+++++++++++++++++++++++

US FERC takes Idaho PUC to court over wind power qualifying facility contracts

Washington (Platts)–25Mar2013/455 pm EDT/2055 GMT
The US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is suing the Idaho Public Utilities Commission over the PUC’s 2011 handling of qualifying facility sales contracts between a local utility and two wind generators.

Specifically, FERC claims the PUC violated the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act when it held that Idaho Power was not obligated to buy from a number of wind generators because the utility did not sign the QF contracts prior to December 14, 2010, which was when the QF qualification threshold dropped to 100 kW from 10 MW.

FERC in November vowed to take the PUC to court over its rejection of 20-year contracts for Idaho Power to buy 30 MW from Murphy Flat.

Also, earlier this month FERC said its court complaint would include the PUC’s similar finding on contracts involving Grouse Creek Wind Park and Grouse Creek Wind Park II, each of which have a nameplate of about 20 MW but produce no more than 10 MW per month on average. The projects are owned by Wasatch Wind Intermountain.
FERC believes that the utility was bound by the agreements even though it did not sign them before the PUC changed the QF threshold, it told the US District Court for the District of Idaho on Friday.

“The Idaho commission’s June 8, 2011, orders invoke a bright line rule holding that a QF cannot incur a legally enforceable obligation in the absence of a fully executed contract,” FERC said.

PURPA and FERC’s related regulations require that electric utilities purchase electricity from qualifying facilities, which are typically small cogeneration and renewable power facilities, at a utility’s full avoided cost of replacing that power with other generation. Except when asked to intervene on a QF’s behalf, FERC has left it to the states to set the avoided-cost rate and address QF contracts.

FERC’s regulations provide QFs the option to sell capacity and energy to utilities under a so-called “legally enforceable obligation” at a rate determined at the time the obligation kicks in, the complaint said. This obligation prevents an electric utility from circumventing the mandatory purchase obligation by refusing to negotiate or enter into a contract, FERC said.

Therefore, a utility’s obligation to buy the power can pre-date the signing of a contract, the complaint said.

The PUC’s “requirement that, in the absence of a fully executed contract, a QF must file a meritorious formal complaint with the Idaho commission in order to security a legally enforceable obligation, is inconsistent with and therefore violates PURPA and FERC’s PURPA regulations,” FERC said.

–Esther Whieldon, esther_whieldon@platts.com
–Edited by Katharine Fraser, katharine_fraser@platts.com

AWEA U.S. Wind Industry
Fourth Quarter 2012 Market Report
A Product of AWEA Data Services
Released January 30, 2012

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 The U.S, wind energy industry had its strongest year ever in 2012, installing a record 13,124 megawatts (MW). A record-breaking 8,380 MW were installed during the fourth quarter alone. During 2012, utility-scale turbines were installed in 26 states and Puerto Rico.

The milestone of 60,000 MW was also reached just five months after AWEA announced in August that the U.S. industry had installed 50,000 MW. There are now 60,007 MW across 39 states plus Puerto Rico.

For more details see: http://www.awea.org/learnabout/publications/reports/upload/AWEA-Fourth-Quarter-Wind-Energy-Industry-Market-Report_Executive-Summary-4.pdf

Please join us at the Plaza Club on October 30, 2012 for a luncheon and program as described below:

P. S. Seating is limited, so don’t hesitate!

Why we pay double for solar in America (but won’t forever)

By John Farrell

Grist guest contributor

Cross-posted from Energy Self-Reliant States

I often get flak when I publish research on the cost trajectory for solar (my “Rooftop Revolution” report estimates 100 million Americans reaching grid parity by 2021). About half think I’m too conservative, and half think I’m too overconfident that solar will continue to drop in price by 7 percent per year indefinitely.

But I’m not alone in perceiving an enormous cost reduction opportunity for solar in the United States. An article in Forbes last week suggested that we can “Cut The Price Of Solar In Half By Cutting Red Tape.”  It provides a chart (reproduced below) like one I published in March, that shows how a similarly sized residential solar array in Germany costs 60 percent less than one built in the U.S.

This anecdote from a colleague illustrates the ridiculous disparity in red tape between the two nations (and consequently, the enormous opportunity):

• There’s an article in the most recent issue of PHOTON describing a German family that got a 4.6 kW PV array installed and interconnected to their roof eight days after calling a solar installer for the first time. The homeowner had a proposal from the installer within eight hours. The installer called the utility the morning of the installation to request an interconnect that afternoon. The installer called at 10 a.m., the utility came and installed two new meters and approved the interconnect at 2:37 p.m. — the same day. The online registration of the PV system with Federal Grid agency and approval of the feed-in tariff took five minutes.

• I’m sure that not every project gets completed that fast in Germany, but an interconnection and permitting process that takes less than a day?! 10 times that … would still be just incredible.

• By comparison, New York City’s permitting goal under Solar America Cities was 100 days (before Solar America Cities it took 365 days).

As I’ve mentioned before, the difference is mostly in “soft costs,” not hardware, and these cost barriers are solved by policy, not technological, innovation. For example, soft costs include an enormous paperwork burden for U.S. solar installers (pictured in theForbes post on cutting costs), and already there are policy ideas that significantly reduce these costs.

So is it too ambitious to assume the price of solar continues to fall by 7 percent per year? On the contrary, if the cost of solar continues at that pace, it will take the U.S. until 2025 — 13 years! — to match today’s cost of solar in Germany. Can anyone honestly claim we’ll remain so far behind for so long?

When you add potential hardware innovations (like this) to the soft-cost reduction opportunity, the cost of solar is likely to keep falling rapidly in the United States.

John Farrell is an Institute for Local Self-Reliance senior researcher specializing in energy policy developments that best expand the benefits of local ownership and dispersed generation of renewable energy. His seminal work, Energy Self-Reliant States, gave a vision of states meeting their energy needs with in-state sun and wind and spawned a rapidly expanding distributed generation resource.

READ MORE: SOLAR POWER

House Subcommittee Approves Bill That Could Ease Domestic Hydropower Development

By Michael Harris, Online Editor, HydroWorld.com
June 11, 2012

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Legislation that would unlock hydropower development at existing infrastructure around the country took a big step last week when the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power voted to advance H.R. 5892.

H.R. 5892, also known as the Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act, contains measures that would “facilitate the development of hydropower and conduit projects through several common-sense reforms,” including:

– Updating the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license exemption standard to streamline the development of more hydro projects;

– Giving FERC the option to exempt hydro projects with a capacity of less than 10 MW and conduit projects with capacity between 5 and 40 MW from the permitting process; and

– Allowing FERC to extend the terms of a preliminary permit for up to two years, for a total of five years, in order to allow a permittee sufficient time to develop and file a license application.

The bipartisan bill, introduced by representatives Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) and Diane DeGette (D-Colo.), passed before the subcommittee on a unanimous voice vote.

“The Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act makes sense for America,” DeGette says. “It charts a new path towards smarter, more efficient hydropower project permitting. This bipartisan legislation will expand renewable and affordable hydropower across the country.”

The bill is one piece of a comprehensive energy solution that McMorris hopes will include an increased emphasis on hydropower.

Last week, she wrote a letter to President Obama, urging him to better utilize America’s hydroelectric potential. “While I applaud your decision to embrace an ‘all-of-the-above’ energy approach, I am disappointed your ‘all-of-the-above’ approach does not include hydropower,” McMorris writes. “According to your campaign website, the United States’ leading renewable energy source does not play a role in our nation’s energy future.

“With the potential and benefits of hydropower in mind, I respectfully urge you to reevaluate and include hydropower in your ‘all-of-the-above’ approach to energy independence.”

The bill is similar to one co-sponsored by senators Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) that passed the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on a voice vote in April 2011.

The House also recently voted on the “Bureau of Reclamation Small Conduit Hydropower Development and Rural Jobs Act of 2011“, which seeks to remove certain requirements from conduit projects built on Reclamation properties.

If you are interested in attending the Asia Pacific Clean Energy Summit , and have not registered, take advantage of the discount offered below:

The link to APCES Registration: http://www.ct-si.org/events/APCE2012/register.html