Proposition 7: Big Solar’s Baby?
Two renewable energy initiatives will be put to the vote this November in California. Proposition 10, or the California Alternative Fuels Initiative, and Proposition 7, the California Solar and Clean Energy Initiative, have brewed up some very heated debate. I focused on Prop 10 in an earlier entry. Here I will try to dissect Proposition 7 and what it could mean for California, already a national leader in renewable energy.
What is Prop 7?
Proposition 7 would effectually catapult California’s renewable portfolio standard (RPS) by requiring all utilities to get at least 50% of their electricity from renewable sources by 2025. Among other provisions, the measure would:
- Fast-track the permit process for new renewable power plants
- Identify solar and clean energy zones for plant construction (think Desert).
- Reduce non-compliance penalties on utilities from 5% to 1%, although caps would be eliminated.
- Prohibit utilities from passing penalties along to customers.
- Include solar thermal, PV, geothermal, wind, tidal, and other renewable energy sources.
The financial impact of Prop 7 is largely unknown. According to the California Legislative Analyst’s Office, it would cost roughly $3.5 million per year for regulatory agencies and higher electricity rates for customers, in the short term. Long-term effects on rates are, apparently, unknown.
Ayes…
Supporters of Proposition 7 include nobel laureates and other experts in renewable energy. They claim the measure would put California into the worldwide lead in renewable energy advancement. It is a bold step, but now is when bold steps must be taken. They also claim that the initiative would create roughly 370,000 new green-collar jobs in California and will have no negative impact on small-scale renewable projects. Proponents of Proposition 7 are led by Peter Sperling, the Arizona billionaire who is also the primary financial backer of the measure, having donated over 5 million dollars to the cause.
Nays…
Opponents of the measure say that Prop 7 would actually put a stop to progress in renewable energy in California. It is strongly opposed by major utilities, such as Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison, which have raised over $24 million to oppose the bill. Prop 7 opposers also claim that it is poorly written and would “immediately lead to litigation.” The initiative, which many dub Big Solar, heavily favors large-scale solar projects and would seriously inhibit rooftop arrays and a more customer-distributed grid. Some companies claim, for that reason, that the bill would put them out of business.
Prop 7 is also opposed by such groups as the California Democratic and Republican parties, the California Solar Energy Industries Association, the California Labor Federation, California Taxpayers Association, the Sierra Club, and the League of California Cities. Utilities claim that the mandates are unrealizable. They are already behind in reaching current standards of 20% by 2010. The California Public Utilities Commission recently estimated that current goals would be missed by at least three years.
Aye or Nay?
Proposition 7 sets goals that most of us would love to see realized. But is it too much, too fast? Furthermore, if you are one who sees customer distribution and individual energy independence as a big plus for solar, then Prop 7 becomes hard to support because it certainly favors a more centralized grid. Proponents claim that it would not affect small-scale projects, yet it aggressively promotes large-scale solar plants which would likely erase any incentive for utilities and municipalities to promote small, rooftop systems. It also does not seem to address transmission guidelines. Rooftop and urban systems can easily be tied directly to the grid while desert arrays will have transmission infrastructure to deal with. It is also unsettling that the experts seemingly have no idea about the effect on electricity costs in the future. Could this be a well thought out proposition? I’m not so sure.
What do you think?
Links:
Posted on September 26th in Solar Politics by Dan.
September 27th, 2008 at 7:57 am
It’s my understanding that it will take many more years for rooftop solar to become prevalent enough to meet the urgency of climate change, cost competitive enough for consumers to adopt wide spread, and in demand enough for corporate retail sellers of electricity to actually pay consumers for the excess energy they provide back to the grid. They currently credit accounts but will pay nothing back.
It’s also my understanding that rather than “no idea”, experts have decided using renewable energy will drive down electricity costs in the long run. The only cost for these technologies is the capture aspect of the energy, whether that be wind, solar, geothermal, etc. With these technologies developing in new more efficient and inexpensive ways and without having to pay for a fossil fuel resource, costs for rate-payers will lessen over time and in my opinion, stabilize.
PG&E and it’s partners in opposition recognize that natural gas prices are volatile right now. That’s currently the price that sets the entire market referent price and determines rates and increases. I’d rather pay a rate increase I know would decline and stabilize over time rather than one that is volatile and will rise with the increased scarcity of fossil fuels. I also think we’ve procrastinated too long on switching to renewables, whether intentionally or not, and it’s high time we make the change. Climate scientists agree if we can’t address this global warming problem in the next decade, we’re in for serious consequences.
Might I remind everyone that we get nearly all of our water from slow melting snowpack? We’re facing serious problems in the near future when temperatures rise and water is just the beginning.
I recommend a vote of YES. Photovoltaics and small renewable projects aren’t going anywhere. It’s the large coal and natural gas plants we need to replace.
October 1st, 2008 at 9:54 am
[...] Proposition 7, or the California Solar and Clean Energy Initiative, would dramatically beef up California’s renewable energy standards. It would require all the state’s utilities to get at least half their electricity from renewable sources by 2025. In order to facilitate this, the measure would also speed up the permit process for large renewable power plants and eliminate caps on penalties for utilities who do not comply. [...]
October 16th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
Prop. 7 will require that by 2025 50% of all the electricity in the state comes from renewable sources like solar and wind.
Prop. 7 does not raise taxes or issue any bonds and includes a consumer protection clause that ensures your bill will never go up more than 3% by 2025. Prop. 7 will also create 370,000 high wage construction jobs right here in California.
Over 40% of global warming pollution comes from electricity generation and by voting Yes on Prop. 7 we can do something real about global warming by requiring the Big Utility Companies to use more clean renewable energy.