By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

While the rest of the world was trying to solve global climate change last week at the COP24 talks, the United States held a forum to discuss how the rest of the world should use more "clean coal" and nuclear energy. To say the current U.S. administration is skeptical of climate science (even when it's produced by its own scientists) would understate the case by a factor of 200. But to date, the record on funding clean energy research appeared to continue apace. The Sunshot Initiative continues to release funds to research projects both on new technology on the solar and the energy storage front. So it seemed that despite their public feud with the solar industry, behind the scenes cooler heads would prevail. Or so we thought. The National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), however, begs to differ. In a press release, the NRDC calls upon Congress to investigate why more than $600 million of funds earmarked for clean energy research hasn't been already spent. They say that for the past two months - ever since the end of the fiscal year 2018 - the funds have not been forthcoming. An NRDC official says the delays are "uncharacteristic and concerning." “The consequences of the funds remaining unspent with no apparent plan for utilization is not only an insult to congressional direction but undermines U.S. businesses and entrepreneurs in developing the next generation of clean energy technologies,” she said.

Specifically, the NRDC points to the following shortfalls to support its point:

• DOE’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) office – which the Trump administration tried twice to eliminate – has not spent more than 79% of its $353 million FY18 research budget ($280 million); and
• The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) – which the Trump administration tried to gut by about 70% - has failed to spend more than $319 million (14%) of its $2.32 billion FY18 research budget.

The world needs clean energy research now more than ever. If the NRDC numbers are correct - and there's no reason to think they're not - then they're right. Congress needs to investigate and examine why on Earth the Trump Administration is defying its will. They must demand that they follow the law and spend the money appropriated to these programs.

2019. I’ve decided that you’re early Christmas present is a binging of the SolarWakeup Live Jersey City conversations which will drop at some point this week. All 7 conversations will be available on the SolarWakeup Live podcast this week. More importantly, in 2019 I will be mixing my day job and SolarWakeup a bit more by opening the studio for conversations at the Quick Mount offices. I’ve been spending the past 6 months inviting solar leaders to our manufacturing plant and many are coming in the new year. At the same time we plan on recording those conversations on site. This is an exciting combination of both of my passions and look forward to hearing about the good ideas you have to discuss. Come visit me in Walnut Creek, California!
You Are Not Welcome. The US joined Russia, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia not to join the UN climate report at COP24. This is a statement of the era we are in that is hoping to return to the 20th century as opposed to the reality that is required for the rest of the 21st Century. 
No Clean Air For You. Newly situated EPA administrator, Andrew Wheeler, is doing the important work of lifting environmental regulations for coal plants. This is part of the Trump plan to bring coal back to life but in reality will do absolutely nothing to do such a thing given that the cost to operate coal plants is no longer viable. The EPA should ask this question to the VP’s staff with contacts in Indiana. 
GM Blowback. Trump tweeted last week that GM should lose its EV tax credits for closing the manufacturing plants. Last night, Elon Musk told 60 Minutes that he may be interested in acquiring those plants. Elon also spoke some hard truth to the SEC in this clip. 
PG&E Legislative Forecast. It is almost certain that PG&E will be in Sacramento this year asking for a bailout for the fires in Paradise/Chico which also caused my kids to visit the doctor. The more relevant question is what will the solar industry be asking for when PG&E advances their bailout bill. Our job isn’t to have a feeling for their ask but to put a price on the legislation for the solar industry. I have my price, would be interested to hear what you would ask for. 
Labor In Solar. Minnesota (and other States) solar companies are restricted in growth by their ability to hire qualified labor. It is a great opportunity to open the solar industry to others that are training or can be trained to be helpful to the solar industry. 
Facebook Not Building Community. Another sample of the corporate Facebook focus on their data center energy supply without growing the market where they are investing. More importantly, their employees aren’t increasing their ability to go solar while working at the local building either. 
Huawei Situation. Don’t under appreciate the impact of the Huawei CFO situation as it pertains to the trade negotiations between the US and China. There are very real tariffs on the table that are increasing the cost of your racking, inverter and modules supply. 
Diversify Now. Abby Hopper of SEIA is leaning in on diversity with good reason. While solar is doing a good job on diversity and veteran hiring, it could be doing so much better. More importantly, we are more open to being better than the status quo. I go back to the Vote Solar Equinox event in DC when a very non-diverse room welcomed speakers on the environmental justice topic. As the solar industry diversities it will also grow the market, both are undoubtedly linked. 

Have a great day!

News

 

Have a great day!
Yann

Have a great weekend, no column today as I hosted a Hannukah party last night and Decoy won out! See you on Monday. 
Make sure to check out the Q&A from Frank about the California solar home mandate and some of the top stories of the day!

Have a great day!

News

 

Have a great day!
Yann

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

California has been working for nearly seven months on a plan to mandate solar on the roofs of all new-build homes starting in 2020. While the initial fanfare surrounding the bill took place in May, it didn't become, in the words of Kelly Knutsen, "officially official" until yesterday. Knutsen, Director of Technology Advancement for the California Solar & Storage Association, agreed to talk to SolarWakeup about the mandate: what it means and where the California solar industry will go from here. SolarWakeup: We thought this was a done deal. What was the vote about today? Kelly Knutsen, director of technology advancement for the California Solar & Storage Association (Knutsen):There was always the small asterisk that the final part of the process for updating the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards is that the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC) had to officially sign off on the California Energy Commission’s (CEC) May 9 vote to update the standards. As the CBSC explained before the discussion, the CBSC confirms that the CEC followed all the proper procedures in developing their updated rule. This is done every three years as one final check on the process to ensure everything is done appropriately. CBSC’s hearing and final vote yesterday confirmed the rigorous process. SolarWakeup: How many new homes will this affect per year? Knutsen: California on average builds 80,000 homes per year, per this California Department of Housing and Community Development report. There are exceptions for shading (the code is flexible for these types of instances), so technically not all new homes built will have solar, but 80,000 is a good estimate of the number of new homes every year that will now have solar installed. SolarWakeup: What affect will this have on solar penetration in California Knutsen: Each year there are roughly 120,000 solar installs on homes and buildings, and of those installations, currently only 15,000 are on new homes. (FYI -- In 2016, there were 149,422 residential solar projects installed (both new and retrofit homes. It's been on the order of 120,000 to 150,000 annually for past couple years). So, this new rule will see an increase from 15,000 to 80,000 new solar homes (65,000) each year. If retrofit stays the same, that increases overall installations to 185,000 per year, or 54% increase over the current 120,000 installs per year. SolarWakeup Is the grid ready to handle the influx of distributed solar? Knutsen: Yes. The grid already safely and reliably interconnects 120,000 to 150,000 residential solar installations each year, so adding another 65,000 each year is on the order of existing installations. In fact, the addition of distributed energy resources has been shown to actually decrease the need for additional transmission lines. PG&E, one of the nation’s biggest utilities, cancelled 13 transmission projects saving ratepayers $192 million – thanks to the growth of solar – making the additional ratepayer costs unnecessary. In addition, in Fresno, the rapid growth of solar has California officials reconsidering the need for a major new transmission line, which is projected to cost between $115 and $145 million to build. Finally, the new standards include a solar plus storage option, which if given the proper price signals, will provide benefits to both the grid and the consumer. SolarWakeup: How will this affect utilities in the state? Knutsen: I think the position of the utilities was best summarized in quotes from Julia Pyper’s GTM article on the new standards. In her article, Erik Takayesu, director of grid modernization, planning and technology at Southern California Edison said “[w]hen we look at what we need in the future to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to get to the state's goals of 40 percent below 1990 levels, there needs to be a lot more carbon-free resources that supply energy to the grid, and so we think that this is one component of that.” When discussing the impact to the grid, he added “[b]ut when we look across the system more holistically, when we consider the amount of electrification that's needed with transportation, electric transportation, building electrification, we think that there will be some offset to the amount of solar that we're seeing.” SolarWakeup: Is the next goal to mandate energy storage and, if so, how soon will that discussion start? Knutsen: The next goal on storage is to make it cheaper, easier and faster to install across the state. Discussions to make that happen are already underway and that will require work on multiple fronts. The state legislature just approved an extension of funding for storage incentives, and the state is working with local governments on ways to streamline the permitting processes through the implementation of AB 546. We worked hard to make the case for the inclusion of the solar plus storage option in the code, which we see as a very important step towards having all homes and businesses in California install storage – a goal we need to achieve in order to meet our ambitious climate change goals. SolarWakeup: What advice would you give to other states that want to consider doing what California has done? What's the most important lesson you learned through this process? Knutsen: The key to California’s success was a well-known, inclusive and rigorous stakeholder process, with good debate, data and analysis from all parties. Like most things in life, building up working relationships over time can achieve good results that work well for all parties. The underlying framework was also there. State laws were passed over time (dating back to the 1970s) that established a state-agency-led process for increasing the energy efficiency of California’s buildings. Having a state agency implement the measure through a known three-year process developed strong buy-in from all stakeholders. Taking it in step-wise manner also helped. Solar was first option for compliance with codes (as was done in earlier versions of the standards) and then once determined to be cost-effective across all climate zones in the state it became a requirement. Flexibility for compliance, such as an understanding about shading, is important to include in a solar requirement. And finally, going back to the point at the top, make sure that it will be implemented. That means having key stakeholders like the solar industry and building community closely engaged in the process and on board with complying gives confidence that the codes will not just be paper on the books, but will provide real direction for real homes that will be built with solar.