« Privacy Policy | Main | What are FITs? »

May 17, 2008

Status of FIT Legislation in Each State

So far, 23 states are considering Feed-In Tariff legislation. Click on the name of the state to find out more about the status of FIT legislation in that state, as well as acquire contact information of those working towards FIT legislation in that state:

Full Descriptions

Arizona
Contact: Jean Lasee, jean@changecatalystgroup.com  
Renewable Energy History in Arizona
The Arizona Corporation Commission decides the state’s energy policy and comprises of five elected Commissioners. Only seven states have constitutionally-formed Commissions, with thirteen states having elected Commissioners. In 2006, the Commission created the Renewable Energy Standard or RES. It calls for regulated electric utilities to meet fifteen percent of its retail energy sales from renewable sources by the year 2025. It also requires that utilities obtain 30 percent of its renewable energy from distributed sources close to the point of load. The remaining 70 percent of non-distributed power must be acquired from large, centralized projects.
While distributed generation on the customer-side of the meter has expanded considerably in the last four years, utility-scale projects have yet to be built in the state (although a major project with Abengoa Solar received a loan guarantee in July 2010). The Commission knew that it needed to encourage development of more non-distributed renewable energy facilities and began to look at feed-in-tarriffs as one option to advance growth. FITs have been quite successful in getting considerable solar built in Europe. Advantages include the following:
  • Reasonable fixed rates of return for investors
  • Standard contracts for all projects
  • Guaranteed customers (utilities and government)
FIT Workshop
Formal discussions of a state feed-in-tariff started in January of 2010 in the form of a two-day workshop facilitated by Kris Mayes, Chairwoman for the Commission. Its purpose was to determine whether such a policy would be an effective strategy for increasing development of small commercial projects (for example, churches, and non-profits) and wholesale distributed energy in Arizona. The workshop included participants from many areas including industry, utilities and government. Representatives from solar companies in other states, as well as a German national who lives locally gave their feedback on “lessons learned” in implementing FIT policy both in California and Europe.
In July 2010, the Commission’s feed-in-tariff draft policy statement became available. Overall, it supports the FIT as a tool for bringing significant renewable energy online in a shorter period of time. However, it currently does not describe specific implementation steps. A list of what the policy statement advocates is described below and reflects recommended tasks for local utilities to accomplish in order to move towards a feed-in-tariff strategy:
Recommendations
Costs, Price and Funding
  • Discuss and allocate pre-determined revenue requirements before submission.
  • Differentiate price according to size and type of technology.
  • Make cost recovery available through the utility’s Purchased Power and Supply Adjustor (PSA). If this mechanism is not available, use RES adjustors or defer costs to a future date.
  • Create a competitive auction process that includes standard contracts for projects between 1 to 5 and 5 to 20 MW in size to take advantage of economies of scale.
  • Ensure that any renewable energy technology that qualifies for RES funding also qualifies for FIT funding.
Implementation
  • Establish caps on the FIT program to avoid oversubscription. This includes a cap on the number of small projects and a revenue requirement for mid-sized projects.
  • Present projects that have reasonable timelines, bidder qualifications and development security to ensure they get built. Note: Alternative compliance payments were not discussed.
  • Allocate renewable energy credits (RECs) from the non-distributed portion of the contract.
  • Execute FITs as part of the yearly REST Implementation Plan, starting with the year 2011.
  • Propose small commercial projects to the Commission on a first come, first serve basis. Have a competitive bidding process for large-scale projects.
The Corporation Commission currently has no set date in which to make FIT strategy actual policy. For access to the policy statement, click on http://images.edocket.azcc.gov/docketpdf/0000113828.pdf.
Contact: Bill Ball, Arkansas RE Association, bill@stellarsun.com, 501 993 0032
Electricity profile:
 
Arkansas electricity prices are amongst the lowest in the United States, with a variety of mostly coal, natural gas, and nuclear power generating the vast majority of total electricity. The three largest electricity retailers are investor-owned, with Entergy Arkansas being the largest, providing over 50% of all retail electricty in Arkansas. In 2009, all 2.1% of electricity that came from renewable technologies was generated by electricity cooperatives.(Information from U.S. Energy Information Administration)
Is there currently a feed-in tariff in Arkansas?
No.
 
What has been done in the past to promote feed-in tariff legislation?
 
Arkansas has come extremely close to passing feed-in legislation twice.
 
A bill, HB 1851, commonly known as ‘REFIT Arkansas’, was introduced in March 2009 in the House of Representatives by Rep. Kathy Webb. It came before the House Insurance and Commerce Committee, where it was defeated by a vote of 8 to 6. Supporters of the bill felt that it lost because there was a great deal of ‘misinformation’ spread about it by the utilities who opposed it. The Governor, the Arkansas Public Service Commission, and the Arkansas Economic Development Commission all strongly supported the bill.
 
Before the next vote in 2011, there was a pilot feed in tariff largely funded by federal stimulus money in 2010. The following is taken from Bill Ball's White Paper.
 
"The Arkansas RenewableTechnology Rebate Fund, a pilot “feed in tariff” program made available in March of 2010,has already more than doubled the number of RE generating facilities, not including some commercial installations expected to go on line over the next few months.This helped spur interest in another feed-in tariff bill in 2011."
 
Another bill was introduced in the next session of the legislature in 2011. Proponents felt certain that with more education of the Committee and House members, the bill would pass. After the Chairman of Arkansas's Senate Insurance & Commerce Committee declared that "the yays have it" on the final SB 721 vote, it was called back. One of the nay voters called for a show of hands, for which there were only 4 yays of a required 5. One of the committee members who didn't show up was expected to vote yes on the bill according to Bill Ball. This is a summary from The road less traveled.
 
Video of SB 721 vote:
 
 
What is the next move to promote feed-in tariff legislation in Arkansas?
 
The hope among feed-in tariff advocates is that they may be able to enact a feed-in tariff through language in the Energy Conservation Act of 1977. This would allow for a feed-in tariff through new regulations rather than through a new statute. As for the prospect of new legislation for feed-in tariffs, the Arkansas legislation doesn't convene again until 2013, so the hope is to have regulations adopted by the Public Service Committee (PSC) before then.
 
 
Additional Links

California
Contact: Mircalla Wozniak, FIT Coalition MarCom Manager (mircalla[at]fitcoalition.com)
 
Summary: Speaking extemporaneously at the conclusion of the German-American Chamber of Commerce's Solar Symposium on July 14, 2008 in San Francisco, John Garamendi, California's Lieutenant Governor, said it "seems to me we want to use what works . . . and feed-in tariffs clearly do." He also added that "we need to come to a decision quickly" so the state can move forward. Read more about the Symposium.

The following is taken verbatim from Wilson Rickerson et al's 2008 report: California has played a leading role in developing FITs in the US. California Assembly Bill (AB) 1969 of 2006 established a FIT for systems with a capacity of 1.5 MW and below, capped at 250 MW total statewide. Generators can choose 10-, 15-, or 20-year contracts, and can opt to sell either 100% of their power, or offset their retail load and sell only their excess electricity. Unlike in the German law, California's tariff rates are based on time-of-delivery, rather than the generation cost of individual technologies. This means that all technologies are offered the same price, but that this price varies depending on whether the electricity is generated during peak or off-peak times. In Southern California Edison territory, peak payments can be up to $0.31/kWh in the summer (Rickerson et al., 2008). The original program was limited to facilities sited at wastewater and water treatment facilities, but the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) extended the program to all customer-types, and expanded the cap to 478.4 MW in 2007. Subsequent bills have sought to expand both the overall program cap and the individual project cap, and a recent bill (AB 1807 of 2008) is seeking to increase the system capacity limit to 20 MW, and shift to a more European-style structure based on technology-specific payments.

There are several FIT bills in the state legislature including a bill from Senator Fran Pavley that would establish a cost-based solar energy feed-in pilot in several municipalities. None of the bills have moved yet, and none offer a ‘full system of feed-in tariffs like those in Germany’. In addition, the CA Public Utility Commission (PUC) is in the midst of an exploration or proceeding to expand CA’s limited existing FIT program. PUC staff recently recommended the FIT to systems 10 MW and below and to 1,000 MW total statewide. (Paul Gipe, pgipe@igc.org, 416 597 2748 ex. 229, http://wind-works.org )

The City of Los Angeles, California

"Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced to much fanfare on November 24, 2008, that the city's municipal utility would launch one of the continent's largest solar power programs. [...] Among provisions of the plan is a feed-in tariff for 150 MW of solar photovoltaics by 2016." (Gipe, 2008)

Learn more about LA's solar FIT program: Download Clean-Up LA Document 
 
Marin County, California
Marin County has a feed-in tariff for facilities less then 1 mW generating capacity. Details can be found at DSIRE and MarinClean Energy.org
Palo Alto County 
Palo Alto County, California plans to implement a feed-in tariff by 2012. The program is still in development. Details and other useful links can be found here. 
Colorado
There are 29 municipally owned utilities in Colorado and 2.1% of the electricity distributed came from non-hydro renewables in 2009.
Rural electric cooperatives make up 21.8% of Colorado's energy portfolio. 3.3% comes from non-hydro renewables.
Two investor owned utilities in Colorado, Black Hills and Xcel, combined for 62.8% of total electricity sold to Colorado consumers in 2009, 9.8% of which comes from non-hydro renewables. Xcel has invested far more in renewable energy as it built the first commerical wind farm in Colorado and is the United States' largest utility provider of wind.
What has been done to promote FiT legislation in Colorado?
In September 2009, "The Application of Feed-in Tariffs and Other Incentives to Promote Renewable Energy in Colorado," was prepared by the staff of the Colorado Public Utility Commission for its use in analyzing the pros and cons of Feed-in Tariffs for Colorado. Read the full report, and see the supplementary Excel spreadsheets.
In February 2010, Lois Barber and Robert Youngberg met with Steven D. Catanach, Light & Power manager, city of Fort Collins Utilities to discuss with him bringing a FiT policy to Fort Collins.

Paul Gipe visited Colorado September 15 - 20. This was a very special opportunity to hear from an international expert on Feed-in Tariffs. While in Colorado Paul met with Durango business leaders, the City of Fort Collins Utilities and Fort Collins energy advisors, Boulder Clean Energy Action, South Metro Denver Chamber of Commerce Renewable Energy Task Force, Colorado State Legislators, Colorado renewable energy industry leaders and the Colorado Governors Energy Office. This lead to an "energy action plan".
There was an attempt to have the State Economic Development Office perform a study on the economic benefits of a feed-in tariff, but this was not approved despite the fact that the funding for the project would have come from the Colorado Solar Energy Industries, amongst others, and not taxpayers.
Although there are currently no FiT programs in Colorado, the city of Fort Collins has made great strides in attempting to put a FiT in place, and many are confident that it will be in place by January 2012. Although the exact details of what the FiT would entail are unknown, it is expected to be only for solar photovoltaics, will offer 20 year contracts, and will be paid for by 1-3% increases in consumer electricity bills.
What's Next?
Some of the major hurdles in promoting FiT legislation have been lack of funding and lack of education of the benefits they could bring to Colorado.
  • Undertake a ballot initiative among La Plata Electric Association (LPEA) to support a Fit pilot project
  • Continue member education of FiT in pursuit of coalition building
  • Continue efforts to persuade LPEA to study adoption of a FiT: Essentials to communicate
  • Initiate research to determine the details of the pilot project
  • Propose resolutions by local jurisdictions to support a FiT for Southwest Colorado Electric Power Generation
  • Proceed with the development of the Bodo/Dept. of Energy Uranium tailings site for a solar photovoltaic project
Are there currently Feed in Tariffs in Florida?
There is a Feed in Tariff in the city of Gainesville, Florida. This is a municipally run utility. The Feed in Tariff was implemented in March 2009.
Information about the FiT in Gainesville:
  • Only for solar photovoltaics
  • 20 year contracts
  • The maximum capacity allowed is 1000 Kw for ground mounted systems and 300 Kw for building of pavement systems.
The following tariff rates were taken from the DSIRE website:
  • All systems 10 kw or less: $0.32/kwh
  • Building or pavement-mounted systems between 10 and 300 kw: $0.29/kwh
  • Ground-mounted systems between 10 and 24 kwh: $0.29/kwh
  • Ground-mounted systems between 25 and 1,000 kw: $0.24/kwh
There is no statewide FiT policy in Florida.
What hurdles need to be overcome to promote FiT policy?
An important factor missing in the promotion of FiT policy in Florida is the connection between FiT's and job creation.
What is being done to promote FiT policy in Florida?
Efforts are already underway to get other municipal utilities to sign on to FiT's. Municipal utilities, such as Gainesville, appear to be a more likely avenue than investor owned utility companies, which have shown no interest in adopting FiT policy.
The following is a brief summary fo how efforts in Florida to promote FiT Legislation.
The following summary is well-researched, but may not be thoroughly up to date. Please check the blog posts for the latest news.

Summary: FARE’s 2010 activity was introduction of a bill in Florida during legislative session called “The Florida Farm to Energy Act” which had the best practices of FITs (although it might not grade at an ‘A’ on the WFC report card) and would establish the fixed price, fixed contract precedent. By having this in statute, FARE would be able to go for the pure FIT upon a changing of political tides.

Although the bill did not pass in 2010, we anticipate the tides to be changing anyway and we are currently working with current state CFO and candidate for Governor in 2011 Alex Sink. We are working closely with her to establish a sustainable renewable energy policy, which if in place would give us the platform we need to establish a long term FIT style mechanism.

Since the devastating oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, Florida has seen an unprecedented amount of attention paid to establishing a renewable energy policy. It is the goal of FARE to capitalize on this attention and help develop a long term policy that will create a sustainable marketplace in Florida.

In the 1st quarter of 2009, the Florida Alliance for Renewable Energy (FARE) created an overwhelming buzz and understanding of a FIT policy where none existed even 6 months prior. In February, FARE hosted a delegation from the EPIA (European Photovoltaic Industry Association) in conjunction with their "Effective Renewable Energy Policies" conference. The EPIA delegation, whose members represent over 80% of the worlds solar production, participated in a whirlwind tour of the State's capitol, visiting with over 30 legislators in 2 days. Time and again, the executive officers of the world's largest solar companies stressed to lawmakers the direct correlation between the growth of their companies and the implementation of a feed-in tariff in Germany and other European countries. Read more.

Having addressed what the future of Florida's renewable energy industry could look like, FARE next focused on what today's industry was made of. FARE held a lobby day in March, bringing hundreds of renewable energy advocates and small businesses to flood the State's capitol with the message that they too deserve a seat at the table when lawmakers determine the shape of renewable energy legislation.

In addition to their Lobby Day, FARE launched a Renewable Energy tour, hosting 5 town hall meetings in 5 days all across the state, sharing their message with hundreds of Floridians and recruiting more and more dedicated advocates to their cause. Read more.

Also in early March, FARE hosted Former CIA Director R. James Woolsey, who testified in front of both the House and Senate Energy Committees and held private meetings with Commissioner of Agriculture Charles Bronson, Florida Governor Charlie Crist, and over a dozen individual legislators. Mr. Woolsey testified to the importance of a secure and reliable energy grid, and went on to say the distributed generation that would result from a feed-in tariff policy would help create energy security as well as energy independence for Florida. Read more.

In the second half of 2008 FARE engaged the Public Service Commission in their recommendation process, and in the following six months they changed their position from adamantly behind a tradable SREC policy to now engaging in a steadily increasing dialogue about a FIT systems to address projects under a certain size under a Standard Offer Contract umbrella.

In March 2008, the Florida Solar Energy Industries Association (FlaSEIA) endorsed a legislative policy effort to adopt a Renewable Energy Payment mechanism. The FlaSEIA Board of Directors unanimously concluded that the most cost-effective legislative policy tool to deliver the rapid deployment of solar energy, while ensuring a healthy and sustainable industry in Florida, are energy feed-in payments (FlaSEIA Endorsement Letter PDF). Since FlaSEIA's decision to endorse Florida feed-in tariffs, several other organizations have followed suit: Maryland-DC-Virginia SEIA Endorsement Letter; SolarWorld California Endorsement Letter; Solar Power Partners Endorsement Letter; Environmental Defense Endorsement Letter.

In 2007, Florida Governor Crist issued several Executive Orders to reduce Florida’s greenhouse gas emissions, increase energy efficiency, and remove market barriers for renewable energy technologies such as solar and wind energy. He created a State Environmental Task Force to review various policy options for achieving these goals. Team members will create a Florida Climate Change Action Plan which will include strategy and proposed legislation for consideration during the 2008 Legislative Session and beyond (Executive Orders 2007 News Release). The task force reported its final recommendations in October 2008.

The City of Gainesville, Florida

From Oct. 4 - 8, GRU will accept applications from customers interested in installing new small solar projects, up to 10 kilowatts (kW) each, through the FIT. Customers sell the energy generated by their system directly to GRU at a fixed price under a contract for 20 years. Space in the innovative program filled up quickly when it officially launched in 2009, and GRU expects similar results with this offer, which is capped at 400 kW – or at least 40 participants.

“When we initiated the first solar FIT in the United States, GRU customers had just over 300 kilowatts of solar installed,” said GRU Energy and Business Services Manager Bill Shepherd. “We’ve now surpassed 2,000 kilowatts which demonstrates Gainesville’s strong commitment to renewable energy and environmental responsibility.”

Customers interested in taking advantage of the new opportunity through GRU’s solar feed-in tariff should review all requirements at www.gru.com and ensure completed application packets are received by 5 PM Oct. 8. In the event that more than 400 kW of applications are received, an independent third party will select projects for inclusion by random drawing.

News Links:
EDF to Florida PSC: Feed-in Tariffs Better than REC Trading
Florida Solar Coalition Calls for Feed-in Tariffs Over RECs at PSC
Florida Alliance for Renewable Energy Launches
FARE Files Florida PSC Comments Calling for Feed-in Tariffs
Gainesville, Florida Putting REPs into Place
Fueling Demands for Solar
An Idea Catches On
The Rooftop Revolution
Feed-In Tariffs vs Credits

Hawaii
Electricity profile:
 
Hawaii, unlike most U.S. states, generates most of its electricity from burning petroleum (EIA State Profiles). This is a more expensive way to generate electricity then burning coal and it can be seen in their electricity bills, which are 5 cents more expensive per kWh than any other state. This, along with the abundant natural resources Hawaii posesses, seems to make it a prime candidate for a successful feed-in tariff.
 
Is there currently a feed-in tariff in Hawaii?
Yes.  
 
Hawaii’s FiT:
A Summary of Hawaii's feed-in tariff can be accessed on DSIREUSA
 
   
Background history on the efforts to put the feed-in tariff into law:
 
In the 2006-2007 session Hawaii introduced three bills (House Bill 1748 and Senate Bills 1223 and 1609). All three of the bills seek to establish a 20-year $0.70/kWh feed-in tariff for solar photovoltaic systems up to 20 MW in size.

Hawaii state legislature Erik Kvam of Zero Emissions Leasing who drafted the bill says he arrived at the tariff by incorporating the federal tax subsidy and solving a cash flow model for an internal rate of return of 15% after tax. He notes that not unsurprisingly this is similar to the current German solar PV tariff. However, the difference is that the feed in tariffs apply only to excess electricity from net-metering and the tariff is capped at 5% of utility peak demand.

In January 2008, Legislature Representative Thielen introduced House Bill 3237 which was similar to those previously introduced, but with a different rate of $0.45/kWh for solar photovoltaic systems.

None of the bills were passed out of committee. They will have to be carried over to the 2009 session (Rickerson 2008). According to Kvam, "there's real interest here" on both sides of the aisle and "everyone wants to be seen as out in front on this."

On October 20, 2008 the Governor of Hawaii, Linda Lingle, the Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism, the Division of Consumer Advocacy of the Department of Consumer Affairs, and the Hawaiian Electric Company (HECO) signed an agreement to implement a feed-in tariff policy in 2009.
Additional Links:

Illinois
In February 2008, Representative Karen May introduced the “Illinois Renewable Energy Sources Act” House Bill 5855, based on the Michigan model.

However, it was amended to remove the Feed-in Tariff. A net-metering provision was added to compensate photovoltaic generators for their excess generation at 200% of the retail rate (Sec. 16-F). Illinois had recently passed legislation to provide $1 billion in electricity rate relief in response to steep electricity price increases. In view of this, House Bill 5855 was met with significant opposition in the legislature as it was thought ratepayers would be too sensitive to legislation that may raise electricity prices (Rickerson 2008). The bill will not move back to the floor this session, but might be reintroduced in the next session as a net-metering bill enhanced to include a broader array of technologies (Rickerson 2008; House Bill 5855 Status).

Indiana
Contact: Laura Arnold (laura.arnold[at]indianadg.org), Indiana Renewable Energy Association (InREA), (317) 635-1701
Summary of the efforts to promote feed-in tariff policy in Indiana:
Feed-in Tariffs (FiTs) or Advanced Renewable Energy Contracts (AREC) have been under discussion in Indiana before both the Indiana General Assembly and the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) since late 2008.

Rep. Matt Pierce (D-Bloomington) introduced proposed legislation during both the 2009 and 2010 sessions of the Indiana General Assembly. A committee hearing on HB 1622 during 2009 was conducted in the House Commerce, Energy Technology and Utilities Committee chaired by Rep. Win Moses, Jr. (D-Ft. Wayne), however no vote was taken. Rep. Pierce introduced HB 1190 during the 2010 short session, however, no committee hearing was scheduled.

During interim between the 2009 and 2010 sessions of the Indiana General Assembly, the Regulatory Flexibility Committee conducted a hearing on FiTs on September 29, 2009. Copies of the presentations made as well as a video file of the hearing can be found at http://indianarenew.org/index.php/component/content/article/1-feed-in-tariff.

On 12/29/2008 Indianapolis Power and Light (IPL) filed a petitionwith the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) in Cause No. 43623 pertaining to their Demand Side Management (DSM) programs proposing to establish a FiT which they called Rate REP for Renewable Energy Production. The order was approved and became effective on March 30, 2010. For more information see http://indianadg.wordpress.com/2010/04/01/final-ipl-feed-in-tariff-effective-march-30-2010/.

Information about Rate REP can be found on the company’s website. See http://www.iplpower.com/ipl/index?page=IPLGeneral&Menu=02000000&DocID=020391af33d6012801538fc10057cb.

Since the Indiana Renewale Energy Association conducted a webinar on IPL’s renewable energy programs on May 27, 2010, it has been reported that several other Indiana electric utilities have been discussing Rate REP with IPL officials. Slides from the webinar can be found at http://indianarenew.org/index.php/inrea-resources.

Indiana Update September 8, 2010

The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) has scheduled a technical workshop on a draft Proposed Rule on net metering beginning on September 9, 2010. Although the IURC still has not formally initiated the rulemaking yet, this is a huge step forward for renewable energy development in the State of Indiana. For details including a copy of the new draft proposed rule see http://indianadg.wordpress.com/2010/09/01/iurc-circulates-draft-proposed-net-metering-rule-technical-workshop-sept-9th/

In addition, on July 16, 2010 the Northern Indiana Public Service Company (NIPSCO) filed a petition with the IURC to revise its net metering tariff and to propose a new feed-in tariff. This is the second voluntary feed-in tariff proposed by an Investor-Owned Utility (IOU) in Indiana. NIPSCO pre-filed its testimony on July 19. Copies of their testimony can be downloaded here http://indianadg.wordpress.com/2010/07/27/details-on-nipsco-net-metering-changes-and-proposed-feed-in-tariff-will-vectren-be-next/. Click here for a table comparing the proposed NIPSCO feed-in tariff with the approved IPL feed-in tariff.
Does Indiana currently have a feed-in tariff?
Yes, NIPSCO and IPL, the two biggest electricity distriubutors in Indiana both petitioned and signed on for voluntary feed-in tariffs. 
Below is a link to a word document that compares the two feed-in tariffs.
NIPSCO Renewable Energy Payment start date: 7/13/2011
IPL feed-in Tariff start date: 3/20/2010
The DSIRE website also has summaries of both of the feed-in tariffs.

Iowa
A bill, HF412, was introduced in the House that would have the Utilities Board and State Energy Board set FITs.
Iowa has a Renewable Energy Purchase Rate for farmers in Kalona. This is similar to a feed-in tariff because it has 10 year contracts and guaranteed 20 cents per kWh guarantee for Solar PV and Wind energy. The DSIRE website has the details of the program.

Maine
Contact:Peter Drum, Midcoast Green Collaborative (peterdrum[at]gmail.com)
Summary: The proposed Maine feed-in tariff bill, called the Maine Renewable Energy Sources Act, is currently being drafted with help from the MidCoast Green Collaborative, a non-profit organization, has called for feed-in tariffs as part of a broader renewable energy strategy (Kando 2008 PDF). Legislative Representative Hannah Pingree, is working with the Collaborative, and plans to sponsor the bill when it is complete in the 2009 session (The Coastal Journal 2008).

The Collaborative worked with the Boston University (BU) Legislation Clinics to develop legislative language for a Renewable Energy Payment. The BU proposal would require a 20- year fixed price contract for renewable generators with payment rates, determined by Maine Public Utilities Commisssion, based on generation cost plus a reasonable profit (Rickerson 2008).

The public hearing on a feed-in tariff bill in the Maine legislature was held before the Utilities and Energy Joint Committee on Tuesday, April 14. The meeting ran over 4 hours which is unusual. There was ample support for the bill with more people prepared to testify in favor than the committee had time to hear, about 14 of 23 who came to speak. There was a clear majority of support in the room that was filled to capacity. There were a few who spoke against the bill, most notably a Central Maine Power lobbyist and a representative of big industry in Maine. Rep. Herb Adams, is the sponsor of the bill. Read more at: www.midcoastgreencollaborative.org
Is there currently a feed-in tariff in Maine?
No.
Massachusetts
In 2007, Governor Deval Patrick announced a target of 250MW of solar electricity by 2017 (Rickerson 2008). Although the state considered Renewable Energy Payments to meet the new target, Massachusetts instead opted to utilize rebates because they were considered cheaper for ratepayers in the short-term. Stakeholders were also concerned about federal preemption issues. In 2010, the state created an RPS carve-out for solar electricity, which stakeholders again suggested should be structured to incorporate FITs. FITs were not selected as the compliance mechanism, although the policy does include a price floor of $0.30/kWk in an attempt to provide investors with a greater degree of security. (More information: http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=eoeeasubtopic&L=5&L0=Home&L1=Energy%2c+Utilities+%26+Clean+Technologies&L2=Renewable+Energy&L3=Solar&L4=RPS+Solar+Carve-Out&sid=Eoeea)
Is there currently a Feed-in-Tariff in place?
No.
What has been done to promote FiT policy?
Massachusetts senator Robert Hedlund Assistant Minority leader posted on his legislative agenda that he was planning to introduce "An act relative to renewable energy generation and connection (SD1608)". "This legislation would call on the DPU to promulgate regulations requiring utilities to provide access to the grid and the certainty that the electricity produced by renewable generators will be purchased. Based on the feed-in-tariff system in Germany." The legislation is currently sitting in the Joint Committee on Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture and isn't expected to make it out due to a lack of political steam.
 
Background of efforts to promote feed-in tariff legislation:
There has been lots of opposition from politicians and even utility companies in Michigan to the proposed feed-in tariff, including a white paper by Richard Barclay.

Despite opposition, the Bill had been referred to committee and was on hold as legislatures focused on an RPS bill for Michigan.
A legislative luncheon was held in early April organized by the World Future Council & Paul Gipe with Toby Couture from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) giving a presentation. The luncheon reinvigorated the hope of a positive legislative response to FITs in MI. (Paul Gipe, pgipe@igc.org, 416 597 2748 ex. 229)
In 2008, Pulic Act 295 enabled a feed-in tariff with Consumers Energy, Michigan's second largest electricity provider.
Michigan's feed-in tariff:
 Details of Michigan's experimental feed-in tariff can be accessed at DSIREUSA.

Additional links:

Wind-Works: Michigan


Contact: John Farrell, Research Associate, Institute for Local Self Reliance (jfarrell[at]ilsr.org), 612 379 3815 ex. 210
Summary: In February 2008, Representative David Bly introduced “Renewable Energy Feed-In Tariff Act” House Bill HF 3537. The bill is co-sponsored by Representative Bill Hilty, who chairs the Energy Finance and Policy Committee, where the bill was referred, and Assistant Majority Leader Aaron Peterson.

The bill contains the same rate structure as Michigan’s bill, except there are no rates for geothermal resources and small wind generators are defined as systems with 1000 square feet of swept area or less.

Unique to the Minnesota bill, generators must be majority owned by Minnesotans as defined in the state’s Community-Based Energy Development (C-BED) statute. If Minnesota transitions to a C-BED feed-in-tariff as the bill proposes, it could spread to other states such as Nebraska (Legislative Bill 629), South Dakota (Senate Bill 71 PDF), and Iowa (Senate File 255), which have passed or are considering C-BED legislation similar to Minnesota’s (Rickerson 2008).

This bill will not move to the floor during this session.

For the second year in a row, state legislators in Minnesota proposed a statewide feed-in tariff. The 2009 proposal differed sharply from the prior year's, narrowing technologies down to wind and solar PV, capping the program at 20 percent of the state's renewable energy standard (RES), and creating a rate equalization formula that would share the cost equitably across all state utilities.

Despite the changes, the bill fared no better in this session. The House Energy Finance and Policy Division held a hearing on the bill - HF 932 in April but took no action. Utilities lined up to oppose the bill, focusing on the price offered for solar PV and the price setting mechanism. Advocates included the North American Water Office, Windustry, Audubon Minnesota, and the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR). There was also a companion bill in the Minnesota Senate - SF 843 - but no action was taken.

In 2010, Rep. David Bly introduced HF 3618 to establish a feed-in tariff for wind and solar technologies. The program had been scaled down from the 2008 and 2009 proposals to a 7 MW maximum project size for wind and 1 MW project size for solar. To work around PURPA limitations, the program was to be funded by a public benefits surcharge on utility bills.

Advocates included Windustry, the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, Audubon Minnesota, and others. Despite the scale-down, the bill fared little better than 2008 and 2009 offerings, with an informational hearing in the House (no vote) and no hearing at all in the Senate.

Prospects for a 2010 bill are better – assuming Rep. Bly wins re-election – because Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s energy office, staunchly opposed to the feed-in tariff, will be replaced after the 2010 elections. Rep. Bly intends to re-introduce the bill.

link to HF 3618: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bin/getbill.php?number=HF3618&session=ls86&version=list&session_number=0&session_year=2010

New Jersey
New Jersey was an early adopter of a [Renewable Portfolio Standard] target specifically for solar (2% by 2020) and it quickly became the second largest solar power market in the country after California (Prometheu Institute PDF 2006). Between 2002 and 2006, New Jersey achieved triple digit solar market growth through a mix of upfront state rebates (link to a section defining rebates) and solar Renewable Energy Certificates(link). Although this model was highly successful, state officials were concerned that rebate budgets would not be sufficient to reach the full solar target (White Paper Series: NJ’s Solar Market 2006, Winka 2-7 PDF).

[An RPS Transition Working Group] was established to consider various principles and financing models outlined in a series of [White Papers] to support the continued growth and expansion of New Jersey’s solar market. The Summit Blue team assisted the New Jersey Board Of Public Utilities in this market transition stakeholder process by preparing two reports: a qualitative review of market transition options
(Review PDF) proposed by stakeholders and an analysis of estimated ratepayer impacts from the proposed models (Analysis PDF).

The latter report found that the investor security created by feed-in tariffs would lead to lower rate-payer impacts than any other model including RECs and a Hybrid-tariff model (links defining). Nevertheless, the Board opted for a pure solar REC market (Preliminary review of alternatives for transitioning the New Jersey solar market from rebates to market-based incentives).
Electricity Profile:
New Jersey's three largest electric utilities companies are Investor owned. In 2009, New Jersey had 16 MW of solar net generating capacity, 1.2% of their electricity supply (EIA).
 
Does New Jersey have a feed-in tariff?
 
No. New Jersey has a "competetive feed-in tariff", which is different from a feed-in tariff in the following ways:
  • the competetive tariff is determind by the market
  • there is a complex bidding system to receive the tariffs
  • tariff changes occur based on the market
  • it is based on the lowest cost to the taxpayer
Information about New Jersey's Renewable Energy Certificates and competetive feed-in tariff can be found at DSIRE and in a New Jersey Clean Energy Program Report.

 

New Mexico


A bill, HM87, was introduced in the House. It would require a committee to establish a FIT.

New York
To meet the New York’s Renewable Portfolio Standard obligation, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) centrally procures long-term Renewable Energy Certificate contracts on behalf of utilities. However, NYSERDA has been authorized to use a wide-range of policy mechanisms to procure RECs, one of which was a standard offer contract, which would be similar to a REC-only Renewable Energy Payment.

A bill has been introduced in both the Assembly and Senate. The Senate sponsor is Antoine Thompson, from Buffalo. (His aide, Bill Nowak: 716-854-8705, or, 716 882 9237)

During the 2009 and 2010 legislative sessions, advanced Feed-In Tariff legislation was introduced in both chambers of the legislature. The proposed policy would create differentiated, cost of generation-based tariffs for solar, wind, biomass, small hydro technologies. While both bills did gain some support in the form of cosponsorship, the legislation did not advance beyond the energy committees of either chamber. The legislation was supported by a number of grassroots community organizations and NGOs, but failed to gain traction with influential environmental advocacy and lobbying groups. A core group of citizen activists and labor representatives are currently developing a legislative strategy for 2011 that would involve the introduction of new and improved legislation that would ideally be sponsored by influential members of the senate and assembly energy committees or core leadership. The recent implementation of other FIT programs in the region - most notably Ontario - is beginning to elevate the policy's standing among policymakers in Albany, leading to higher levels of interest. It remains to be seen, however, if such interest will translate into new law in 2011, or if other competing proposals - such as a renewable energy credits (RECs) program - will gain the momentum.

Nevada
Contact: Bob Tregilus, FiT4NV, elaterite@yahoo.com, 775 826 4514.
Electricity Profile:

91% of Nevada's Electricity comes from and investor owned utility: Nevada Energy. The other 9% comes from rural electric cooperatives and municipal utilities.
Are there currently any Feed in Tariffs in Nevada?
No.
What has been done to promote Feed in Tariffs in Nevada?
Below is a timeline from the FiT4NV website on the major events related to the promotion of FiT Policy:
August 2008: While researching smart-garage technology (a merging of smart-grid with vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technologies that creates a synergy between buildings, electric drive transportation, and the electric grid), Bob Tregilus, of the Electric Auto Association of Northern Nevada, learns about the policy tool known as a renewable energy Feed-in Tariff (FIT) on an episode of the Inside Renewable Energy podcast, hosted by Steven Lacey and featuring guests, Paul Gipe of Wind-Works and John Farrel of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance New Rules Project. After doing about 20 minutes of additional research, Tregilus begins exploring the possibility of adopting a FIT law in the state of Nevada.

August 2008-June 2009: Tregilus gives several FIT presentations to various energy stakeholder groups in Nevada.

July 2009: The Great Basin Resource Watch, under the guidance of John Hadder, joins the FIT effort in Nevada and the Feed-in Tariffs for Nevada (FIT4NV) Initiative is born.

October 2009: The Reno Gazette Journal publishes an oped by Tregilus, "FITs Can Boost Homegrown Energy Production."

November 2009: Tregilus is asked to deliver a presentation on FITs to the Legislative Interim Committee on Production and Use of Energy (SCR 19). As a result of the presentation, the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada (PUCN) is requested by the Committee chair, Senator Mike Schneider, to open an investigatory docket into FITs (docket #09-11004).

January-April 2010: Two rounds of comments and two stakeholder workshops on FITs are conducted by the PUCN.

May 20, 2010: PUCN Commissioner, Rebecca Wagner, presents the PUCN FIT report to Senator Schneider's Interim Committee. Tregilus also gives a follow up presentation based on the report's findings highlighting for the Committee how a FIT program might be integrated into Nevada's energy incentives mix.

June 2010: The SCR 19 Committee meets for its last "work session" prior to the regular legislative session in 2011. The Committee decides not to submit a bill draft request (BDR) for FITs. Their reasoning, with the exception of Committee chair Senator Schneider, was they did not yet know enough about the policy and have not had an opportunity to study it further. It should be noted that Nevada holds biennial legislative sessions that last 120 days, ergo, being a legislator in Nevada is not a full-time job.

August 12, 2010: Senator Mike Schneider, chair of the Senate Committee on Energy, Infrastructure, and Transportation during regular Nevada Legislative sessions, submits BDR 229 that "Provides for establishment of a feed-in tariff program for renewable energy sources." The BDR 229 will be drafted based on these guidelines:
"Request the drafting of a bill authorizing the PUCN to adopt regulations establishing a feed-in tariff program for renewable energy sources of all types listed in NRS 704.7811. The program must not conflict with existing statutory programs such as net metering and the renewable portfolio standard. The program should focus on providing incentives for projects and participants that do not presently qualify for existing statutory renewable energy programs and, in particular, for projects in the 100 kilowatt to 3 megawatt range. The program should adopt best practices from existing feed-in tariff programs in other jurisdictions, including foreign programs, and should be constructed in a manner to balance potential impacts on ratepayers with advancement of the legislative findings on State energy policy enunciated in NRS 701.010. The program should also be consistent with existing federal requirements. The PUCN should be given the authority to design the pricing mechanism and to administratively set rates."

July 2010: FIT4NV launches its website at www.FIT4NV.org.
 
August 12, 2010: Senator Mike Schneider of Las Vegas submits bill draft request (BDR) 229 which, "Provides for establishment of a feed-in tariff program for renewable energy sources."

September - December 2010: FIT4NV: ramps up efforts to collect endorsements of the FIT4NV resolution as well as lobbying the Nevada Conservation League (NCL), the Nevada chapter of the League of Conservation Voters, common agenda group members to adopt BDR229 as one of four common agenda issues for the 2011 legislative session.

December 2010: NCL votes for FITs as one of its four legislative priorities. This automatically brings on board over 30 legislators who work closely with the NCL. However, Vote Solar managed to dilute our efforts by entering a competing priority (net-metering plus production based incentive (PBI)) several months after the deadline for submissions (early 2010) and only weeks before the voting began. The Vote Solar's priority tied with FIT4NV. So the NCL used the common elements of both BDRs as lobbying points.

January 2011: FIT4NV actively lobbied legislators, seeking resolution endorsements from commercial property owners, economic development agencies, and the AIA. FIT4NV is in active discussions with NV Energy, the PUCN, and State Office of Energy

February 2011: FIT4NV conducts editorial board meetings with the local news outlets and will be going public with our FIT assessment on Wednesday, February 9th, timed to dilute Vote Solar and Solar Alliance's joint meeting of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Labor and Energy and the Assembly Committee on Commerce and Labor.

February 22, 2011: Nevada State Senate introduces SB184 (formerly BDR229) to create a Renewable Energy Systems Development Program modeled on FIT policies.

March 14, 2011: Independent from the Senate AB268, a FIT bill similar to SB184, is introduced into the State Assembly. Notably, AB268 is sponsored by six Republicans and two Democrats. Additionally, a second, solar only FIT bill, is submitted to the Assembly as well.

Mid March, 2011: FIT4NV brings the Clean Coalition in to help lobby for SB184.

April 14, 2011: The Senate Committee on Commerce, Labor, and Energy passes SB184 on a party line vote and sends it to the Senate floor for a vote.

April 23, 2011: R. James Woolsey , a former CIA director, senior advisor at VantagePoint Venture Partners (the premier clean-tech venture capital firm on the entire planet!), and energy task force member at the Hoover Institution under Reagan Secretary of State George Schulz, comes to Nevada to lobby for SB184. At the same time, Janet Gagnon representation the largest solar panel manufacturer in the United States, SolarWorld USA,lobbies for SB184 as well. Notably, Governor Sandoval's office declined (twice) to talk to Woolsey or Gagnon about SB184.

April 26, 2011: Senate floor vote of 13 yea, 8 nay with two Republicans, including the Senator minority leader, supporting sends SB184 to the Assembly.

May 25, 2011: The Assembly Commerce and Labor Committee passes SB184 and sends it to the Assembly floor. However, SB184 was severely amended in Committee, turning it into a PUCN study (see November 2009 entry above, been there, done that).

May 30, 2011: SB184 is killed on Assembly floor pursuant to Joint Standing Rule 14.3.4, allowing no further action. (Time ran out to act on the bill. This was by design due to Kelvin Atkinson(Assembly CL Committee chair), Marcus Conklin, and Marilyn Kirkpatrick (all Democrats and CL Committee veterans) not understanding SB184 and Kirkpatrick though it was some sort of scam because her employer said it was) and the three Committee leaders being embarrassed by SB184's sponsor,Senator Mike Schneider.. (He told them in no uncertain terms that they did not understand the simple FIT policy.)

June 6, 2011: In the last minutes of the 76th Session, the SB184 FIT study language was amended to AB416, a net-metering plus production based incentive (PBI) bill. Also, at the last minute, NV Energy managed to get an onerous transmission amendment, that would have mandated the public to pay for infrastructure that would have benefited only NV Energy shareholders, added to AB416 as well. By end of June the governor had vetoed AB416.

August 2011: FIT4NV is regrouping and presently considering our options.
What is the next step? What is being done to promote a FIT policy in the future?

Working on funding and coalition building.

What hurdles or obstacles must be overcome?

1) Funding, and 2) regulatory framework that incents NV Energy to oppose meaningful public participation in energy generation.

What would be most helpful to you and others in your efforts to promote a FIT policy?

1) Funding, and 2) broad legal assistance to change the regulatory framework at both the federal and state levels. Utility profits should be decoupled from capital investment in generation capacity and pegged exclusively to distribution, ancillary services, smart-grid, and delivery.

Oregon
 
Contact: Jennifer Gleason, Staff Attorney, Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (ELAW), jen@elaw.org, 541 687-8454 ext. 15
 
What has been done to promote Feed in Tariffs?
In 2009, Oregon’s governor signed into law ORS 757.365 (2009), as amended by House Bill 3690 (2010), requiring Oregon’s Public Utility Commission (PUC) to develop pilot programs for each investor-owned utility to “demonstrate the use and effectiveness of volumetric incentive rates (VIRs) and payments for electricity delivered by solar photovoltaic energy (SPV) systems.”
In late 2009, the PUC was on its way to adopting a strong pilot feed-in tariff (FIT) for solar installations with installed capacity up to 500 kW (limited to a total of 25 MW over five years). Unfortunately, some parties raised concerns about possible federal preemption and the PUC staff then modified its proposal and moved away from a strong pilot feed-in tariff program. Instead, the PUC created a bifurcated program that looks more like net metering (for installations up to 100 kW) and a bidding process for larger installations.
 
What is currently in place?
The good news is that Oregon’s program went into effect in July 2010, and the first round of available projects are reported to have sold out in 15 minutes.
The program includes a few “FIT-like” elements:
  • The rates for the small-scale and medium-scale installations are cost-based rates;
  • The rates are differentiated by project size and solar zone; and
  • The rates will be reviewed every six months.
The 25 MW will be rationed over four years (6.25 MW per year). There will be two allocations each year for small-scale and medium-scale systems (October 1 and April 1) (eight total allocations). Large-scale capacity will be allocated through a bidding process on a yearly basis.
The capacity is allocated among Oregon’s investor-owned utilities as follows (based on sales revenue):
PGE - 14.9 MW
Pacific Power - 9.8 MW
Idaho Power - .4 MW (residential systems only)
When the final rules for the program were adopted, ARE steering committee member Jen Gleason critiqued Oregon's program and explained why it is not a true pilot FIT:
http://elawspotlight.wordpress.com/2010/06/08/oregons-new-solar-law-not-a-good-fit/
In addition, Eugene Oregon has a municipal utility, the Eugene Water and Electric Board, which operates a "direct generation" program which is very similar to a feed-in-tariff, except that the rate offered is based on a value that the utility assigns to it, instead of basing it on the cost of production.http://elawspotlight.wordpress.com/2010/06/08/oregons-new-solar-law-not-a-good-fit/
Rhode Island
In 2008, Representative Ray Sullivan introduced the “Rhode Island Renewable Energy Sources Act” House Bill H7616.

Unlike Michigan, Illinois, and Minnesota, the Rhode Island Bill does not use a sliding scale (stepped tariff design) for wind systems. Rather systems below 20MW can receive a $0.115 payment and 20-50MW are eligible for a $0.105 payment. Further its solar PV payments are far lower than any of the other bills. Resources without prescribed rates are guaranteed a payment 1.15 times greater than the avoided cost. This bill is still being negotiated.
Three renewable energy bills were passed on June 21, 2011 in Rhode Island that are closely related to feed-in tariffs. This bill promotes distributed generation, increases the efficiency of net metering, and improves interconnection.

Texas
The Hamilton Consulting Group released a report on Texas's clean energy economy that speaks favorably of the role FITs could play in the state. Download the Hamilton Report on Clean Energy.

Virginia
Contact: Richard Deutschmann, GroSolar (richard.deutschmann[at]grosolar.com)
Summary: Virginia’s Governor’s Climate Change Commission recommended a feasibility study for FITs.

Vermont
Contact: James Moore, Clean Energy Program Director, Vermont PIRG (james[at]vpirg.org)
What has been done to promote Feed-in-Tariff policy?
 
Summary: The following is taken verbatim from Wilson Rickerson et al's 2008 report: In 2005, Vermont passed legislation creating the Sustainably Priced Energy Enterprise Development (SPEED) program as part of its renewable portfolio goal legislation. Under the SPEED statute, the legislature directed the Vermont Public Service Board (PSB) to establish long-term contracts for facilities one megawatt or less in size. The legislation did not set specific contract rates or length, but the Board was directed to establish contracts "at a specified margin below the hourly spot market price." On March 19th, 2008 Senate Bill 209 (Lyons) amended the SPEED statute such that projects of one MW or less are allowed to sell power under 15 year long-term contracts at levels that are "adequate to promote" renewable resources, rather than linked to the spot market price. The PSB was also directed to establish standard long-term contracts for generators over one MW, which utilities are encouraged to enter into. The state goal is that 20% of retail electricity sales will come from SPEED resources by 2017, but the legislation contains clauses that would suspend SPEED contracts if it is determined that sufficient market growth has occurred by 2012.

On Earth Day the Vermont House of Representatives passed House Bill 446, the Vermont Energy Act of 2009. The bill includes changes to Vermont's Sustainably Priced Energy Enterprise Development Program (SPEED) that would implement a pilot feed-in tariff policy . Learn more: H 446 Bill As Passed by House, and H 446 Bill Status.

The proposed standard contract program is modest even by North American standards. There is a severe restriction on the extent of the program. Nevertheless, this is the first bill proposing a system of feed-in tariffs that has both been reported out of committee and passed one chamber of a bi-cameral legislature in the United States.

The bill was assigned to the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Energy April 28, 2009 and passed the committee April 29. The bill now moves to the Senate Finance Committee.

Is there currently a Feed-in-Tariff in Vermont?
 
 
Yes, with the passing of the Vermont Energy Act (Act 45(H.B. 446)) in May 2009, all retail electricity providers in the state of Vermont are required to purchase renewable energy through long term contracts at a standard price rate. The program is called the Sustainably Priced Energy Enterprise Development (SPEED) Program.
Key aspects to the SPEED program
  • Program cap of 50 MW
  • Project size cap of 2.2 MW
  • Contract term: 25 years for all solar project and 15-20 years for all other technologies.
  • All renewable energy credits (REC's) are transferred to the utility except for Methane derived from agricultural sources. For this energy source, the generator is allowed to hold on to the REC's.
  • Future tariffs based on cost of generation plus profit less applicable tax credits and Other Incentives
  • Profit set at rate of return of Vermont electric utilities
Tariff rates per kWh
  • Wind energy tariff <15 kW: $0.20
  • Wind with rated capacity of greater than 15 kW,Hydropower, and Biomass (except methane from landfill or agricultural operation): $0.125
  • Methane derived from agriculture: $0.16
  • Solar: $0.30
  • Methane derived from landfill: $0.12
More information on the SPEED program can be found on the DSIRE website
Washington State
In May 2005, the Washington State Senate Bill 5101 passed in the Assembly creating a Renewable Energy Payment law for small solar, wind, and biogas projects. Homes and businesses with solar PV and wind power systems would earn a credit of 15 cents per kWh of electricity generated by their renewable energy systems up to $2000 annually, fixed over a 10 year period beginning July 1, 2005. The bill combines economic multipliers to increase the system owner's payment rate if the project's components are manufactured in Washington. This can raise the 15 cent per kWh credit up to as much as 54 cents per kWh (Renewable Energy World 2005).

The weakness of this REP is that the price is too low and the contract term (10 years) is too short to make a viable business case for a 3.5 kW-size system. Further, money for the REP is not collected directly from ratepayers a key difference to a model REP (link to part of the website that would describe this) (Gipe 2008).

At least four ‘misguided’ feed-in tariff bills were introduced in the House and Senate and moved forward in committees. The last day for any bill to move is April 24th. Supporters are waiting to see what happens.

For more information on developments in Washington State, contact Mike Nelson, Northwest Solar Center, 206 396 8446.

Wisconsin
RENEW Wisconsin, a network of clean energy businesses, educators, utility managers, farmers, builders, and other concerned citizens, filed testimony with the Wisconsin Public Service Commission on September 18, 2006 calling for implementation of Renewable Energy Payments (also known as Advanced Renewable Tariffs) in the state by January 1, 2008. (Gipe, 2006).

This was the first formal action by a non-governmental organization in the US to urge the adoption of Renewable Energy Payments to successfully spur rapid development of renewable energy.

Governor James Doyle of Wisconsin created the Governor’s Task Force on Global Warming (TFGW) in April 2007. The Task Force is finalizing its policy recommendations and a Feed-In Tariff is currently under consideration (REP Proposal PDF) They recommend it for renewable generators 15MW of smaller. The Wisconsin Public Service Commission would set the long-term fixed payment rate in 2009 based on generation cost plus profit.

The FIT would be a component of an “enhanced Renewable Portfolio Standard.” A utility company can apply generation purchased under the Feed-in Tariff policy toward its RPS obligations. Renewable certificates generated under the policy would be granted to the utility company engaging in the power purchase agreement (FIT Proposal PDF). This is a clear example of how the best features of different FIT, REC and RPS can be brought out in a well designed integrated policy mix (link to section of website that speaks to this).

WE Energies (PDF of their RE policies) and Madison and Electric (their RE policies) are examples of utilities (link to whats in it for utilities part of the website) that have small renewable energy payment programs (Gipe 2008).

In January, the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin opened a docket to investigate what they are calling, ‘Advanced Renewable Tariffs’ (ARTs). In opening the document, the Commission listed a series of questions seeking comments on every facet of ARTs. Comments from RENEW Wisconsin and Clean Wisconsin were filed on Feb. 17. The groups are awaiting a determination from the Commission about next steps in this proceeding. Comments filed by RENEW Wisconsin and Clean Wisconsin can be accessed at the URL below: http://renewwisconsinblog.org/2009/02/18/renew-clean-wi-submits-comments-to-support-higher-buy-back-rates-for-small-renewable-installations/

To review all documents submitted in response to the Commission's investigation, go to the url below and type in 05 EI 148 in the docket box: http://psc.wi.gov/apps/erf_search/content/result.asp (Michael Vickerman, Ex. Dir., RENEW Wisconsin, mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org, 608 255 4044, www.renewwisconsin.org)

NewsLinks:
RENEW Wisconsin Argues for Generic Feed-in Tariff Case


pisode of the Inside Renewable Energy podcast, hosted by Steven Lacey and featuring guests, Paul Gipe of Wind-Works and John Farrel of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance New Rules Project. After doing about 20 minutes of additional research, Tregilus begins exploring the possibility of adopting a FIT law in the state of Nevada.

August 2008-June 2009: Tregilus gives several FIT presentations to various energy stakeholder groups in Nevada.

July 2009: The Great Basin Resource Watch, under the guidance of John Hadder, joins the FIT effort in Nevada and the Feed-in Tariffs for Nevada (FIT4NV) Initiative is born.

October 2009: The Reno Gazette Journal publishes an oped by Tregilus, "FITs Can Boost Homegrown Energy Production."

November 2009: Tregilus is asked to deliver a presentation on FITs to the Legislative Interim Committee on Production and Use of Energy (SCR 19). As a result of the presentation, the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada (PUCN) is requested by the Committee chair, Senator Mike Schneider, to open an investigatory docket into FITs (docket #09-11004).

January-April 2010: Two rounds of comments and two stakeholder workshops on FITs are conducted by the PUCN.

May 20, 2010: PUCN Commissioner, Rebecca Wagner, presents the PUCN FIT report to Senator Schneider's Interim Committee. Tregilus also gives a follow up presentation based on the report's findings highlighting for the Committee how a FIT program might be integrated into Nevada's energy incentives mix.

June 2010: The SCR 19 Committee meets for its last "work session" prior to the regular legislative session in 2011. The Committee decides not to submit a bill draft request (BDR) for FITs. Their reasoning, with the exception of Committee chair Senator Schneider, was they did not yet know enough about the policy and have not had an opportunity to study it further. It should be noted that Nevada holds biennial legislative sessions that last 120 days, ergo, being a legislator in Nevada is not a full-time job.

August 12, 2010: Senator Mike Schneider, chair of the Senate Committee on Energy, Infrastructure, and Transportation during regular Nevada Legislative sessions, submits BDR 229 that "Provides for establishment of a feed-in tariff program for renewable energy sources." The BDR 229 will be drafted based on these guidelines:
"Request the drafting of a bill authorizing the PUCN to adopt regulations establishing a feed-in tariff program for renewable energy sources of all types listed in NRS 704.7811. The program must not conflict with existing statutory programs such as net metering and the renewable portfolio standard. The program should focus on providing incentives for projects and participants that do not presently qualify for existing statutory renewable energy programs and, in particular, for projects in the 100 kilowatt to 3 megawatt range. The program should adopt best practices from existing feed-in tariff programs in other jurisdictions, including foreign programs, and should be constructed in a manner to balance potential impacts on ratepayers with advancement of the legislative findings on State energy policy enunciated in NRS 701.010. The program should also be consistent with existing federal requirements. The PUCN should be given the authority to design the
pricing mechanism and to administratively set rates."

August-December 2010: The FIT4NV Initiative is presently building a coalition to support the adoption of BDR 229 in the 2011 Nevada Legislative session.

---

ABOUT FIT4NV
Feed-in Tariffs for Nevada (FIT4NV): is an Energy Independence and Economic Security Initiative. FIT4NV is a coalition of individuals, businesses, government, and nonprofit groups working together to promote energy independence, economic security, job creation, and technological innovation through the adoption of feed-in tariff legislation in the state of Nevada by 2011.

Web: http://www.FIT4NV.org

Posted by at 02:20 AM |