Category Archives: Power

Progress and pitfalls in California’s clean energy quest

The Mystery Cities in Prop 10

Every ballot measure has its fine print and every piece of legislation its earmarks and “ornaments.” Prop 10, officially the California Renewable Energy and Clean Alternative Fuel Act is typical of this time-honored tradition, except in one respect. Usually these quirks can be explained by the people promoting them.

On page 16 of the measure, Prop 10 specifically allocates multi-million-dollar grants to each of eight cities in California. Los Angeles, San Diego, Long Beach, Irvine, San Francisco, Oakland, Fresno and Sacramento (listed in that order) would each get $25 million:

“…for the purpose of capital projects and operating expenses promoting and demonstrating the actual use of alternative and renewable energy in park, recreation and cultural venues, including the education of students, residents and the visiting public about these technologies and practices.”

Seems straightforward enough–except nobody seems to know how these eight cities were chosen. It’s not merely a list of the state’s eight largest cities. It’s close, except that San Jose (#3) is conspicuously missing but Irvine (#17) makes the cut.

John Dunlap, former head of the state Air Resources Board and a paid consultant to the Prop 8 campaign, appeared to be stumped when I asked him for the rationale. His best  guess was that they might be locations with significant transportation infrastructure, such as major port facilities. Again, the mystery of Irvine…and Fresno isn’t quite the Rotterdam of the West Coast.

I called the official office of “Yes on 10” and a media representative told me that she thought the cities were chosen for “geographic distribution” but admitted that she hadn’t been asked before. She promised to get back to me with a definitive answer. That was last week. Election Day is tomorrow. If Prop 10 goes down to defeat, it won’t matter. If it passes, it’ll be even more important to have an answer.

Methane Takes its Turn in the Spotlight

No sooner had I posted a piece about “The Other Greenhouse Gases,” than more new data bubbled up about one of them; methane.

Benicia Refinery

According to a study published by researchers at MIT, there was a global spike in atmospheric methane last year. The increase, on the order of millions of metric tons, was uniform around the world, not concentrated around major methane emitters, as one might expect. In other words, “background” methane levels are up all over, so that the atmospheric concentration is nearly 1800 parts per billion.

That’s a much lower concentration than carbon dioxide, which stands at about 385 parts per million. Methane also breaks down faster in the atmosphere. But it worries climatologists because it is far more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas; anywhere from 25 to 50 times more harmful, depending on how you measure it. Researchers Matthew Rigby and Ronald Prinn say atmospheric methane levels have more than tripled since the Industrial Revolution but has held steady in recent years. Recently something has thrown it out of balance but the MIT team could only speculate about possible reasons.

Methane escapes from a combination of both natural and human-induced sources. It leaks from oil & gas industry infrastructure and landfills, and is produced by livestock (and human) digestion. It’s also released by marshes and rice paddies. California is a major rice producer but the rice fields’ share of total U.S. methane emissions is relatively tiny.

Climate Watch is preparing an upcoming feature on  methane and climate change. Listen for it on The California Report in November.

400,000 Jobs or Bust. Or Both.

There’s an interesting juxtaposition nowadays between the grim economic/public funding forecasts and the eye-popping estimates of job growth in the “green-collar” economy…at least in the ever-optimistic Golden State.

Given the current meltdown in the capital markets, there is understandable fear that investment in renewable energy and carbon-reducing technology will be nipped in the bud. Recent articles in the New York Times and Times of London reflect the new angst.

But against this backdrop of doom, predictions are popping out all over about the coming economic boom, if we can somehow stay the course toward a low-carbon economy. This week number-crunchers at UC Berkeley issued the bold declaration that through energy efficiency alone, California can add 403,000 new jobs. David Roland-Holst and his colleagues assume a scant 1% annual improvement in overall energy efficiency, in order to get there. And by the way, they say, you can pencil an extra $76 billion in gross state product into the bargain. We’ll be spending so much less to light, heat, cool, and move us around, that it will free up billions of dollars and an outbreak of general prosperity will ensue. Sound like Pollyanna gone wild? The authors say we’ve done it before.

A recent economic analysis by the California Air Resources Board predicted that full implementation of the sweeping Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (CA AB-32) would add 100,000 jobs by 2020. The astute reader might wonder how, since energy efficiency is just one facet of AB-32, can the Berkeley number be so much higher. The answer, according to Roland-Holst, is that the Air Board estimate is “innovation-neutral.” In other words, it assumes that nothing new is invented on the efficiency front.

Hear more details as KQED’s Peter Jon Shuler speaks with  Roland-Holst about his methodology.

Renewable Energy Tax Credits Extended

In today’s historic passage of the $700 bailout package for the financial industry, Congess also managed to finally extend the alternative energy tax credits that have been held up for months in legislative wrangling.  The Senate approved incentives last week, and yesterday lawmakers included them as part of a $150.5 billion add-on package to the so-called “bail out bill” in efforts to gain more House votes for the financial rescue plan.  The move will extend the existing tax incentives for the wind and solar industries for that were set to expire at the end of the year.

An article from investment research firm Morningstar reports some of the details:

“The bill extends production tax credits for wind energy projects for one year, and for geothermal, biomass, and other renewable sources for two years. 

The solar energy industry won an eight-year extension of the investment tax credit for commercial and utility-scale solar projects, and an eight-year extension of tax credits for residential solar power installations.”

Passage of these incentives is good news for alternative energy advocates who feared the expiration of these credits might harm fledgling wind and solar businesses and initiatives.

Last month, David Gorn reported a story for Climate Watch about what’s going on with large-scale solar installations in California as the state pushes to meet a plan requiring that 1/3 of California’s energy come from renewable sources.  

 Stay tuned for Monday’s radio report on Quest exploring California’s Proposition 7, which would require more wind and solar energy use in the state.

Three Bucks a Ton

You load 16 tons and whaddayou get? The late Tennessee Ernie Ford’s answer to that was “Another day older and deeper in debt.” But in the emerging carbon market, we now have a real answer: about $48.

At least that’s how much you’d use up in carbon credits if you participated in the nation’s first “cap-and-trade” auction for carbon emissions, which set the price for a ton of carbon in that particular market at $3.07. That auction last week was for RGGI, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, casually known as “Reggie.” It’s the carbon trading market set up by a group of ten northeastern states and it may give us a preview for when trading begins by the Western Climate Initiative, a consortium of eleven western states and Canadian provinces, including California. As I reported last week, the WCI just made public its general gameplan for carbon trading to begin in 2012. The first RGGI auction raised $40 million, which the states can now spend on developing low-carbon sources of energy (let’s hope “Reggie” fares better in the long run than “Fannie” and “Freddie.”)

Actually, 16 tons isn’t even enough to get you noticed in these carbon markets. Burning a gallon of gas in your car typically releases less than 20 pounds of CO2. Only facilities that pump out 25,000 tons or more per year will have to comply with WCI, which has yet to decide what portion of its credits to give away or auction off.

On Friday, we expect staffers at the California Air Resources Board to release the last version of their “scoping plan,” before it goes to the board for approval. It’s the master plan for implementing the state’s comprehensive law to combat the effects of climate change. Part of it hinges on California’s participation in the WCI, so the successful first auction of credits by RGGI bodes well.

Wind and Solar Incentives Pass Senate

And speaking of solar power…  After months of roadblocks, the extension on tax credits for renewable energy is one step closer to reality after the Senate yesterday approved the $17 billion package with a 93-2 vote. The credits for wind, solar, and energy efficiency projects are part of “The Renewable Energy and Jobs Creation Act of 2008,” a larger tax bill (HR 6049) that has been stalled in Congress as legislators wrangled over how to fund the credits. If they are not renewed, the incentives will expire at the end of this year, undoubtably having a negative impact on future solar and wind innovation and expansion in the United States. 

You can read more about of the current situation in a piece by Ben Gemen at E&E Daily, but to access the article directly, you must be a subscriber.  For the rest of us, Climate Progess has posted the story here.

Solar Incentives May Be Uneven Across State

In response to our Solar Realities series, a Northern California listener raised an interesting point and sent us the following email, though he asked that we withhold his name: 

As you likely already know, the CA Public Utility Commission‘s “California Solar Initiative” provides some very good rebates to give citizens, businesses, and public agencies an incentive to install grid-tied PV generating systems. However, one thing that might be worth noting is that the far northern portion of CA that is served by Pacific Power is not eligible for any of these rebates. The Pacific Power service area is all or part of Modoc, Siskiyou & Del Norte counties. So citizens in these counties cannot participate in the CA Solar Initiative! Apparently, the CA Public Utilities Commission has not yet gotten around to require Pacific Power to charge a fee to its CA customers to fund the rebate program. …2/3 of this of this area is prime territory for PV installations with a very high number of clear sky sunny days per year.

In Tuesday’s Climate Watch piece, reporter Rachael Myrow explains how California’s solar rebates and credits work for utilities customers in most of the state.

Solar Realities for the Rest of Us

These are Gold Rush days for solar advocates in the US.  Molly Sterkel, who supervises the California Solar Initiative for the Public Utilities Commission, jokes that she lives in fear that private industry is looking to poach her staff:

There’s a lot of people going to solar companies to work because it’s a really exciting industry. It’s growing so much in California, so it’s attracting some of the best and brightest. I’ve told all of my staff that they have to sign 10-year contracts to work for me but so far most of them have stayed because it’s a really exciting time to be in government, to be able to run the largest solar program in the country.

In 2002, California established its Renewable Portfolio Standard Program “…with the goal of increasing the percentage of renewable energy in the state’s electricity mix to 20 percent by 2017.” Then the Energy Commission bumped the deadline up to 2010, and the 2004 Energy Report Update further recommended increasing the target to 33 percent by 2020.

Whatever the deadline, numerous incentives and rebate programs funded by the state and utility ratepayers are fueling an explosion of solar.  Sterkel says it’s growing at a rate of 40-50% a year.

But installing solar is still not cheap. Even now, all the solar in California adds up to 350 MW (one big power plant generates about 500 MW).

In part, that’s because most of the people taking advantage of the subsidies are residential utility customers, and most of those are installing systems of 4 KWs. That’s not a bad thing, per se.  Any kilowatt that home doesn’t siphon off of the grid is a kilowatt that can be used elsewhere. But slow and steady is a little too slow and a little to steady for some. Never mind that California is way ahead of other US states.  That just makes it easier to compare us to other countries, like Germany and Spain, that have invested even more in solar.

There’s no argument it takes subsidies to make solar financial feasible.  The question for advocates and regulators alike is how much subsidy helps solar thrive without spurring a ratepayer revolt? And how long should those subsidies last?  A report from McKinsey & Co. concludes:

“…regulators must adjust incentive structures over time and phase them out when grid parity is reached.”

Grid parity is the point at which there’s no difference between the price of solar and the market price for (less environmentally preferable) “brown power.”
Sterkel says:

(That) is the point at which everybody gets solar. Just like there was a moment when everyone got a cell phone and everyone got a car. And this year, we’ve already installed more megawatts than we did in all of 2007, and we’re not even all the way through the year. The policies are all pushing towards solar. The businesses are growing. The venture capital is here. You know, all signs point to “yes” for solar here in California.

That’s even though incentive levels in California have been dropping.
Where’s it all going?  Some say we could see a repeat of the 1980s, when oil prices tanked after spiking and green energy projects went “poof.”  It took them well over a decade to begin the long, slow climb back to economic and political viability.  Oil prices appeared to be sliding after a long, hot summer in 2008–until yesterday, anyway.  But green advocates say they won’t be caught out in the cold this time around. That’s because renewable energy advocates can point public attention to something that goes well beyond consumer price protection: climate change.

Rachael Myrow hosts The California Report. She reported on rooftop solar installations for Climate Watch on September 23, 2008. Listen to her story here.

Supersizing Solar

Kramer JunctionMonday begins the radio component of Climate Watch, with the first of a two-part series on “solar realities.” (Click here for the second part of the series). Solar power is one of those renewable, low-carbon sources of energy that is enjoying a boom, as we scramble to reduce the state’s carbon footprint and, with any luck, slow down the climate change train.

But one of the thornier realities of utility-scale solar is that it has its own footprint. In fact, in terms of the sheer real estate that it gobbles up, you could say it’s the Sasquatch of renewables.

David Gorn begins our series on Monday morning’s edition of The California Report. Here’s a page from his reporter’s journal:

My girlfriend couldn’t believe it. “You’re going WHERE? The middle of the Mojave Desert? In August?”

And she looked up the temperature out there in Kramer Junction, California. She’s so helpful that way. The web page said it would be a high of 121 degrees Fahrenheit. But the reality was much better; the area was going through a “cold snap” the week I went, and it was only 106.

Still, that’s hot enough to fry eggs on the hood of your car, and it’s hot enough to power some of the largest solar reflectors in the world. In fact, because of the dearth of cloud cover, the searing heat and the higher elevation (~2,500 feet), the Mojave is one of the best places on Earth for solar power generation.

Out at Kramer Junction, the solar power-generating plant uses solar troughs to collect the heat. There are about 10,000 of these modules, 20 mirrors to a module, spread out over a million square meters.  That’s about 1,000 acres.

The new plant that’s proposed for the Mojave city of Ivanpah, near the Nevada border, will be about three times that size. The entire thing would cover about 5 square miles.  When it’s built, it may be the largest solar power generating site in the world, depending on the pace of some other planned projects.

There are actually three other proposals for even larger solar plants in California, but those are not yet under review by the Bureau of Land Management. And one of them is out in the Imperial Valley, where there are currently no transmission lines in place.

You can peruse the major Mojave sites on our interactive map. The California Energy Commission has the complete list of existing and proposed large solar arrays.

Listen to David’s story on super-sized solar sites here.

Net Zero Energy Future?

According to the Air Resources Board, about a quarter of California’s (human-induced) greenhouse gas emissions come from buildings–or what planners like to call the “built environment.”

My colleague Peter Jon Shuler was at today’s meeting of the California Public Utilities Commission in San Francisco, when it rolled out its master plan for energy-efficient buildings throughout the state. Peter’s notes:
The California Public Utilities Commission has taken the first steps in an innovative plan to eventually get all new construction in the state down to zero net energy use.

On Tuesday, the PUC adopted what it’s calling the Long Term Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan.  More than 500 individuals and organizations came together to craft the ambitious plan – designed to save energy while growing the state’s population and economy.  It’s still a little fuzzy on the details of how all this will happen.

The plan includes what it calls its four Big Bold strategies:

• All new residential construction in California will be zero net energy by 2020;
• All new commercial construction in California will be zero net energy by 2030;
• The Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) industry will be reshaped to ensure optimal equipment performance; and
• All eligible low-income homes will be energy efficient by 2020.