Author Archives: Frank Andorka

In Other ‘Water Is Wet’ News, Stronger RPS’s Encourage Investment In Renewable Energy, Study Says

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

There are days when you read about academic studies and wonder out loud, “Did we really have to study THAT?”

As I read the excellent story on KSL’s (NBC, Channel 5, Salt Lake City) website about a study concerning renewable portfolio standards (RPS), I had just that sort of revelation.

It seems that our intrepid researchers have discovered that states with stricter RPS’s encourage great investment in renewable energy. In other news, water is still wet and the Pope is still Catholic.

[wds id=”3″]

I’m not diminishing the work by KSL reporter Amy Joi O’Donoghue, who does an excellent job of discussing the issues surrounding RPS’s and then bringing it back to the Utah RPS (which most solar advocates think is mighty weak), but I did scratch my head at the work of the researchers because, for reals, this outcome was as obvious as they come. The weird thing is, the researchers themselves seemed surprised by their findings. Take Lincoln Davies, a law professor at the University of Utah who participated in the research:

Strong laws work really well and weak laws don’t. The more aggressive the law, the more effective they are, which means they will also push down price over time.

I’m not arguing with Davies, of course. It makes total sense that stronger laws would encourage stronger compliance, which in turn would lead to greater investment. But I just keep coming back to the question of whether this really was a question that needed to be studied in the first place.

O’Donoghue notes:

About 30 states around the country have some sort of renewable energy standard on the books.

Hawaii has the strictest standard at 100 percent, with Vermont at 75 percent. California has a standard of 50 percent.

So let’s recap: States with strict RPS’s have utilities that invest in renewable energy. States that have weak or loophole-riddled RPS’s do not.

Well, at least that’s clear now.

More:

Study: Aggressive renewable energy standards spur solar, wind investments

Russian Hackers: The Reason We Need A More Distributed Electrical Grid (Duh.)

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

Because I need another thing to keep me up at night….

The Department of Homeland Security this week revealed that Russian hackers attacked our electrical grid last year and could have created electricity blackouts throughout the United States, thanks to our overreliance on a centralized grid.

You’d think we’d have taken the hint by now.

[wds id=”3″]

But no. In Washington, the geniuses at the Department of Energy are still trying to figure out how to bailout economically untenable coal and nuclear plants.

Cool.

Newsweek reporter Jason Murdock has the terrifying details:

Hackers working for a state-sponsored cyber-espionage unit with alleged links to Russia could have caused electricity blackouts in the U.S. last year after gaining access to some utility control rooms, a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) official disclosed this week.

Jonathan Homer, chief of industrial control system analysis at the agency, said that hackers “got to the point where they could have thrown switches” and mess with power flows, according to the Wall Street Journal, which first reported the news from a federal briefing on Monday.

The best part of this whole story is that they didn’t throw the switches. The Russian hackers were just letting us know they could gain access to them any time they wanted and throw them should they decide to do it.

So the solution is…a more centralized grid?

Maybe this report will be the wake-up call the federal government needs to realize it’s time to take seriously electrical security and move to a distributed-generation grid. Heavily solar states are already moving in that direction, and as battery costs continue to plummet, you can expect the push for a decentralized grid to intensify.

But I’m not hopeful. After all, we have put people in charge of these agencies that seem to think Russian hacking is just something we have to live with and not something we need to combat vigorously. I just fear that next time, we won’t be able to escape unscathed.

More:

Russian Hackers ‘Could Have Caused Electricity Blackouts’ In The U.S.

Isn’t That Convenient? Duke Energy Launches Community Solar After Net Metering Cap Hit

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

Last week during Intersolar North America, Duke Carolinas announced it had hit its 2% net metering cap in South Carolina for residential solar installations, meaning anyone that installs after August 1 will be compensated under less generous net metering rules.

And low and behold, a week later, Duke Energy opens its first community solar farm in the state.

Fancy that.

[wds id=”3″]

I’m sure you can see my two minds fighting with themselves over here. On the one hand, I’m all about community solar. As someone whose house is not optimally oriented to have solar on my roof, I’m on the email every couple of months or so begging my mayor to start a community program in my home town (Hi Mayor Welo!). On the other hand, it’s pretty convenient that the community solar program only starts when most South Carolinians within Duke’s service area won’t be ABLE to put solar on their roofs for full compensation.

Here’s a quotation from Kodwo Ghartey-Tagoe, state president for Duke Energy in South Carolina, about the “Shared Solar Program” (Duke South Carolina’s community solar program) from the release announcing the program:

This is a great program for any customers who don’t own their residence or are unable to put a solar facility on their property. We estimate that residential customers will earn back their initial payment in credits from the solar array in three years. Customers are not only saving on their electric bill, they are directly supporting a renewable energy future in South Carolina for generations to come.

Huh. “Unable to put a solar facility on their property.” After the utility (and, in fairness, other utilities in the state) put the kibosh on raising the net metering cap a few months ago, thereby putting a lot of people in the position of being “unable to put a solar facility on their property” because it was no longer financially viable.

Now, I’m not suggesting there’s some great conspiracy here. It’s actually a brilliant business decision, looked at from strictly that perspective. I just feel a bit sorry for the South Carolinians who are now at Duke’s mercy when it comes to deciding from where they can buy their solar electricity.

More:

Duke region hits South Carolina net metering cap

Michigan Advocates Decry Utility’s Net Metering Successor

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

DTE Energy has a love-hate relationship with renewable energy.

On the one hand, they’ve pledged to be coal-free by 2040, at least in part through investments in wind and solar. On the other hand, they’ve suggested a replacement for retail net metering that has solar advocates screaming “Foul!” from the rooftops.

[wds id=”3″]

Midwest Energy News reports that DTE Energy has suggested a new reimbursement scheme that would compensate its solar customers at the lower – often significantly lower – wholesale rate of power. In addition, they have discussed imposing fixed fees on solar customers to fulfill the mandate that every utility has to toss up the fake “cost-shift” subterfuge to maintain their membership in the Utility Club.

(The Utility Club is not a real thing. But this lie, this ridiculous slander, about the cost shift, is unfortunately all too real.)

For those of you who have not heard me rail against this before, here it goes:

The argument goes like this: Retail-rate net metering, a program under which solar customers are reimbursed for the excess electricity they produce, pushes extra costs on to non-solar customers because solar customers aren’t paying for grid upkeep.

What the utilities don’t want you to notice, of course, is that solar customers also relieve congestion on the grid during peak production times, which saves strain on the transmission and distribution lines. So while they may not be paying for upkeep directly, solar production saves wear and tear, which ultimately saves the utility money in the form of repair costs.

You’re welcome.

I should note here that while there is a minor cost-shift, a study by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory indicates the shift only happens when a state passes the 10% mark for solar-electricity generation. And I should also note that even at more than 10%, the shift is so small you’d need the Berkeley Lab’s $27 million electron microscope to see it.

My good friend Becky Stanfield, senior director of western states with Vote Solar, summed it up pretty succinctly for Midwest Energy News, saying:

DTE Energy is clearly using the distributed generation tariff to try to discourage people from going solar. It’s pretty outrageous.

Yes it is, Becky. Yes. It Is.

More:

Advocates call Michigan utility’s net metering replacement ‘outrageous’