Author Archives: Frank Andorka

Report: New Jersey Community Solar Program Could Spur $800 Million In Economic Benefits

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

Vote Solar released the results of its analysis of New Jersey’s planned 450 MW community solar program, in which it found the program could spur as much as $800 million in economic development.

Specifically, the report says the community solar program will create:

  • 1,778 sustained full-time jobs during construction and an additional 41 sustained full time jobs associated with operations and maintenance.
  • $414.7 million in earnings for those employed.
  • $797.9 million in local economic benefits for the state, excepting local tax revenues.
  • $3.3 million from property tax revenues in the first year alone.
[wds id=”3″]

“Community solar holds a promise to expand access to affordable energy while creating jobs and growing New Jersey’s clean power sector,” said Pari Kasotia, Mid-Atlantic Director for Vote Solar. “These tangible economic benefits are an important part of the Garden State’s leadership and success in building a modern, 21st-century clean energy system that equitably serves everyone. We are glad to see New Jersey implement policies that align environmental goals with economic goals.”

The report was prepared by Vote Solar, a nonprofit organization working to lower solar costs and expand solar access across the U.S. They used the Jobs and Economic Impact (JEDI) Model developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to reasonably estimate the employment, earnings and economic impacts from the construction and operation of the solar energy facilities that could be expected if New Jersey adopts the minimum target of 450 MW over a three-year period. 450MW has been recommended by many stakeholders as the minimum program size necessary to drive investment in the state’s clean energy sector, achieve economies of scale, ensure all New Jersey’s communities gain access to community solar, and meaningfully contribute to the state’s 2030 clean electricity requirements.

The new community solar program, recently passed into law by the New Jersey legislature and signed by Governor Phil Murphy, is one of numerous attempts to get the state back on track after several years of languishing solar development in the Garden State. Murphy, who took office in January, campaigned strongly on a platform of clean energy and has made it one of the top priorities of his administration.

It’s nice to see New Jersey returning to prominence, having at one time been the No. 2 solar state in the Top 10 solar state rankings from the Solar Energy Industries Association – behind only California.

New Mexico Relieves Its Solar Consumers From Unfair, Untenable Fee

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

Saying the fees were arrived at using flawed studies and without taking into account the advantages that solar customers bring to the grid, the New Mexico Public Resources Commission eliminated Rate 59, a fee previously charged only to solar customers and cost them, on average, $300 per year.

The New Mexico PRC also said it would start a rulemaking proceeding to ensure that the state law concerning solar surcharges was followed in future. At issue was the charge levied by Southwestern Public Service, the state’s largest regulated utility.

[wds id=”3″]

As Vote Solar reported:

In its final order, the Commission identified a number of problematic aspects with Rate 59:

  • The standby rate is not cost-based;
  • SPS’s study of the costs and benefits of distributed generation was “riddled with errors” and unreliable; and
  • SPS did not calculate the benefits of distributed generation to the SPS system.

Predictably, Vote Solar and its supporters were thrilled with the decision:

“Today’s decision is a victory for SPS customers who finally have the freedom to choose affordable solar and the opportunity to save money on their electric bill. Ending this punitive charge is especially welcome news for low-income and fixed-income residents who spend a higher portion of their income on utility bills, yet for years were unable to lower their bills with solar because of this charge,” said Rick Gilliam, Vote Solar’s program director of DG regulatory policy and expert witness in the proceeding. “We applaud Hearing Examiner Carolyn Glick and the Commission for reviewing the facts and putting control over energy bills back in the hands of New Mexico residents.”

Vote Solar reports that thanks largely to Rate 59, Southwestern Public Service had only 112 solar customers in its service area. The removal of the charge, it believes, will allow solar to expand well beyond those households and will bring New Mexico more in line with its fellow Southwest states like Nevada and Arizona.

Duke Energy Requests Temporary Retail Net Metering Revival In South Carolina

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

Duke Energy is asking the South Carolina Public Services Commission to reinstate retail net metering until a compromise can be reached on raising the current 2% cap, an issue that has roiled the South Carolina solar industry over the past 12 months.

The utility has joined a group of solar stakeholders to extend the net metering program through March 15, which they allow time for the development of long-term recommendations through the ORS-led collaborative process and for legislative consideration of any consensus recommendations, including any recommendations related to future net metering policies or programs.

[wds id=”3″]

As Duke Energy spokesman Ryan Mosier explains:

We believe this temporary extension of net metering will provide consistency and certainty for customers and the renewable energy industry in South Carolina while Duke Energy and other interested stakeholders develop recommendations for consensus, common-sense policies that are fair and balance the interests of all who call South Carolina home: solar providers, energy companies, and customers who use solar energy – and those who do not.

The list of co-petitioners reads like an all-star list of clean energy advocates in the state: the South Carolina Office of Regulatory Staff, South Carolina Coastal Conservation League, Southern
Alliance for Clean Energy, SunRun, on behalf of the Alliance for Solar Choice, and the South Carolina Solar Business Alliance.

The petition would appear to be something of an about-face for Duke Energy, which consistently has opposed raising the 2% net metering cap that it hit earlier this year, helping to scuttle a compromise bill that had worked its way through the legislature and seemed well on its way to passing until the state’s utilities got involved. Instead of passage, the bill was scuttled using an obscure parliamentary tactic that changed the type of bill it was and thus the vote margin necessary for passage.

As a result, the simple majority that had planned to vote for the bill was no longer enough for the bill to pass, and so the compromise died.

It’s unclear what compromise Duke Energy is seeking, although their comments about protecting “customers who use solar energy – and those who do not. (emphasis added)” indicate there may be some charge suggested to mitigate the mythical cost shift that utilities claim occurs when solar customers don’t pay their fair share of transmission costs.

National studies have concluded that a “cost shift” only happens when solar penetration reached 10% of the total electricity generation (something happening in only five states in the country, and South Carolina isn’t one of them). Even at the 10% level, those same studies peg the cost shift at fractions of a penny per kWh.

Private Equity Firm Raises Nearly $1 Billion For Clean Tech Investements

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

A hundred million here, a hundred million there, and suddenly you’re talking real money. And that’s the kind of real money that Energy Impact Partners, a utility-backed investment fund, has raised to invest in clean tech.

$681 million, to be exact.

Bloomberg reports that Energy Impact Partners, backed by such utility giants as Southern Company and National Grid, are looking to invest the money in startups that are doing clean tech research, looking for the next big breakthrough.

This is in addition to the the $200 million the fund has already invested in companies like Advanced Microgrid Solutions and includes $150 million from U.S. Small Business Administration loans.

[wds id=”3″]

As Bloomberg New Energy Finance notes:

Utilities are trying to capture future industry growth amid stagnant electricity demand and a rise in technologies that give customers more control over their energy use. Utilities disclosed about $6.8 billion in venture capital, private equity and merger and acquisition deals in 2017.

And as Energy Impact Partners’ CEO Hans Kobler told Bloomberg:

We are helping them future-proof their business. This is a difficult landscape and as utilities prepare for that, they need to look for what’s coming down the pike and we serve as their eyes and ears for them.

I’m not entirely sure how I feel about this. On the one hand, clean tech startups need the money and aren’t going to be too particular where the money comes from to fund their breakthrough technology. On the other hand, it feels a little bit like the original electric car movement, doesn’t it? This fund invests in new and exciting clean tech technologies and keeps the utilities informed about what competition they will be facing down the road. This gives them the opportunity to prevent the technology from ever coming to light or to head it off by tangling it in regulations at the state level.

Now I know that would never happen because as we all know, utilities are as pure as the driven snow. But just in case this was the case, that kind of conflict of interest seems like a difficult one to navigate for Energy Impact Partners.

I’m honestly torn – what do the rest of you think?