Tag:

Solar

PUCN Study: Rooftop Solar is a Cost-Saver for NV Energy

We are applauding the results of a study from the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada (PUCN), which found that rooftop solar and other small clean energy systems installed through 2016 will deliver $36 million in net benefits to Nevada ratepayers. The study was released as regulators consider additional customer fees and other policy changes that would have lasting negative impacts on private solar investment in the state. Given the clear benefits of more rooftop solar to Nevada, we urge regulators to reject such fees and ensure that Nevada’s solar customers continue to receive fair, full credit for the valuable clean energy they deliver to the grid.

“Rooftop solar is putting Nevada energy customers in charge of their electricity supply and utility bills like never before. Today’s report confirms that such investment in solar delivers real benefits amounting to millions of dollars for Nevada energy consumers, and that the state’s existing net metering program is a fair and simple way to account for those benefits,” said our western regional director Susannah Churchill. “We urge the state’s policymakers to recognize these benefits by keeping the way clear for Nevadans to choose solar power.”

The study, commissioned by the PUCN and undertaken by consulting firm Energy and Environmental Economics (E3), assessed the costs and benefits of one of the state’s most important rooftop solar programs, net metering. Like rollover minutes on a cell phone bill, net metering gives solar customers full credit on their utility bills for the excess clean power they contribute to the grid. In place in 43 states, this simple crediting arrangement is one of the most important state policies for enabling Americans to generate their own power from solar and other renewable energy resources. The PUCN study confirms that net metering delivers grid benefits to solar and non-solar customers alike in NV Energy territory.

“Any Nevadan knows that our state has a tremendous solar resource. I’m proud to know that my solar investment is lowering my own bills as well as those of my neighbors by producing clean, reliable local electricity. It just makes sense to put that free sunshine to work with good state policy that clears the way for more Nevadans to go solar,” said retired Colonel Michael Horsley, a Las Vegas resident who went solar in 2013.

“Sunshine saves my business thousands of dollars annually that I can reinvest in my company. It’s helped us take control of our energy bills and choose clean energy, and that’s further benefitting the community we serve,” said Jared Fisher, owner of Las Vegas Cyclery, which has been solar powered since 2012.

The study found that the benefits of Nevada’s net metered solar energy systems include: savings on expensive and polluting conventional power; reduced investments in transmission infrastructure; reduced electricity lost during transportation over power lines, as surplus net metered solar energy flows to the grid and is consumed locally; and savings on the cost of meeting carbon reduction and renewable energy goals.

In addition to grid benefits, distributed solar is delivering economic, environmental and public health benefits to solar and non-solar customers alike in Nevada. Local solar power helps keep energy dollars invested in the state, an important economic engine as the state currently relies on imports for 90 percent of its energy resources. The state’s rooftop solar market has driven $200 million in private investment and helped support 2,400 solar jobs, with significant opportunity for continued economic growth if the state maintains strong policy and regulation.

Private investment in local solar also reduces pollution, building healthier communities, environment and climate. This pollution reduction is especially important for low-income families who disproportionately bear the public health burden of fossil power. Of particular benefit to Nevada, rooftop solar also helps reduce the state’s use of water-intensive traditional power sources, which require an estimated 55,000 gallons of water per year to supply power for the average Nevada household. Plus, it’s keeping the iconic “Welcome to Fabulous Las Vegas” sign lit with reliable, homegrown power. What could be more Nevada than that?

Check out our fact sheet for a 2 page overview of Nevada’s net metering benefits.

07/14/2014 0 comment

Renewable Energy

Extreme Weather Causing Higher Energy Usage Even As Renewables Grow

written by

Two new reports from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) summarizing energy usage trends for the first part of 2014 were released last week.

The first was EIA’s Electric Power Monthly, which provides data on electricity usage through the end of April. The second was EIA’s Monthly Energy Review, which provides usage data in all sectors (including transportation and heating) for the first quarter of the year.

In a nutshell, renewables are growing quickly, but not as quickly as carbon emissions. During the first four months of the year, renewables provided 14.05% of all electricity generated nationwide. That’s a level that wasn’t expected to be seen until 2040. No longer can anyone say that renewables provide an insignificant portion of our energy needs. No one expected them to proliferate this fast.

During that same period, wind power grew past the 5% threshold, contributing 5.15% of US electricity production. At the same time solar doubled its contribution compared to the previous year, increasing 108.9%. Solar surpassed geothermal for the first time in April and is now contributing almost 0.5% of the total US electricity supply. Solar is gaining on second place wood and wood-derived fuels, which has remained steady for several years. If the present trends continue, solar should take the #2 spot among renewables in the next year or so.

This year has also seen non-hydro renewables (biomass, geothermal, solar, wind) overtake conventional hydropower.

Nuclear power generation increased by 0.7% over this time frame, though its contribution to the overall total actually fell. This illustrates the fact that overall generation increased, at least during the first three months of the year. This could be explained in part by the very cold winter experienced in many parts of the country.

Turning to the more comprehensive energy picture, we see similar trends. Domestic production of renewable energy, including biofuels, grew by 4.36%, to the point where it now accounts for 11.41% of all domestic energy supply. Likewise, renewables consumption grew by 3.52% over the previous year, accounting for 8.81% of all energy consumption.

In the biofuels sector, ethanol grew by 11.74% and biodiesel grew by 10.85%

So much for the good news. The bad news is that consumption of fossil fuels increased by 5.17% in the first quarter of 2014 compared to the same period in 2013. Coal rose by 8.91%, natural gas by 7.43%, and petroleum by 1.07%. As a result, CO2 emissions rose by 5.48% compared to the same period in 2013 and by 10.52% when compared to the first quarter of 2012.

Breaking this down by sector, one can see a long term trend of decreasing energy use in the industrial sector, with pronounced spikes in both the residential and commercial sector, during both the winter and summer seasons. This suggest that the more extreme weather we have been experiencing has been causing higher energy usage in a positive feedback loop that contributes to even more climate instability. It would be nice to think that these anomalies are just flukes, but there is much to suggest that this is the new normal, which means we’ll have to work even harder to actually reduce emissions.

Article by RP Siegel of Justmeans, appearing courtesy 3BL Media.

07/01/2014 1 comment

Renewable Energy

Barclays, Citing Solar Threat, Downgrades Electric Utilities

written by

Will large capital-intensive power plants become the buggy whips of the 21^st century, finding themselves in the undesirable position of no longer being needed?

Rob Wile of in Business Insider seems to think so. “It’s been a good run,” he says in the closing line of his assessment of the outlook for the electric utility industry. Citing the sector downgrade by investment bank Barclays from “market weight” to “underweight,” which refers to how much utility investment they are recommending for a typical portfolio, he sees trouble ahead.

That trouble comes in the form of residential solar, which is increasingly taking on the form of a perfect storm from the utilities’ perspective. First, the price of installed rooftop solar has plummeted, falling by half since the year 2000. That led to a rising number of installations, but the utilities could still count on continued sales since they continued to serve as the primary source of storage in the grid-connected systems that have been the predominant configuration. But now the cost of battery storage, helped along by the commercialization of electric vehicles, has also dropped. And if Elon Musk keeps his promise about a super-factory for batteries, the price will drop even further. In this case utilities will be the provider of last resort, only used when all else fails. Yet, even that requires the utilities to maintain roughly the same level of infrastructure as they do today, with little in the way of revenue to show for it.

It is somewhat reminiscent of the old saying, “why buy the cow, if you can get the milk for free?”

The problem is, we need to keep the utilities around, at least for the foreseeable future, because we need them to maintain the grid and to continue to deliver power those who can’t generate their own and also to those who can during those long cloudy spells, when the solar panels are idle and the batteries drained.

The fact that people, in increasing numbers, are essentially downloading their electricity from the sun for free, has led Edison Electric Institute to issue a report called Disruptive Challenges that confronts the existential threat being posed to the industry by accelerating penetration of distributed energy resources, demand side management, and energy efficiency. The authors raise the specter of “irreparable damages to revenues and growth prospects” as the scenario plays out.

So if we still need to keep utilities around but their business models are no longer viable, something has to change. That is the question being pursued by eLab at the Rocky Mountain Institute. They have convened a wide variety of stakeholders including utilities, regulators, renewable providers, and customers to dialog about the issue in search of workable solutions. Their first step was to outline a set “of principles that should guide the creation of new business models.”

These are included in their report entitled, New Business Models for the Distribution Edge. The distribution edge is defined as, “the interface between the electricity distribution system operated by utilities and the rapidly growing portfolios of energy assets, control systems, and end-use technologies at or near customers’ premises.”

The old business models and rate structures no longer apply to the reality of today’s world. In the new models, “Rates must be restructured to provide clearer signals about the costs of electricity service… In order to progress to a future where distributed resources can provide real value and reduce costs of electricity service overall, we must transition to refined pricing structures that reflect diverse service needs and offerings.”

When the game has changed this much, it’s time to change the rules, too.

Article by RP Siegel of Justmeans, appearing courtesy 3BL Media.

06/10/2014 0 comment

Renewable Energy

Idaho Joins the Solar Cheaper Than New Fossil Club

written by The Vote Solar Initiative

Some really fascinating solar developments are happening in Idaho.

The short story is this: PURPA requires utilities to buy renewable generation if the rates are lower than the avoided costs (i.e. the cost a utility would incur if it bought from another source). Recently, around 500 MW of solar projects sought to sell to Idaho Power at these avoided cost rates, and Idaho Power in turn petitioned the Idaho Public Utilities Commission to suspend the obligation to buy. The PUC denied the utility’s petition (PDF, and really worth a read).

We can now add Idaho to the list of states where solar is cheaper than the alternatives. Here’s why that’s so exciting. This isn’t sunny California, with its high rates, progressive policymakers, and enviro-centric citizenry. Or the island state of Hawaii, which depends on expensive fossil imports and is a supertanker accident away from becoming Amish. This is Idaho, which has, according to the latest EIA data, the lowest retail electricity prices in the country.

With Georgia adding 800 MW of solar below avoided cost, Minnesota choosing solar over natural gas, and Austin buying 150 MW below 5 cents kWh, the club of coal states where solar is making inroads is growing.

06/02/2014 1 comment

Renewable Energy

Chinese Military Hackers Charged with Disrupting U.S. Solar Market

written by Stuart Kaplow

A grand jury in the Western District of Pennsylvania has indicted Chinese military hackers for computer hacking, economic espionage and other offenses directed at a solar products manufacturer in America.

The indictments, the first time criminal charges have been filed against known state actors for hacking received wide spread attention earlier this week. And while the mainstream media described the U.S. corporate victims as in the nuclear power and metals industries and a labor organization, scant attention has been paid to the fact that one of the businesses is a solar panel manufacturer.

The indictment made public this past Monday, alleges that Wen Xinyu, one of five named defendants, who is officer in Unit 61398 of the Third Department of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, hacked the computers of U.S. subsidiaries of SolarWorld AG several times to glean its strategy in a trade dispute with China.

In 2012, at about the same time the Commerce Department found that Chinese solar product manufacturers had “dumped” products into U.S. markets at prices below fair value, Wen and at least one other, unidentified co-conspirator, stole thousands of files including information about SolarWorld’s cash flow, manufacturing metrics, production line information, costs, and privileged attorney-client communications relating to ongoing trade litigation, among other things. The information enabled Chinese competitors to target SolarWorld’s business operations aggressively from a variety of angles.

On February 5, 2014, Frank H. Asbeck, founder and CEO of SolarWorld, issued an open letter to President Barack Obama requesting his “support for both the U.S. manufacturing and installation wings of the domestic solar industry as they confront trade aggression from China.”

I had written in a blog post last October, Bankruptcy Trustee Sues Chinese Over Solar Panel Dumping, about a case filed in the U.S. District Court Eastern District of Michigan, claiming the object of the Chinese state owned companies’ illegal dumping actions was to drive established solar industry leader, Energy Conversion Devices, out of business.

“For too long, the Chinese government has blatantly sought to use cyber espionage to obtain economic advantage for its state-owned industries,” said FBI Director James B. Comey. “There are many more victims, and there is much more to be done. With our unique criminal and national security authorities, we will continue to use all legal tools at our disposal to counter cyber espionage from all sources.”

This criminal case charging five Chinese military officers should be a wakeup call to all; not only have Alcoa, Westinghouse, and U.S Steel been damaged, but every U.S. business and homeowner with solar panels on a roof has been a victim of Chinese economic espionage.

Article by Stuart Kaplow, appearing courtesy Green Building Law Update.

05/27/2014 0 comment

Renewable Energy

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.

05/12/2014 0 comment

Energy Efficiency Renewable Energy

Committing to a Clean Energy Future

written by

In his State of the Union address, President Obama pledged to make 2014 a year of action. And today, we announced new ways we’re taking action to advance clean energy and create opportunity for hardworking Americans. The Obama Administration has made historic investments in the research, development, and deployment of clean energy. And these investments are paying off; solar power provides a strong example.

Since President Obama took office, U.S. solar generation has grown more than ten-fold. Since 2011 alone, the cost of a solar energy system has dropped by more than 50 percent. And last year, about one quarter of new power generation capacity came from solar.

We know that solar is winning in America: It’s good for our environment, our economy, and our energy security. But it’s not alone. Energy efficiency is one of the easiest and cheapest tools we have for combating climate change while expanding opportunity. That’s why the Obama Administration has developed efficiency measures, such as new appliance standards, that will cut carbon pollution and save consumers billions on their utility bills in the next two decades. The Energy Department has partnered with 190 organizations through the Better Buildings Challenge to advance energy efficiency over the next 10 years – and they are making tremendous progress. And fuel economy standards for our cars and trucks mean we are – and will continue to be – less reliant on foreign oil.

But there’s more we can do. That’s why today we announced new executive actions to cut energy waste, create jobs, and reduce carbon pollution. These initiatives will help build a skilled solar workforce, provide innovative financing for deploying solar, improve appliance efficiency, strengthen building codes, and drive investment in energy upgrades to federal buildings. You can read more about our announcements on this fact sheet.

We’re making great progress. But we can’t do it alone. That’s why we asked leaders from every sector to build on the momentum that’s driving solar deployment and efficiency investments throughout the country – and make a commitment to do more.

Today, more than 300 organizations have partnered with us and committed to deploy clean energy and cut energy waste. Our partners span every corner of the United States – from a vegetable farm in California to a rural electric co-op in Kentucky, the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority to a homebuilder in Texas. Together they show us that no matter where you live in America, cleaner, more efficient power is becoming increasingly accessible and affordable for you and your family.

All in all, these commitments represent more than 850 megawatts of solar that will be deployed – enough to power nearly 130,000 homes. And with more businesses, rural cooperatives, and homeowners choosing solar, prices will keep going down, manufacturers will keep innovating, and more jobs will be created.

That’s what we heard from folks all across the solar supply chain who joined us for the April White House Solar Summit – from installers like Evergreen Energy Solutions to suppliers like Soligent – they all recognize the economic opportunity of clean energy and see solar demand as a job creator.

In the coming weeks, our efforts to deploy clean energy, cut carbon pollution, and fight climate change will take new aim. And we will continue to work with our partners – from every sector and every corner of America – to implement the President’s Climate Action Plan and advance this country toward a cleaner energy future.

We know that we can address climate change in a way that creates jobs and grows the economy. As we deploy solar power, we spur innovation. As we cut our energy waste, we create jobs. And as a result, cleaner efficient forms of energy are powering more of this nation every day.

That’s what today is about. That’s what President Obama’s year of action means. We’re acting now because we need to. The opportunity couldn’t be bigger.

Article by Dan Utech, Special Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change.

05/10/2014 0 comment

Renewable Energy

Chile’s Largest Utility Appeals to New Government on Energy Policy

written by CleanTechies.com Contributor

Jorge Rosenblut, the President of Endesa, one of the biggest utilities in Chile, gave a speech at the Enersis annual convention (Enersis is part of the Endesa Group) recently. In his address to those gathered, he urged the new government to focus on the development of local sources of energy that are both sustainable and competitive.

Chile is historically known for lacking internal conventional energy resources. This situation has made the country import the fuels needed for electricity generation, and thus making them dependent on their partners’ economy fluctuations.

According to Rosenblut, the import of fuels represents between 4% and 5% of the overall imports that arrive in Chile. To reverse this situation he stated the need to invest in local energies that would reduce the energy dependence of the country.

Among the natural resources that Chile holds, solar radiation is one that has not been fully exploited yet. However, with the approval of the new renewables objectives (20% of renewable generation by 2025) this situation will be changing in the next few years.

At present there is an 110MW CSP project being developed by Abengoa Solar, which will serve as proof of concept in Chile. Many other projects are under planning in the country, which have to potential to source the Endesa´s President´s request for the development of sustainable and competitive energy resources in Chile.

On the 27th and 28th of May the international CSP industry will gather at ChileSol 2014 in Santiago de Chile to discuss the development of CSP projects in the country. Leading companies such as Abengoa, SolarReserve and BrightSrouce Energy will be joined by local authorities such as the National Commission of Energy, the CDEC-SIC and CDEC-SING among others.

05/01/2014 1 comment

Renewable Energy

New Analysis Shows That 10 Utilities Dominated Integrated Solar Capacity in 2013

written by CleanTechies Staff

According to a new analysis released this week by the Solar Electric Power Association, ten American electric utilities accounted for 82 percent of all solar capacity integrated in 2013, up from 73 percent in 2012. The latest rankings show utilities ranked by Watts-per-Customer and Annual Capacity. In both categories, the lists were dominated by utilities located in California and Hawaii. With the release of the latest rankings, Julia Hamm, president and CEO of SEPA noted “It’s truly inspiring to see utility partners and their consumer communities rally around implementing solar programs that are changing the nature of our national energy portfolio.”

Newcomers to the list include Duke Energy Progress, National Grid, and Georgia Power. Pacific Gas and Electric Company let the Annual Capacity list followed by San Diego Gas & Electric Company, Arizona Public Service, and Southern California Edison. According to Steve Malnight, PG&E’s Vice President of Customer Energy Solutions, “Given both PG&E’s large-scale solar procurement and our customers’ ongoing support of solar and other clean technologies, we are confident we will continue to be a renewable energy leader.”

Watts-per-Customer
Utility	Annual W/Customer
Sterling Municipal Light Dept (MA)	831
San Diego Gas & Electric Company (CA)	461
Sillicon Valley Power/City of Santa Clara (CA)	427
Arizona Public Service (AZ)	368
Hawaiian Electric Company (HI)	329
Pacific Gas & Electric Company (CA)	281
Hawaiian Electric Light Company (HI)	182
Maui Electric Company Ltd (HI)	178
Kaua’I Island Utility Cooperative (HI)	167
Imperial Irrigation District (CA)	159

Megawatts (MW)
Utility	Annual Capacity (MW)
Pacific Gas & Electric Company (CA)	1471
San Diego Gas & Electric Company (CA)	643
Arizona Public Service (AZ)	417
Southern California Edison (CA)	373
Duke Energy Progress (NC, SC)	137
National Grid (MA, RI)	111
Public Service Electric & Gas Company (NJ)	103
Hawaiian Electric Company (HI)	98
Georgia Power Company (GA)	59
Duke Carolinas (NC, SC)	58

04/29/2014 1 comment

Renewable Energy

India – US Faceoff in WTO Over Solar Escalates

written by CleanTechies Staff

Earlier this year, the US requested consultations with India pursuant to World Trade Organization (WTO) rules concerning domestic content requirements under India’s Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission for solar cells and solar modules.

Specifically, the request for consultations alleges that “India requires solar power developers, or their successors in contract, to purchase and use solar cells and solar modules of domestic origin in order to enter into and maintain certain power purchase agreements under the NSM or with National Thermal Power Company Vidyut Vyapar Nigam Limited or the Solar Energy Corporation of India. In addition, solar power developers, or their successors in contract, receive certain benefits and advantages, such as long-term tariffs for electricity, contingent on their purchase and use of solar cells and solar modules of domestic origin.”

According to sources, talks between the two sides have failed to produce a satisfactory solution raising the likelihood of the matter going to a dispute settlement panel in May. Tarun Kapoor, India’s Joint Secretary of the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy noted that “Once WTO starts investigation in the matter, it will go on for a year. We will contest the charges in front of the panel and maintain our stand that the policies under the country’s flagship solar programme aren’t anti-competition.” India may counter US complaints by alleging that 13 states have preferential schemes for the purchase of power produced by US made solar products.

04/29/2014 0 comment

Renewable Energy

California PUC Kicks off Big Debate on the Future of Net Metering

written by The Vote Solar Initiative

The future of rooftop solar in California was front and center this week at the California PUC’s first workshop on the design of the expanded net metering program. Following a strong recent decision keeping the rules stable for existing net metering customers for at least 20 years, the CPUC must next decide what the net metering rules will be for customers who install onsite renewable generation after the sunsetting of today’s net metering program, ie. after about July 2017. More than 60 people packed the hearing room for the workshop, including clean energy advocates, utility representatives, groups representing schools and other large customers that have gone solar, and ratepayer advocates.

First on the agenda, Commission staff asked for input on the ‘guiding principles’ to be used when designing the expanded net metering program (see below for our proposed guiding principles). Next, CPUC Energy Division staff discussed plans to develop a public spreadsheet tool by the end of this year that will help quantify the costs and benefits of various successor program structures. Since the Commission is also set to approve changes to residential rate design by spring 2015, assessing the costs and benefits of various program designs will be no small task, because the ratepayer impacts of net metering flow directly from the structure of underlying rates.

The reality is, no one – including the big utilities that argue so strenuously against the current net metering rules – has provided any real evidence that our current net metering program is anything other than a fair way to value rooftop solar and enable ordinary Californians to control their own energy future and help tackle our climate challenge. California is a solar leader due in large part to net metering’s success as a simple, predictable way to compensate solar customers for the valuable local power they feed back onto the grid — and we are all reaping the benefits of that success via cleaner air, local job growth and climate progress. No other method for compensating rooftop solar customers has achieved anywhere near that kind of real-world success in the U.S.

We think it’s smart that CPUC has kicked off public discussion on the future of net metering early, well in advance of its decision deadline of December 2015. But we also think the Commission must have strong evidence that something is broken before it makes big changes to a program that has made solar a classic California success story. Stay tuned as this critically important policy discussion continues to unfold. In the meantime, we leave you with . . .

Vote Solar’s Guiding Principles for an Expanded Net Metering Program in California:
1) Protect customers’ fundamental right to use as much or as little energy behind the meter as they choose, including reductions in their demand from the grid using renewable self-generation and other clean distributed resources. Only customer generation exported to the grid is relevant for the successor tariff.

2) Keep compensation structures simple, stable and predictable over the long-term so that solar customers, developers and investors can reasonably predict their return on investment.

3) Encourage customer adoption of storage and other customer-side innovations that improve grid functionality and balance supply with demand.

4) Minimize customers’ exposure to stranded assets. Utilities must plan for investments in the grid properly taking into account likely future growth in renewable behind-the-meter generation, storage, energy efficiency and other distributed resources. If a utility does not appropriately account for the benefits associated with distributed generation and other distributed resources, and the result is partially or fully stranded assets, then shareholders should bear the cost, not ratepayers.

5) Ensure that customer-sited renewable distributed generation continues to grow sustainably, as required by AB 327. Statutory language states that the market for distributed generation must be uncapped after July 1, 2017, and implies that the installation rate should be similar to or faster than what we see today. In order to achieve the state’s sustainability goal of 80% reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels by 2050, studies show substantial increases in customer-sited and other renewable generation are likely to be needed in excess of current goals, in addition to electrification of the majority of the transportation sector.

6) Ensure that the total benefits and costs of the tariff to all customers are approximately equal, as required by AB 327. Put another way, customer generators must receive fair compensation for the benefits of their exports. Updated analysis is needed to determine if benefits and costs will be approximately equal, assuming revised rates and including societal as well as grid benefits, under the current NEM tariff. If the updated study finds costs and benefits are approximately equal, no major policy change is warranted at this time.

7) Encourage growth in customer-sited renewable distributed generation among disadvantaged residential customers, as required by AB 327.

04/25/2014 0 comment

Renewable Energy

Oklahoma Utilities Aim to Tax the Sun

written by The Vote Solar Initiative

Earlier this week, Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin signed SB 1456 into law, a utility-backed bill that could give Oklahoma utilities carte blanche to slap new fees on rooftop solar customers or small wind generators.

The Week called the move “The World’s Dumbest Idea.” We agree that it’s certainly not the smartest move for Oklahoma or other states. Let’s start with a little perspective: in Oklahoma there are roughly 200 solar customers in the entire state – amounting to a tiny 0.0025% of the state’s energy consumers. Oklahomans have hardly begun to tap their solar potential, and the utility is already using unfounded threats of grid impacts trying to tax the sun and squash solar adoption. This law shows just how unjustified the current spate of utility attacks on rooftop solar truly is.

Utilities should not be allowed to punish customers who choose to invest in local solar power that delivers very real economic, environmental and grid benefits. And most importantly, Oklahoma’s families, schools and businesses have the right to generate their own power from the sun without their utility standing in the way. You can speak up for solar rights in Oklahoma or your own home state by signing our petition.

We believe the appropriate next step is for the Oklahoma Corporation Commission to take a step back and examine whether any new fees are actually justified by evaluating the benefits and costs that distributed resources bring to the grid.

Fortunately Governor Fallin agrees, and she issued a powerful executive order at the bill signing requiring the state’s Corporation Commission, which will implement the bill, to follow some common-sense guidelines:

The Commission is required to implement SB 1456 in a manner that is consistent with the state’s First Energy Plan, that stresses that solar, and particularly distributed generation is a resource that should be promoted in Oklahoma
The Commission is required to undertake a transparent evaluation of distributed generation resources that includes stakeholder participation from the solar and wind industries.
Prior to implementing any fixed charges, the Commission is required to consider other alternative rate structure reforms such as time-of-use rates, or minimum bill charges.

Vote Solar will be engaged in Oklahoma to make sure implementation of this bill follows the sound guidance laid out by Governor Fallin.

04/23/2014 1 comment

Renewable Energy

Community Solar Gardens Sprouting in Minnesota

written by John Farrell

On April 7, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission resoundingly rejected (click the link for an annotated ruling) a severely lacking community solar gardens proposal from Xcel Energy and required substantial improvements for the utility’s revised filing.

The regulatory smack-down means a promising community solar market for Minnesota (scroll down for the infographic version).

The Basics
Advocates worked hard to make it easy to establish community solar projects, and the following basic rules apply:

Minimum of 5 subscribers (who cannot own more than 40% of output, each)
Minimum 200 Watt subscription (typically one physical panel)
25-year standard contract
Total project size can be up to 1 megawatt (AC)

Compensation

The utility (Xcel Energy) must purchase all energy from the community solar project, whether or not it is fully subscribed
For subscribers – utility must pay them the full applicable retail energy rate (like individual net metering), including for net excess generation (energy in excess of their own on-site use)
For unsubscribed energy – utility must buy power from panels that are not owned by subscribers at the applicable retail rate for projects smaller than 40 kilowatts (kW), but only at the avoided cost rate for projects larger than 40 kW
REC – $0.03 per kWh for < 250 kW, $0.02 per kWh for > 250 kW. Not eligible if project also gets Made in Minnesota or Solar Rewards
Applicable retail rate reviewed and adjusted annually.
Bill credits, month-to-month carryover, purchase at end of year (at applicable retail rate)
If and when Xcel Energy files to offer a value of solar price, it will supersede the above rates and REC prices (at time of publication, Xcel has asked the PUC to reconsider the value of solar)

Fees
1-time fees:

A $1200 application fee, refundable if the project is withdrawn
A $100/kW deposit, refundable upon project completion or withdrawal (with interest)

Ongoing:

Administrative (called “participation”) – $300 per year
Metering fee – $66 per year, three phase: $96 per year

Process
Applications are not processed in order of application, but are prioritized as “first ready, first served” to help level the playing field between large and small developers (the latter taking more time to apply, perhaps):

The project meets the definition of completeness in Xcel’s solar-garden tariff;
The project has obtained or arranged appropriate insurance or has entered into an insurance-broker agreement;
There is evidence of site control and a point of interconnection;
There is evidence of projected subscription at the time of construction; and
The project proposal complies with all applicable material terms of the tariff and standard contract and with any additional considerations that Xcel, solar-garden developers, the Department, the OAG, and interested parties participating in the solar-garden working group have agreed to include in the plan.

Despite utility efforts to curtail solar gardens, the PUC emphatically said that there can be no limit on the total installed capacity of solar gardens.

Killed
The following items were thankfully removed from Xcel’s original proposal:

A second deposit
A 2.5 megawatt quarterly limit on solar garden installations
Lower compensation, based on “average retail energy rates”
Capacity limits in DC instead of AC (about 25% smaller)

Will They Grow?
The Public Utilities Commission was very deliberate in identifying rules that facilitate a fair balance between ease of establishing solar gardens and protections for solar gardens subscribers. The PUC also endeavored to provide adequate compensation for solar gardens, setting solar REC prices based on the projected cost of establishing solar gardens. Finally, the Commission removed capacity limits and lower proposed compensation that would have severely hindered development.

In other words, it’s a promising year for community solar in Minnesota, and combined with the victory of solar over natural gas and the solar energy standard, Minnesota’s solar market is heating up.

Article by John Farrell, appearing courtesy Institute for Local Self-Reliance.

04/22/2014 1 comment

Renewable Energy

Duke Energy – Bad Headlines and the Public Good

written by The Vote Solar Initiative

It’s been a bad news kind of week for Duke Energy. First, several major investors in the utility – which is the largest electric power holding company in the United States – urged fellow shareholders to fire four Duke directors over the company’s coal ash spill in early February. A letter filed Tuesday by one of those investors stated that the directors “have failed to fulfill their obligations of risk oversight as members of a committee overseeing health, safety, and environmental compliance at the company.” This call for accountability comes two months after 39,000 tons of coal ash and 24 million gallons of contaminated water leaked from a storage pond at Duke Energy’s shuttered Eden power plant in North Carolina. (We’d be remiss to let this post go without reminding folks that, in contrast, when there’s a huge solar spill, it’s just called a ‘nice day’). The coal ash spill has brought about legislative hearings, a federal criminal investigation, and involvement by the EPA – and the very slow process of cleaning up the toxic sludge is expected to incur massive costs, with the question remaining: who will pay?

Duke Energy is taking heat in Florida as well, where ratepayers face a $3.2 Billion (with a ‘B’) bill for two ill-fated nuclear power plants: the soon-to-be decommissioned Crystal River Plant and the proposed-then-canceled Levy County plant. In the words of one impassioned local columnist, “Customers who are captives of monopoly utilities never should bear the multibillion-dollar cost of screw-ups by their power company.”

Companies like Duke Energy are given that special monopoly to serve the public good – and it’s safe to say this week’s headlines do not have it living up to its end of the bargain.

The public Duke Energy serves DOES want more control over their energy supply and electricity bills with solar power. Yet the utility has been stating publicly that it wants to weaken North Carolina’s net metering program for rooftop solar. We’re using Duke as the example here, but it’s hardly acting alone among American utilities. If energy customers in Florida, North Carolina or anywhere else in the U.S. want to take energy matters into their own hands by investing in clean, local solar power, utilities should be serving that demand – not standing in the way.

It’s worth highlighting that it’s not all bad news out of our utilities. Duke Energy has made its own significant investments in solar power. In fact, North Carolina ranks among our nation’s leaders in solar, although that solar is almost entirely in the hands of the utility via large-scale solar projects, including a recently-announced 300MW RFP. Duke’s neighbors at Georgia Power also just issued an RFP for a whopping 495 MW of PV below the cost of their fossil and nuke alternatives.

Utilities are increasingly seeing the value of this non-polluting (vs. coal), easily deployed (vs. nuclear) and increasingly cost-competitive (vs. all) resource — which is great! We just ask that they not do it at the expense of individual consumers choice and solar rights. Utilities know solar is a good deal; their customers should be able to get in on that deal too.

04/18/2014 0 comment

Newer Posts

Older Posts