Thursday, September 30, 2010
How promising is algae biofuel?
Friday, September 24, 2010
National News - National RES Bill Introduced
Bingaman and Brownback Introduce National RES Bill: 15% by 2021
On September 21, Sens. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and Sam Brownback (R-KS) joined by others introduced a national stand-alone bipartisan Renewable Electricity Standard (RES) bill, S.3813. Sellers of electricity would be required to obtain certain percentages of their energy from renewable resources or energy efficiency improvements, starting at 3% in 2012 and gradually increasing up to 15% by 2021. RES legislation is “an essential component of any forward-looking energy policy,” according to the Senate release.
Mr. Bingaman said the votes are there and that it’s time to move forward. “I think that the votes are present in the Senate to pass a renewable electricity standard. I think that they are present in the House,” he said in a statement. Along with Sen. Brownback, two other Republicans are cosponsoring the bill: Susan Collins of Maine and John Ensign of Nevada.
The current sponsors are working toward 60 cosponsors in hopes of bringing the bill up for consideration before Congress adjourns, although most likely in a lame duck session following the November elections. According to the senators, a national RES also will support efforts in energy security, the reliability of the electricity grid, homegrown renewable energy, and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. The bill requires 3% from renewable resources and efficiency improvements by 2012-2013, 6% in 2014-2016, 9% in 2017-2018, 12% in 2019-2020, and 15% in 2021-2039.
See Senate Release
NY Times Green Blog
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/21/a-bipartisan-bill-on-renewable-energy/
Non-Hydro Renewable Sources Already Providing More Electrical Output Than Called for by 2013 in New U.S. Senate Legislation
Press Release: September 22, 2010 — Washington DC – Proposed legislation introduced yesterday in the U.S. Senate would establish a Renewable Electricity Standard (RES) that sets targets for the year 2013 and beyond that are actually lower than the amount of non-hydro renewable electricity already being produced in the United States today.
The Senate bill, sponsored by Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Sam Brownback (R-KS), Byron Dorgan (D-ND), Susan Collins (R-ME), Tom Udall (D-NM), and Mark Udall (D-CO), would require sellers of electricity to retail customers to obtain 3% of their electricity from renewable energy resources or from energy efficiency improvements by the years 2012-2013.
Yet, according to the most recent issue of the "Electric Power Monthly" issued by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), non-hydro renewable energy sources (i.e., biomass, geothermal, solar, wind) provided nearly 4.1% of domestic U.S. electrical generation during the first half of 2010. Hydropower provided an additional 6.8% of net U.S. electrical generation for the same time period. **
Moreover, electrical generation from non-hydro renewable sources continues to grow rapidly. According to EIA data, electricity from biomass, geothermal, solar, and wind during the first six months of 2010 increased by 13% over the amount generated during the first half of 2009. Wind-generated electricity increased by 21.4%; electricity from solar thermal and photovoltaics rose by 16.4%; wood & other forms of biomass rose by 4.5%; and geothermal output increased by 0.8%.
Thus, inasmuch as the Senate bill includes incremental hydropower, hydrokinetic, and new hydropower at existing dams as well as energy efficiency improvements among the resources - in addition to biomass, geothermal, solar, and wind - that can contribute to the RES targets, it’s obvious that the 2013 target has already been surpassed by 30% or more and the 2016 target of 6% is within easy reach.
“Creating an RES framework and starting foundation is a worthy goal and the Senate bill should be supported for that reason,” noted Ken Bossong, Executive Director of the SUN DAY Campaign. “However, inasmuch as the near-term targets have already been surpassed and the longer-term targets are easily achievable, any criticism or opposition by those who might suggest the renewable electricity targets would be costly, unrealistic, or otherwise burdensome should be dismissed as being disingenuous at best.”
See http://www.altenergymag.com/news_detail.php?pr_id=17423.National News - Senate Energy Committe Hears Testimony on DOE Loan Guarantee Program
Loan Guarantee Process Needs Improvements, Says Industry at Senate Energy Committee Hearing
On September 23, a Senate energy committee hearing was held on the Department of Energy Loan Guarantee Program. Energy industry representatives told lawmakers that the loan guarantee process is slow and unpredictable and that renewable energy innovations could potentially be threatened by barriers it presents. Despite improvements over the last 12 months “[DOE] is still short of people, still short of resources,” said John Clapp, chief financial officer of Solar Trust of America.
In Sen. Jeff Bingaman’s (D-NM) opening statement he commended Secretary Chu and the DOE for its commitment in “getting this program moving” but expressed concern over the U.S. level of commitment compared to its competitors, saying the American public does not want to fall behind other countries in developing clean energy technologies.
“While we are arguing about whether or not we can afford to restore the $3.5 billion that was withdrawn from the $6 billion program set up less than two years ago, [China’s domestic clean energy support] is measured in the hundreds of billions,” Mr. Bingaman said. He added that while there are many reasons companies would locate in the U.S., “I would argue that we must lift the barriers that currently make it impossible to develop and manufacture new clean energy technologies here.”
Bingaman said a loan guarantee program that is fully functional with all parties committed could provide a remedy to market failure. “I’m concerned that there are those, including some in the Administration, that view financing as merely another benefit, like tax credits, to be cut when other needs dictate, rather than a remedy to a fundamental market failure that is acting as a barrier to domestic technology development.”
“What I’d like to explore today is level of the Administration’s commitment to this effort, not just at the Department of Energy, which I am persuaded does have a commitment in this area, but at other key decision-making centers, like the Office of Management and Budget,” he said.
Tim Newell represented US Renewables Group as a witness at the hearing. “I am here today because we believe the Department of Energy’s loan guarantee program to be a crucial part of US renewable energy policy, as well as an important component of our country’s overall economic policies – particularly with respect to supporting US competitiveness in global energy markets,” he said in his statement.
Newell said the Loan Guarantee program and related programs, such as the Sec. 1603 Treasury Grant program (which provides cash grants to renewable energy projects in lieu of tax credits) are crucial to attracting long-term renewable energy investors. He added that of the $6 billion in appropriated funds for the Loan Guarantee program, $3.5 billion which was diverted to other programs still needs to be restored. “Congress should act immediately to restore funding for this critical program,” he said.
Aside from having full funding restored, Newell said the program could be additionally strengthened through extending the “Commence Construction” date by two years, clarifying and limiting the role of the OMB, extending the Program’s mission to support small business lending, and providing for a permanent renewable energy financing mechanism to support US leadership in renewable energy.
Read witness testimonies and watch the hearing at:
See also
State News - Update on California's AB 32
By John McCaull ~ GEA Western States Representative
September 23, 2010. With a November 2010 ballot initiative (Proposition 23) looming to repeal California’s landmark climate change law, the California Air Resources Board defied the critics of AB 32 today, and approved two major planks in the law’s regulatory strategy on unanimous Board votes.
After the passage of AB 32 (The Global Warming Solutions Act) in 2006, the California Legislature passed SB 375 (Steinberg) in 2008. This law capitalized on the political success of AB 32 by taking on what has traditionally been the third rail of California politics: land use. For decades, the state has refused to weigh in and attempt to direct where and how urban growth should occur. Most major land use and transportation decisions have been essentially local or regional in nature, with the state having very little role in combating sprawl, traffic congestion, air pollution and a skewed “jobs-housing” balance in many communities that forced Californians to live hours from their workplace. The state’s decision to take on climate change also forced a new realization. California had to create a new set of incentives for sustainable land use decisions if it was to have any hope of reducing the largest source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, namely vehicle emissions.
SB 375, also known as the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, requires regional transportation plans to include a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that links transportation and land use planning together into a more comprehensive, integrated process. On Thursday, the Air Board adopted regional greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for passenger vehicles for 2020 and 2035 for each region covered by one of the State's 18 metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs).
Each of California’s MPOs will prepare a "sustainable communities strategy" that demonstrates how the region will meet its greenhouse gas reduction targets through integrated land use, housing and transportation planning. Once adopted by the MPO, the sustainable communities strategy will be incorporated into that region's federally enforceable regional transportation plan. On Thursday, the Air Board approved regional GHG reduction targets ranging from 2-15%, with each region of the state and MPO pledging to work with the Board to achieve the necessary reductions by 2035.
As the Board staff report stated:
“The benefits of integrated planning and sustainable development go far beyond simply reducing the greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change and its damaging effects. Communities that are well designed provide housing for all income groups, and are supported by a range of transportation options that will have many other advantages. Among these are: increased mobility and transportation choices; reduced congestion; greater housing choices; improved public health as a result of better air and water quality; natural resource conservation; economic benefits such as opportunities for neighborhood economic development and lower costs for community infrastructure; reduced dependence on foreign oil; and greater equity through the provision of improved access to jobs, housing, and everyday needs.”After 5 hours of debate on the SB 375 regional targets, the Air Board then moved on to consideration of the adoption of a 33% by 2020 “Renewable Electricity Standard” (RES) for California. With the Legislature’s failure to pass SB 722 (Simitian) during the 2010 session, the Air Board was left with the task of ensuring that California’s mandate to meet renewable energy procurement targets for all of California’s major utilities stayed on track.
In December 2008, the Board adopted California’s Climate Change Scoping Plan. In the staff report accompanying the “Proposed Regulation for a California Renewable Electricity Standard” CARB staff indicates that:
“In developing the [scoping] plan, ARB staff worked closely with California Public Utilities Commission, the California Energy Commission and the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) to identify various energy-related measures that could substantially reduce GHG emissions. One of the key measures included in the Plan was the need to increase the amount of renewable energy used to meet California electricity demand to 33 percent by 2020. Renewable energy reduces GHG emissions by displacing the amount of electricity derived from fossil fuels.”After a year of hearings, public workshops and voluminous public comment, the Air Board selected a controversial path towards meeting the 33% by 2020 RES. The Board’s regulations are deceivingly simple: California utilities can meet their RES obligations (which gradually rise between 2010 and 2020) by selling or buying “renewable energy” credits (RECs) that are tracked through the Western Renewable Energy Generation Information System (WREGIS) administered by the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC).
As the Air Board staff report states:
“RECs are used to verify and track the creation and use of renewable electricity. RECs are widely used in the U.S for both voluntary green claims and compliance with state RPS programs. RECs used for compliance with the regulation must be registered in and tracked by WREGIS. WREGIS issues a uniquely-numbered certificate for each MWh of electricity generated by a facility in the system, tracks the ownership of certificates as they are traded, and retires the certificates once they are used to avoid double counting. RECs used for compliance with the RES must be retired in WREGIS and may not be used for compliance with any other federal, state, or local program.”To complicate matters, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) issued its own decision on “Tradable Renewable Energy Credits” in August 2010. On August 25, the CPUC issued a proposed decision that would end the state’s moratorium on approval of tradable renewable energy credit (TREC) transactions and increase the cap on such transactions for large investor-owned utilities to 40%. The Air Board regulation adopted today allows for up to 100% compliance with the RES for California utilities. As part of the adoption of the RES, the Air Board committed to immediately opening a new rulemaking proceeding to reconcile their REC policies with those previously adopted by the CPUC.
Significant concerns were raised at today’s RES hearing by labor, environmental and renewable energy groups. At issue is how to ensure that a compliance process reliant on the REC tool does not result in a loss of momentum for building renewable energy projects in California, or a “paper chase” process that does not result in an actual shift away from more carbon-intensive sources of electricity production. The various attempts in the Legislature and in the RES process to create “deliverability” requirement that the sale of RECs must be “bundled” with the actual delivery of renewable energy into the California electricity grid seems to have lost favor with the Air Board and its sister agencies such as the CPUC and CAISO. It is also worth noting that the principal proponents and backers of the 100% REC based compliance system are California’s major public and private utilities. All the major utilities supported the RES regulations, and praised the Air Board for their creative and collaborative approach. Several also expressed concern against “back sliding” once the Air Board starts to work with the CPUC on reconciling their two systems.
In the coming weeks, the Air Board will open a new proceeding meant to reconcile today’s RES decision with the CPUC findings on tradable renewable energy credits. GEA will continue to monitor and report on the RES regulatory proceeding.