California Gov. Jerry
Brown drew headlines for his proposal to increase the state’s renewable
energy
standard to 50 percent by 2030, but
elsewhere, the momentum on mandates is shifting in the opposite direction.
standard to 50 percent by 2030, but
elsewhere, the momentum on mandates is shifting in the opposite direction.
A half-dozen states
have moved to scale back, freeze or eliminate their renewable energy standards in the past year, fueled by
concerns over higher energy prices, the impact of the EPA’s Clean Power Plan and the growing perception
that it’s time to take the training wheels off the wind and solar industries.
standards in the past year, fueled by
concerns over higher energy prices, the impact of the EPA’s Clean Power Plan and the growing perception
that it’s time to take the training wheels off the wind and solar industries.
“You’re seeing
independent efforts across states [with] legislators just kind of getting tired
of it and questioning these mandates,” said Donald
Bryson, state director of
Americans for Prosperity-North Carolina. “If these industries are already
economic engines, then why do we have to force people to buy their product?”
About 29 states have
approved some kind of renewable portfolio standard, or RPS, a policy that swept
state legislatures eager to go green and attract federally subsidized
wind-and-solar investment in the early 2000s.
in the early 2000s.
Those state policies
have been critical to the fast-growing industry’s success, says Jim
Marston, the Environmental Defense
Fund’s vice president for U.S. climate and energy, who supports keeping the
standards in place.
“Absolutely, no doubt.
The reason prices have gone down and quality has gone up is clearly because of
these RPSs,” said Mr.
Marston.
Rebecca Stanfield,
Midwest deputy policy director of the Natural Resources Defense Council, said:
“Nationally, clean energy continues to thrive despite years of attempts by
polluting industries to obstruct progress on renewable energy and energy
efficiency for their own profits.”
for their own profits.”
But that growth also
has weakened the argument for mandates, opening the door for free market groups
like Americans for Prosperity to make the case that the day has come to lift
the thumb off the scale in favor of renewable energy.
“In North Carolina,
this mandate was set up in 2007, and so people have been forced to buy increasing
amounts of renewable energy for the past seven or eight years,” Mr.
Bryson said. “What you’re
hearing is, ‘Hey, this is either a viable industry or it’s not. You’re not
paying your share of taxes, plus you’re forcing people to buy your product, and
you’re still not a viable industry?’ Something’s wrong with this picture.”
Both Michigan and
North Carolina are considering legislation to roll back the renewable energy
standard following the passage of a similar bill last year in Ohio. In March
2014, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence allowed a bill to become law — without his
signature — that repealed the state’s energy-efficiency mandate.
In May, Kansas Gov.
Sam Brownback signed a bill making the state’s mandate of 20 percent renewable
energy by 2020 voluntary and giving future renewable energy projects a 10-year
break from property taxes instead of a lifetime exemption.
The Ohio freeze law
The newly
Republican-led West Virginia Legislature set the tone in January by repealing,
as its first act, the six-year-old law requiring utilities to generate 25
percent of their electricity from renewable or alternative sources by 2030.
West Virginia
legislators were driven in large part by the renewable energy industry’s threat
to coal. Republican state Delegate Josh Nelson said after the vote: “A vote against repealing West Virginia’s cap-and-trade
act is the very same thing as handing another coal miner his or her pink slip.”
: “A vote against repealing West Virginia’s cap-and-trade
act is the very same thing as handing another coal miner his or her pink slip.”
Even in states where
coal isn’t king, the renewable requirement is falling out of favor. A year ago,
Ohio Gov. John Kasich signed a bill freezing the annually increasing mandate
until 2017, along with efficiency standards requiring consumers to reduce their
power use by 22 percent by 2025 — as measured by 2009 levels.
One reason is the cost
to consumers, who pay more for power in states with renewable
energy standards. The AFP cites data from the U.S.
Energy Information Administration showing that electricity costs, on average,
22.9 percent more in states with mandates.
standards. The AFP cites data from the U.S.
Energy Information Administration showing that electricity costs, on average,
22.9 percent more in states with mandates.
The Ohio “freeze” law,
which also orders a legislative study, was the inspiration for legislation in
North Carolina to suspend the renewable energy standard at 6 percent instead of allowing it
to hit 10 percent by 2018, and require the state legislature to undertake an
examination of grid security and stability.
standard at 6 percent instead of allowing it
to hit 10 percent by 2018, and require the state legislature to undertake an
examination of grid security and stability.
In many of these
states, the renewable energy industry is firmly entrenched, such as in Kansas,
where wind energy is expected to reach the 20 percent target by 2016, four
years ahead of schedule. Wind production has nearly tripled since 2010, making
the argument for mandates harder to swallow.
At a May press
conference, Mr. Brownback praised the wind industry’s “fabulous growth,” adding
that the agreement “further solidifies and stabilizes the policy environment so
that investment can continue in Kansas.”
can continue in Kansas.”
Even the EDF’s Mr.
Marston said it would be hard
to fault Kansas’ record on wind power. “If all the country had Kansas’ number,
I’d be completely happy,” he said.
Michigan already has
reached its 10 percent renewable energy standard. Rather than increase it,
however, Republican state Sen. Mike Nofs, who heads the Senate Energy and
Technology Committee, introduced legislation July 1 that would eliminate the
mandate.
The proposal comes as
part of a larger effort to rethink and overhaul the state’s energy grid in
response to the EPA’s Clean Power Plan. Lawmakers anticipate that
as many as nine coal-fired plants will ultimately be shuttered to comply with
the rule’s tighter emissions standards, resulting in a huge boon to renewable
energy.
‘Renewable energy potential’
“The question is, do
we need a separate standard to overlay with what the federal government’s going
to require? And we just don’t think that’s necessary,” said Greg Moore, Mr.
Nofs’ legislative policy director. “All these different rules and requirements that
utilities have to follow seem to be overly burdensome. So we’re going to get
rid of the mandates and just let the integrated resource plan process decide
whatever makes the most economic and environmental sense win the day.”
Part of the idea is to
replace the goal of renewable energy with that of clean, lower-emissions
energy, no matter what its source.
“We shouldn’t care,
frankly, as a legislature, what’s being used to generate it as long as the
emissions are meeting the standard that we set,” Mr. Moore said. “That gives
some people heartburn, those people [investing in] wind turbines and solar farms, but
frankly, if it’s just as clean, why do we care? Why are we stepping in the
middle of it and trying to make bad decisions in the marketplace?”
in] wind turbines and solar farms, but
frankly, if it’s just as clean, why do we care? Why are we stepping in the
middle of it and trying to make bad decisions in the marketplace?”
Supporters of the
mandates argue that states that jettison their renewables requirements make
themselves less attractive to wind and solar investment, while foes counter
that lower energy prices encourage business and manufacturing development.
Advocates of renewable
energy have also notched some victories, starting with the California proposal
to increase the standard to a highest-in-the-nation 50 percent. Then there was
the defeat in May of a Texas bill to retire the state’s RPS, which was approved in 1999
and stands as the oldest such policy in the nation.
the state’s RPS, which was approved in 1999
and stands as the oldest such policy in the nation.
Ultimately, retaining
the mandates in top energy-producing and -consuming states like Texas and
California matters more than keeping them in states with relatively low
renewable energy footprints like Indiana and Ohio, said Mr.
Marston.
“They’re relatively
small states in terms of renewable energy potential,” Mr.
Marston said. “As far as the
effect on the industry, I think that, other than in their state, I think the
effect was pretty small.”
Environmental groups have
blamed the anti-mandate campaign on groups advocating on behalf of the fossil
fuel industry, but Mr.
Bryson says that’s not the
case.
“We’re not anti-solar
or anti-wind,” he said. “We’re just trying to be pro-consumer.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/16/renewable-energy-standards-reconsidered-as-states-/
No comments:
Post a Comment