This page and its contents are copyright © 2007 by Etopia News Channel. All rights in all media reserved.

California Energy Commission wants “feed-in tariff ” to boost state’s renewable energy output

In a recent California Politics Today article entitled “California Feed-In Tariff Initiative (CalFIT INIT) is launched to create jobs and reduce dependence on imported and CO2-emitting energy sources,” it was reported that the California Energy Commission (CEC), in its lavishly-illustrated and surprisingly-readable 2007 Integrated Energy Policy Report (adopted December 5, 2007), had said it “believes that excess solar generation delivered to the grid should be compensated through a feed-in tariff [“fixed, long-term prices that utilities are legally obligated to pay for renewable electricity”].”

In a document provided to California Politics Today, the CEC cited the failure of California to significantly increase the proportion of its electricity being generated by renewable means as a reason to move to a feed-in tariff system, pointing out that:

“California’s RPS [Renewable Portfolio Standard, the proportion of power utilities are required to get from renewable sources] was intended to be performance-based, with a certain percentage of electricity generation coming from renewable generators. However, the percentage of renewable generation in California in 2006 was virtually the same as it was in 2002 when the program began (10.9 percent in 2006 versus 11 percent in 2002). Although the amount of renewable energy delivered has increased, it has not kept pace with the state’s increasing electric load. Meanwhile, Germany’s feed-in tariff has increased the percentage of renewable electricity from 6.3 percent in 2000 to 12.5 percent in 2007. As a result, Germany is now examining higher goals of 27 percent by 2020 and 45 percent by 2030.”

In an nearly-40 minute audio interview this afternoon on the Etopia News Channel, Terry Tamminen, the former head of California's Environmental Protection Agency and Chief Policy Advisor to California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, said that while he supported the concept of a feed-in tariff for California, he did not believe that it was “essential” that one be adopted in order for the state to meet the Renewable Portfolio Standards that it has set for itself.

He said reaching those targets might be delayed a bit due to environmental concerns regarding the construction of transmission lines needed to bring remotely-generated renewable power into the heavily-populated areas where it would be used, but that these goals could be met without having a feed-in tariff in place.

A feed-in tariff that encouraged the widely-distributed installation of photovoltaic solar generating systems on residences and businesses, by definition already located in places where people and companies use the electricity generated by these systems, would, of course, have no need for the construction of additional transmission lines to bring in power from distant locations.

Mr. Tamminen made these comments in an interview about his latest book, Lives per Gallon, which argues that the big oil companies have engaged in “lies” and a “conspiracy” comparable to those which resulted in the tobacco industry being massively and successfully sued by state Attorneys General a few years ago. The former Schwarzenegger advisor said that state Attorneys General should organize and bring a similar lawsuit against the oil companies and that they could do so on many of the same grounds used against the tobacco companies.

You can listen to this interview in its entirety in the Brightcove video player below. You can order Lives per Gallon by clicking on the Amazon link below that.