Articles by Adam Browning

Saul Griffith calculates what we need to do to keep the world we evolved in

When pondering whether we need to invest in energy efficiency, a smart grid, new storage technologies, or transmission to the best renewable energy resource areas, I urge interested parties to first take some time to watch TV. Specifically, this presentation given by Saul Griffith, MacArthur Genius at the Long Now Foundation:

He calculated what's needed to, in the eloquent words of James Hansen, keep the world we evolved in. The answer? Cut each individual's carbon footprint to the bone via serious lifestyle choices. Then, dedicate an area the size of Australia to renewable energy production. And do so in the next 25 years.

It's not an either/or proposition. We need it all.

Slides available on Griffith's blog, here.

L.A. solar not dead, regardless of final vote on ballot measure

Despite rumors to the contrary, solar is not dead in Los Angeles. Not only is the outcome of Measure B still undecided, but Measure B is only a third of the larger L.A. solar plan [PDF]. And, frankly, the vote is irrelevant. On Wednesday, L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said:

I can tell you, regardless of what happens, we're moving ahead on our solar initiative.

It's clear from listening to the discussion of Measure B that both supporters and opponents support solar power. This was not a referendum on solar, this was a referendum on process. People were pissed about how the measure got on the ballot. Some unions were rightfully pissed that the measure cut them out in favor of other unions. And so on.

It seems that there was no real reason to put this on the ballot in the first place, especially with so much process-related political baggage. From his comments on Wednesday, it appears that the mayor will now do what mayors normally do: establish ambitious goals, work out all the details with stakeholders through established oversight processes, and make it happen.

Berkeley's program to finance solar systems through property tax assessments is off to great start

The city of Berkeley, Calif. is pioneering a program to help homeowners finance solar systems through property tax assessments. How's that working out?

The first tranche of funds sold out in nine minutes.

And on Friday, the first two checks were handed out to proud owners of new solar systems. Meanwhile, we were able to tweak the federal tax code to ensure that program participants can still use the federal investment tax credit (thanks, Speaker Pelosi). And we are working with partners in eight states and counting to get enabling legislation on the books to allow more cities to replicate the model.

Note that this program can be set up to fund more than just solar electric.  Solar hot-water and energy-efficiency upgrades can and should be included as well.

A closer look at PG&E's immensely promising solar proposal

Last Tuesday, PG&E, the second largest utility in California, announced a major new solar initiative: 250 megawatts (MW) of utility-owned, distributed generation solar, and a further 250 MW to be built by private solar developers, under fixed-price contracts, at the utility's cost of service.

This is very good news, with implications I predict will reverberate through the solar policy community for quite awhile.

First, let's take the issue of utility involvement in the distributed generation solar market. I co-wrote an article on this last fall with my colleague Kevin Fox. The upshot: utility involvement in solar brings the opportunity for new economies of scale, but can also raise concerns about the potential of monopoly power crowding out private solar developers and stifling competition. The future of solar is dependent on nurturing a competitive workforce throughout the value chain, and healthy competition to foster a robust market and bring costs down for consumers.

Our suggested cure: utility involvement in the distributed generation solar industry should be conditioned on opening access for private solar companies to provide the same value to ratepayers. On first look, PG&E's application appears to meet this standard. The program maximizes the benefits of utility involvement while minimizing the potential drawbacks.

PG&E's solar program follows on the heels of similar announcements from Southern California Edison, San Diego Gas & Electric, and Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. SCE and LADWP's approaches contained efforts to limit markets and exclude participation, and as a result have been met with robust challenges.

The second policy implication concerns discussions around feed-in tariffs. While this is not a classic feed-in tariff in that it doesn't contain a must-take element (developers will submit projects to PG&E under standard contract and prices, winners will be selected based on assessed project viability and other elements), this proposal will re-introduce the spirit of competition when discussing fixed price contracts. More on this later.

Finally, we are going to see a lot of discussion on the price. PG&E projects that its cost of service will be the equivalent of $0.246/kWh, plus time-of-delivery adder, totaling $0.295 kWh. Given that the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission just signed a contract for 5 MW at $0.235 in one of the least sunny places in California, and Austin Energy signed a 30 MW contract for a reported $0.165 c/kWh, I believe this is a case of PG&E underpromising so as to overdeliver. We'll see once they make their actual bid. In any event, it's sunny days for the California solar industry.