment in rooftop solar is helping build a cleaner, safer and more resilient energy supply for all Coloradoans. And the state’s largest power provider, Xcel Energy, is apparently not too happy about it.

Continue Reading


July 30, 2013 1 comment
0 Facebook Twitter Google + Pinterest

Top Ten Highlights of Cleantech in Colorado

written by Walter Wang

Colorado, known as the Centennial State, is also known for its many clean technology and sustainability highlights. The state is always looking for new projects to employ that will aid the state in reaching its renewable energy goals and decreasing carbon dioxide emissions by employing renewable energy and energy efficiency measures, including schools,

Continue Reading


April 17, 2012 0 comment
0 Facebook Twitter Google + Pinterest

Colorado to Achieve 30% Renewables Eight Years Early

written by Walter Wang

Advocates say that massive amounts of renewable energy are feasible and will save money in the long run. But how do we know that’s true?

Because that’s exactly what’s happening.

Let’s take Colorado. The state has a 30% renewable

Continue Reading


November 14, 2011 1 comment
0 Facebook Twitter Google + Pinterest

Top Ten Highlights of Colorado Cleantech Industry Association

written by Shawn Lesser

The Colorado Cleantech Industry Association (CCIA) was established in 2008 and is a statewide organization devoted to the promotion of the cleantech industry within the state of Colorado. Currently, the Colorado Cleantech Industry Association is the only industry led and industry focused cleantech group in the entire state. Their

Continue Reading


March 22, 2011 0 comment
0 Facebook Twitter Google + Pinterest

Colorado Billionaire Battles Utilities Over Power Line On His Ranch

written by Solar Calfinder

In Colorado, hedge fund billionaire Louis Moore Bacon is fighting a new transmission line proposed by two utilities: shareholder-owned Xcel Energy, and Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, a wholesale electricity supplier.

Bacon, the founder of Moore Capital Management LLC and owner of the

Continue Reading



November 30, 2010 3 comments
0 Facebook Twitter Google + Pinterest

Xcel to Retire 900 Megawatts of Coal-Fired Power

written by Earth & Industry

Xcel Energy, the largest electric utility in Colorado, Friday filed a plan with the Public Utility Commission that would bring it into compliance with Colorado’s new Clean Air Clean Jobs Act signed into law by Governor Ritter in April. The new law is designed to target encourage steep cuts in carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants — and to effectively block

Continue Reading


August 16, 2010 0 comment
0 Facebook Twitter Google + Pinterest

Colleges Going Green Despite Falling Endowments, Study Says

written by Ceylan Thomson

A growing number of U.S. colleges and universities supported green initiatives during the last year despite declining endowments, according to a report released by the Sustainable Endowments Institute.

Twenty-six of 332 schools evaluated in the College Sustainability Report Card received the highest-possible grade of A-minus through sustainable management of campus operations and endowment practices.

Now in its fourth year, the College Sustainability Report Card evaluates schools in nine categories, including climate change and energy, food and recycling, and green building.

Continue Reading


October 8, 2009 1 comment
0 Facebook Twitter Google + Pinterest

CleanTechnica.TV

Listen to CleanTech Talk

CleanTech Talk

Free CleanTechnica Newsletters

CleanTechnica's main newsletter (daily)

CleanTechnica's EV newsletter

CleanTechnica's wind newsletter

CleanTechnica's solar newsletter

CleanTechnica's weekly newsletter

Support Our Work

CleanTechnica Clothing & Cups

Recent CleanTechie Bios

Amy McMorrow Hunter

Keith Allen

Tom Scheel

Patrick Corcoran

Christine Bennett

Mike Casey

Henk Rogers

JB Straubel

Lynn Jurich

Matt Moroney

Kyle Field

Paul Francis

Chelsea Harder

Griff Jurgens

Scott Cooney

The content produced by this site is for entertainment purposes only. Opinions and comments published on this site may not be sanctioned by, and do not necessarily represent the views of CleanTechnica, its owners, sponsors, affiliates, or subsidiaries.


Back To Top