QUICK NEWS, 5-24: EFX OF ENERGY/CLIMATE BILL; MORE COSTS OF COAL; CALIF SUN EXPERIMENT; WHAT WIND CAN DO FOR TEXAS

EFX OF ENERGY/CLIMATE BILL
Study Says American Power Act Will Work
May 21, 2010 (Sustainable Business)

"The Peterson Institute for International Economics released the first comprehensive study of American Power Act proposed last week by Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), finding that it would create 220,000 and cut greenhouse gas emissions 22% below 2005 levels by 2020.

"Assessing the American Power Act employs the Department of Energy's National Energy Modeling System to forecast the legislation's economic, employment, energy security, and environmental impact through 2030…"

click to enlarge

"…[It] would significantly alter the way the United States produces and consumes energy. The share of total energy demand met by fossil fuels would fall from 84% today to 70% in 2030. Renewable and nuclear energy would grow from 8% each of US energy supply today to 16% [and] 14% respectively in 2030…[It also] would reduce US oil imports by 33% to 40% below current levels and 9% to 19% below business-as-usual by 2030…cut US spending on imported oil by $51 to $93 billion per year and, by lowering global oil prices, reduce [2030] oil producer revenues by $263 to $436 billion annually…

"…The Act would establish an economy-wide carbon price starting at $16.47 per ton in 2013 and growing to $55.44 dollars per ton in 2030, reducing greenhouse gas emissions from covered sources 22% below 2005 levels by 2020 and 42% by 2030."

click to enlarge

"…[It] prompts $41.1 billion in annual electricity sector investment between 2011 and 2030, $22.5 billion more than under business-as-usual. This stimulates US economic growth and job creation in the first decade, increasing average annual employment by about 200,000 jobs.

"…By pricing carbon, the American Power Act raises the price of fossil fuels for businesses and consumers. Households see an average 3% increase in electricity rates and 5% increase in gasoline prices between 2011 and 2030. Energy efficiency improvements largely offset these energy price increases--households see somewhere between a $136 increase and a $35 decrease in average annual energy expenditures, depending on future improvements in vehicle efficiency."


MORE COSTS OF COAL
Study: Missouri, Illinois spent $2.6B to import coal
May 21, 2010 (St. Louis Business Journal)

"Illinois sent $1.49 billion out of state to pay for the coal that generated its energy in 2008, according to [Burning Coal, Burning Cash; Ranking the States that Import the Most Coal] from a nonprofit that promotes environmental concerns. Missouri sent $1.13 billion out of state, the report said.

"That’s because more than 94 percent of the coal used by Illinois power plants in 2008 was imported, and more than 99 percent of the coal used by Missouri was imported —primarily from Wyoming for both states…The Union of Concerned Scientists] report says states would benefit from spending more money on local renewable energy technology and energy efficiency programs."

click to enlarge

"The state of Missouri is the most dependent on net imports as a share of total state electricity use, at 82 percent…Missouri spent about 22 cents a person on ratepayer-backed electricity efficiency programs in 2007, but cutting annual energy use by 1 percent could save consumers $30 million and keep the state from having to send as much as $13 million out of state in the first year.

"Renewable energy sources, particularly wind and bioenergy, could generate about nine times Missouri’s 2008 electricity needs, the report said."

click to enlarge

"Illinois was the 14th most dependent on total net imports. The state was one of the top coal-producing states in 2008, with 32.9 million tons produced…Illinois makes the list of 10 most-dependent states for tonnage of imports, coming in fourth, but not for expenditures because almost all its imports come from relatively low-cost mines in Wyoming.

"Illinois spent 6 cents per person on ratepayer-funded electricity efficiency programs in 2007…But Illinois has adopted a strong energy efficiency resource standard…and utilities must rely on renewable energy to supply 25 percent of the state’s power by 2025."


CALIF SUN EXPERIMENT
All Eyes on California as State Considers Energized Feed-in Tariff
Bettina Weiss, May 2010 (PV Group)

"Representing 60% of the total grid connected PV demand in the United States, California is increasingly seen as one of the most critical solar markets in the world. Even without the passage of federal energy legislation in Washington, favorable policy actions in California could help US demand reach as high as 4GW in 2012, up from the 2009 level of less than 700MW, to become the world’s largest solar PV market.

"Consequently…[the California Solar Energy Industries Association (CALSEIA) effort] to re-energize current California Feed-in Tariff (FIT) legislation, could have a significant impact on the solar energy market in US and the world."

click to enlarge

"CALSEIA is urging the California Public Utilities Commission to implement SB 32, a feed-in tariff bill enacted in 2009, with “PV Adder” pricing which would result in an additional 750 megawatts of new renewable generation in California. Last year, SB 32 was passed utilizing a Market Price Referent (MPR) [based on natural gas market prices]…With natural gas prices reaching 10 year lows…California’s FIT has failed to create a meaningful incentive for solar power in the State.

"… CALSEIA released a study on FIT pricing showing that the value of renewable generation is between 9 and 16 cents over the wholesale price of natural gas generation. The PV Adder pricing is based on several factors, including avoided distribution and transmission costs, air quality and health benefits, and contribution to State-mandated renewable energy credits. The analysis demonstrates that only by accounting for these factors could the MPR rate meet the requirements for ‘ratepayer indifference’, recognizing the value of the energy and its attributes on a market value basis…"

click to enlarge

[Senator Negrete-McLeod (D-Chino), author, SB 32;] “The Commission needs to take action now to implement SB 32…There’s no reason to delay and plenty of important reasons to move ahead…The Feed in Tariff will help to bring clean power to California and jobs to people who need them now.”

"…[ Advancing a Sustainable Solar Future] advocated the use of feed-in tariffs as the best policy tool available to encourage solar energy and provided a set of recommended best practices…[including] technology differentiation, generation cost-based rates sufficient to spur demand, well-defined purchase and interconnection requirements, and fixed price and long-term payments…SB 32 with Market Price Referent based on wholesale price of natural gas generation alone failed the best practice of cost-based rates sufficient to spur demand. Since California has adopted [the plan]…little demand has been created…"


WHAT WIND CAN DO FOR TEXAS
Texas Study Finds Substantial Economic Benefits and Consumer Savings from Wind Power and CREZ Transmission Plan
Dr. Ray Perryman, May 20, 2010 (The Perryman Group)

"The typical Texas residential consumer is expected to potentially save $160 to $355 annually in electricity bills, once new transmission lines are completed to deliver wind power throughout the state, according to a study released today from The Perryman Group. Investment in new wind turbines and the Competitive Renewable Energy Zone (CREZ) transmission lines will help power the State of Texas...

"In addition, the combined investment in new wind turbines and these transmission lines will create $30 billion in economic gains, employ thousands and bring in almost $2 billion in additional state and local taxes. Also, Texas’ CREZ investment is expected to help the state annually conserve approximately 17 billion gallons of water, reduce carbon dioxide emissions by as much as 16 percent and reduce nitrogen oxide emissions by up to 13 percent."

click to enlarge

"Several Texas university economists endorsed the methodology and results of the study, which measures the likely economic impact of the CREZ transmission investment, as well as the anticipated doubling of available wind power available to Texas customers by 2013.

"Because wind turbines do not pay for fuel, their cost of operation does not increase the more they are used. So, as more wind power becomes available on the market, it has a greater influence on wholesale market prices...[lowering the] overall cost of electricity...[Reductions] for residential, commercial and industrial customers...exceed the long-term cost of the CREZ investments. This effect already has been seen in the West Texas wholesale market for electricity…"

click to enlarge

"...[There will also be] sizable positive economic impacts [from]...Construction and development of the new transmission infrastructure and the wind turbines required to achieve the newly expanded capacity...Ongoing maintenance of the transmission facilities and wind turbines, royalty payments to landowners, and cost savings stemming from improved fuel diversity...[and]Potential economic development benefits associated with solidifying Texas’ position at the forefront of renewable energy.

"Currently, Texas is home to almost one-third of the nation’s wind generation capacity. Within three years, the completed CREZ transmission facilities will make available more than 18,000 MW, stimulating economic development and delivering clean energy to Texans throughout the state…"