What New York recently did on net metering
July 23, 2008
“You could send me to hell or to New York City, it’d be about the same to me…”
Come on, it’s a Hank Jr. lyric. Just a little Kansas joke.
But regardless, if you did go to New York, they would have net metering. Check it out (I think I originally received this info from Dan Nagengast of the KS Rural Center).
reprinted in full below
*********************
18 June 2008 - Governor David A. Paterson today announced an agreement with the Legislature on landmark energy legislation that will authorize increased development of renewable energy with a process called net metering. Net metering allows electricity customers with qualified renewable energy systems to sell excess electricity back to their local utility.
The bill will significantly expand the State’s net metering law and lead to greater investment by homeowners, farms and businesses in facilities that generate energy from clean renewable sources. By increasing market demand for renewable technologies, the bill will also attract renewable energy manufacturers and installers to New York State.
“I want to thank the Legislature for making this enhanced energy law a reality. In addition to changing the State’s dependency on traditional, fossil-fuel based energy sources this law will be a job creation vehicle, particularly in Upstate New York,” said Governor Paterson. “For instance, those businesses with large roof areas present enormous opportunities for hosting solar energy facilities. If those kinds of resources are fully realized, it could relieve significant stress from our already over-burdened utility grid and improve our energy independence.”
Governor Paterson has long advocated for and championed the cause of renewable energy and enhanced energy independence for New York State. Governor Paterson campaigned on a promise of an enhanced emphasis on alternative fuel sources in 2006, and more recently called for an expanded and enhanced net metering law in February of this year as one of 16 recommendations from his Renewable Energy Task Force.
The bill will significantly expand net metering in three areas of renewable energy – solar, wind and farm waste.
Solar Power
The bill will expand the State’s solar net metering program to apply to businesses, and increase the size of eligible solar PV systems to 25 kilowatts for residential customers and up to 2 megawatts or the customer’s peak load (whichever is less) for non-residential customers. The law will also increase the maximum amount of electricity that the utility would be required to buy back through net metering. Additionally, the law will provide the Long Island Power Authority with authorization to implement non-residential solar electric net metering pursuant to Public Service Law requirements.
Wind Power
The bill will also authorize net metering for wind technology for all utility customer classes, including non-residential classes. Previously, the law authorized such systems for residential and farm operations only. The law will also allow non-residential wind electric generators to net meter up to the lesser of their peak load or 2 megawatts, and increase the maximum size of wind facilities for farm operations from 125 kilowatts to 500 kilowatts. Caps on net-metering enrollment in utility service territories will also be increased.
Farm Waste
The size of a farm waste electric generation system that can be net metered will increase from 400 kilowatts to 500 kilowatts.
Previously, the Governor’s Renewable Energy Task Force had identified New York’s net metering law limitations as a barrier to broader use of distributed renewable energy generation.
Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno said: “I applaud Senator Maziarz and Senator Johnson for providing leadership in the Senate on this critically important issue. Net metering can advance many sources of alternative energy in New York State, promote economic development and help us save energy. At a time where New York’s families are struggling with rising energy costs, this is an opportunity to provide much-needed relief. I’d like to thank the Governor and the Assembly for partnering with us on this legislation.”
Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said: “The expansion of net metering paves the way for greater independence and cost-savings for New York’s energy consumers. This legislation will encourage residents, businesses, schools and non-profits to reduce costs by producing power through non-polluting alternative sources such as solar and wind technologies. By signing this bill, Governor Paterson joins the Assembly in its commitment to reducing costs and creating cleaner energy for our consumers.”
Senate Minority Leader Malcolm A. Smith said: “Governor Paterson has long been an advocate for alternative energy sources and I am extremely pleased the Legislature has once again taken a step towards embracing them. The net metering law will attract business and employment opportunities to the state, as well as reducing household utility costs—providing the much needed relief to working families. There is an appreciated need to tap into as many alternative sources to produce energy, especially with soaring gas prices expected to hit record highs during the summer season.”
Senator George Maziarz, Chairman of the Senate Energy and Telecommunications Committee said: “Greater access to net metering will give consumers greater control over their own energy future. Net metering will lower energy bills, promote renewable energy sources, and help create green-collar jobs in New York. This is a significant step in the right direction for finding a way to meet our long-term energy needs.”
Assembly Energy Committee Chair Kevin Cahill said: “Together with conservation, net metering represents our best hope to reduce peak energy demand immediately. I am proud to have been able to work with the Governor and my colleagues in the Legislature to come to an agreement that will help protect the environment, spark economic growth and meet our energy needs.”
Senator Owen H. Johnson said: “New York’s current restrictive net metering law has been an impediment to the widespread use of renewable energy, but that’s about to change. The net metering legislation we’ve agreed upon will promote greater use of solar, wind and farm waste energy and will increase the proportion of renewable electricity consumers use. I commend Governor David Paterson for his leadership on this issue and Senator George Maziarz for his hard work and resolve in getting this important legislation passed this year.”
Assemblyman Steven Englebright said: “With rising energy prices and increasing concerns about the impact of fossil fuels on our climate, New York takes a big step today to address these serious challenges. A broader segment of energy consumers will now have greater incentive to produce the types of clean power that will help reduce utility costs without further damaging our environment.”
Assemblyman Thomas O’Mara said: “Serving as the Ranking Republican Member on the Assembly Energy Committee, I want to commend Governor Paterson for his leadership in supporting this legislation, as it will help reduce energy prices for Upstate families and employers, along with promoting the use of renewable energy sources that are cleaner, greener and lessen our dependence on foreign oil.”
Solar train racing on
June 25, 2008
Where wind was a decade or so ago, solar is now. Alerted by the recent history of wind, all sorts of folks are now circling solar, trying to figure out where and when and how to jump in. Save the world? Make some money? 
I just heard some green entrepreneur out there ask: What’s the difference?
Hold that thought. Reprinted straight from the Department of Energy’s EERE newsletter:
Study: Solar Power Could Provide 10% of U.S. Electricity by 2025
Solar energy currently provides less than 0.1% of the electricity generated in the United States, but a new report finds that solar power’s contribution could grow to 10% of the nation’s power needs by 2025. The report, prepared by research and publishing firm Clean Edge and the nonprofit Co-op America, projects nearly 2% of the nation’s electricity coming from concentrating solar power systems, while solar photovoltaic systems will provide more than 8% of the nation’s electricity. Those figures correlate to nearly 50,000 megawatts of solar photovoltaic systems and more than 6,600 megawatts of concentrating solar power.
As noted in the report, solar power has been expanding rapidly in the past 8 years, growing at an average pace of 40% per year. The cost per kilowatt-hour of solar photovoltaic systems has also been dropping, while electricity generated from fossil fuels is becoming more expensive. As a result, the report projects that solar power will reach cost parity with conventional power sources in many U.S. markets by 2015. But to reach the 10% goal, solar photovoltaic companies will also need to streamline installations and make solar power a “plug-and-play” technology, that is, it must be simple and straightforward to buy the components of the system, connect them together, and connect the system to the power grid.
The report also places some of the responsibility with electric utilities, which will need to take advantage of the benefits of solar power, incorporate it into future “smart grid” technologies, and create new business models for building solar power capacity. The report also calls for establishing long-term extensions of today’s investment and production tax credits, creating open standards for connecting solar power systems to the grid, and giving utilities the ability to include solar power in their rate base.
For the full report, click here.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
Your Friday video extravaganza. First from EDF -
And now, lovely actresses telling you to use CFL lightbulbs! (If you want to know how to recycle the lightbulbs click here for a pdf handout)
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
Right now, wind is getting most of the press in Kansas. Ten years ago, however, that was not the case - and that is the position that solar power finds itself in today.
This past week, the Kansas Corporation Commission (KCC) released a new solar radiation map. As the consultant who developed the map explained, Kansas has even more solar potential than Florida. The key for Kansans will be figuring out how to take advantage of the resource.
Tah dah, here it is. The copy below will probably be blurry, but you can download the original pdf here (all three pages):
Hint: Yellow is good. Blue, not so much. Pretty clearly, southwestern Kansas wins.
Note, if you live in NE KS and you have solar panels that work great even despite all the blue and green colors, don’t holler. The resolution of the map is on a 10K grid. For the smaller scale of home and business use, microclimates and exposures will certainly vary. (Keep reading for further explanation.)
To create the map, the KS energy office contracted with Joe King of Coriolis. Now a private consultant, when Joe ran the Energy Office - before it was combined with the KCC - he was the one who put together the original Kansas wind map of 50 meter data. (TruWind has recently updated with a 70 m map).
Second hint: Print that TruWind map and compare it to the solar map. Pretty cool.
How to interpret this resource: Sun and wind are both renewable resources. However, they work differently. Wind patterns are more fluid than solar - the sun holds a fairly fixed position in the sky. Its path varies daily and seasonally, true, but the patterns are probably not going to shift significantly over any human frame of time.
What matters to solar resources, though, are the levels of atmospheric interference with the sun’s rays. Interference includes particulates, aerosols, moisture, etc. Southwestern Kansas in particular has a combination of good solar and comparatively little atmospheric interference.
This map (especially pages two and three, which you will have to download) measures the average solar exposure in different parts of the state.
How counties and other planning groups can use this information*: The value of a solar resource depends on the technology that you plan to use to take advantage of it. Right now there are two ways to do this.
The first is photovoltaics (solar panels), which are currently most used in residential and commercial markets. Right now those panels are pretty expensive, but enormous amounts of capital are being poured into the industry to figure out more affordable technology. GE, a leader in getting wind power off the ground in the U.S., expects its solar interests to become a billion dollar business (Reuters).
For most Kansas businesses and homes, photovoltaics are not economically feasible right now (with the possible exception of hot water heating). Right now, there is no net metering in the state. If you can’t interconnect to the grid, you have to invest in batteries, which are expensive. King’s short comment on connecting to the grid: “Technically, it’s easy. Politically, it’s hard.”
There is some good news, though - the KEEP program of the Kansas Housing and Resources Commission has recently had its income restrictions removed. Now all Kansans are eligible for low-interest loans to install solar panels, buy energy-efficient appliances, etc.
The second option is CSP technology, which utilities in the West are starting to consider. The National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) in Colorado has helped revive this technology, which has been around since the 1970s.
CSP installations mix old and new principles of electricity generation. They use mirrors to take the solar power and create heat, which then drive the turbines that create the electricity. CSP can be a challenge to site. Some styles of the technology take lots of land, and the right kind - meaning, flat. There are some forms of CSP that can work with tower installations.
Right now, there are many CSP manufacturers and technologies, not a lot of installations, and the market will probably shake out over the next ten or so years. Since CSP uses mirrors, it is also vulnerable to weather. Even super-duper mirrors are still subject to weather extremes, such as wind, snow, and hail.
Can we mix wind and solar? On a utility scale, quite probably. Wind and solar are both intermittent power sources, meaning they are not always available. For example, wind blows less during the summer, during times of peak load. However, except for in extreme events - summer is when the sun shines the most (during the day, anyway).
Combining wind and solar at one installation would help balance the intermittency issue. Already, wind developer Iberdola is mounting pyrometers on their Kansas wind turbines to measure the available solar resources.
Nationally, there is also some discussion of mounting CSP installations on or around traditional fossil fuel electricity generating plants, like natural gas. When available, the renewable source could be used to back off the fossil fuel.
Any downside to solar? During the Q&A session of the meeting, Commissioner Harkins pointed out that ethanol has been a cautionary tale - lots of government subsidies for a renewable fuel source, that ended up having unintended consequences.
He asked what the risks were with solar. King replied that an important question to ask of any renewable technology - how renewable is it? Are there lots of fossil fuel inputs? Waste streams? Etc. Also, is it economically viable?
For more coverage of the KCC meeting, check out Sarah Kessinger’s story from Harris News Service. Afterwards, she spoke to Chairman Wright. Quotable:
After the briefing, Wright said the commission has no role in promoting renewable energy, but they could ask lawmakers to change their mission in that regard.
“The Legislature has given us a certain level of authority in dealing with investor-owned utilities, but not to develop (renewable standards).”
*Note: Not all of the info above came from the KCC presentation. CEP has done additional research into solar technologies in the past. Some of the details about wind and solar are also drawn from recent KS news articles.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
by Nancy Jackson
Remember the Pony Express? While those heroic riders endured rain, sleet, and snow, the world was changing around them. In a short eighteen months, it left them behind. The Pony Express didn’t see the telegraph coming – when it arrived, they were done.
At exactly the same time, a stagecoach company called Wells Fargo was transporting passengers, packages and precious gold across the frontier in stage coaches. Unlike their pony-riding peers, the smart folks at Wells Fargo saw trains coming. With big changes afoot, they decided to take a calculated risk.
Wells Fargo looked forward, puts its iconic stage coaches in storage, and focused on keeping money safe and delivering it on time. The result is a multinational financial services empire that thrives today.
Today on the Plains, a new energy economy is coming with a low-carbon future. We will not escape it. But we are uniquely situated to benefit from it.
Kansas is blessed with abundant wind, sun, and biomass – we have huge natural advantages in producing renewable energy. We also live on top of some of the most promising geologic formations in the country for compressed air energy storage (which could act like a battery for wind) and long-term storage of carbon dioxide. Better yet – a good number of those very same formations yet hold oil and gas that may be economically recoverable with, would you believe, injection of carbon dioxide? Enhanced oil recovery (EOR) is a well tested practice and would pay to develop the infrastructure (pipe, injection technology) for storage and sequestration later.
If you are shaking your head and feeling a little sorry for me because clearly I just don’t know that much about energy or economics, I won’t hold it against you. But I will refer you to the case above and ask again: who do you want to be? The Pony Express? Or Wells Fargo?
The new energy economy is coming, folks. Financial giants like Warren Buffett and T. Boone Pickens are investing heavily in wind energy. Many of the dot.com geniuses who brought us the information age (and this blog) are similarly invested in solar, wind, biofuels, and wave energy. Energy giants (and huge greenhouse gas emitters) like Duke Energy, American Electric Power, and Florida Power & Light see a low-carbon world coming and are acting now to create carbon legislation at the federal level, as well as regional cap-and-trade systems. They will ensure that their business survives and their customers thrive.
We in the Heartland have an opportunity today to be part of the solution. This is that rare chance to do well while doing good, because the new energy economy brings with it many well-paid, non-exportable green collar jobs – jobs for which our state universities and technical colleges can train a new work force. Our best and brightest will have the opportunity – and also the desire – to stay in Kansas, because it will be “re-branded.” Kansas can be the new energy capitol of America. We can lead the nation in developing solutions for a low-carbon world.
Kansas has led before. Our ancestors stood up against the grave injustice of slavery, though its economics had been remarkably good. Our Free State was pivotal then, and it can be again today.
Skepticism and doubt rarely lead – few fortunes have ever been made by people who list the reasons a thing will not work. Innovation, hope, and determination do lead – and fortunes are made by those who create elegant solutions to pressing problems.
Who do you want to be?
— Nancy Jackson, CEP Executive Director
www.climateandenergy.org
CEP live blogging from House Energy Committee - NREL briefing on net metering and Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS)
March 13, 2008
big rush this a.m.! So let’s get right down to it - Trudy Forsyth of the National Renewable Energy Labs (NREL) is briefing the committee this morning on net metering. Her colleague, whose name I haven’t caught yet, is going to speak on Renewable Portfolio Standards.
Hit the refresh button every once in a while. Members of the committee include: Representatives Johnson, Flora, Mast, Sloan, Long, Moxley, Faust-Goudeau, Swanson, Proehl, Keuther (Ranking Minority), Holmes (Chair), Olson (Vice Chair), Svaty, McLachlan, Fund, Knox, Hawk, Light, Neighbor, Morrison, and Myers.
Room - pretty darn full (25 plus in audience). Lots of energy industry folks, to judge by the banter between gas folks and everyone else. The reps all get treats from Rep. Rocky Fund because his cell phone went off during proceedings yesterday. Whoops. He brought them tangerines and granola bars, very healthy!
Of course, this is also the committee where one of the reps once mentioned he didn’t believe in granola bars this is never boring.
Chairman Holmes brings the meeting to order.
Trudy Forsyth, NREL
Has worked for labs for 14 years, leads distributable wind turbines project. Small to mid-size turbines. Research and testing. Overview of wind energy.
Small wind turbines used since at least early 1980s. Especially good for farmers. Indsutrial uses for distributed turbines, schools, businesses, and residential. Wind industry began really in 1980. Smaller turbines, 50-100kW oirignally used in CA wind farms. Turbines gets bigger and bigger, to 1.5-2.5 megawatt (MW). Also rising interest in offshore wind, in NE U.S. Installed wind capacity in US, shows large wind number (which is different than small wind): 45% growth curve per year. Small wind has 25% growth curve. Phenomenal growth. In 2007, more than half states have some form of wind power installed.
CEP live blogging from House Energy Committee
February 26, 2008
hi all. This morning at issue - I think - is a bill that would strip the KDHE Secretary of all of his authority I may be oversimplifying. But I believe that is what it is. I am just here in case they do anything on the net metering bill. Maybe they will, maybe they won’t. Again, I don’t think this will really turn into a scintillating transcript, so I will more take notes than transcribe.
But hey this might get interesting. One never knows. Either a whole lot of boring or a whole lot of eek! that tends to be how things go.
9:15 a.m.
Chairman Holmes calls meeting to order.
HB 2872 hearing continues from yesterday. Not material to CEP, so we will skip it. Telephone stuff and the KCC.
HB 2894 - on KDHE. No proponents, one neutral (KDHE), one opponent. In offered testimony, others submitted written.
Sunflower Electric Representative - they oppose the bill. The provision would apply standards that KDHE applied to Sunflower to all utilities. They don’t want anyone else to endure what they’ve been through, so they oppose the bill. Sunflower went through an extensive permit process, public hearings, provided lots of detailed studies on plant’s impact re air quality, met with KDHE staff numerous times, staff approved the permit which meant no health or environmental problems. In October, KDHE secretary decided that CO2 was a danger to health and environment. It was CO2 that was the problem, not coal, please note that was the problem. Now Bremby is gathering info on CO2 emissions on KS in general. What will he do with this info? He said he would seek voluntary reductions throughout KS. If those voluntary reductions do not occur, then permitting process wil be applied. This concerns us - what do we do? His standards are unclear. we don’t want them to apply to anyone else. Bremby talks about what they are doing in Washington DC< but we don’t know what that standard is. That would be troubling. This has sent a shock wave thru business community, all the uncertainty. Troublesome - you can get permit in state of KS, but at renewal, you could lose that permit. Not good for investors. Too much doubt. We oppose this bill. It should not be enacted into law.
CEP live blogging from House Energy and Utilities Committee
February 25, 2008
Morning! Here we sit, awaiting the beginning of the testimony on Rep. Tom Holland’s net metering legislation, HB 2881. I believe this bill is also supported by Rep. Treaster of Reno County.
What’s different about this net metering legislation, versus the solar net metering still attached to the Holcomb bill? Answer: lots. So today should be interesting. I will also have electronic copies of some testimony to post later.
9:15 a.m.
Chairman Holmes calls the meeting to order. Pretty full room, all things considered - ie, net metering is really not in the least a sexy or fascinating issue. You have to really care about renewable energy in order to be here. (Or probably, to read a live blog on the topic )
For those who may not even know what net metering is, check out the main CEP website’s glossary entry on the topic. In general, net metering is an incentive for consumers to invest in renewables. It is a critical part of a comprehensive state energy policy that encourages development in renewable energy, as well as in encouraging manufacturers in that industry.
Conference committee announced - 531 North at 3:30 p.m. Warning - very small room.
news update - vote trading, and more
February 22, 2008
What happens in the time period between floor votes on a bill, and a threatened gubernatorial veto?
Arm twisting, apparently. Even arm breaking. The Topeka Capitol-Journal has reported a very troubling incident that occurred on the statehouse floor yesterday, where Republicans Speaker of the House Melvin Neufeld and Rep. Hayzlett pressured Democrat Rep. Sydney Carlin to change her no vote on Sunflower’s Holcomb plants.
Tip of the iceberg, I’m afraid - at least from what I have been hearing. Carlin just happens to have the guts to go on the record.
I’m sure that a general low level of this sort of behavior goes on all the time. Hey, it’s politics. However, the Holcomb issue seems to have intensified the dynamic to a highly problematic level.
As citizens, this should trouble us all. Should all of the legislation proposed during this session be compromised for one company, Sunflower Electric? This scale of - highjacking - by economic interests is really unthinkable in a democracy.
(I hope!)
More on the big solar project going in Arizona - via Jim Mason of KNRC, I think that’s where I grabbed the cite (USNews&World Report). Another great quotable from this story:
The big issue with solar energy has been the cost. Brandt says the Solana plant is expected to generate electricity at 12 cents to 14 cents per kilowatt-hour, which is about 20 percent more than the cost of the other electricity that APS generates with its mix of nuclear, natural gas, and coal. But Brandt notes that since the price of the fuel is free, it’s a 30-year contract with one big source of risk eliminated. If natural gas prices increase or if coal-fired power is made more expensive because of climate-change legislation, the CSP power could end up being one of the lowest-priced forms of electricity in the utility’s portfolio. “Any business wants to diversify its sources of supply,” Brandt says. “That’s why we feel right now the price is attractive. And you factor in the possibility of natural gas prices rising or any carbon legislation, and I think we’ll look back in five years and think this was an absolute grand-slam home run.”
Renewable energy is going mainstream - and bipartisan. An AP story on how states are struggling to figure out how to incent and finance renewables (during a, um, non-recession) quotes Ohio Democratic Governor Ted Strickland:
“If states like Ohio want to overcome their economic challenges, they’ve got to embrace advanced energy technologies and renewable sources,” Strickland said Thursday. “This idea of clean, green energy is no longer a tie-dyed T-shirt kind of idea. This is mainstream economics.”
And it also quotes Minnesota Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty: “Although there are certainly differences in how each state approaches energy policy, there is consensus that more needs to be done to create a cleaner, more secure and more independent energy future.” Pawlenty himself “has embraced renewable fuels, conservation and a requirement to cut global warming emissions in Minnesota by 80 percent by mid-century. He also supports clean coal technology and coal-burning power plants where carbon is captured and sequestered.”
More on Sunflower’s proposed algae reactors, from the Salina Journal: Duane Schrag has previously reported on research suggesting that in order for Sunflower to sequester 30-40% of the CO2 emissions from the proposed coal-fired Holcomb expansion - as they said they would, during their testimony on the bill - they would need approximately 60,000 acres (provided the technology will work effectively in the KS environment). Today, their spokesman said that they had allotted 500 acres to the algae reactor. This would capture somewhere between 0.5% to 4% of the CO2 emitted. Cost estimates range widely, from $2.50 to $9.30 a square foot.
I’m sorry, I forget the conversions to figure out how many square feet are in an acre - but I think we can safely conclude that the cost is pretty astonishingly expensive. When you add up the skyrocketing costs for power plant construction (for all sorts of power generation, not just coal), plus the cost of the algae reactor - plus the fact that the Department of Justice already considers Sunflower to be a financially troubled borrower - yeeow.
More on hunters. To whom I am highly sympathetic, since I really like wild turkey (the kind you eat). Also from the Arizona Republic - more hunters and anglers are getting involved in climate change issues. Quotable:
“The hunting and angling community is becoming more aware of global climate change and the problems associated with that, especially how it affects fish and wildlife,” said Rod Mondt, who lives in Tucson and works as a conservation-lands coordinator for Trout Unlimited. “They see it more readily because they’re out in the field more.”
By taking on global warming, outdoor enthusiasts join a diverse group of activists, from evangelical Christians to farmers, clamoring for legislative action on climate change.
Finally, for investor folk: T. Boone Pickens is getting into wind power on an even grander scale (EnergyCentral.com) Also, a plug for one of my favorite blogs - Climateer Investing. Whoever writes it posts an insane amount of posts, but they are spot on in identifying trends.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
news updates
February 21, 2008
Weather. Ick. But in Arizona I bet the sun is shining - that’s a big chunk of how the state just attracted what will be one of the world’s largest solar thermal power plants (AZ Republic). Important to note: The facility will be built and operated by Spanish company Abengoa Solar and Arizona will reap 1,500 construction jobs; at 280 megawatts the plant will power at least 70,000 households; the state will use the power to meet their Renewable Portfolio Standard (requiring that utilities get 15 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2025); and the plant will be able to offset peak demand reliance on natural gas and will also be able to store heat for power generation for at least six hours after dark.
Whoa, wait. Intermittent power, per kilowatt hour costs, blah blah - is this plant still financially feasible? Quotable:
APS will pay about 14 cents per kilowatt-hour, compared with about 10 cents per kilowatt-hour from natural-gas plants at peak demand.
The premium is worth it because coal and natural-gas prices are unpredictable, and emissions from those plants likely someday will be taxed for their contributions to global climate change, Brandt said. That makes predictable solar prices attractive.
In general, the overhead costs for power plant construction and even basic operation are going up (IHS.com) - coal, gas, wind and nuclear (each generation type is after all built from many of the same materials, and they all involve turbines).
If you are at all the investor type, listen up to how we know this, because it’s cool: IHS and Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA) have developed a new Power Capital Costs Index (PCCI). The index “shows the cost of new power plant construction in North America increased 27 percent in 12 months and 19 percent in the most recent six months, reaching a level 130 percent higher than in 2000.”
Anyone else entertained/ mystified/ *headdesk* over how China kept coming up in the House and Senate debates over what Kansas should do about its own concerns re coal-fired generation? To add this to the mix (not that I really want anything to do with that mix) - China has a Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) that requires renewables to make up 15 percent of China’s primary energy consumption by 2020, up from 7 percent currently (CERA). For an additional/ another perspective on China going green, see the WSJournal Environmental Capital blog.
The whole logic in comparing Kansas coal consumption to China coal consumption entirely escaped me. Just because they pollute, we should too…? I am 100% percent certain that if I had gone to my parents when I was around age 15 and said, hey! I’m going to go out and have premarital sex and that’s okay because other kids are doing more of it, so there - they would have locked me up for the next thirty years.
Bad logic is bad logic, whatever your fact pattern is.
OK, quit laughing. Climate and energy news is very serious stuff, so don’t you dare enjoy it. Let’s see… oh yes. How could I forget? Coal. Lest a day go by without us mentioning the Sunflower Electric/ Holcomb plant expansion. (Plus, everyone else is mentioning it!)
Salina Journal’s Duane Schrag has really been on top of the algae reactor story - here is the latest installment. To work, the proposed Holcomb algae site might have to cover as much as 60,000 acres. Eek. Also, the Kansas City Star editorial board excoriated many of the Johnson and Wyandotte County legislators for voting for the coal plants.
EDIT: note for Spike, who emailed me! “Excoriated” means “ripped to shreds,” “burned,” and/or “really said harsh things to.” From the online free dictionary: “to censure strongly, to denounce.”
There are also other slang ways to put that - but, I won’t.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
the possible future of carbon regulation in Kansas
January 22, 2008
CEP’s Community Energy Forum in Salina went very well last night. (There is another in Overland Park tonight, and another in Topeka tomorrow - see CEP press release for details.)
CEP invited analysts from energy consulting firm Synapse Energy to the forum, and they had some interesting things to say. If you’d like to see the .pdf of the powerpoint presentation by David Schlissel and Ezra Hausman, please click here (.pdf, 1.3 MB)
From the Harris News coverage, some quotables:
Synapse senior consultant David Schlissel said federal limits on coal plants’ carbon emissions are “more than likely” in the near future.
“A proposal before Congress right now would mandate steep reductions of 50 to 80 percent in CO2 emissions,” Schlissel said. “The adoption of these federal regulations will mean substantial costs for new power plants that are coal- or gas-fired. Coal, of course, is the most carbon intensive.”
Synapse has developed a forecast of expected costs related to carbon emissions for power plants and other businesses.
If the regulatory cost, for instance, becomes $20 per ton each year, companies such as Sunflower that emit 12 million tons annually will have to purchase allowances of at least $240 million.
Part of Sunflower’s response that I found interesting - they again mentioned the potential of their bioenergy project (which is not contained in their proposal) as a partial offset to some of the problems with the proposed coal plant.
A while back, an argument you heard a lot was that Kansas wind power couldn’t be developed without transmission lines for coal power, and that turned out not to be the case. Now the coal cart is getting hitched to biofuels - but there’s a lot of lower cost ways to produce biofuels, with a lot more proven technology.
Also re renewables - on one hand, renewables are booming right now. On the other hand… that could all go south pretty quick (or at least take a significant detour) if the federal government does not renew the production tax credits for wind and solar. The renewal of these credits did not make it through the highly contentious battle over the energy bill, and the initiative is now up again before Congress (CSMonitor).
-– Maril Hazlett
Want to know more about climate and energy issues? Check out www.climateandenergy.org.
blog harvest
January 8, 2008
Just checking out a few climate, energy, ag, and military blogs… over at Agricultural Observatory, they posted an article about how the pending farm bill has big energy implications for farmers. Mostly in terms of biomass. Along those lines, anyone interested in biofuels and policy issues should be reading Nathaniel Green’s Switchboard blog over at NRDC.
Climate Progress has a thought-provoking entry on a recent Univ of Maryland study, which looks at the high economic costs of doing nothing about climate change. If you are interested in climate change adaptation at all (and folks involved in emergency response, etc., this probably means you) follow the link the to study, read the executive summary, and also download the regional summary for the Great Plains (or the Midwest. Like so many maps of these regions, KS flip-flops between the two. For heaven’s sake. I don’t think that particular category is an either/or choice, myself. But bless their hearts the study was done in Maryland.)
And if any of those researchers should happen to find this link no, I am actually not a geographical bigot. I just think few people really get Kansas. At times that even includes Kansans, though, so no hard feelings.
Onward with the blog harvest. Sustainablog covers what seems to be a super-cool article about solar in this January’s Scientific American. Quotable: “The magazine proposes a massive, far-reaching plan to get solar power generating 69 percent of America’s electricity 35 percent of our total energy by 2050, thus replacing all of our foreign oil needs and slashing global warming emissions.” If you want to know more about the PV and CSP solar technologies mentioned, see CEP’s solar page.
For folks interested in the nuts and bolts of how to use renewable energies in their homes and daily lives, Mother Earth News covers the best renewable energy books.
And this time none of my milblogs yielded anything about renewables. But sometimes they do.
— Maril Hazlett
Want to know about climate and energy issues in the Midwest (or hey, the Great Plains)? Check out www.climateandenergy.org.
morning harvest of energy news
December 21, 2007
Economic development and renewables: Sunflower Wind company relocates in Reno County (KAKE Channel 10). Smart of them, Reno County is a great location. The Reno County Grow Coalition invited CEP to organize a community forum on wind in Hutchinson last August – it was attended by 200 citizens and sparked an active, 40-member wind working group. One of the group’s goals is to increase the county’s long-term energy security by developing renewables.
(And totally full disclosure - my Dad is from Sterling and I love it there).
Also, on the jobs front, North Dakota State is offering a two year associates’ degree in biofuels technology (EthanolProducer.com) With the energy legislation that passed earlier this week mandating an major increase in biofuels production, there will indeed be more jobs in that field.
St.Louis-based Solar Night Industries gets some play over on Sustainablog - SNI has developed a web-based Modern Energy Plan to help homeowners and businesses figure out what renewable energy system will work best for their needs and location. Haven’t tried it; sounds cool; always remember that CEP does not endorse any .com it might link to; just for a counterpoint remember findsolar.com; also remember Home Power magazine rocks and has ads from many different suppliers and covers solar, wind, and hydro.
This next is of course not interesting to Midwesterners in a practical sense, but I thought it was cool - FERC licenses its first wave power plant in the Pacific Ocean, off the coast of Washington state (Reuters). I just like wave power. I like the idea of it. It seems soothing. Electricity that can make you go ahhhhhhhhhhh…
Now - what sort of environmental impacts does wave power have on marine wildlife? That, I don’t know. All technologies do have impact… that impact is best judged on the basis of life cycle analysis, and relative to the costs of fossil fuels… in this job, I seem to type that sentence endlessly.
But I also think people get it.
And last, generally for dorks (yay, dorks) a an nice overview of biodegradable plastics (CSMonitor). Why is this article getting play on a blog/website about climate and energy? Because most of our plastics today are made from materials derived from petrochemicals, which in turn come primarly from imported oil. Importing oil is highly risky to the nation’s energy security, not to mention the greenhouse gas emissions and their impact on climate change - and then, plastics have disastrous environmental impacts. For many reasons, researchers are seeking other alternatives.
Of course, bioplastics too have an ecological footprint, and in some ways, they aren’t yet all that sustainable. (Ie, “degradable plastic” can be a relative term). Quotable:
“There is a widespread confusion that all [bioplastics] are made from renewable resources and that all of them are biodegradable,” says BPI’s Mojo. “Not all plastics made from renewable resources are biodegradable, and not all that are biodegradable are based on natural resources.”
Also, add in there the consequences of developing bioplastics from food crops - at the same time we are developing biofuels from food crops - and you have a potentially gigantic yikes.
new energy legislation
December 20, 2007
President Bush signed a new energy bill into law. Some folks like it, some don’t, and how it all breaks down might surprise you just a little. Energy and environment are proving to be issues that have the capacity to blur the categories of “usual suspects,” and get some folks to cross party lines. (However limited and marginal that crossing might be.)
A (probably incomplete) summary:
What the bill did:
- Increased CAFE standards (fuel efficiency standards) to 35 mpg by 2020 (a looong way off). This will raise the nation’s fuel efficiency by 40% - from where it was, though, which really wasn’t great.
- Increases biofuels production (right now, that means corn-based ethanol) to 36 billion gallons per year
- Phases out incandescent lightbulbs (which waste 90% of the electricity they use in heat rather than light) which means we will all be buying more CFLs
- increases energy efficiency standards for appliances such as refrigerators, TVs, etc.
What the bill didn’t do:
- Didn’t renew tax credits for renewable energies such as wind and solar. big uh-oh. big!
- Didn’t reduce the colossal subsidies for oil and gas
- Didn’t implement a federal Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS)
Read More
Bush signs broad energy bill, NYTimes
Energy law leaves out wind, solar tax credits, NPR
New biofuel mandate boon for corn farmers, NPR
House sends president an energy bill to sign, Wash Post
