With the passage of strict new auto emission and air pollution standards, California has again demonstrated its role as the U.S.’s environmental pacesetter. In an interview with Yale Environment 360, Mary Nichols, chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board, explains how her state is helping drive a clean-car revolution.

How likely is it that your next vehicle might be an electric car? California just increased the odds. On Jan. 27, the California Air Resources Board, a powerful state agency with a history of setting first-in-the-nation clean air and climate regulations, voted 9-0 on a package of sweeping “clean car” rules that are expected to help reshape the U.S. auto industry.

The chairman of the board, Mary Nichols, oversaw the enactment of these new rules, which require that 15 percent of all new cars sold in California by 2025 emit little or no pollution and that the state reduce emissions of smog-forming pollutants by 75 percent. The rules are expected to result in 1.4 million zero- and low-emission vehicles — electric, plug-in hybrid, and hydrogen fuel cell — reaching California auto showrooms over the next dozen years, compared to roughly 10,000 on the road there today. And it’s a near certainty that once built, those models won’t just be sold in California, but in the other 49 states, as well.

In an interview with Yale Environment 360 contributor Paul Rogers, Nichols — who has headed the board since 2007 — explains why California has consistently led the U.S. in passing the toughest air pollution and vehicle mileage standards, why Detroit automakers have decided to endorse California’s new rules, and why U.S. and international car makers are on the verge of a clean-car revolution. “Auto manufacturers have finally come to the conclusion that their future lies in very efficient, very clean vehicles,” says Nichols.

We’ve concluded that we’re going to need a fleet of vehicles that is not primarily running on conventional fuels.”

Yale Environment 360: Why did California pass these rules?

Mary Nichols: California has been working on these rules for decades. Really, this is just the latest version of a program that has been in effect since the 1960s, which began because we were the first place to discover smog and to begin to take action to deal with the problem of pollution caused by motor vehicles. But this most recent round of standards is one that reflects a real change in viewpoint about what the future of our transportation system is going to look like. Basically we have concluded that when you look at the rates of growth in travel and the even greater problems of energy use, dependence on imported petroleum, as well as global warming and our contribution to it, we’re going to need a fleet of vehicles that is not primarily running on conventional fuels. And so we’re looking for ways to help speed up the transition to a fleet of vehicles that are extremely clean and efficient. And we’re setting standards for their design that help use the power of the California marketplace to do that.

e360: And what impact do you think these rules will have on the entire auto industry in the United States?

Nichols: Well, California buys about 10 percent of all the new cars that are sold every year. But we have even more influence than that over the design of future vehicles because every car manufacturer from the largest to the most innovative start-ups uses us as a design laboratory because they know that Californians know cars and they really like them. The term “love affair with the car” might be an exaggeration, but not too much.

e360: So you see these rules as changing the way all Americans drive, not just Californians?

Nichols: Yes, clearly cars that are manufactured for the California marketplace also get sold outside of California. But we also have 13 states that followed California’s lead automatically. They’ve signed up for the California car program. Those states include all the states in the Northeast plus Oregon and New Mexico. They are going to be requiring that all the cars sold in their states meet California’s standards.

We are prepared to provide direct incentives toward the initial cost of some of these vehicles.”

e360: The standards that the air board passed are pretty far reaching. They require 15 percent of all new vehicles by 2025 to have zero emissions, which as a practical matter means all electrical, hydrogen fuel cell, or plug-in electric. Why do you think the auto industry generally supported them, when in the past it has filed lawsuits to block laws California has previously passed?

Nichols: I think that the auto manufacturers have finally — maybe a bit belatedly — come to the conclusion that their future lies in very efficient, very clean vehicles. If they are going to be able to continue to provide cars for places where the demand is really growing, like Asia and other developing parts of the world, they’re going to have to compete in an arena where gasoline is extremely expensive and, in some cases, almost impossible to obtain. They’ve also got to recognize that gasoline prices are going up and that there is a need for extremely clean fuels that can meet other demands, as well, in some of the most polluted areas on the planet, including India and China.

Alternative fuel vehicles are going to be hot sellers as soon as there are enough cars available and the fuel suppliers come along and fill the demand for whatever the future fuel is going to be. The demand in the parts of the world where people are becoming more prosperous is almost insatiable for vehicles. The first thing that people buy when they get to the point where they have a little disposable income — people want mobility. First, electric bicycles, then motorcycles, then a car — that seems to be an almost iron rule at this point. The car companies are going to have to have cars that meet that customer demand.

The political will to require cleaner cars in California goes back to the discovery of smog.”

e360: In terms of the American consumer, what would you say to critics who say that government can force suppliers to make a certain amount of vehicles, like electric vehicles, but it can’t force the public to buy them? That they might all be left sitting on lots.

Nichols: Well, we agree that there’s more to be done than simply to mandate the vehicles. We view our mandate program as giving a floor so that the manufacturers know that this is the minimum that we are going to be asking of them. But we are predicting that these cars are going to do much better than the minimum. The only way we are going to achieve that is through government taking responsibility that the changeover to new kinds of fuels is as simple as possible for the consumer — that is, making sure that there is easy access to electric charging or other ultra clean fuels. We are also prepared — as we already are doing — to provide direct incentives toward the initial cost of some of these vehicles. We know that until we’ve gotten the demand up and the volumes of production in place, that the initial cost of the new vehicles is going to be a deterrent to some. We want to be sure these cars are widely available, that people see them in the showrooms, and that they want to buy them.

e360: Sounds like the incentives you are talking about are tax credits and access to carpool lanes, things like that?

Nichols: Yes, exactly. Actually, we offer direct rebate funding thanks to a program in California called AB 118, which is a surcharge on vehicle registration fees. Some of that money goes into consumer rebates for purchasing zero-emission vehicles.

e360: How will a showroom in California or the United States look differently 10 years from now because of this rule?

Nichols: We expect that at least one out of every seven cars in that showroom is going to be a plug-in vehicle.

e360: In a wider sense, California has also passed some groundbreaking legislation on climate change with AB 32. Can you talk a little bit about how this clean car package of rules fits in with AB 32?

Nichols: AB 32, which is the state’s global warming law, was actually founded on the basis of our vehicle emissions rules for greenhouse gases. In 2002 the legislature ordered the resources board to start treating greenhouse gases as air pollutants and to set emissions standards for them. The standards were actually set in 2004. They weren’t implemented until after Obama came into office because the Bush administration held up the waiver that California needed to enforce our standards. We were already planning on addressing the problem of the contribution that our motor vehicles make to the overall problem of global warming. In California, [vehicles] are our largest contributor. In passing AB 32, the legislature told us to adopt a plan that would meet the standards of the Kyoto treaty and bring our overall emissions as a state back to 1990 levels by 2020, which meant they [included] our electricity system and our other major industrial sources of pollution, such as oil refineries. But the first step was to look at cars and see what we could do there.

e360: Finally California has a 50-year history of passing tougher air pollution regulations than the rest of the country. Can you talk a little about why that’s the case and what the effects have been?

Nichols: I think the political will to require cleaner cars in California goes back to the discovery of smog, no question about that. But that will is backed up by the fact that people are well aware that we really are breathing a lot of pollution that’s created by our desire and our need for mobility. They are willing to support the notion that we may pay a little more for a brand new car, but in return for that we get the satisfaction of knowing we are helping to move the auto industry in the direction of producing cleaner cars for everybody.

e360: So everything from the catalytic converter to unleaded gasoline and now to these electric vehicle mandates originates in California and spreads to the rest of the country after that?

Nichols: Well, that has been the history, and certainly we’re proud to have played that role as the pioneer. But we wouldn’t have been able to continue doing it if we hadn’t built up a kind of technical expertise, knowledge of what the industry actually could do and what technology might be available with enough of a push to make it happen. Year in and year out, we’ve seen the companies, after some initial fuss, competing with each other to produce very attractive, desirable vehicles that also pollute less. That gives us the confidence to keep on moving forward.

Article by Paul Rogers, appearing courtesy Yale Environment 360.

Related posts:

• California ‘Clean Car’ Rules Mandate Boost in Electric Vehicle Sales
• California’s Air Quality Plan to be Rejected by the EPA
• U.S. Government, California Merge Timelines for Auto Standards
• California Gives Green Light to Carbon Trade
• Going Further with America’s Auto Industry

Sunny California is prime real estate for solar energy, and a number of California rebates make home solar systems highly affordable for Golden State residents. The only downside to these programs is that some have limited funding. Homeowners interested in solar panels will want to act soon to take full advantage of all the savings.

Here are five solar incentive programs that every California homeowner should know.

1. The Federal Incentive Program

The government offers the most generous program. The federal incentive program pays for up to 30 percent of the cost of installing a residential solar system in the form of a tax credit. The program is currently set to expire at the end of 2016.

2. California Solar Initiative

The California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) has transitioned its residential rebate program over to your local utility companies. The CPUC oversees the program. The state still exempts renewable energy home improvements from property tax assessments, so installing a PV system won’t raise your property taxes.

The new program offers per-installed-watt rebates from the state’s three major utilities, Southern California Edison (SCE), Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) and San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E). It’s a tiered program, with rebates that step down in price as more utility customers participate in the program.

Currently, PGE and SDG&E are at the ninth step of the ten-step program, offering rebates of $.25 per watt. SCE is at the seventh step of the program, offering $.65 per watt.

Municipal utilities offer rebates as well, some of them substantially more generous than those offered by the larger utilities, although annual funds are generally limited. Of course, if you live in one of California’s top solar cities, your rebates are likely generous. The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, for example, just moved to step six of their ten-step program, offering $1.62 per watt.

3. Single-family Affordable Homes (SASH) Program

Low-income Californian homeowners may be eligible to receive free or greatly-discounted home PV systems under the CPUC’s SASH program. Residents must be PG&E, SCE or SDG&E customers to qualify and must meet income requirements.

Generally, households earning less than 50 percent of the area’s median income levels may apply for a free 1-kilowatt home solar system. Households earning between 50 percent and 80 percent of median incomes may qualify for $4.75 per watt to $7.00 per watt rebates. SASH is administered by the non-profit organization GRID Alternatives.

4. New Solar Homes Partnership

The CPUC offers cash rebates to home builders who build houses with solar electrical systems built in. The New Solar Homes Partnership has been a huge success, and it’s likely the program will meet its goal of 400-megawatt capacity by 2016.

5. Thermal Rebate Program

The three major Californian utilities offer tiered rebate programs for solar water heating systems, too. Currently, all three utilities are in the first of a four-step program. Homeowners who replace a natural gas system can expect rebates of about $1,500. Those who replace electric systems can expect about $1,000.

Photo via joncallas

Related posts:

• Massachusetts Fires up Solar Hot Water Rebates
• California Exhausts Rooftop Solar Incentive Fund
• Which is Right for You? Solar Lease or PPA
• Motivating Homeowner Energy Behaviors
• Progress Energy Accepting Applications for Solar Power Rebates

San Jose added more residential solar photovoltaic (PV) systems last year than any other city in California, according to the latest PV Solar Report, a quarterly analysis conducted by solar company SunRun.

San Jose’s number of home solar systems in 2011 was up 45.4% from just the year before, a dramatic increase that points to the rising popularity of home solar.

Out of the 960 home PV systems installed last year, 648 of them were leased systems, what SunRun calls “solar service.”

In total, nearly 7,500 home solar systems were installed in California last year.

SunRun, the nation’s top residential solar power company, installs over $1.5 million in solar every day.

SunRun president Lynn Jurich credits the company’s success to the growing popularity of solar leasing, stating that solar service “allows homeowners to make the switch for zero or very little money upfront, and they lock in a low rate for clean electricity.”

Beginning in June 2011, solar leasing in California began to outpace purchased systems. In December 2011 alone, over 70% of solar installations in the Golden State were leased systems.

The appeal of leasing reaches beyond lower monthly electric bills. Many Californians are glad to find affordable ways to support technologies that reduce the nation’s reliance on fossil fuels.

San Jose residents can take advantage of incentive programs as well, including the federal tax credit program that can cut installation costs by up to 30%.

San Jose Pacific, Gas & Electric (PG&E) customers are also eligible for per-watt rebates from the utility. The current rate for PG&E rebates is $.25 per watt.

For a 4 kilowatt-sized home PV system in San Jose, rebates can cut the upfront costs from $33,000 to $22,000, with a payback period of about eleven years.

PG&E customers in San Jose can take advantage of net-metering, too. By reducing their conventional electrical use, they can often stay in the base-rate range, avoiding higher rates during peak demand periods.

Whenever the home is generating more power than the home is using, PG&E will credit the surplus to their monthly bill.

The PV report not only looked at the number of solar installations added, but the fastest-growing California solar cities, such as Hemet and Apple Valley.

“We thought it was important to not just look at which cities have the most solar installations,” said PV Report founder Stephen Torres, “but also those that are growing the fastest.”

Related posts:

• City of San José Promotes Solar Home Tour
• San Jose Leading Electric Vehicle Charge in California
• Indian Clean Energy Growth Was Fastest in World in 2011, Report Says
• Google Invests $75 million in Residential Solar Power Fund
• California to Get another 250 MW of Solar Power

California regulators are expected to pass new rules today requiring that 15 percent of all new cars sold by 2025 be powered by electricity, hydrogen, or other reduced-emission sources.

The new rules proposed by the California Air Resources Board would also require a 75-percent reduction in smog-creating emissions from new cars, SUVS, pickups and minivans, and a 50-percent reduction in emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases by 2025.

According to the board, the initiative would put about 1.4 million low-emission vehicles on California roads by 2025, compared with current levels of about 10,000. They predict the new rules will add about $1,900 to the price of a new car, but will save about $5,900 in fuel costs during the life of the vehicle.

“This is a really large step. It’s transformational,” Tom Cackette, chief deputy director of the board, told the San Jose Mercury News. “Ten years from now the market is going to look quite a bit different.” The new standards will be introduced in 2018 and gradually strengthened over the next seven years.

Article appearing courtesy Yale Environment 360.

Related posts:

• Focus on Fuel Economy Would Boost Profits for U.S. Car Makers
• How Much Will Consumers Pay for EVs?
• Wireless Charging for Electric Vehicles
• Electric Car Made of Hemp Is Developed by Canadian Collaborative
• California’s Car Rules Help Remake U.S. Auto Industry

This week our friends at Environment California released a new report ranking California cities by the amount of solar they’ve installed. The good news?

“From Fresno to San Francisco and Clovis to Culver City, solar power is becoming a mainstream technology throughout California,” said Michelle Kinman, clean energy advocate with Environment California Research & Policy Center and co-author of the report. “Solar power is booming in California and with the right leadership we can continue to benefit from the cleaner air and local jobs that this industry inevitably brings.”

The state has doubled its solar capacity in just two years, with 1 GW of rooftop solar today – the equivalent of two traditional fossil fuel power plants. And, most exciting, plenty of that growth is happening in cities and towns that you might not typically associate with clean energy . . .

Huge congrats to San Diego for topping the list! As Mayor Sanders said: “San Diego didn’t become the state’s No. 1 solar city by happenstance; it was the result of local policies and programs that encourage investment in solar power.” Good work, we say.

Chico, Woodland, Rancho Cordova, Livermore and Petaluma ranks top for “mid-size cities.” Sonoma, Auburn Oroville, Healdsburg and Newman have the most solar installed per capita in the “large town” category. And of the state’s “small towns,” Herald, Edwards AFB, Lebec, Maxwell, and Middletown rank highest.

Our own Executive Director Adam Browning added: “Solar used to have a reputation of being for the hip and hippy. This analysis shows that solar is benefiting all Californians–solar’s just as much Fresno and Chico as it is Santa Cruz and Sebastopol. People all across the state are lowering utility bills and creating good jobs by tapping into the sun.”

Governor Jerry Brown has called for expanding California’s solar market to 12 gigawatts by 2020. To date, more than 60 elected officials statewide have endorsed Governor Brown’s vision. Vote Solar, Environment California and allies are advocating that local and state leaders continue to push big policy initiatives to continue expansion of one of California’s strongest markets. First and foremost is ensuring that Californians continue to have access to net metering – the policy that allows a homeowner or business to receive a credit on their electric bill to offset electricity usage during the night.

It may sound wonky but net metering has delivered tremendous benefits to the Golden State:

California’s solar industry employs more than 25,000 workers. Solar job growth has been ten times higher than the overall economy, providing a rare bright spot during the recession.

Solar has driven $10 billion in private investment in the state over the past 5 years, making it a real economic engine.

Cash-strapped public agencies will save $2.5 billion in electricity costs of the next 30 years by going solar. Schools alone will save $1.5 billion.

Rooftop solar has reduced the need for California ratepayers to invest in expensive and polluting peak generation and the transmission infrastructure needed to carry it.

Local solar business innovation and scale that has effectively driven costs down and made solar more accessible to more Californians. Since 2009, 2/3 of California’s home solar installations have been in median income zip codes.

And as we see in today’s report, those installations are happening all over the state. California’s stable, transparent, long-term net metering policy has been key to its solar success. Help us urge state lawmakers to continue support for rooftop solar and net metering here.

Vote Solar is a non-profit grassroots organization working to fight climate change and foster economic opportunity by bringing solar energy into the mainstream.

Related posts:

• San Francisco Pledges Astounding 100% Green Energy by 2020
• The Solar Bus Stop and Hydrogen Bus: Green Solutions for Public Transport
• San Jose: The Fastest-Growing California Solar City in 2012
• City of San José Promotes Solar Home Tour
• China Secures Major Foothold in California’s Growing Solar Market

Duke University researchers have predicted that climate change in California will result in a declining percentage of rangeland. Such a change will have widespread impact on the state’s large cattle industry of California’s Central Valley. No matter if climate change will cause wetter or drier weather, available pasture will decline. Forage areas, known as one of nature’s free services, may no longer be so free. The grasses will either wither as arid conditions creep north, or be pushed out as inedible shrubs and brush take over.

The study has been published in the journal, Climatic Change, by Duke’s Nicholas School of the Environment in conjunction with the Environmental Defense Fund. The change in the rangeland ecosystem is expected to occur gradually over the coming century. Total costs expected to hit California ranchers over the next sixty years may be as high as $209 million a year if the ecosystem dries up.

Less grazing land will mean smaller herds, and less productive herds. Movement of cattle will also be much more difficult because of highways and suburban sprawl.

If the weather becomes wetter rather than drier, biodiversity is expected to increase. However, this will come at the expense of the ranchers. Cattle like to eat grasses, not trees or bushes.

The US Department of Agriculture has estimated about 5.2 million head of cattle in the state of California. Of these, less than 10 percent are raised in large feedlots. The rest can roam across the range, munching on free grasses.

A decline of rangeland may result in an increasing percentage of cattle raised in feedlots, where cattle food has to be bought and fed, adding to the costs of beef production.

California’s cattle industry brings in over $2 billion in total income through about 11,800 ranches. The hit the industry will take will likely affect the state’s overall economy. If similar climate changes occur in states like Texas and Oklahoma where cattle are much bigger slice of the economy, the nation’s economy may be affected.

In order to prevent this, rangeland preservation efforts may be required. This may be legislated through California’s new cap and trade system.

Article by David A. Gabel, appearing courtesy Environmental News Network.

Related posts:

• U.S. Solar Market Will Add 1 GW of New Capacity in 2010, Report Predicts
• Cost of Solar Energy Lower Than Usually Reported, Study Says
• Premium U.S. Wine Regions Face Climate Risk Within 30 Years
• ExxonMobil Forecasts Major Shift to Greener Vehicles
• Home Energy Management Tools Projected to Surge Over Next Decade

A series of recent policy-related developments within the biofuels industry may have set the stage for what could prove to be a significant shift in biofuel geopolitics over the next decade.

To recap: the European Court of Justice (ECJ) affirmed an earlier ruling that held the imposition of carbon taxes on flights touching down or taking off on EU soil did not infringe international law or the Open Skies Agreement; a U.S. District Court ruled that California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) violates the U.S. Constitution; and the long-standing U.S. ethanol producer credit (aka “VEETC”) slipped quietly into the history books.

Where do these developments leave the industry?

While the inclusion of airline emissions in the EU’s ETS indicates that the buzz around aviation biofuels won’t fade anytime soon, the threat of costly trade wars by the United States and China in response to the ruling could put a crimp on the expansion of international biofuel trade flows.

Meanwhile, just as the expiration of VEETC eliminates an estimated $6 billion worth of annual subsidies to the ethanol industry, the lucrative California fuel market is (at least for now) once again open for Midwest ethanol producers, and likely at the expense of Brazilian ethanol (more on this below).

On the whole, the decisions are generally good for advanced biofuels and corn-based ethanol alike.

Aviation Biofuels Lack Production Volumes, Not Willing Buyers

In the case of advanced biofuels, the decision to uphold the carbon fee suggests that international carriers will not escape the added costs associated with doing business in Europe, adding further incentive to integrate carbon-cutting technologies. As I discussed in an earlier blog, the combination of impending offset purchases and high oil prices appears to be forcing the aviation industry’s hand when it comes to fossil fuel alternatives, which has been signaling strong demand for sustainable advanced biofuels in recent years (note that first-generation biofuels lack the performance characteristics necessary to power commercial and military aircraft).

Although expected, the ruling is generally good news for energy feedstock producers looking to commercialize next generation feedstocks like camelina, jatropha, switchgrass, and algae, and seeking reliable markets and off-take contracts to offset the risk associated with growing relatively unknown crops.

But the advanced biofuels story is not about lack of demand, which suggests that the ECJ decision may actually not have much impact at all. In the case of the aviation industry, rising oil prices mean that demand for biofuel alternatives is deep, durable, and widespread. Even without the EU tax, assuming adequate supply, price parity with petroleum-based fuels, and sufficient distribution logistics, aviation fuel buyers would be clamoring to lock-up every last drop of advanced biofuels production.

Meanwhile, with the threat of trade wars from the United States and China among others, costly tariffs and other punitive measures could actually stifle biofuels development, an unintended consequence of the aviation tax.

Corn-based Ethanol Gets a Boost

Over on the other side of the pond, Judge Lawrence J. O’Neill’s December 29 decision declaring California’s carbon fuel standard unconstitutional represents a significant victory for Midwest corn ethanol producers (see my 2010 article on the LCFS and Green Federalism for more on the legal issues). The California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) policy, introduced in 2007, aims for a reduction in the “life-cycle carbon intensity” of fuels consumed in the state by 10 percent over the next decade. Due to corn ethanol’s inherent inefficiencies, the policy excludes most of the corn-ethanol produced in the United States from one of the world’s largest fuel markets.

Implementation of the policy had led to the peculiar situation where Midwest ethanol producers were shipping their offending product 6,000 miles to Brazil to make up for a shortfall in sugarcane ethanol production. Midwest corn’s exclusion from California, coupled with a national blending wall policy, put a serious constraint on U.S. producers’ scale-up ambitions. The ruling may put corn ethanol back in the domestic driver’s seat, at least for now.

Looking Beyond 2012

As discussed in Pike Research’s report, Biofuels Markets and Technologies, we expect the production of conventional biofuels – namely corn- and sugarcane-based ethanol – to increase steadily over the next decade as demand for alternatives to petroleum-based fuel outstrips advanced biofuels production volumes. The corn-based ethanol industry appears to have established viability, and even without the VEETC, we foresee an increase in production as access to markets like California and the likely raising of U.S. blend walls (e.g. implementation of E15 or expansion of E85) opens up new opportunities for producers.

The key question raised by these decisions: where will the production go over the next decade? As corn-based ethanol ventures beyond VEETC, the industry will need to fight for market access at home and abroad despite this most recent victory. Meanwhile, the EU may be positioning itself as the primary market for advanced biofuels at the expense of U.S. and China.

Article by Mackinnon Lawrence, appearing courtesy the Matter Network.

Related posts:

• As Saudi Crude Flows to China, U.S. Need for Biofuels Grows
• AHRI defeats the City of Albequerque, Complicating Matters for Local Governments
• Betting on Algae and Big Oil?
• Advanced Biofuels Face Uncertain Financing Future
• Stewart Brand Raising Eyebrows in Supporting Nuclear Power

For some, December probably meant eggnogs, football, relatives, etc. For the California solar industry, it meant a record month of rooftop, behind-the-meter solar. There were over 36 MW of customer-owned installations–the highest since the California Solar Initiative’s inception, and over 130 MW worth of incentive applications. Details on the California Solar Statistics site, here.

This is all the more remarkable, since residential solar incentives have been reduced (as scheduled) from $4.50/W to between 25 cents and 35 cents/W. And the non-residential incentives are 4.4 cents/kWh of generation, for 5 years (equivalent to a 5-year, 4.4 cent/kWh SREC contract).

Note that this does not include all the wholesale solar installations (RPS/RAM/FIT).

Sure beats rumcake.

Vote Solar is a non-profit grassroots organization working to fight climate change and foster economic opportunity by bringing solar energy into the mainstream.

Related posts:

• California Exhausts Rooftop Solar Incentive Fund
• Hawaii Solar Power Community Celebrates Favorable Ruling
• 22 Regions Across America Race to the Rooftop for Solar Power
• Small Solar Means Big Economic Benefits in Nevada
• Solar Homeowners Wary of Meager Incentives from Utilities

Vote Solar staff attended meetings last week with staff of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP), the nation’s largest publicly-owned utility, serving about 10% of California’s electrical load. California law now requires munis like LADWP to get 33% of their power mix from renewables by 2020, prompting a big increase from LADWP’s current 20 percent. The utility’s Board of Commissioners officially adopted a program for getting to 33% renewables recently, but staff noted that many of the important decisions will actually get made in the utility’s 2012 Integrated Resource Planning process.

Via the IRP, the utility will analyze a range of different 20-year planning scenarios, choose one of those scenarios as its preferred long-term plan for serving its customers, and request rate increases from the LA City Council as needed to allow funding for that path. LADWP currently gets only 1% of its renewables from solar (wind and small hydro forms the bulk of its clean energy portfolio), but staff indicated a plan to ramp up investment in utility-scale solar considerably, given solar’s ability to locate in urban areas and to provide generation at times of highest demand. In the new year, Vote Solar will work to highlight the value of solar where the rubber meets the road in LADWP’s IRP process.

In other recent LA news, the LA Business Council recently released a report showing that LADWP lags behind most other California utilities on distributed solar – for example, Southern California Edison has more than six times as much distributed solar installed per customer as LADWP. The utility made a step in the right direction this week, however, presenting a plan to implement a 75 MW feed-in tariff program by the end of 2013 and a 150 MW program by 2016, assuming it can get the necessary funding from City Council. We think the utility should move beyond that 150 MW goal, installing at least 600 MW of distributed solar in the next ten years, at the same time creating a valuable new engine for jobs.

Vote Solar is a non-profit grassroots organization working to fight climate change and foster economic opportunity by bringing solar energy into the mainstream.

Related posts:

• Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Strategic Plan
• Riverside 550 Megawatt Solar Project
• Italy’s Enel Green Power Planning Two Huge Solar Power Plants
• San Antonio Utility Increases Order to 400 MW of Solar
• CEC Approves First Utility Solar Project in 20 Years

As the investigation of the federal government loan guarantee to now bankrupt Solyndra of Fremont, California lingers, with critics looking for the company to come clean, it is may seem odd that California’s solar industry is in a celebratory mood this month.

The fact is that California – the leading market for solar energy in the United States – has reached two critical milestones, demonstrating that solar photovoltaic (PV) technology has come of age.

First, the state has reached the threshold of 1,000 megawatts of rooftop solar PV. This success is large due to the California Solar Initiative (CSI), a state government program launched five years ago with a goal of adding a total of 3,000 MW of solar PV by 2016. At this current rate of installation, this state government program, designed with a long-term goal and stable, but declining rates of subsidies, is indeed working. In the process, CSI is giving California the best bang for the buck (in terms of government incentives per kilowatt installed) of virtually any solar energy market in the world.

These distributed solar PV arrays offer tremendous value to both consumers and utilities, bolstering reliability at the local level, and diversifying the energy economy to spur local economic development. Along with electric vehicles, new energy saving devices and smart grid integration systems, these solar PV systems are literally bringing power directly to the people at their own homes. They are also among the most labor intensive of all power sources, since labor substitutes for imported fuel and the incremental amounts of new capacity added roof-by-roof requires significant hours of installation time and effort.

Distributed solar PV installations, while a shrinking portion of the overall global market, still represents an impressive success story globally, as the recent Pike Research report, Distributed Solar Energy Generation, attests. Costs of solar PV, for example, are declining across the board.

Last week also marked a second milestone at the other extreme of the burgeoning market for solar PV. Ground was broken for the California Valley Solar Ranch project, a 250 MW utility-scale solar PV plant that will produce enough power for 100,000 residences. This giant solar farm shows that solar PV is now capable of competing with conventional large-scale power plants that burn natural gas or coal, serving as anchors of the utility grid itself.

This particular utility-scale project – one of many popping up all over the world – features the solar PV panels of Sunpower of San Jose, the most efficient solar PV products on the market. NRG Energy, which has utility operations in Texas and the East, and has invested in both electric vehicles and green power providers, is one of the project’s key investors.

Last, but not least, some interesting statistics have been complied showing how solar power is putting more Californians to work. As of this past summer, one out of every four solar power-related jobs was in California. According to the National Solar Jobs Census, more than 25,575 out of a total 100,237 solar jobs have been created in California, with Colorado, with 6,186 jobs, at a distant second place.

Solar PV is the most versatile of all available power options. Not only are greater numbers of Californians consuming solar energy today, but both small and large systems are creating jobs throughout the state. For example, the California Solar Valley Ranch project, located near San Luis Obispo, will create 350 construction jobs this winter, pumping $350 million into the local government, all the while preserving more than 9,000 acres of land around the Carizzo Plain, a spot that featured the first large-scale solar PV project in the nation over two decades ago.

Yes, the California solar industry — including its growing ranks of happily employed designers, installers and sales force — are smiling this week, and with good reasons.

Article by Peter Asmus, appearing courtesy the Matter Network.

Related posts:

• Solar Industry Provides Growth in Green Jobs in the US
• What Does the Bankruptcy of Solyndra Mean for the Future of the US Solar Industry?
• Listen Up Lawmakers: Americans Support Solar Power
• Solyndra: Illustrating a Recovery Act Supply Chain
• Breakthrough Facility to Trap Solar Energy in Molten Salt