Tampa Bay- Florida - Solar Energy

Add a Comment

Comment by Kennan George Dandar on October 4, 2008 at 6:06am

Freedom Energy, LC is a Tampa based developer of utility scale renewable energy projects in wind and solar. Feed-in tariffs (REPs) are indeed the way to go.
Kennan George Dandar, CEO

Comment by Andy Collazo on September 25, 2008 at 8:14pm

Folks, I’m so excited to announce Pickens U is finally here! Please feel free to contact me for details.

Pickens U is a new Pickens site specifically designed for students and alumni from colleges and universities across the United States who support energy independence for America.

Outreach on college campuses will be a critical component of our effort to build an Army of 1,000,000 supporters. We plan to mobilize students and alumni of colleges across America to support the Pickens Plan and prepare to take action during the first 100 days of the new Administration.

There are hundreds of college campuses across America, and we are interested in having Pickens Plan chapters on as many of them as possible – from small community colleges to liberal arts schools to prominent institutions to the largest state universities. The key is to find a motivated campus coordinator and an enthusiastic student population – with the right people in place, even the smallest of schools can make a big difference.

http://push.pickensplan.com/collegeMain.php

And best of all, we are in need of Campus Coordinators. This is an exceptional opportunity for a student or alumni to represent their College or University in a leadership role within Pickens Plan New Energy Army.

As a Campus Coordinator you will be responsible for the following:

o Be the public point of contact for their chapter of the Pickens Plan
o Recruit as many students as possible to be supporters of the Pickens Plan, with a particular focus on getting students to join our social networks on Facebook and/or Push.PickensPlan.com
o Host 1-2 events on campus between now and Inauguration Day to raise awareness for the Pickens Plan and recruit supporters
o Assist the New Energy Army regional leader with maintaining chapter webpages on Facebook and Push.PickensPlan.com
o Organize calls to action when we need Pickens Plan supporters from their chapter to contact their elected officials or take other action

The Pickens Plan is a bridge to the future — a blueprint to reduce foreign oil dependence by harnessing domestic energy alternatives, and buying us time to develop even greater new technologies.

Building new wind generation facilities and better utilizing our natural gas resources can replace more than one-third of our foreign oil imports in 10 years. But it will take leadership.

On January 20th, 2009, a new President will take office.

We're organizing behind the Pickens Plan now to ensure our voices will be heard by the next administration.

Together we can raise a call for change and set a new course for America's energy future in the first hundred days of the new presidency — breaking the hammerlock of foreign oil and building a new domestic energy future for America with a focus on sustainability.

You can start changing America's future today by supporting the Pickens Plan. Visit our website at www.pickensplan.com to join us. Email me directly for more exciting news.

Comment by Roy R on September 12, 2008 at 7:24am

Dear Governor Crist,

I am writing in hopes that you will give a strong recommendation to the Florida Public Service Commission (FPSC) to adopt Renewable Energy Payments (REP’s) also know as Feed-In Tariffs. REP’s are the best policy mechanism for our renewable energy future.

As you know, the FPSC is currently pursuing a policy focused on Renewable Energy Credits (REC’s). REC’s have proven to significantly limit the renewable energy market expansion. REC’s have caused once prosperous, growing renewable energy industries to collapse. A policy based on REC’s create the conditions for a few shrewd, out-of-state companies to build large, central power plants with Florida rate payers’ money. This would capture the vast majority of these REC’s for their own use. Once completed, they will have established a monopoly and leave Florida. REC’s are expensive, complicated, and require significant resources to deal with.

As a resident and energy rate paying citizen of Florida, I urge you to recommend the proven policy of Renewable Energy Payments. This policy will create thousands of new, high paying, secure jobs. REC’s will not. We need to create energy security and permit all Florida citizens the ability to become independent energy producers through distributed solar power. The benefits to Renewable Energy Payments (REP’s) are extensive:

• Less costly
• Easily administered
• Easily understood
• Utilized throughout the world

Florida is the “Sunshine State” and is positioned to be the leader in solar energy production, paving the way for others to follow by example. As the Governor of this great state, please take action now on our renewable energy policy. Let’s create jobs in Florida, stimu¬late the growth of Florida’s economy, help Florida achieve energy independence, and save our planet for future generations. A policy based on Renewable Energy Payments will make this happen. Just ask the rest of the world using it.

Thank You for Your Support,

Your Name Here

Comment by Efrain Michael Martinez on September 4, 2008 at 10:14am

Good afternoon all. I just joined up. I have been listening to the commercials by T. Boone. I am highly interested in this plan. What have any of us done to get the plan up and running in the state of FL? I'm not sure what to do at this point. I guess keep reading from the website and try and spread the word.

What do most of you guys do regarding the website to promote this "plan"?

Once again, I am new to this and really don't know what to do or where to start. I would love to hear from any of you what we really need to do here.


It seems as if T. Boone has gotten this worked out on paper, but what steps do we have to take to get the ball rolling?


Thanks for listening. Have a great day!!!

Comment by Roy R on September 1, 2008 at 6:29pm

FARE Files Florida PSC Comments Calling for Feed-in Tariffs
August 29, 2008



Tradable credits are the renewable equivalent of the Alaskan bridge to nowhere says filing.
The Florida Alliance for Renewable Energy (FARE) filed comments with the Public Service Commission (PSC) on August 26, 2008 suggesting that the state move towards a system of feed-in tariffs rather than going down its present path.

The Alliance is a coalition of leading Florida solar companies and the Alliance for Renewable Energy, a group formed to promote Renewable Energy Payments (feed-in tariffs) in North America.

FARE's filing was in response to a PSC docket on the state's proposed Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) using a system of Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) as the development mechanism. While many RPS policies do not use tradable credits as the sole implementing mechanism, some do.

Prepared by Florida investment banker John Burges, the filing argued that the proposed REC program "will benefit a few large companies at the expense of many small and mid-sized" firms and do little to advance the Governor's renewable economic and industrial development objectives. Burges contrasted the success of Germany's feed-in tariffs in creating 250,000 jobs with the PSC's timid proposal.

The filing goes on to suggest that a REC trading system will not achieve the goals set out by the Governor nor will it allow equitable opportunity to all in developing the state's renewable resources. RECs are also a poor value to ratepayers in comparison to Renewable Energy Payments, Burges argued in the filing, citing several independent studies that reached that conclusion.

The proposed RECs trading market, "as currently drafted in the PSC rule are a more expensive policy and [will be] less successful in generating investments in renewables--they are the renewable equivalent of the Alaskan bridge to nowhere."

Internationally, feed-in tariffs have become the mechanism of choice for increasing the uptake of solar, wind, biomass and other forms of renewable energy, FARE said.

The Alliance urged the PSC to replace the proposed credit trading system with a system of feed-in tariffs. It argued that the RECs trading system does not work well for renewables such as solar and biomass, that predominate in Florida.

The draft PSC rule has taken heavy criticism from other groups. Leading newspapers and NGOs have been especially critical of the draft PSC rule. The St Petersburg Times said the Public Service Commission's targets for renewable energy [are] far below [Governor] Crist's while the Miami Herald stated that the Public Service Commission is recommending an extremely slow buildup in the use of renewable energy.

The (PSC) targets aren't ambitious enough to drive any kind of investment in renewable energy technology in Florida," said George Cavros of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy in a letter to the Miami Herald. The targets were "the weakest in the nation. Dead last," he added. "Governor Crist would be 94 before his proposed 20 percent target is realized."

"We were just flabbergasted by the one percent cost cap," said Sean Stafford, who represents Florida Crystals, the sugar producer that operates the state's largest renewable energy plant, in reference to another clause that would cap all renewable costs at one percent of utility revenues.

Environmental Defense Fund was also highly critical. Gerald Karnas, EDF's Florida Director, has called for the introduction of feed-in tariffs as the best way to achieve the Governors renewable objectives.


FARE PSC Filing 07738-08.pdf
Public Service Commission's targets for renewable energy far below Crist's (St. Petersburg Times)
Renewable-energy plan for Florida on agenda (Miami Herald)

-End-



Paul Gipe
Tehachapi CA 93561-1741 USA
661 325 9590, 661 472 1657 mobile
pgipe@igc.org, www.wind-works.org

Comment by Roy R on August 30, 2008 at 8:21pm

What are REPs?
Since 1991, Germany, Spain, Denmark, and over 40 other nations, states, and provinces, have pioneered legislation that have proven to promote the fastest, cheapest, and widest growth of renewable energy. In many of these countries these policies are called "Feed-In Tariffs" (FITs). Producers of renewable energy are paid a premium rate or "tariff" for each kilowatt of energy they "feed into" the grid. Here in North America FITs are being called, "Renewable Energy Payments" (REPs). The name has changed but the fundamental principles of these policies stay the same:
• Everyone who produces renewable energy is guaranteed that they can connect to the power grid and sell their energy to their utility company. There is no limit to the amount of renewable energy that can be sold to utility companies.
• Utility companies sign 15-20 year contracts with all their renewable energy producers. All contracts are transparent and open for inspection.
• The contracts include long-term agreed upon prices that the utility companies will pay for the energy they buy. The prices are set high enough to be an incentive to new producers and for existing producers to expand their production capacities. Prices vary according to the source of the energy (i.e, sun, wind, water, bio-mass, etc.) and the size of the energy-producing installation.
• The utility companies can recoup their increased costs of paying higher prices for renewable energy by spreading these costs among all their customers.
• An Independent Review Board is established by the government that periodically sets the prices and terms for new contracts.
How do REPs work?
Renewable Energy Payments are the mechanisms or instruments at the heart of specific state, provincial or national renewable energy policies. REPs are incentives for homeowners, farmers, businesses, etc., to become producers of renewable energy, or to increase their production of renewable energy. As such, they increase our overall production and use of renewable energy, and decrease our consumption and burning of fossil fuels.

Why REPs?
There are many reasons why Renewable Energy Payments (REPs), in Europe called Feed-in Tariffs (FITs), are the most successful renewable energy (RE) incentive in the world. Here are a just a few:

JOB CREATION Germany introduced this type of legislation in 1991 and it has made them the world’s leading producer of RE technology. FITs are credited with creating at least half of their quarter-of-a-million RE jobs. These jobs increased 40% between 2004 and 2006 alone. Most of these new jobs are in the former East Germany, an area being revitalized by their renewable energy economy. All levels of jobs are created including high-skilled positions in engineering, manufacturing, agriculture, and electronics.

SIMPLICITY One important reason REPs have been so successful is their simplicity. With REPs, when anyone generates power from a RE system that is passed through to their local grid, the utility company cuts them a check! RE businesses find this model especially appealing because it makes anyone with a viable RE site and a willingness to invest in their future an electricity entrepreneur. REP laws by their very nature are easy to support because they need little explaining and are relatively simple for utilities to implement and operate. This is true whether the RE producer is a residential homeowner with a small solar system or a huge commercial business with thousands of panels on their roof.

STABILITY & INVESTMENT SECURITY REP incentives also have massive appeal to investors and lenders. This is because the incentives are fixed for long time horizons, typically 20 years, which provides a guaranteed revenue stream that can be borrowed against easily. Unlike Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) which have annually fluctuating values through a trading mechanism, REP incentives never change and never require any administration or additional cost. As long as the RE system is generating electricity it continues to make the system owner a guaranteed return on their investment. With revenue stability of this caliber and a market that is not constrained in size, institutional investors can accurately model the financial risk and returns associated with investing in RE technologies and fund the industry where the best market opportunities exist in real time. In Germany, FIT policies have generated 3.3 billion Euros of investment in RE, with a return on the investment estimated to be 9.3 billion Euros.

STAY-AT-HOME REVENUE With REPS, the revenue from producing renewable energy will stay in the state or province where it is produced. This will create "local wealth" and stimulate the local economy.

FAIRNESS Critics in the US often complain that REPs are too socialistic by design because they “fix the price” instead of letting the market dictate their value. Yet this couldn’t be farther from the truth. In fact, REPs actually allow us to make a FAIRER comparison of the true costs for traditional energy sources such as nuclear, natural gas, coal, and oil. Rather than attempt to figure out how much environmental damage they each do respectively, the REP incentive simply allocates a fair “avoided cost” to RE technologies for the total environmental impact that would otherwise be borne by society by not using them. So in reality the REP is providing an incentive that brings parity to the incentives, tax breaks, and environmental damage done by traditional energy sources that are never reflected in their market prices.

EQUALITY REPs create a level playing field for all different sizes of renewable energy producers. It encourages individuals, small businesses and larger businesses to become RE producers and rewards them all. By ‘democratizing’ and spreading out energy production, REPs stimulate the green market economy and keeps a few large corporations from controlling the market and the profits. With REPs in place, everyone can profit from creating renewable energy.

REPs WILL SPEED UP OUR SHIFT FROM FOSSIL FUELS TO CLEAN RENEWABLE ENERGY. IN THIS WAY, REPs WILL ALSO:

PROTECT OUR HEALTH We will be putting less particulates into the air since we will be burning less oil, coal and natural gas. This will mean less suffering from asthma and other breathing disorders and reduced medical and health insurance costs.

REDUCE GLOBAL WARMING Burning fossil fuels releases 75% of the greenhouse gases that are heating the planet. It is estimated that by switching to renewable energy we can cut CO2 emissions in half by 2030. In 2006, with REPs in place, Germany alone saved 100 million tons of CO2 from entering the atmosphere.

REDUCE CONFLICTS OVER ENERGY The world’s demand for energy is increasing faster than expected, while our supplies of oil, coal and natural gas are declining. As nations compete for energy, there may well be more conflicts, wars and violations of human rights. Increasing the production of renewable energy will help states and nations meet their own energy needs.

CREATE ECONOMIC SECURITY Renewable energy production will lesson a community’s or nation’s vulnerability to increasing fossil fuel prices and will increase self-reliant economic growth. Those who install renewable energy the soonest will save the most. The prices of fossil fuels and nuclear energy are expected to rise as their supply diminishes, and the costs of extraction, environmental protection and cleanup increase. The costs for renewable energy are expected to decline due to economy of scale and technological progress.

INCREASE HUMAN SECURITY The natural disasters triggered by climate chaos are responsible for 150,000 deaths each year, and cause millions of people to seek refuge elsewhere. There are currently more ‘environmental refugees’ than ‘political refugees’. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), recipients of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, predict 50 million environmental refugees by 2010, and 150 million by 2050. The hardships and financial costs for the refugees and those who provide aid will be staggering.

STABILIZE ENERGY COSTS Communities that use locally produced renewable energy have more stable energy costs. Once the systems are set up, their renewable fuels such as sun and wind are low cost or free. Overall, energy costs will be more predictable and controllable, creating economic stability.

CREATE FLEXIBILITY Green energy resources such as sun, wind, water, geothermal, and biomass can be combined depending on their availability. They can provide heating, cooling, electricity, and fuel for machinery, vehicles and other transportation. Renewable Technologies can be flexibly designed to fit the landscape, architecture, machines, and vehicles—increasing efficiency and autonomy.

Comment by Getulio Bastos on August 28, 2008 at 12:58pm

Gentlemen,

This is a letter I just sent to Congressman Ron Klein of West Palm Beach and Florida Senator Bill Nelson. I suggest that all of our members do something similar to provoke some reaction from our politicians.

Mr. Bill Nelson,

Florida is one of the worst hit states in the Real Estate crisis. Our tourism industry is being hit tremendously by the gasoline price hikes. And our state is one of the least served with alternative forms of energy. But we can do something about it and one of the things we can do is to facilitate the creation of an infrastructure to sell, install conversion kits in our cars and distribute natural gas within our region.

There are entrepreneurs interested in creating this infrastructure, but the major obstacle is EPA, which has no scientific reason to keep their antique regulations for the conversion of our cars to use natural gas in our roads. There are no technology barriers at all.

It would save our taxpayers a lot of money in the near future while providing for a new source of employment for thousands of Floridians in a brand new industry. In training of new mechanics, installation of conversion kits, installation of natural gas filling stations, distribution of natural gas across the state and maintenance of it all.

There’s a Bill going through Congress now, entitled “THE DRIVE AMERICA ON NATURAL GAS ACT OF 2008” introduced by Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma.

If you need to research more about it, please visit www.push.pickensplan.com. Please, click here if you want to see the reactions to my discussion Brazil is 100% oil independent. Why aren't we?.

While there you can also see several pictures and videos related to the usage of natural gas as a vehicle propulsion energy both in Brazil and the US.

As a citizen I urge you to support this Bill to pass and provide easier means for our people to expend less on their cars while creating a new industry for the state of Florida.

Your voter,

Getulio Bastos

Click here to send your message to Senator Bill Nelson
Click here to send your message to Congressman Ron Klein

...

Comment by Roy R on August 25, 2008 at 7:01am

Solar Monopolies in Florida! The REC Wrecking Ball – Coming to a State Near You


Florida’s electric utility system is a regulated monopoly. Now, with passage of the Florida Energy Bill this week, legislators in Tallahassee have set a course, that unless rectified, will most probably extend similar monopolies into the fastest growing energy markets – renewables and solar, and in doing so decimate the existing Florida solar industry in favor of larger Wall Street backed multinationals. It seems inconceivable that once policymakers and legislators fully comprehend the implications of the direction that they are heading in, that any true Floridian will actually support this – but stranger things have happened. Now is the time to speak out.

Buried in the Florida House and Senate Energy bill is language that would allow the state electricity Regulator, the Public Service Commission, to introduce policies known as renewable energy credits (or RECs) as a way to stimulate solar and other renewable energy electricity production. RECs are basically bought by utilities from renewable producers and certify that the utilities have acquired a unit of renewable energy, and as such can be used as a mechanism to force utilities to meet certain renewable targets. The problem is that there is growing evidence from other states that have introduced RECs, that these policies are radioactive. Maryland, introduced RECs earlier this year. Even before the policy was signed by the Governor, the largest utility announced it had signed a multi-year transaction to buy solar RECs from SunEdison, a major international solar company. That deal gave the 2 companies a 30% share of the market for 2008 and 60% for 2009 – a quasi monopoly. This crowds out the existing local solar industry since it leaves them with only 40% of the market to participate in. Job losses will follow.

New Jersey has an ill thought out solar RECs policy as well. Smaller residential solar companies are in decline and shedding people. Says Lyle Rawlings, CEO of a large NJ solar integrator “the market is in collapse right now, with projects being canceled and many of the solar businesses that grew under the rebate program now hanging on by their fingernails. The REC market literally is not working, except for a handful of companies who have been able to get long-term REC contracts - we know that the market concentration is very unhealthy, and we think it’s an improper way to deliver a solar incentive program”. Furthermore NJ will be missing its RPS target primarily because of these issues. So based on recent market evidence RECs are a wrecking ball for local renewable companies.

The problem stems from the fact that utilities retain the power to decide who they buy RECs from, and utilities quite naturally won’t want the hassle of buying small quantities of RECs bilaterally from household solar systems or small commercial providers – they would much prefer to deal with one or 2 large aggregators of the RECs doing the largest commercial renewable projects, so they arrange bilateral deals direct with them. Whats wrong with this?

Since the utilities prefer to buy in bulk they will pay more for these aggregated RECs – typically up to 80-90c in the $, whereas for residential or small commercial RECs the value is 50c or less (this is the figure the State of Maryland has proposed should they become the default residential aggregator). Consequently while the RECs incentive covers 70% or so of the build out cost of the larger commercial projects, thus providing a massive contribution to the companies least in need of it, they only provide 30% of the cost of the small systems that are the life blood to the local solar integrators. This leads to a curtain call for the local industry all done with rate payer and tax payer money that has effectively been laundered to the benefit of the larger commercial REC suppliers. And funnily enough who is supplying the policy language for the legislatures and PUCs? The answer is the very same solar companies that will benefit from them!

There are already strong indications in Florida that these same out of state large solar companies are lining up multi year contracts with Florida utilities in excess of 100MW that could sop up a majority of the RECs that would become available to the solar industry – leaving next to nothing for the local solar integrators to compete for.

As Ted Middleton, Managing Member of a Maryland solar company explained, “The ratepayer base thus foots the highest bill possible to fund Wal-Mart installations, and the little guys (houses) get a much lower cash benefit relative to each REC produced because they have little market leverage with remaining REC purchasers”

Florida legislators have just voted to approve renewable policies such as these – thankfully the energy bill both requires the PSC in Florida to fine tune these policies and then seek reaffirmation from the legislature in 2009. Maybe in the intervening months, the Governor’s office and Florida policy makers including the PSC should ask smaller NJ and Maryland solar companies as well as the Florida SEIA companies if they think these REC policies are working. They will likely hear a resounding NO!

“Unfortunately, the language that passed through the legislatures favors a REC based policy. Without any change, for the foreseeable future anyway, Florida could end up with renewable energy policy primarily designed for only one or two large companies, just like what has happened in Maryland and New Jersey,” comments Pete DeNapoli, FlaSEIA Director. “Sure, the state of Florida will meet the RPS goals, but the bottom line is that the Governor’s goal of creating a vibrant renewable energy industry with thousands of new, high paying jobs will not be realized,” Pete adds. “With Production Based Incentive or Feed-In Tariffs, you get it all.”

What legislators and policy makers instead need to do is look at the highly successful renewable policies that have been in place in Europe for years and resulted in both the rapid deployment of renewable electricity projects, a massive expansion in local jobs from it, all done with no taxpayer expense and minimal increases in electricity prices. Germany has 250,000 employed in renewables generating $30BN in sales. At the very least Florida policy makers and legislators should do what the utility solar association SEPA is doing, and undertake a trip to Germany to review first hand how Germany has a vibrant solar and renewable industry with ~ 4000MW of solar at the cost for ratepayers of “the price of a loaf of bread”. Both the Florida Solar Energy Industry Association (FlaSEIA), the Maryland, District of Columbia and Virginia SEIA, Environmental Defense Fund as well as several high profile manufacturers and solar integrators have publicly advocated introducing these feed in policies as the best public policy incentives for solar and renewables.

So for the sake of those desiring a vibrant renewables job market in Florida, I ask legislators and policymakers to reconsider these ill advised REC policies. Thanks to the efforts of the Governor, and his energy team, Florida has the opportunity to develop a clear energy policy that can get the state to 20% of electricity from renewable sources, create robust new industries employing thousands of people and improve the states energy security. However the state must be careful in what policy incentive mechanisms are introduced to get us there and avoid replicating ill conceived and dangerous policies that are already failing in other states. Other State SEIAs, such as in New York and Pennsylvania, need also to proactively participate in this growing debate and understand the full ramifications of what often is being foisted on them by other so called national industry mouthpieces with vested interests inconsistent with the local industry.

Comment by Roy R on August 25, 2008 at 6:39am

Solar Monopolies in Florida! The REC Wrecking Ball – Coming to a State Near You


Florida’s electric utility system is a regulated monopoly. Now, with passage of the Florida Energy Bill this week, legislators in Tallahassee have set a course, that unless rectified, will most probably extend similar monopolies into the fastest growing energy markets – renewables and solar, and in doing so decimate the existing Florida solar industry in favor of larger Wall Street backed multinationals. It seems inconceivable that once policymakers and legislators fully comprehend the implications of the direction that they are heading in, that any true Floridian will actually support this – but stranger things have happened. Now is the time to speak out.

Buried in the Florida House and Senate Energy bill is language that would allow the state electricity Regulator, the Public Service Commission, to introduce policies known as renewable energy credits (or RECs) as a way to stimulate solar and other renewable energy electricity production. RECs are basically bought by utilities from renewable producers and certify that the utilities have acquired a unit of renewable energy, and as such can be used as a mechanism to force utilities to meet certain renewable targets. The problem is that there is growing evidence from other states that have introduced RECs, that these policies are radioactive. Maryland, introduced RECs earlier this year. Even before the policy was signed by the Governor, the largest utility announced it had signed a multi-year transaction to buy solar RECs from SunEdison, a major international solar company. That deal gave the 2 companies a 30% share of the market for 2008 and 60% for 2009 – a quasi monopoly. This crowds out the existing local solar industry since it leaves them with only 40% of the market to participate in. Job losses will follow.

New Jersey has an ill thought out solar RECs policy as well. Smaller residential solar companies are in decline and shedding people. Says Lyle Rawlings, CEO of a large NJ solar integrator “the market is in collapse right now, with projects being canceled and many of the solar businesses that grew under the rebate program now hanging on by their fingernails. The REC market literally is not working, except for a handful of companies who have been able to get long-term REC contracts - we know that the market concentration is very unhealthy, and we think it’s an improper way to deliver a solar incentive program”. Furthermore NJ will be missing its RPS target primarily because of these issues. So based on recent market evidence RECs are a wrecking ball for local renewable companies.

The problem stems from the fact that utilities retain the power to decide who they buy RECs from, and utilities quite naturally won’t want the hassle of buying small quantities of RECs bilaterally from household solar systems or small commercial providers – they would much prefer to deal with one or 2 large aggregators of the RECs doing the largest commercial renewable projects, so they arrange bilateral deals direct with them. Whats wrong with this?

Since the utilities prefer to buy in bulk they will pay more for these aggregated RECs – typically up to 80-90c in the $, whereas for residential or small commercial RECs the value is 50c or less (this is the figure the State of Maryland has proposed should they become the default residential aggregator). Consequently while the RECs incentive covers 70% or so of the build out cost of the larger commercial projects, thus providing a massive contribution to the companies least in need of it, they only provide 30% of the cost of the small systems that are the life blood to the local solar integrators. This leads to a curtain call for the local industry all done with rate payer and tax payer money that has effectively been laundered to the benefit of the larger commercial REC suppliers. And funnily enough who is supplying the policy language for the legislatures and PUCs? The answer is the very same solar companies that will benefit from them!

There are already strong indications in Florida that these same out of state large solar companies are lining up multi year contracts with Florida utilities in excess of 100MW that could sop up a majority of the RECs that would become available to the solar industry – leaving next to nothing for the local solar integrators to compete for.

As Ted Middleton, Managing Member of a Maryland solar company explained, “The ratepayer base thus foots the highest bill possible to fund Wal-Mart installations, and the little guys (houses) get a much lower cash benefit relative to each REC produced because they have little market leverage with remaining REC purchasers”

Florida legislators have just voted to approve renewable policies such as these – thankfully the energy bill both requires the PSC in Florida to fine tune these policies and then seek reaffirmation from the legislature in 2009. Maybe in the intervening months, the Governor’s office and Florida policy makers including the PSC should ask smaller NJ and Maryland solar companies as well as the Florida SEIA companies if they think these REC policies are working. They will likely hear a resounding NO!

“Unfortunately, the language that passed through the legislatures favors a REC based policy. Without any change, for the foreseeable future anyway, Florida could end up with renewable energy policy primarily designed for only one or two large companies, just like what has happened in Maryland and New Jersey,” comments Pete DeNapoli, FlaSEIA Director. “Sure, the state of Florida will meet the RPS goals, but the bottom line is that the Governor’s goal of creating a vibrant renewable energy industry with thousands of new, high paying jobs will not be realized,” Pete adds. “With Production Based Incentive or Feed-In Tariffs, you get it all.”

What legislators and policy makers instead need to do is look at the highly successful renewable policies that have been in place in Europe for years and resulted in both the rapid deployment of renewable electricity projects, a massive expansion in local jobs from it, all done with no taxpayer expense and minimal increases in electricity prices. Germany has 250,000 employed in renewables generating $30BN in sales. At the very least Florida policy makers and legislators should do what the utility solar association SEPA is doing, and undertake a trip to Germany to review first hand how Germany has a vibrant solar and renewable industry with ~ 4000MW of solar at the cost for ratepayers of “the price of a loaf of bread”. Both the Florida Solar Energy Industry Association (FlaSEIA), the Maryland, District of Columbia and Virginia SEIA, Environmental Defense Fund as well as several high profile manufacturers and solar integrators have publicly advocated introducing these feed in policies as the best public policy incentives for solar and renewables.

So for the sake of those desiring a vibrant renewables job market in Florida, I ask legislators and policymakers to reconsider these ill advised REC policies. Thanks to the efforts of the Governor, and his energy team, Florida has the opportunity to develop a clear energy policy that can get the state to 20% of electricity from renewable sources, create robust new industries employing thousands of people and improve the states energy security. However the state must be careful in what policy incentive mechanisms are introduced to get us there and avoid replicating ill conceived and dangerous policies that are already failing in other states. Other State SEIAs, such as in New York and Pennsylvania, need also to proactively participate in this growing debate and understand the full ramifications of what often is being foisted on them by other so called national industry mouthpieces with vested interests inconsistent with the local industry.

Comment by Karen Potts on August 19, 2008 at 6:20am

II am in association with a start up company, whose inventor has successfully created a prototype using proven technology in a configuration that, because of its design, and depending on its scale, proves to exceed the level of solar concentration compared to that which is currently available or on the drawing board; is comparatively more compact; requires less maintenance (enclosed); less moving parts (does not need to track the sun); can tie into the grid or stand alone; has the advantage of minimal (if any) retrofitting to tie into plant (be it government power plants, corporations, domiciles, (In other words, can be scaled up or down).

In search of a partnership to implement a unit to prove its viability in order to better position company for funding. The project can be a retrofit to existing plant or new construction site. Can run parallel to current grid connection (easier to get planning board approval and reduces the cost to implement with less storage requirements for evening and at the same time has the advantage of real time / daytime power (i.e. during peek power demand).
If you know of such a candidate please contact me at kpotts2@gmail.com. Place in the Subject: CANDIDATE for RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECT

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last