Of possible policy options, shifting subsidies from fossil fuels to clean energy sources was deemed to be the most important policy mechanism we can use to combat climate change.

Methodology & In-Depth Findings

Over the past year, Solar Tribune has invested extensive time and resources interviewing experts across every sector and field that touches upon climate change and the need for action: advocacy groups, scientists and academics, politicians and government leaders, writers, influencers, and more. In connecting with these over 100 experts, our goal has been to ask them for input on the type of action that we need to be seeing, both on a collective and an individual level, to fight climate change.

A key resource built out thanks to these invaluable conversations has been a compendium of proposals, supporting quotes, and links and documents where Solar Tribune readers can find out more information when they want to dig deeper. You can wade through the bevy of policy priorities, individual recommendations, and other outcomes from this project at the following links:

• Advocating for the Right Public Policies
• Individual Action to Combat Climate Change

This extensive interviewing process is still an ongoing and ever-evolving effort, meaning we’re continuing to build out the above resources (so, please continue to check in on them and see these ‘virtual conversations’ grow!). But in answering those questions, the experts with whom we were connecting started sharing insights into some additional questions outside of the original prompts. Where we were asking for policy proposals that were important, these thought leaders were debating which were the most effective compared with which got the most bang for the buck (whether literal dollars and cents or in terms of political capital). They also highlighted actions that maybe weren’t as directly impactful on a CO2 level but were still intangibly vital. And a common theme of questions that kept coming up: how much should we really be discussing the importance of individual action compared with demanding accountability from politicians? Similarly, how much should we care about our household carbon footprints when the real impact is no doubt coming from the corporate carbon footprint?

Recognizing that these questions were just as critical, if not more so, than the original ones we had been asking, as well as reflecting on the fact that we had inherently built an extensive rolodex of climate experts (both those who participated with shareable quotes and those we’ve connected with on other levels behind the scenes), we realized it was important to take the next step. We want our contribution to the climate conversation to not just be listing out possible routes to take, but using these expert voices to quantitatively evaluate priorities.

With that, we rolled out our Solar Tribune Climate Expert Survey. Thanks to our over 100 participants who were generous enough to share their time and insights with us via private survey, we’re happy to now be publishing version 1.0 of those results. This iteration is just version 1.0, not a final product, because we do recognize some limitations inherent in our results thus far, and we want to engage with more experts, people with more diverse backgrounds and perspectives, and build a consortium of climate experts who can help us minimize those limitations while maximizing the applicability of our results.

The goal is to really gauge where the climate action winds are blowing, where they may be blowing in coming years, and (most importantly) where they should be going. So, let’s dive in..

Questions Asked

To start with, we collected 13 of the top climate policy priorities that came from our one-on-one expert interviews. These 13 items represent themes, policy mechanisms, and actions that authoritative thought leaders have advocated for in our discussions, and (in no particular order) they are:

• Carbon pricing
• Shifting subsidies from fossil fuels to clean energy sources
• Clean energy financing policies
• Renewable portfolio standards
• Feed-in tariffs
• Transportation policies that encourage EV adoption
• Transportation policies that require elevated efficiency from vehicles
• Building energy codes
• Appliance energy standards
• Policies for industrial efficiency / emissions
• Public funding for technological solutions and R&D
• Land use policies
• Focus on a just transition and environmental justice

Presenting these 13 policies, we asked each survey responded to rank all of these options against each other in three different categories:

1. Importance
2. Cost-effectiveness
3. Effectiveness in reducing CO2

Another topic that came up frequently in expert interviews was the debate about how much emphasis should be placed on different potential groups and influencers for climate action. Some activists express anger and frustration about the trend of focusing on how individuals can reduce their carbon emissions because it is theoretically letting the most polluting entities—corporations—off the hook. Along that same train of thought, many argue that it simply should not matter what any particular individual or corporation can do because, in the end, they’re always going to act in their self-interest. As such, this argument goes, regulators and policymakers must be the ones instilling certain requirements towards sustainability, or at the very least putting a thumb on the scale to make sure the dangerous externalities of climate change are priced into the decisions made by people and companies. To address these points, we asked our respondents to rank on a scale of 0-5 how important it was to:

• Encourage individual citizens to take action on climate
• Encourage policymakers to take action on climate
• Encourage individual corporations to take action on climate

And, lastly, to ensure we knew who we were talking to, we asked from demographic information from any respondents who were comfortable sharing the following:

• Their political affiliation
• Their state or country
• Their gender
• The industry/sector in which they work
• Whether they consider themselves a climate activist

Initial Results

The results from this Version 1.0 of the survey are thought-provoking, and they can best be expressed through graphical representation:

Limitations of the Survey

Before diving into the implications from these results and the conclusions we can begin to make, we must walk through some of the previously suggested limitations. These limitations are important to analyze because they should give us some pause in declaring the results authoritative quite yet.

The biggest limitation established was in who we were able to get to complete the survey. Though we spent extensive effort in reaching a broad set of leaders—people of different political persuasions, lines of work, and more—the people who did end up participating are still a self-selecting group. As such, for full transparency, we do want to present a breakdown of who these 120 people are whose answers comprise version 1.0:

Note: Dark blue has most respondents, lighter blue is moderate respondents, yellow is very few submissions. 

Note: Dark blue has most respondents, lighter blue is moderate respondents, yellow is very few submissions. 

Obviously, we’d love to fill this out more completely and fully representatively. We want respondents in equal amounts from both sides of the aisle; we want as many women as men to participate, we want to target influencers and stakeholders who don’t purely consider themselves as climate advocates but are actually just operating in their industry while considering the realities of carbon emissions. If you fit the bill of any of these groups currently underrepresented in our survey, or you know anyone who would fit the bill and is indeed a thought leader, please let us know!

Outside of those who participated, the structure of our survey also has inherent shortcomings that should be acknowledged. Our list of climate policy proposals is, of course, incomplete, and it’s also ignoring that the ideal direction is a suite of complementary policies rather than just one ‘best’ option. No single proposal will be a silver bullet, but by tapping into all of the best tools available that’s how you can build great success. That theme came up time and again in our interviews, and we’ve acknowledged the need for this discussion of ‘System Changes, No Silver Bullet’ on this page, but by artificially requiring respondents to pick one policy over another some of that nuance can certainly be lost.

Another limitation came from the fact that we lumped together policies that stretch expanded beyond single sectors: transportation to power generation to the built environment to land use and more. Each of these sectors has specific goals and unique considerations, so pitting them head to head is a bit of an apples and oranges comparison, in theory. That said, we’re approaching this as a theoretical government leader or political candidate must approach it in practice. When these leaders commit to climate action, various sectors are all essential to address, though some may be more urgent, have lower-hanging fruit, or require different levels of political capital. In that way, pitting these policies against each other is often what leaders must do.

But those limitations should not mean the results of this survey are moot. In fact, in conducting this survey we accomplished an important feat in getting responses from curated experts, not the general public or not decision-makers who aren’t as well-versed in the climate reality as they are in general politics. The people who have provided answers in this version 1.0 are the people who live, work, and breathe these important topics. So, let’s see what insights we can glean from the previously listed results.

Implications of the Results

Recognizing that we have to hedge how much we read into these results given the above limitations, we can still start to recognize some important and valuable trends.  First and foremost, the relative ranking of policy options prove to be telling. Shifting subsidies from fossil fuels to clean energy was definitely the most recommended by our experts, as it was rated as the most important, the most effective, and the most cost effective policy across the board.

Trailing behind, carbon pricing and clean energy financing were both in the top 3 of each of these categories as well, showing that these are also critical to any sort of massive package of policies to push forth.

On the other side of the equation, the bottom 5 of each of the categories included public funding of R&D, appliance energy standards, feed-in tariffs, and land use policies. Note that these low relative rankings doesn’t necessarily mean these policy options aren’t worthwhile. In fact, our one-on-one interviews with experts have provided us with key insider quotes endorsing them specifically (see these quotes endorsing R&D, appliance energy standards, feed-in tariffs, and land use). That said, the inherent ‘game’ of this survey was prioritizing and figuring out which policies were atop the priority list and which were less imperative and/or time sensitive. Given that reality, if there was compromise needed to get a wide-scale package implemented, for example, perhaps these types of policies would need to be at the top of the chopping block

While these notes are the most obvious standout points from the survey results, one of the most compelling discussion points come where there’s disparity between the questions. Environmental justice, in particular, ranked as the fourth most important policy consideration but in the bottom three in terms of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. That result demonstrates that building in the social equity factor will surely add costs to a policy package without as much direct impact to CO2 results, but our experts still ranked it highly for all the obvious reasons why it’s the right thing to do.

Another important conclusion comes in the ranking of individual vs. corporate vs. policy focus. Our expert respondents overwhelming found that policymakers are the ones that should be held most accountable, followed by corporations, and with individuals coming in last. This relative ranking tracks with the scale of potential impact (i.e., government action can have impact many individual corporations, and the typical corporate impact encompasses the carbon footprint equivalent of hundreds to thousands to even millions of individuals). Similarly, these results fall in line with the role each actor plays: a government’s job is to protect its people and ensure they prosper, while a corporation’s sole goal in a capitalist environment is to maximize shareholder return, and an individual is most likely to work altruistically after their basic needs are met—but again the impact of what individuals can do is limited without them trying to tap into that corporate or government level (in fact, that’s the individual action many of our experts recommended—trying to influence change at your workplace or with your wallet as a vote in the economy, or by mobilizing voters and putting pressure on elected officials).

Refining and Building Out Moving Forward

As stated, these results simply represent version 1.0. The Solar Tribune goal is to multiply the number of respondents to our survey and make them more representative and then check back in with a version 2.0.

If you would like to participate, please get in touch with us at matt@solartribune.com. If you specifically have recommendations about experts who should get involved that are women, Republicans, or not climate advocates, per se, then we’d love for you to make those connections for us as well!

And even if you aren’t in those groups who are less represented in our results, we still want more volume of respondents so we have the granularity in version 2.0 we can break out the results even further:

• What policies are favored for Republicans vs. Democrats?
• How does the sector in which you work in influence who you think should be pushed most between individuals, corporations, and government officials?
• Do men and women differ in the priority they place on different sectors of action?

These are the nuanced and important questions we’re eager to answer—but we need your help to do so!

The post 2021 Climate Policy & Industry Priorities: Survey of Industry, Academic, and Political Leaders appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Many thought leaders indeed espouse the mantra that true change will come via systematic and societal change rather than through shaming individuals for their actions. Indeed, reports have shown that over 70% of global emissions since 1988 have come at the hands of just 100 global companies. However, the doom and gloom of the frequent climate change reports and mixed targets has people looking for ways to take action. By remaining idle, people are more prone to what the psychiatric community has started to describe as “climate grief.”

Instead, millions are taking to the Internet and trusted resources to find out what action can be taken. And the result isn’t just to minimize personal guilt, but in fact collective action—changes in diets, driving habits, energy use, and more—can add up to be a powerful climate tool in aggregate. Even last Fall’s report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) made a pivot to stress that individual actions, in addition to collective actions, would be required to mitigate and prevent the worst potential climate change impacts, particularly when changes in behavior and lifestyle were enacted in complement of technological and structural change. The impact of such individual actions would be even greater in areas with higher wealth and inherently higher consumption lifestyles.

Source: Phys.org

So while the most impactful act an individual may be able to do to affect the climate in a positive way is likely voting for candidates and policies that will drive the needed systematic changes, many concerned citizens are looking at their personal carbon footprint and seeking out a way for them to improve.

A particular challenge, though, has been that as far back as the 1970s when conservation and energy efficiency was being touted by President Jimmy Carter amid the oil crisis, the energy-conscious lifestyle changes have been unfairly and unnecessarily associated with sacrifice and a decline in quality of life. The truth of modern technology and creative innovation across energy-related sectors, though, is that individual climate-positive actions can be made that maintain or even improve quality of life.

Seeking Ways to Empower Individual Climate Action

These facts lead Solar Tribune to a set of very important questions: What are the most impactful personal actions that individuals or small organizations can embrace to reduce carbon footprint and help mitigate climate change? What exactly is the measurable impact, as well as difficulty of those actions? And how can we educate the public on choosing and implementing these strategies.

These questions must not remain theoretical, and so we’re looking to bring together the great energy and climate minds to kick off this much-needed conversation. Similar to our compendium on what climate policy mechanisms are the most critical in the public push towards effective action, Solar Tribune plans to reach out to leaders across the relevant industries to ask the above simple, but necessary, questions.

Below we’ve highlighted the main categories under which the answers to those questions may come, kicking it off with some publicly available information on potential options. As we engage in these conversations with thought leaders, we’ll update this page with their input, the big ideas, and the critical conversation. In that way, this page will quickly become an anthology of approaches and strategies to move climate-positive action into what we need them to be for the next decade and how those ideas can be best promoted.

If you have questions, thoughts, or want to add your voice to the mix in this collection of ideas, please reach out to us directly.

Investment

Investing in Climate Positive Companies

Source: Grist

What the action looks like: While voting in elections will directly impact leaders who make climate impactful policy, for better or worse, but many would argue that rather than waiting for sparse elections a more direct way to voice your views is to vote with your dollars. If you have an investment portfolio, you may opt to identify companies who are working to mitigate or prevent climate change through their business operations or even just through corporate social responsibility (CSR). Further, as an investor (no matter how small) in any publicly traded company, you can make your voice heard and push for more climate-positive actions in shareholder meetings.

Example of the impact is: As one example highlighted by the United States Sustainable Investment Foundation (USSIF):

In 2009, a proposal from Trillium Asset Management asking Idacorp, an electric utility, to set greenhouse gas emission goals was supported by 51 percent of the shares voted, prompting the company to set a goal of reducing its carbon dioxide emissions intensity in the years 2010-2013 to 10–15 percent below the level in 2005. In its 2012 sustainability report, it reported that it had succeeded in reducing its carbon intensity 27 percent in 2012 from the 2005 level.

Level of difficulty: Medium—requires a person to have money to invest, the knowhow on how to direct their investments, and the research into what companies would be most positive or what actions they should encourage as a shareholder.

Relevant quotes, stakeholders, and resources:

“We believe that this wave of sustainable investment can deliver strong long-term returns because it is common sense that you would consider the ESG factors around any business model. This is not a trade-off of values for value.” – Lila Preston, co-head of the growth equity team at Generation Investment Management as quoted by Financial Times

“Divestment is an important symbol, but it’s symbolic. The oil and gas companies seem to be doing pretty well regardless of $6 trillion having been divested by various college funds and other endowments over the last several years.” – Richard Heede, Co-founder and co-director of the Climate Accountability Institute in Vox.com interview

Investing to Curb Climate Change: A Guide for the Individual Investor by USSIF

Divesting from Companies Harmful to the Climate

Source: The sideways view

What the action looks like: Just as investing in climate positive companies can reinforce and support those public companies that are making the right steps when it comes to climate change, pulling your existing funds out of companies that aren’t taking those proactive steps is another way to let your wallet speak for you. As more individuals divest from companies that are shouldering a disproportionate load of climate responsibility without taking the necessary steps to move away from those carbon emitting activities fast enough, it sends price signals and can be enough to influence change within said companies that would have more business reason to clean up their act than ever before.

What the impact is: The impact is more intangible with divestment, though a peer-reviewed article in the Sustainability journal notes:

Divestment seems to have imparted a need for action on finance and climate change in the finance world, where a discussion has developed around the pros and cons of divestment versus alternatives; this discussion is itself evidence of impact

Level of difficulty:  Medium—requires a person to have money already invested in these companies in some way, the knowhow on how to redirect their investments, and the research into what companies deserve divestment from your portfolio today.

Relevant quotes, stakeholders, and resources:

“In short: it just doesn’t make sense for individuals to hold stock in fossil fuel companies while understanding the consequence of climate change. The one thing we know the fossil fuel industry cares about is money. Collectively, we invest a lot of it. If you help to lead a personal divestment campaign focused on the stigmatization of these bad actors — weakening their political capital — we can help the momentum of climate solutions and sustainable economies. This was a key part of how the world ended the apartheid system in South Africa, and we hope it can have the same effect on the climate crisis.” – Statement on personal divestment from 350.org

“Divestment, to date, probably has reduced about zero tonnes of emissions. It’s not like you’ve capital-starved [the] people making steel and gasoline,” he said. “I don’t know the mechanism of action where divestment [keeps] emissions [from] going up every year. I’m just too damn numeric.” – Bill Gates, as quoted by Financial Times

Fossil Fuel Divestment & Reinvestment by USSIF

Energy Providers

Install Solar Power at Home

Source: Solar Tribune

What the action looks like: Energy used in the home is a contributor towards personal carbon footprints because in even the most decarbonized of grids there are still fossil fuels being burned for at least a portion of the electricity mix. While that concentration of renewable energy can vary (from 86% in Maine to 13% in Wyoming), no matter where you live one of the most guaranteed ways to make sure your energy comes without CO2 emissions attached is to generate it yourself renewably. The accelerated proliferation of residential solar installations shows how popular that is, and while you’re unlikely to be able to go completely off the grid just by installing solar, the more solar energy you produce on your property the less you’ll be associated with the carbon emissions from your region’s power grid.

What the impact is: As calculated by Andrew Blakers, a Professor of Engineering at Australian National University:

A 10-kilowatt solar PV system installed on your roof will produce about 14 MWh of electricity per year. Since coal power stations produce 0.9 tonnes of carbon dioxide per MWh this save about 12 tonnes of CO2 emissions per year.

 

Level of difficulty: Medium—the path is straightforward, but the costs can be prohibitive and homes with incompatible roofs or people who rent instead of own may not have the option.

Relevant quotes, stakeholders, and resources:

Planning a Home Solar Electric System by U.S. Department of Energy

A Maryland Consumer’s Guide to Solar by The Maryland Energy Administration

The Environmental and Public Health Benefits of Achieving High Penetration of Solar Energy in the United States by U.S. Department of Energy

Switch to Green Energy Providers

Source: KHMER Times

What the action looks like: In certain parts of the country, the utility market isn’t the monopoly it always was and customers actually have the ability to choose whichever retail electricity provider they like. While the areas where such deregulated markets exist encompass a minority of the U.S. population, those who do have the option can leave their legacy utility for whatever reason they see fit, whether that’s more affordable rates, more customizable programs, or to choose an energy provider who has more renewable energy in it’s generation mix. Such customers can do their research and identify green energy providers and make the choice to switch so that the energy they use in their home accounts for fewer carbon emissions. Note that when you switch providers, your home is still attached to the same grid and the physical electrons going into your home are indistinguishable from what they were before, but your payments go towards the renewable energy certificates (R.E.C.s) that funnel the funds from your payment to those who generated the same amount of renewable energy.

What the impact is: As quoted by the New York Times, John Rogers—a senior energy analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists—says:

Short of having a solar array on your roof and keeping all those electrons to yourself, it’d be really hard to figure out what type of electrons you’re using if you didn’t have something like R.E.C.s to keep track of the math…certificates are a legitimate way to foster the growth of the renewable energy industry.

 

Level of difficulty: Easy—that is if energy choice is available in your home market.

Relevant quotes, stakeholders, and resources:

Buying Clean Electricity by U.S. Department of Energy

Frequently Asked Questions About Switching to Green Power by Green Energy Consumers Alliance

Green Options by Maryland Public Service Commission

Transportation

Purchase an Electric Vehicle

Source: Wall Street Journal

What the action looks like: Every decade or so on average, Americans buy a new car. In recent years, purchasing an electric vehicle has become a more attainable decision for common citizens as prices come down and battery ranges go up. While gasoline powered cars have continued to make marginal increases in efficiency, expressed in terms of CO2 emissions per mile, electric vehicles greatly surpass the equivalent emissions of those cars and even hybrid cars. By being powered by the grid, which is more carbon efficient than gasoline powered engines (and getting less carbon intensive by the year as the grid decarbonizes), driving an EV becomes a cleaner decision with each year that passes.

What the impact is: According to an explainer by Carbon Brief:

In the UK in 2019, the lifetime emissions per kilometre of driving a Nissan Leaf EV were about three times lower than for the average conventional car, even before accounting for the falling carbon intensity of electricity generation during the car’s lifetime.

 

Level of difficulty: Medium—new EV models with customer friendly prices are becoming available every day, as is availability of public EV chargers. The ease will only become greater with time.

Relevant quotes, stakeholders, and resources:

Are Electric Vehicles Really Better for the Climate? Yes. Here’s Why by Union of Concerned Scientists

Emissions from Hybrid and Plug-In Electric Vehicles by U.S. Department of Energy

 Take Public Transportation

Source: Solaris Bus & Coach SA

What the action looks like: People naturally need to get to and from work, school, and elsewhere, and buying an electric vehicle or even a fuel-efficient vehicle might not be practical for them from a cost or logistics standpoint. However, they can still make significant impact on their carbon footprints by opting to take public transportation rather than driving their car (or taking a Taxi or calling an Uber) whenever possible. The name of the game for public transportation is efficiency; buses and trains are running on a regular basis and the more people who can be taken to their end destination with them, the greater ‘value’ is taken from the emissions that propelled those vehicles. More people on public transportation reduces the amount of GHG-emitting cars on the road, reducing traffic which helps bring down transportation-sector emissions even further.

What the impact is: According to the Federal Transit Administration:

Heavy rail transit such as subways and metros produce on average 76% lower greenhouse gas emissions per passenger mile than an average single-occupancy vehicle (SOV). Light rail systems produce 62% less and bus transit produces 33%. Transit can also reduce greenhouse gas emissions by facilitating compact development, which conserves land and decreases the distances people need to travel to reach destinations. Moreover, by reducing congestion, transit reduces emissions from cars stuck in traffic. Finally, transit can minimize its own greenhouse gas emissions by using efficient vehicles, alternative fuels, and decreasing the impact of project construction and service operations.

 

Level of difficulty: Medium—depending on where someone lives, public transit can be either incredibly easy or completely not available.

Relevant quotes, stakeholders, and resources:

Can Public Transportation Save the World from Climate Change? By Metro Magazine

The Planet Can’t Survive Our Transportation Habits by CityLab

Avoid Air Travel

Source: Vox

What the action looks like: Flying is by far the most carbon-intensive way to travel per mile. Further, the small segment of the population that accounts for the greatest amount of flights end up amassing a significant carbon footprint and contribute more highly to climate change. As such, a common strategy is to reduce the amount of unnecessary air travel whenever possible, such as by conducting web conferences rather than cross-country flights for business purposes, by taking train or driving when possible on shorter flights, and finding other creative ways to reduce flight.

What the impact is: According to a writeup on the topic in the Guardian:

According to figures from German nonprofit Atmosfair, flying from London to New York and back generates about 986kg of CO2 per passenger. There are 56 countries where the average person emits less carbon dioxide in a whole year – from Burundi in Africa to Paraguay in South America. But even a relatively short return trip from London to Rome carries a carbon footprint of 234kg of CO2 per passenger – more than the average produced by citizens of 17 countries annually.

Level of difficulty: Low—while some flight instances are unavoidable, finding alternatives to flying or traveling to destinations that don’t require air travel are attainable for most people.

Relevant quotes, stakeholders, and resources:

Fly or Drive? Parsing the Evolving Climate Math by Yale Climate Connections

What’s Better For the Environment, Driving or Flying? By Sierra Club

Flying is Bad For the Planet. You Can Help Make It Better by New York Times

Reduce/Re-use/Recycle

Making Your Home More Energy Efficient

Source: AZ Energy Efficient Home

What the action looks like: The most climate-friendly type of energy, they say, is the energy that’s not generated because it’s not needed– rather than Megawatts, think of then as neg-a-watts. The more efficient you can make your home, the less energy you will use on a daily basis and the more your carbon footprint will be reduced. Integrating energy efficiency measures into your home can take many different forms, with common ones including using LEDs instead of incandescents, installing more energy-efficient appliances, installing insulation and high-performance doors and windows to reduce the amount of heat that leaks through the building envelope, and more. Many energy efficiency upgrades can start with a home energy audit performed by trained professionals at vendors or even from your utility provider.

What the impact is: According to the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions:

Homeowners and renters alike can benefit from an energy audit. An audit will evaluate energy bills, insulation, heating and cooling systems, electrical systems and appliances to determine how much energy your home consumes, and where energy is wasted. The auditor will make specific suggestions to increase your home’s energy efficiency. Following through on the recommendations could lead to savings between 5 and 30 percent on your energy bill. Improving your home’s energy efficiency doesn’t just save money.

Level of difficulty: Moderate– efficiency upgrades can be easy, like replacing a bulb, or they can be expensive and difficult, like installing new large appliances or installing insulation. It’s best to have an energy professional involved for the more difficult options.

Relevant quotes, stakeholders, and resources:

Home Energy Audits by U.S. Department of Energy

Energy Savings at Home by ENERGY STAR

Smarter House

“We preach energy efficiency before renewables for both individual homeowners and businesses. It’s in your best interest to make your building as energy efficient as possible so that you reduce your load and your emissions as possible, and then you consider renewables. It’s more efficient dollar-wise to focus your efforts on the efficiency of buildings before considering renewables. We take a whole building approach, and it’s first important to arm people with information through energy assessments of buildings. And a great part of it is that most of the opportunities for efficiency we find, people can do themselves.” – Tony DePrima, Energize Delaware Executive Director

“One observation we can take out of how the world has adjusted during the time of COVID-19, is the type of energy usage that has been avoided when we look at the world differently. For example, for all the people who could no longer go to their gyms who changed to just running out in the fresh air, that’s a lot less energy needed to run those facilities. And for all the vehicles that are now off the road and planes grounded, the energy reduction directly and indirectly in doing that is unprecedented. While home energy use may have increased, it’s a smarter energy use. Think of all the office buildings that keep lights on 24 hours per day, heat huge unoccupied spaces (don’t touch the thermostat sticker!), but now that energy is being used at home where people turn off the lights when they’re not needed as they have control. These are the type of thoughtful actions people can learn from.” — Alan King, CEO of Dusk Mobile

Recycling at Home

Source: CNBC

What the action looks like: One of the earliest environmental messages most people got was the value of recycling. Because of the immense time, energy, and resources that go into extracting elements from the earth and forming them into cans, glasses, and paper products, ensuring those materials can be reused effectively will offset the need to continue to create those products from scratch. While the transport and recycling process is not one free from emissions and energy use, it is (especially for aluminum) a net positive for emissions accounting.

What the impact is: According to Green America:

Our national recycling rate, meaning the amount of materials recycled and composted from our total waste, is roughly 35 percent. This reportedly reduces 184 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions, or the equivalent of taking 39 million cars off the road. And it would be even greater if the US surpassed a 50 percent recycling rate and joined world leaders like Germany and Taiwan.

Level of difficulty: Low—are you not recycling? There’s no reason not to recycle

Relevant quotes, stakeholders, and resources:

Recycling and Climate Change by North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

Source Reduction and Recycling: A Role in Preventing Global Climate Change by U.S. EPA

Benefits of Recycling by Stanford University

Reducing Wasted Material

Source: HotSchedules

What the action looks like: Reducing waste can be even more valuable than recycling, which is why the ‘reduce, reuse’ part of ‘reduce, reuse, recycle’ deserves more focus. Rather than recycle material, ensuring that it doesn’t need to be produced in such quantities in the first place or find ways that organic material can be returned to the earth and not put in the waste streams is critical. Two of the more commonly known strategies for reducing waste are to use reusable grocery bags and to compost your kitchen and garden scraps. When you bring your own reusable grocery bags, you prevent the need for added plastic or paper bags to be used for the same purpose. Those single-use plastic bags that you would otherwise get from the groceries not only require energy use and associated emissions for their production and transportation to the store, but they then end up in landfills and contribute to environmental degradation and climate change. Similarly, when you send your unused food scraps (whether uneaten food or inedible parts like banana peels and peanut shells) to the landfill with the rest of the garbage, not only are there fossil fuels burned to transport this extra waste to the landfill, but once they are in the landfill the conditions cause them to decompose anaerobically and release greenhouse gas emissions. Thus, by performing home composting with your organic food scraps, you’re able to attack your carbon footprint in two directions.

What the impact is: A study by the Environment Agency found that:

To have lower global warming potential than single-use plastic bags: paper bags should be used three times low-density polyethylene bags (the thicker plastic bags commonly used in supermarkets) should be used four times non-woven polypropylene bags should be used 11 times cotton bags should be used 131 times.

According to U.S. EPA numbers:

Nationally, the composting of food rose from 1.84 million tons in 2013 (5.0 percent of food) to 2.6 million tons (6.3 percent of food) in 2017. In 2017, Americans recovered over 67.0 million tons of municipal solid waste through recycling, and almost 27 million tons through composting. This is 1.13 pounds per person per day for recycling and 0.45 pounds per person per day for composting. Food composting curbside collection programs served 6.1 million households in 2017.

Level of difficulty: Varies depending on the practice; using reusable bags is easy because they are affordable and readily available whereas composting is high because you need enough space and knowhow to properly implement composting in your home

Relevant quotes, stakeholders, and resources:

How Banning Plastic Bags Could Help New York Mitigate Climate Change by Earth Institute, Columbia University

Plastic Bags, or Paper? Here’s What to Consider When You Hit the Grocery Store by The New York Times

How much can composting help to reduce my carbon footprint by The Eco Guide

Composting at Home by U.S. EPA

Food and Diet

Switch to a More Plant-Based Diet

Source: The Nation

What the action looks like: In order to feed the global population, a diet filled with more plants instead of animals and animal products is more efficient and reduces carbon emissions. An easy way to conceptualize why this is the case is by thinking about where the energy from your food comes from. When you eat plants, those plants get their energy from the sun and then you take the energy by eating it. When you eat meat or animal products, though, the energy goes from the sun to a plant that the animal eats before you get energy from the animal’s meat. That extra step is added inefficiency, and as such plant-based diets end up using up less land and water while creating fewer carbon emissions associated with transportation, processing, and the natural gaseous emissions from livestock. Eating lower on the food chain is thus an effective way to reduce your personal carbon footprint.

What the impact is: According to data analyzed by The Economist:

Giving up meat makes a big difference. For instance, compared with an American who eats 2,300 calories of a typical mix of foods, one who became vegetarian would knock 30 percent off their annual greenhouse-gas emissions from eating. But dairy, produced by methane-emitting cows, is still costly. Environmentally conscious omnivores can get similar reductions in their carbon footprints by cutting out milk and cheese. A better option still would be to go vegan for two-thirds of meals, while still occasionally indulging in animal products. Doing so would cut food-related greenhouse-gas emissions by nearly 60 percent. Absolute veganism, unsurprisingly, is the most environmentally friendly. Die-hard leaf-eaters can claim to have knocked off 85 percent off their carbon footprint.

Level of difficulty: Varies—depends on  your dietary restrictions, your culinary skills, and your willingness to make the adjustment. Some find the change to be easy, others it would be a great challenge.

Relevant quotes, stakeholders, and resources:

Plant-based diet can fight climate change – UN by BBC News

The Case for Plant Based by UCLA

Eating Plant-Based Diets Can Play a Huge Role in Limiting the Effects of Climate Change by Bioneers

Education and Advocacy

Vote for Climate Positive Candidates and Continue to Hold Elected Officials Responsible

Source: Green Peace

What the action looks like: While we seek out personal changes that can help our carbon footprints minimize, working to get leaders elected who will tackle the problems of climate change and emissions can have the biggest impact of all. While we are all only responsible for our own carbon footprints, it is these elected officials who can demand accountability from larger entities in government, in industry, and in aggregate. So, you can make a huge impact by using your right to vote for candidates who prioritize and act on climate change. You can even volunteer your time and resources towards getting such climate positive candidates elected. The work isn’t done when the candidate who is more climate positive takes office, though, as it’s up to the electorate to keep those leaders accountable to their climate promises and their green goals.

What the impact is: It’s hard to quantify the impact of your contributions towards a climate-focused candidate, but once such a candidate is in office there’s truly no limit to what the end result could be.

Level of difficulty: Easy—you just need to educate yourself and you can get started today!

Relevant quotes, stakeholders, and resources:

7 Senate races to watch on energy and environment by EE News

How to Find Your Climate Candidates by Outside Online

“The most important action towards global warming is to tell your elected officials that this is a priority for you and you expect them to act on it. Citizens need to do the research to know who represents them, from school board up through the President, and have their contact information to weigh in. You don’t need to be a policy expert, just the fact that you express that it’s a pressing issue for you is enough to share with them.” – Andrea McGimsey, Senior Director, Global Warming Solutions Campaign

Join Climate Advocacy Groups

Source: Climate Advocacy Lab

What the action looks like: Beyond supporting specific climate candidates, many broader-focused groups exist that look to tackle climate change advocacy across all areas: pushing for regulatory changes, advocating in federal, state, and local elections, educating the public, and more. These groups can push for specific policies, fight injustice that is taking place, and help raise awareness and education on all issues related to climate change.

What the impact is: It’s hard to quantify the impact of your contributions towards a climate-focused candidate, but once such a candidate is in office there’s truly no limit to what the end result could be.

Level of difficulty: Easy—you just need to educate yourself and you can get started today!

Relevant quotes, stakeholders, and resources:

Campaign Carbon Footprints by the Washington Post

Vote Climate U.S. PAC

U.S. Climate Action Network

Sunrise Movement

Educate Yourself and Others

Source: Sierra Club

What the action looks like: The saying “knowledge is power” may be cliche, but it became a well-known saying for a reason. When it comes to making sure you and your peers are motivated to take action on climate change and understand the best ways you can put up a fight against it, education must come first. Without adequate understanding of what climate change is, why it’s happening, and what can stop it, any advocacy or action will be stilted. Worse, a population that isn’t literate on climate, energy, the environment, and science, in general, are susceptible to being influenced by those trying to keep down the movement.

What the impact is: All of the above impacts may be for naught if they are implanted and supported by people educated by the issue, so it really all starts there. Further, according to a recent study in Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies, educated people who take action might actually find that these actions will be contagious to their peers, neighbors, and acquaintances:

For instance, several studies have demonstrated that the chances of an individual deciding to install solar panels increases as more panels are installed in their neighborhood or region. (One study calculated that for each additional installation in one California zip code, the probability of another increased by 0.78 percentage points.)

Level of difficulty: Easy—you’re already on this site, so you’re already taking the first steps towards educating yourself!

Relevant quotes, stakeholders, and resources:

The role of education in propelling climate action by The Commonwealth Education Hub

The role of climate change education on individual lifetime carbon emissions in PLOS One

How can environmental education help to combat climate change? by Iberdrola

“When researching and learning about climate, energy, and carbon footprints, people need to learn to go to the source. Trust the information and the evidence you can read yourself and whose sources you can trace and verify. That is the pillar of the Enlightenment that took us from the Dark Ages to now. The ability to question things and reason them out yourself by using peer-reviewed sources (that can be found at places like ScienceDirect, ResearchGate, or even Google Scholar) allows people to educate themselves and think critically about the best actions to take. This approach should not be left to just a handful of experts; it’s accessible to all and can be used by everyone.” – Greg P. Smestad, Ph.D. / Principal Consultant / Sol Ideas Technology Development

The post Empowering Individual Action To Fight Climate Change appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Decades after climate scientists first started sounding the alarm on climate change and a full 12 years after Vice President Al Gore stood on stage to warn us about climate change’s Inconvenient Truth, the Sunrise Movement and the policy package that came to be known as the Green New Deal finally seemed to bring desire for action to the United States federal government. While the complete package of a Green New Deal looks to be a long shot – at least at this point in time – to be passed, it succeeded in bringing the conversation about climate action to the forefront of American politics.

For example, whereas in previous elections it was simple enough to separate potential Presidential candidates by those who prioritized climate action and those who did not, the field of 2020 Democratic candidates are now forced to bring their actionable climate plans to voters and defend not just that climate action is necessary but that their particular plan is the one that will get the job done in time. While of course the question of how high on each candidate’s priority list energy and climate lie is up for debate, voters (and donors) are paying more attention than ever before and the seven-hour town hall on climate change that CNN hosted with the prospective candidates demonstrated the level of detail at which voters are now looking.

Photo source: CNN.com

All that is set up to say: what are the right policy measures that should be utilized by the U.S. government? The clean energy community certainly doesn’t speak with a singular voice, and you’ll have portions of the climate advocacy population ardently defending carbon taxes vs. renewable portfolio standards; investment tax credits vs. deregulating electricity markets; policies for transportation emissions vs. industrial emissions; and many more. This segmentation can be damaging in the short-term because those fighting against spending money on climate action or for placing regulations on corporations tend to be unified, but in the long run, it’s critical that the federal government’s role in climate action be chosen deliberately, carefully, and with all the facts. Germany’s progress towards emissions reductions, for example, was delayed a damaging amount due to acting too quickly and going down arguably the wrong path. So, while inaction is wasting time, going down the wrong pathway (pouring time and resources into the non-ideal solutions) can be just as damaging towards the ultimate goal.

That conversation about which policies are the most critical is the basis of Solar Tribune’s Climate Policy Primer. In this ongoing project, we’re connecting with stakeholders across industries, regions, and positions to ask them about which climate change policies are the most singularly important in their opinion. These conversations we’re continuing to have are informing and growing this living document (and if you’d like to share your two cents, please don’t hesitate to reach out!), so I’d encourage you to refer to that page to see about some of the identified priorities in climate policy, the very issue that’s being debated on the federal and electoral stages today.

While this is a process that is of course still ongoing, a number of interesting trends have been popping up. One intriguing occurrence I noticed quickly was how many people, when narrowed down to a single policy to discuss, advocate for those that were not in the list of usual suspects like carbon pricing, tax credits, or mandatory renewable energy goals. Rather, these advocates were passionate about first and foremost identifying and bringing up climate change policy measures that are less likely to be discussed in the soundbites from the campaign trail. This trend could identify an opportunity for the innovative and forward-looking candidates to blaze a new trail and connect with climate-concerned voters in new ways, but more importantly, these experts in their fields simply saw the measures as being too critical to land anywhere other than the top of the priority list.

A few examples of these less commonly discussed climate policy options include the following…

Land Use Policies

Solar Tribune connected with Protect Our Winters about the climate policy question. This organization was founded by a professional snowboarder who inherently treasured the natural landscapes on Earth and saw the dangers that climate change had begun posing to all outdoor spaces. The concern for areas to hike, to snowboard, and to enjoy nature are naturally paired with all of the questions of climate change. From the mission statement of Protect Our Winters, the organization notes:

“Right now, we have the luxury of worrying about how climate change might impact the outdoor industry. Right now, we get to help dictate the outcome rather than react to a foregone conclusion. If we sit on our hands for the next two decades, we won’t be worried about powder days, tourism or having fun. We’ll be worried about the stability of our environment, our jobs, and our economy.”

Inherent to this inclination to protect nature comes the unique perspective on what climate change approaches are most important.  When I talked to Lindsay Bourgoine, Director of Policy & Advocacy of Protect Our Winters, she shared the following sentiment:

“Public lands not only enhance carbon sequestration, but their protection often removes them as a fossil fuel development opportunity. As an example, on the Arctic Refuge, not only do we oppose the drilling of this land because of the human rights issues and conservation issues, but also because the indirect emissions that would come from such drilling would be equivalent to about a million new cars on the road. Protecting public lands is protecting the climate.”

While many of the most commonly shared ideas on fighting climate change focus on the need to minimize the man-made CO2 emissions emitted into the atmosphere, the focus on land use policies instead prioritize maximizing Earth’s natural tendencies to be able to regulate and capture carbon. But when we increase greenhouse gas emissions while simultaneously reducing the environment’s capacity to regulate those same emissions, that’s when the climate death spiral comes into play.

LEAF Asia

Focusing on a Just Transition

Another area of focus outside the top-discussed federal roles in climate policy came from Solar Tribune’s discussion with Eban Goodstein, Director of Graduate Programs in Sustainability at Bard College. When talking to Eban, he noted that federal energy policies had already largely done their role in the traditional routes of tax subsidies, R&D dollars, and the like. Given that renewables like solar and wind were already cost-competitive, or already more affordable to build than new fossil generation, two routes for climate policy were necessary. For the role of continuing to bolster renewable energy generation, Goodstein saw that as the responsibility of state and local governments. Each more localized government would be able to assess the hurdles that still remained in their region and which policies were the best fit for their situation, rather than look at a one-size-fits-all policy for the entire country. These state and local initiatives are the basis of Bard’s upcoming Solve Climate By 2030 initiative over the coming year.

While deferring to state and local governments for solutions is not entirely outside of the usual suspects of climate solutions, what is more unique in Goodstein’s perspective is where the federal role is given the above. While the more regional governments should be charged with increasing renewable deployment, Goodstein sees the federal government’s role to be one that oversees this energy transition and ensure it’s completed in a fair and just manner. As Goodstein and his co-author, L. Hunter Lovins, noted in a paper:

“Green New Deal type policies that focus on employment and on fair and reliable access to power and transportation will be central to ensuring that the social benefits of a rapid transition to clean energy are widely spread and that the transition is not cut short due to policy opposition.”

The idea behind this push is that the nation has already reached a part where the clean energy transition will be taking place in one way or another, but if that plays out naturally there are risks that certain populations will benefit more from the change than others. Whether that’s certain disadvantaged communities not receiving the economic benefits of renewable energy, regional disparity in how the jobs market changes (e.g., coal country getting hit harder than others in economic consequences), or another way, the federal government has a role to play in ensuring that the energy transition is equitable, accessible to all populations, and doesn’t play favorites with different populations.

Photo source: Shepherd Express

Allowing Geothermal, Hydro, and Biomass Parity to Achieve with Other Renewables

When the clean energy transition is discussed in popular media, most people recognize that conversation to strictly deal with wind power and solar energy. However, a host of other renewable energy generation sources are critical to the U.S. energy mix today and in the future, including geothermal, hydropower, and biomass. When discussing the climate policy primer with The Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI), the non-profit organization highlighted to Solar Tribune the need for federal policies to include these secondary forms of renewable energy as well:

“Wind and solar will need to be complemented by geothermal energy, hydropower, and biomass energy. This can be incentivized by modifying the current tax credit structure that currently favors solar and wind power. Despite unequal access to tax incentives, geothermal, hydropower, and biomass are valuable because they provide baseload power and are located in geographically diverse areas.”

Renewable energy and climate change policies must not blindly support just one or two technology types, and despite solar and wind being the most commonly considered renewable energy sources, they are not alone the solution. In fact, until 2018 hydropower was the most common source of renewable energy generation in the United States, only recently being overtaken by wind. Because of the flexibility these non-wind and non-solar renewables provide based on local geography, resources, and economics, EESI is smartly beating the drum of these alternatives. While of course that does not mean they don’t see wind and solar as key parts of the solution, but any climate change policy that includes tax credits or other economic incentives must also account for the value provided by the renewable energy sources less often placed on the podium.

Photo source: Better World Solutions

Conclusion

The takeaway here is that voters and citizens who care about the government following the right policy pathways when it comes to climate change need not be so narrowly focused. While many groups may have coalesced around a handful of key ideas, a successful fight against climate change will tap into the full toolbox of solutions. So, the above (and other) options outside the usual suspects remain critical to investigate and about which to ask questions. As Solar Tribune continues connecting with advocates and thought leaders about the Climate Policy Primer, don’t be surprised if more new areas of focus arise that might seem out of left field. But just because they’re not the standard, sound-bite proven answers to the climate change questions does not mean they are not appropriate and effective real-life solutions.

About the author: Matt Chester is an energy analyst in Orlando, studied engineering and science & technology policy at the University of Virginia, and operates the Chester Energy and Policy blog and website to share news, insights, and advice in the fields of energy policy, energy technology, and more. For more quick hits in addition to posts on this blog, follow him on Twitter @ChesterEnergy.

The post Climate Change Policy Measures: Identifying Priorities, Particularly Outside of the Usual Suspects appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Mosaic is a company that provides financing for large home improvements, finding plans that help both contractor and homeowner recognize what they can truly afford. Too often, families will look at the high total costs for a solar rooftop upgrade and assume such a measure is out of reach for them. Even worse, other families simply think solar installations will be too costly and don’t even look into the numbers. Unfortunately, these kinds of financial restrictions tend to be most common on lower income households that could benefit the most from rooftop solar that could offset their power bills.

Looking to bridge the gap and show what’s possible, Mosaic has long offered financing for home upgrades, and recently they’ve launched their next generation of residential home solar loans known as PowerSwitch 6. After having already assisted almost 100,000 homes afford solar in just six years, this move represents an evolution that incorporates solar plus storage, efficiency measures, and prepares homeowners for the stepdown of solar tax credits.

Any program that enables the common family to embrace the energy and monetary benefits of personal solar is a winning venture. I had the opportunity to find out more from Erin Talbot, the GM of Solar at Mosaic, to learn more about this program and the company’s endeavor of making solar more accessible.

Mosaic

Matt Chester: Thanks so much for taking the time to share your story with Solar Tribune. To start, can you tell me a bit about your background and how you got involved in the solar field?

Erin Talbot: My background is in fintech and consumer lending, having previously held a variety of senior roles at E*TRADE as well as LightStream. So, while I’m new to the solar industry, my experience was a perfect fit for managing Mosaic’s next-generation solar financing platform, and I was excited to put my skills to work for a company with such an inspiring mission.

MC: Regarding Mosaic, why did you find it necessary to come up with a new structure for residential home solar loans, the PowerSwitch 6? Why are solar installations hard for households to pay for and how were existing loan structures falling short of meeting those needs?

ET: We think of PowerSwitch 6 not as ‘necessary’ to fix anything, but as the next step in the long-term evolution of solar financing, with benefits for both contractors and homeowners. One of the biggest innovations on the homeowner side is the ability to use combined total household income to qualify for a solar loan, which is unique in the solar industry. Households with multiple income sources should be able to count all of them towards their home solar loan application, and we think this will expand access to solar and all the cost savings that come with it.

MC: Within that program, you’ve also unveiled a new type of loan program, the PowerSwitch PLUS, which enables homeowners to package solar loans with re-roofing or other energy efficiency upgrades in the home. How does this package work and what are the benefits to the consumer?

ET: PowerSwitch PLUS is a flexible, one-stop solution for homeowners that want a single loan to finance everything they need for a home energy upgrade. Re-roofing is an obvious need–  no one’s going to put solar on a roof that they’ll need to replace in two years– but energy efficiency improvements are also important to get the maximum value out of your solar panels. In addition to the simplicity of using one loan to cover a range of home energy upgrades, PowerSwitch PLUS offers terms of 10, 15, and 20 years, which are hard to find with traditional home improvement loans that homeowners might otherwise use.

Photo Source: JoinMosaic.com

Results

MC: What have the results of these loan programs looked like? How many homes have used your loan programs and for how many of those homes would solar installations have been out of reach if they had to deal with the other options on the market?

ET: We’ve helped nearly 100,000 households go solar with our loan financing platform over the past six years, and we believe the innovations in PowerSwitch 6 will continue expanding on this growth by making solar and other energy efficient home improvements more affordable and accessible.

MC: With regard to PowerSwitch PLUS, do you have any data on what types of energy upgrades and total savings — both energy and costs– average customers are able to achieve?

ET: No data yet, since PLUS has just launched and we can’t share data from our pilot program. But for perspective, the average homeowner going solar with a Mosaic loan saves over $30,000 over the life of their solar installation. We anticipate even greater savings when bundled with energy efficiency improvements, which can pay back even more quickly than solar.

Source: Wikicommons

Looking Forward

MC: One key feature is that the PowerSwitch PLUS loan does not assume tax credits will be used to pay down the principal– can you talk about why that is and how that might benefit both the customer and the wider industry?

ET: The benefits are two-fold. For customers, it simplifies the process of combining solar with other home energy upgrades, and it allows them to use the tax credit for whatever they want instead of paying down their loan principal. For the wider industry, it helps our contractor partners get ahead of the coming stepdown for the federal tax credit that begins next year. By giving our contractors more options, including an option that isn’t structured around the tax credit, they are better positioned for long-term success.

MC: What’s Mosaic’s strategy for finding customers in the market for solar financing and engaging them with your offerings? What’s that sales cycle look like? 

ET: Mosaic is a B2B2C company. While we ultimately provide loans to homeowners, our primary customers are actually solar contractors. So, in addition to making PowerSwitch 6 loans more appealing to homeowners for all the reasons we’ve discussed, we’ve also made them more appealing to contractors in specific ways.

For example, daily funding will cut the time for a contractor to receive funding to one to two business days, and earlier disbursements and simpler milestones will also improve contractor cashflow. Ultimately, our strategy for engaging our partners is to give them the best possible tools to build their business.

MC: The various products you offer are clearly a sign of the rapidly evolving solar industry and responding to those changes. DO you have any predictions for how the industry will continue to evolve and what that might mean for the solar financing market? 

ET: We think that homeowners will continue to ask for more than just solar when it comes to home energy upgrades, whether that’s new technologies like batteries and smart home devices or established efficiency solutions like insulation and windows. Thus, we expect to see lines continue to blur between solar, storage, and other home energy efficiency loans, and we also expect customers to demand more ease of use, flexibility, and accessibility from financing products.

To keep up with these changes, solar financing providers need a commitment to innovation as well as strong backing from financial markets, and Mosaic has proven itself to be an industry leader on both accounts.

Photo Source: Prosperous America

For more information on Mosaic, visit their website for regular updates.

About the author: Matt Chester is an energy analyst in Orlando, studied engineering and science & technology policy at the University of Virginia, and operates the Chester Energy and Policy blog and website to share news, insights, and advice in the fields of energy policy, energy technology, and more. For more quick hits in addition to posts on this blog, follow him on Twitter @ChesterEnergy.

The post Mosaic’s PowerSwitch 6 Residential Home Solar Loans: An Interview with GM of Solar, Erin Talbot appeared first on Solar Tribune.

At the end of June, the American people will get their first real look at the candidates running for the Democratic nomination. The eventual candidate’s opponent, President Trump, has scored notoriously low on any sort of climate change or clean energy metric: famously claiming climate change is a hoax purported by the Chinese, levying tariffs on imported solar panels, egregiously claiming noise from wind turbines cause cancer, and repeatedly seeking to bolster the coal generation industry, among other black marks.

Photo Source: CNN

Given these unfortunate climate stances from the incumbent, whoever faces Trump in 2020 will undeniably have a better track record when it comes to climate change and renewable energy. While choosing this eventual candidate over the President responsible for pulling the United States out of the Paris Climate Agreement would seem to be a straightforward choice for any voter who places the climate as their top policy issue, looking ahead to 2020 is premature. Instead, the climate voting bloc should be parsing through the nearly two dozen Democratic candidates to determine which would do the most to actually prioritize climate change during the 2020 race and if they’re elected to office. Having a challenger in 2020 who looks good on climate simply by comparison with President Trump is not enough, and clean energy advocates and climate fighters should be pushing for the candidates that have demonstrated a real commitment to action in these areas.

How can electors parse through the typical political speech to actually determine which candidate best represents their views and priorities? For candidates with a political history, tracing their words and actions is one such pathway. But the issue with this approach can be that this early in the primary, candidates are trying to cast a wide net to win support and gain momentum. Voters need to wade through the vast amount of talk to find the real meat of what matters to candidates compared with what issues are simply being offered more hollow lip service.

To aid in this process of approaching the candidates in the Democratic primary with an educated and judicious eye, Solar Tribune is rolling out a series of articles to evaluate:

1. How high climate change and clean energy ranks as a policy issue for a candidate compared with other issues
2. The substance of the climate-related policy planks that candidates are proposing
3. A qualitative rating of how aggressive those policy proposals are, both in time frame and in completeness, in anticipation of mitigating the worst consequences of climate change

This article will introduce the methodology of item 1, as well as a preview into those results. Later posts will dive into items 2 and 3 and then put them all together in a way that creates a three-dimensional view of each candidate’s climate profile. So, stay tuned to this space to see more as Solar Tribune continues to develop the 2020 Climate Profiles to inform voters, as well as updates them as the field of candidates changes and their positions evolve during the course of primary season.

Note: Another recommended in-depth source for assessing the credentials in fighting climate change each candidate deserves comes from the Vote Climate U.S. PAC and their 2020 Presidential Voting Guide. 

Methodology

For this first item, evaluating where climate change and energy rank in terms of priority for each candidate, we’re taking an entirely quantitative approach. A reasonable proxy for how important a given issue is to a candidate is to evaluate how often they talk about the issue when compared with other issues. Luckily (or unluckily, depending on your view), we live in a world where social media is paramount and candidates recognize the importance of having their positions and policy proposals posted online in short and punchy ways. Twitter, in particular, has become a key communication tool for any potential candidates.

As such, Solar Tribune’s 2020 Climate Profiles will take a snapshot of each candidate’s Twitter history to evaluate how often climate change and/or clean energy are mentioned compared with other policy issues. We’ve identified seven major topic issues that are likely to take center stage during the 2020 Presidential Election and evaluated how often each of those issues are mentioned on a candidate’s profile to create a rank of how high that issue appears to be in the mind and  public position of the candidates. To do this, we’ve assigned a handful of keywords to each of those policy areas and pulled a Google query for those terms on the candidate’s official Twitter profile. These seven policy areas and their keywords are displayed in the table below:

Based on the frequency with which each candidate Tweets about climate change keywords compared with the other six policy areas, we’ll assign them a score from 1 (highest priority) to 7 (lowest priority).

This methodology of course isn’t perfect and has a couple holes that can be poked into it in terms of whether this is the best way to evaluate candidates, but those weaknesses can also be mostly mitigated or at least explained via caveat:

• These Twitter queries pull the candidate’s whole Twitter history and does not reflect where they’ve stood in recent years, which is arguably more important to measure: While this argument can be made, the candidates that have prioritized climate change and clean energy for longer are more likely to be candidates who stand firmly in that corner, rather than having more recently adopted those positions in order to win favor of climate advocates.
• These keywords are just indicating if an issue was brought up, not if they actually include a helpful position: Another true point, and even President Trump’s Twitter history bashing renewables would count more positively via this metric. However, the strength and effectiveness of a candidates’ positions will be measured and taken into account in the two other measures of Solar Tribune’s 2020 Climate Profiles, so this ranking still works as one component towards that.
• Twitter is not an authoritative representation of all candidates’ positions: While actions do indeed speak louder than words, using social media mentions allows for an even playing field for all candidates and in an easy ‘apples-to-apples’ type comparison.
• Speeches are more important that Twitter posts: Candidates might be more careful and crafted in their longform speeches, but the world of short attention spans and soundbite news clips means candidates know that the brevity of Twitter will lead to it potentially reaching the most voters. Just because of how social media is sometimes used does not undercut the importance that candidates see in what they Tweet about
• The keywords used are incomplete and could be not totally representative: This issue is a true one, but identifying an equal number of keywords among each of the policy areas is the most even way to evaluate the large number of candidates, save for reading through each Tweet individually.
• Ranking these policy areas against each other unfairly ‘punishes’ candidates for caring about other important issues: The goal of this process is not to say that climate change is the only issue that matters or to diminish the importance of the other policy areas. Rather, the goal here is to provide an accessible measure and tool for the growing voting population that ranks climate change as their most important issue when it comes to choosing a candidate.

With that all said, let’s get to the results…

Data and Conclusions

Because candidates will continue to Tweet all the time, it’s important to note first that the data for this analysis is all accurate as of June 4, 2019. These relative numbers will likely change at least in some small way as the candidates continue down the campaign trail, so Solar Tribune can update these numbers as the weeks carry on.

After pulling the data from the Twitter feeds of each of the 23 Democrats currently running, we get the full set of data that you can view on this Google Doc.

Visualizing that data provides the following for where each of the 23 candidates prioritize climate change among the seven policy areas.

Both ends of this graph are notable for the climate advocates determining who to support during the primaries. Inslee is far and away the candidate who appears to prioritize climate change as an issue the most, a conclusion that comes as no surprise to anyone who’s followed his career as Governor of Washington state and his presidential campaign. While his current polling numbers aren’t overly compelling, sitting below 1% according to RealClear Politics, one of the main goals of party primaries is not just for candidates who think they are likely to win to run but also for candidates who want to pull the eventual candidate towards a policy area that is important to them. Governor Inslee has given no indication that he is running for any reason other than to win the nomination, but climate advocates can and should consider it a win if his presence and bringing climate change into the main conversation for his fellow candidates ends up shifting the 2020 Democratic platform towards immediate and drastic climate action.

Photo Source: NPR.org

On the other end, for the party that typically caters more to the energy and climate crowds, it’s surprising to see just how many candidates have climate fall in the bottom three of their Twitter keyword mentions, including such strongly polling candidates as Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Pete Buttigieg. This ranking of priorities could be seen as a cause for concern to the climate voting bloc, though many candidates do still have plans and proposals to meet the type of clean energy transition that is needed to prevent climate change’s longest-lasting and most devastating effects. That’s where the balance of the Solar Tribune’s 2020 Climate Profiles will come into play.

A last notable nugget to take from this first graph is the perhaps surprising presence of Joe Biden higher than most of his fellow candidates. The current frontrunner has received a lot of backlash about his policies that have been deemed by many as not aggressive enough. In fact, Biden’s attempts to appeal more to centrists than advocates on climate change issues spurred the viral hashtag #NoMiddleGround to insist that playing it safe and catering to both sides was inherently against the climate movement. Again, though, the effectiveness or lack thereof of potential climate solutions proposed by candidates will ultimately be reflected in the rest of the 2020 Climate Profile criteria.

Photo Source: The Atlantic

To account for the disparity between how often different candidates actually use their Twitter accounts, the following graph also visualizes the percentage of all Tweets that are deemed related to climate, the percentage of all policy-related Tweets (i.e., the ones who included keywords from one of the seven policy areas) are related to climate, and the total number of climate Tweets:

Visualizing the data in this way really drives home how much further ahead of the pack Inslee is when compared with his fellow candidates. Additionally, it provides some more context to the surprising candidates that had climate lower on their policy priority list. In particular, while climate ranked lower than other policy issues for Sanders and Harris, this graphic shows that they’re still not slouching and have Tweeted about the issue hundreds of times. Even though they’ve Tweeted about the other issues more, it provides some home that perhaps they’re still committed– but the substance of their proposed actions will have to make it up for them to score higher in the final candidate climate rankings.

Photo Source: Philly.com, Burlington Free Press

Stay tuned in this space in the coming weeks, as Solar Tribune will begin profiling individual Democratic Candidates using the criteria spelled out in each of the three dimensions of the 2020 Climate Profiles.

Cover Photo Source: Vox.com

The post Are the 2020 Democratic Candidates Serious About Climate? Twitter Data Says No appeared first on Solar Tribune.

On May 14 and 15, hundreds of industry professionals, financiers, and other stakeholders in the solar power industry gathered in Paradise Valley, Arizona, for the 12th annual Solar Summit put on by GreenTech Media and Wood Mackenzie to do just that. Marketed as the ‘premier conference for defining the latest industry needs for installers, developers, system manufacturers, financiers and regulators,’ this gathering of hundreds of the key players across the world of solar power provides critical functions as professionals who share the goal to increase the viability, market penetration, and future possibilities of solar technology and renewable energy more widely.

Such a gathering of diverse organizations and people who share these common goals gives those in attendance the opportunity to reflect on the past year while charting out their coming year in business. With that in mind, Solar Tribune had the opportunity to chat with a few attendees to hear how the conference went for them, hear what the priorities appear to be of the industry moving forward in 2019, and learn what the top benefits of the solar conference circuit is for a few different types of industry members.

Overall Impression

Clocking in at just a day and a half, the Solar Summit included panels, general sessions, and more narrow breakout sessions. Jordan Blanchard of Live Oak Bank, a financial institution that has become a major player financing solar projects, particularly enjoyed the breakout sessions. These sessions were separated into financing and developing sessions, and he attended the financing ones. “A lot of discussion now on solar plus storage,” he noted, which was one of the aspects that made the session of prime value to him compared with the more general sessions.

The size of the 2019 Solar Summit was just a few hundred professionals, which many deemed to be an ideal size where the major players were in attendance but it wasn’t so large as to make it overwhelming. Blanchard noted that some other conferences “are so massive that it’s hard to even find people, much less set up meetings,” but that the Solar Summit’s more intimate size allowed for high-value networking.

Photo Source: Valeria Luxury Living

Another key benefit of the structure of the Solar Summit is that it’s an area for thought leaders to converge, rather than just companies pushing specific products. As Chuck Ellis of SMA, a global specialist for PV technology, describes it:

“I prefer these kind of environments vs. trade shows because you typically have a different group of people that are attending. You tend to have more strategic forward-thinking representatives at these kind of conferences instead of just people trying to sell products in booths.”

Another unique selling proposition of the Solar Summit specifically is that it’s put on in conjunction with Wood Mackenzie. As Blanchard noted, “the Wood Mackenzie folks provide the data, and that is something that’s really unique to this conference…that’s the unique strength. I’m overall happy with it and planning on going again next year.”

Charting 2019 Solar Goals

The role of the Solar Summit, as well as other solar power conferences like this one, appear to play a more minor role in setting the solar industry goals as a whole, but the value of bringing all the minds together in one place is still notable.

Asked whether the conversations and education from the Solar Summit helps guide his company’s course for the next year, Ellis noted:

“I think it helps validate some of our strategy, but I don’t know that it really steers us in any one direction. Does it contribute? Absolutely. Does it validate things? Sure. But the overall strategy comes from our headquarters, not these conferences.” Blanchard shared a similar sentiment, noting of conferences as a whole that “I don’t think any of them really change the course of our business.”

That said, a few topics were brought up that were notable to those in attendance that Solar Tribune interviewed:

Energy Storage

Blanchard came into the Solar Summit eager to talk about energy storage, but had his impression confirmed that the technology is not yet ready for prime time. “But,” he noted,

“if I had heard at the conference that people thought it was ready and they were getting storage deals done then that maybe would accelerate our desire to finance solar plus storage more.”

Floating Solar

An area of excitement in the solar community for the expanded possibilities it provides when it comes to where installations can be planned is in floating solar. Teresa Barnes attended in her role with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory to discuss just this topic, noting:

“We presented an update on the general status of the field and the results of a recent NREL publication on the potential for floating PV in the United States. We had very productive conversations with different stakeholders who are interested in PV.”

NREL finds that floating solar, which is not yet highly tapped into in the United States, could eventually account for 10% of the nation’s total annual electricity generation.

Photo Source: Energy Sage

U.S. Solar Policy

One topic that was at the forefront of Ellis’ mind heading into the Solar Summit was U.S. policy, such as the recent fight around solar tariffs. After talking with his peers he says he found a more or less consensus around his own ideas, which is useful for him to know moving forward. He told Solar Tribune that

“While I don’t want to get into what other people were talking about, certainly we’re going to see a short-term impact on business. It’s similar to the other tariffs that have been put into place and other obstacles that have happened in solar. The market will adjust and we’ll continue down the path we’re running. The real question I had is if it’s a long-term tariff or if we’ll reach an agreement with China and Trump will back off. I think it’s pretty relative, there seems to be such a dynamic market in this industry that there’s always something of this magnitude taking place. It’s the most dynamic industry I’ve been a part of.”

ITC Step Down

Despite noting in the preview of the conference that the Solar Summit “will cover how the ITC stepdown will impact project finance,” Blanchard notes he didn’t hear much about the topic. “No one seemed that concerned,” he relayed. Adding further,

“So maybe that will be a bigger topic next year. People will feel it, but it’s not enough to really diverge existing projects, especially because of the safe harbor rules. So it’s just not a huge topic of discussion.”

Evolution of the Industry

Another useful role these conferences play is one of a tent pole, where tracing the topics of concern, the major players, and the pending concerns from year to year is a great way to track how the industry as a whole has evolved. One example that Ellis noted was,

“the width and breadth of where solar is going is expanding pretty rapidly. You think back five to six years ago, you really just had inverters and modules and they were focused on residential, commercial, or utility-scale projects. You didn’t get into integration of grid management, you didn’t get into energy management, you didn’t get into virtual power plants or virtualization of all that stuff. Not only is the technology getting more advanced, but the strategies utilities can embrace when it comes to solar is expanding, the types of installations that are viable with storage and smart grid technology are advancing quickly, and the solar industry of tomorrow will seldom look the same as it did yesterday.”

Solar Conferences More Widely

As a whole, the real value of the Solar Summit and  similar conferences is the networking and community-building. The information is important, but innovation is moving at a pace that’s comfortable enough for organizations to keep up on their own without hearing anything new or game-changing at these conferences.

Photo Source: Solar Power Events

When asked about the value of these conferences, Blanchard described that it’s the law of diminishing returns:

“In 2016, when we first got into the industry, every conference was hugely helpful on the learning side and on the networking side. But every year that goes by, we’re far more knowledgeable about the industry and we’ve learned what we need to learn. And so, the learning opportunity diminishes, but the networking value is always increasing.”

Ellis agreed that networking is the true value, and while he enjoys hearing panels and speakers he says,

“I think the real value for me is being able to conduct with my peer group and get an understanding of where they see the industry going, what challenges they may be facing, and areas in which we can collaborate.”

In a similar way, organizations like the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and other research-based organizations find these conferences as a key strategy to spreading their findings and analyses. Barnes said they attend solar conferences “to educate the U.S. solar community on our work and engage with stakeholders working in the downstream industry.”

About the author: Matt Chester is an energy analyst in Washington DC, studied engineering and science & technology policy at the University of Virginia, and operates Chester Energy and Policy to share news, insights, and advice in the fields of energy policy, energy technology, and more. For more quick hits in addition to posts on this blog, follow him on Twitter @ChesterEnergy.

The post State of the Solar Industry Through the Lens of Solar Summit Attendees appeared first on Solar Tribune.

To facilitate these discussions and educate our readers and decision-makers alike on the specifics of different climate change policy mechanisms, Solar Tribune has gathered a comprehensive (though not necessarily exhaustive) list of those policy levers. We’re collecting insights from thought leaders compare the pros and cons and identify the key considerations of these potential climate change policies. Check back to this page regularly as we continue to conduct interviews in order to add voices of new experts across industries and insights from leaders in this field.

Carbon Pricing

What is it: Policies enacting carbon price allow utilities, industries, and others to continue emitting greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere, but it prices the externalities created and requires the emitter to pay for them. Because the damage from climate change would be economic and for everyone across the world, this method forces emitters to internalize those costs and often creates a business case for installing more efficient and clean equipment.

Is it enacted anywhere: According to the New York Times, carbon pricing is enacted in a variety of places across the globe, including Canada, Mexico, the European Union, Australia, and more, as well as in 10 states across the country.

In Favor of Carbon Pricing:

“Climate change poses great dangers to us all. Carbon pricing makes investments in low-carbon or carbon-free technologies attractive and ensures that fossil fuels are used efficiently.”– Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany

“Here has to be a price on carbon because there is a price on carbon: it’s the consequences to health and the economy and to our climate. We face an existential challenge with the changes in our climate. The time to act is now.”– Jerry Brown, former Governor of California

“Climate change is a member of a special kind of economic activity known as global public goods.” To solve this problem, “At a minimum, all countries should agree to penalize carbon and other GHG emissions by the agreed upon minimum price.”– William Nordhaus, President of the American Economics Association

On carbon pricing, the pontiff said that humanity is called to use natural resources “wisely,” and their use can only be considered ethical when the economic and social costs of using them are transparently acknowledged and “are fully borne by those who incur them, rather than by other people or future generations.”– Pope Francis

“A fee on carbon polluters is a fee imposed on fossil fuels, ultimately intended to eliminate the emission of carbon dioxide. Vote Climate U.S. PAC believes that a fee on carbon polluters is an essential piece of the Green New Deal or any comprehensive legislation to slow climate change. A carbon fee would compel energy producers to switch from fossil fuels to clean, renewable energy or lose their competitive edge.” – Karyn Strickler, Vote Climate U.S. PAC 

 

“From an economist’s perspective, carbon pricing (whether in a tax or cap-and-trade system) is still the most efficient way to control emissions. It does all the work for you, as long as you set the cap or price at roughly the appropriate level, conduct auctioning rather than allocating on emissions allowances, and emitters are more willing to pay the costs of emitting than to relocate to other jurisdictions.” – Alex Clark, Doctoral Researcher, Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, Oxford University

Against Carbon Pricing:

“Existing carbon-pricing schemes tend to squeeze only certain sectors of the economy, leaving others essentially free to pollute. And even in those sectors in which carbon pricing might have a significant effect, policymakers have lacked the spine to impose a high enough price. The result is that a policy prescription widely billed as a panacea is acting as a narcotic. It’s giving politicians and the public the warm feeling that they’re fighting climate change even as the problem continues to grow.”- Jeffrey Ball, scholar-in-residence at Stanford

Read more:

Pricing Carbon – World Bank Group

These Countries Have Prices on Carbon. Are They Working? New York Times

About Carbon Pricing – United Nations Framework Council on Climate Change

Cap-and-Trade

What is it: Cap-and-Trade is one specific type of carbon pricing mechanism, whereby the price of carbon is set based on market forces. Under a cap-and-trade system, the governing body dictates the level of emissions that are permitted and issue allowances equal to that amount and every carbon emitter would be required to hold those allowances equal to the amount they produce. Emitters that reduce their carbon output below their allowance can then auction their extra allowances to those who exceeded their limit on the open market.

Is it enacted anywhere: According to the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, cap-and-trade is the form of carbon pricing being used in the European Union, Mexico, and a number of U.S. states.

In Favor of Cap-and-Trade:

“Putting a price on carbon emissions via cap and trade is among the best possible ways to get emissions down quickly and cheaply.”- Gernot Wager, economist with the Environmental Defense Fund

Against Cap-and-Trade: 

“The strategy of buying and selling carbon credits can lead to a new form of speculation which would not help reduce the emission of polluting gases worldwide. This system seems to provide a quick and easy solution under the guise of a certain commitment to the environment, but in no way does it allow for the radical change which present circumstances require. Rather, it may simply become a ploy which permits maintaining the excessive consumption of some countries and sectors.”- Pope Francis

When asked about cap and trade Warren Buffet said, “In the utility business, it’s going to be borne by customers. And it’s a tax like anything else.” He added that the “tax is probably going to be pretty regressive.”- Warren Buffet, American business magnate

“A full-blown fleecing of the middle class, it would raise electricity prices, increase gasoline prices, and ship American jobs to countries like China and India”- John Boehner, former Speaker of the House

Read more:

How cap and trade works – Environmental Defense Fund

Cap and Trade Basics – Center for Climate and Energy Solutions

Cap and Trade and Carbon Taxes – Union of Concerned Scientists

Carbon Taxes

What is it: Carbon taxes are the other type of carbon pricing, other than cap-and-trade, where the governing body sets the price on carbon emissions and collects that tax accordingly. Whereas cap-and-trade offers defined emission reductions with uncertain carbon prices, carbon taxes offer defined carbon prices with uncertain carbon reductions.

Is it enacted anywhere: According to the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, carbon taxes are being used in certain parts of Canada, as well as in Boulder, Colorado.

In Favor of Carbon Taxes:

“The real right way to correct [the subsidy] would be to establish a carbon tax. If you ask any economist they will tell you that is the obvious thing to do, put the correct price on carbon because we currently have an error in the economy which misprices carbon at zero or something closer to zero. It is a fundamental economic error.”- Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla, Inc.

“A global carbon tax levied on a relatively small number of large sources can be monitored by satellite and checked against the annual surveillance of fiscal and economic polices already carried out by IMF staff. Thus, the accounting involved is much more precise and much less subject to the vagaries of corruption and conflict over which industries and companies get their free handouts of carbon credits — carbon pork — than in a cap-and-trade system.”- Ralph Nader, American political activist, attorney, and author

 

Against Carbon Taxes: 

“Energy is the lifeblood of any economy. A carbon tax would increase energy prices and thus cost jobs, making it difficult for U.S. companies to compete with foreign rivals and punishing the poor.”- H. Sterling Burnett, Senior Fellow on Energy and the Environment at the Heartland Institute

Read more:

Cap and Trade and Carbon Taxes – Union of Concerned Scientists

Carbon Tax Basics – Center for Climate and Energy Solutions

The 5 Most Important Questions About Carbon Taxes, Answered – Vox

Eliminating Fossil Fuel Subsidies

What is it: The current fossil fuel landscape sees the government providing the fossil fuel industry (including oil, gas, and coal) with various types and levels of government subsidies, which are financial incentives and rewards for fossil fuel production and generation. These subsidies can appear in a number of different ways, including loopholes in calculating payouts for coal mining on public lands, direct subsidies via fuel tax credit, indirect subsidies like the Last In, First Out Accounting method permitted to oil and gas companies, research grants into new fossil energy technologies, and more. Increasingly, one climate policy position has been to push for the removal of these fossil fuel subsidies, both the outright incentives and the hidden ones, as a way to force fossil fuel generation to compete on a more level playing ground with clean energy sources.

Is it enacted anywhere: The G7 nations (the United Kingdom, United States, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the European Union) set a deadline of 2025 for them to collectively eliminate fossil fuel subsidies, though obviously, each participating member of G7 has achieved a varying level of compliance towards that as-of-yet unreached deadline to date.

In Favor of Eliminating Fossil Fuel Subsidies:

“It is inconsistent, and ultimately counterproductive, to strive to meet urgent climate goals while at the same time increasing oil and gas production capacity, further extracting coal and developing additional coal-fired power generation. To level the playing field that currently undermines the prospects for renewable energy, subsidies to fossil fuels need to end, and both the public and private sectors must accelerate divestment from these harmful resources” – REN21

 

“We need to realign the incentives and tax breaks away from fossil fuels and towards energy conservation and renewable energy. We need to create new carefully targeted incentives for reducing carbon emissions. There’s no reason for draconian laws and tax hikes. There are new technologies already available, whether electric cars, cost-saving equipment for zero energy buildings, or electric grids powered by renewable energy and batteries. All the technology is available and ready to go. Only two things are needed: 1) to realign the incentives so people and companies do what’s right here– using off-the-shelf availabile technologies that will improve lives, save money, and improve the environment; and 2) some education and cheerleading to bring awareness of the many benefits of these energy-saving technologies.” – Joe Emerson, Zero Energy Project

Against Eliminating Fossil Fuel Subsidies:

“Here we show that removing fossil fuel subsidies would have an unexpectedly small impact on global energy demand and carbon dioxide emissions and would not increase renewable energy use by 2030. Subsidy removal would reduce the carbon price necessary to stabilize greenhouse gas concentration at 550 parts per million by only 2–12 per cent under low oil prices. Removing subsidies in most regions would deliver smaller emission reductions than the Paris Agreement (2015) climate pledges and in some regions global subsidy removal may actually lead to an increase in emissions, owing to either coal replacing subsidized oil and natural gas or natural-gas use shifting from subsidizing, energy-exporting regions to non-subsidizing, importing regions” – Jessica Jewell, et. al, in Nature Journal

Read more:

Time for the US to End Fossil Fuel Subsidies: Natural Resource Defense Council

Fact Sheet: Fossil Fuel Subsidies: A Closer Look at Tax Breaks and Societal Costs: Environmental and Energy Study Institute

Fossil fuels are underpriced by a whopping $5.2 trillion: Vox

Renewable Portfolio Standards

What is it: Policies for Renewable Portfolio Standards, or RPS, are mandates that utilities use a given amount of government-defined energy sources (e.g., some states may include nuclear energy as a carbon-neutral source or biomass as a renewable source, while others may narrowly define which energy sources count as renewable). Typically, RPS policies will be escalating over time and require utilities to generate an increasing percentage of its power from qualified resources. RPS standards can be considered a hammer in the clean energy policy toolbox, simply requiring the appropriate amount of renewable energy rather than incentivizing it, though it also ensures all energy providers covered by the RPS are uniformly expected to adapt.

Is it enacted anywhere: According to the Solar Energy Industries Association, 38 states and the District of Columbia have some form of RPS in place.

In Favor of Renewable Portfolio Standards:

“One of the tools that’s been most effective at all levels of policy is performance standards, such as appliance efficiency standards, building codes, and clean electricity or renewables portfolio standards. These tools can be particularly powerful when they set technology-neutral performance goals, which allow for flexibility in finding the most cost-effective ways to achieve targets without pre-judging the best technologies.” – Michael Mastrandrea, Director of Near Zero at Carnegie Institute for Science

 

“Since 2017, Nevadan voters have been repeatedly calling for a stronger RPS, and today the legislature delivered. Senate Bill 358 will bring thousands of jobs, reduce costs for consumers and keep our clean energy momentum going. We look forward to seeing Governor Sisolak sign this bill.”- Andy Maggi, executive director of Nevada Conservation League

Against Renewable Portfolio Standards:

“The estimates indicate that 7 years after passage of an RPS program, the required renewable share of generation is 1.8 percentage points higher and average retail electricity prices are 1.3 cents per kWh, or 11% higher; the comparable figures for 12 years after adoption are a 4.2 percentage point increase in renewables’ share and a price increase of 2.0 cents per kWh or 17%. These cost estimates significantly exceed the marginal operational costs of renewables and likely reflect costs that renewables impose on the generation system, including those associated with their intermittency, higher transmission costs, and any stranded asset costs assigned to ratepayers. The estimated reduction in carbon emissions is imprecise, but, together with the price results, indicates that the cost per metric ton of CO2 abated exceeds $115 in all specifications and ranges up to $530, making it least several times larger than conventional estimates of the social cost of carbon.”- Michael Greenstone, Ishan Nath, Economists at the University of Chicago

Read more:

State Renewable Portfolio Standards and Goals – National Conference of State Legislatures

Renewable Energy Standards – Solar Energy Industries Association

U.S. Renewable Portfolio Standards: 2018 Annual Status Report – Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Feed-in Tariffs

What is it: Feed-in Tariffs represent a policy mechanism that provides economic certainty to providers of renewable energy and thus encourage the investment in such sources by provisioning a set price that these generators receive for their energy (typically based on costs to generate at the moment, meaning less mature technologies receive higher rates) while requiring utilities to purchase a given amount of the generation at this price for a set period. These tariffs thus encourage and support innovation around emerging energy sources and ensure business models for them are given time to flourish.

In Favor of Feed-in-Tariffs:

“A lot of the charm of the feed-in tariff is solid, take-it-to-the-bank security and confidence for the investing community. You get access to what is very difficult to get right now: financing.”- Jay Inslee, Governor of Washington and candidate for  2020 Democrat Presidential nomination

Against Feed-in-Tariffs:

“The honest truth is we earn our returns by building plants and putting them into rate base and making profits on them.” A feed-in tariff “does take away that opportunity of utilities to earn on their investments. … If you really, really want us to love this stuff, figure out a way we can make some money on it.”- Betsy Egelking, resource planning and bidding manager for Xcel Energ

Read more:

Feed-in tariff: A policy tool encouraging deployment of renewable electricity technologies – U.S. Energy Information Administration

Feed-in Tariffs: Good Practices and Design Considerations – National Renewable Energy Laboratory

Feed-in tariffs: a primer on feed-in tariffs for solar – Energy Sage

Renewable Tax Credits

What is it: Renewable energy tax credits can take the form of investment tax credits (ITCs), which provide tax credit to owners of renewable energy facilities based on the cost of facilities, and production tax credits (PTCs), which provide tax credit to owners of renewable energy facilities based on how much energy they generate. These financial incentives are offered to make it more appealing to investors to take a risk on renewable energy installations where they might have been more hesitant to pour money into technologies that had not yet matured.

Is it enacted anywhere: The United States originally enacted renewable energy tax credits in 1992, which have been renewed and expanded several times between then and the most recent version in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

In Favor of Renewable Tax Credits:

“Wind and solar will need to be complemented by geothermal energy, hydropower, and biomass energy. This can be incentivized by modifying the current tax credit structure that currently favors solar and wind power. Despite unequal access to tax incentives, geothermal, hydropower, and biomass are valuable because they provide baseload power and are located in geographically diverse areas.” – The Environmental and Energy Study Institute

“While the pendulum of energy subsidies may be swinging in favor of renewables in the last year or two, such momentum can be lost easily if lawmakers don’t extend various incentives and credits that have helped drive it.”- Roddy Scheer and Doug Moss, Scientific American

Against Renewable Tax Credits:

“The government shouldn’t pick winners and losers in the marketplace – but they try.

Renewable energy, driven by state and federal subsidies, is driving out baseload producers and jeopardizing the reliability of the electricity grid. According to ERCOT’s 2017 Capacity, Demand, and Reserves report, the expected 2018 peak reserve margin for the Texas electricity market has dropped to 9.3%, below the 13.75% target. Six months earlier, ERCOT had projected a reserve margin of 18.9%. This drop is primarily due to retiring generation sources, mostly coal-fired plants. Some would see this as a success, but favoring less reliable sources has an obvious downside—unreliability.”- Will Morgan, Texas Public Policy Foundation

“I believe that solar energy still needs some kind of compensation to account for its beneficial environmental impact compared with traditional energy sources based on fossil fuels. Although the tax credit has proven in the past to be a powerful instrument in helping to promote the various forms of renewable energy, I believe that moving forward a performance-based approach using tradable certificates like SRECs [solar renewable energy certificates] would further improve the acceptance of renewable energy and significantly boost its progress by better integrating the investment world.”- Frank Rieger, Sol-Up USA

Read more:

The Value of Energy Tax Incentives for Different Types of Energy Resources – Congressional Research Service

The Basics: Renewable Energy Tax Credits – US Bank

Renewable Electricity Production Tax Credit – DSIRE

Competitive Energy Markets

What is it: While most utilities operate with a regulated monopoly over their customers, increasing amounts of states and countries have deregulated their energy markets to allow for competition among multiple energy providers. Such monopolies mean there’s less incentive for utilities to innovate and adapt to customers’ desires, but over a dozen states have passed legislation allowing competition in their energy markets which lets customers choose among multiple energy suppliers who will provide their generation (transmission and distribution is still covered by the local utility so as not to build out multiple grid systems). Because more customers these days want to know their home is being powered by renewable energy, implementing competitive energy markets is a policy mechanism to incentivize utilities to adapt to these new customer requirements.

Is it enacted anywhere: According to Electric Choice, 17 states plus Washington DC offer deregulated electricity markets.

In Favor of Competitive Energy Markets:

“In states that are highly regulated, such choice is not possible. Utilities might use some renewable resources to generate their electricity, but customers do not often have the same option to choose 100 percent renewables. Utility companies could offer this, but they don’t have competition to incentivize them to come up with such innovative programs or to reduce the prices of their renewable energy offers.

Laws and regulatory directives could be introduced that require them to take these steps, but these routes are often less efficient than letting the market work.”- Emily Folk, Renewable Energy Magazine

Against Competitive Energy Markets:

“The competitive market for energy is simply not working for residential customers. Consumers pay more for the same electricity, and even states with strong consumer protections have not ended overcharging and abusive marketing practices. In light of this history, states should consider whether competitive suppliers should be limited to the commercial and industrial markets and municipal aggregation.”- Jenifer Bosco, National Consumer Law Center

Read more:

Energy Deregulation Around the World: A Comprehensive Guide – Electric Choice

Energy Deregulation Opening Up Potential for Renewable Energy Future – Renewable Energy Magazine

Will Renewable Power Prosper in a Deregulated Industry? – Southwest Research and Information Center

Vehicle Performance Standards

What is it: Vehicle performance standards are requirements for the amount of carbon emissions allowed to be emitted by cars and trucks when they are driven, typically expressed in terms of miles per gallon, or MPG, (since a gallon of gasoline burned will emit a given amount of emissions, so greater ability to drive for the same fuel will reduce overall emissions). As hybrid and electric vehicles have become more evasive, governing bodies have added in a measure of miles per gallon equivalent (MPGe) that accounts for the emissions required to generate the electricity that powers these vehicles.

Is it enacted anywhere: The United States has implemented vehicle performance standards since 1975, under the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, with the goal of reducing reliance of foreign fossil fuels after the uncertainty from the Arab Oil Embargo in the 1970s. These standards have been updated many times, with some states also adapting more stringent vehicle performance standards prescribed by California.

In Favor of Vehicle Performance Standards:

“Under the standards, the country’s cars, pickup trucks, SUVs and minivans are getting much cleaner. EPA’s online counter shows that new vehicles sold since model year 2012 have already avoided the emissions of more than 242 million tons of carbon pollution. The 2012-2025 standards are the biggest federal climate-protection program in place. If fully implemented, cleaner vehicles sold as a result of the standards will cut pollution that warms the planet by nearly 6 billion tons.

By reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the standards slow the warming of our planet, and they protect our health by reducing the number of high-smog days that would come with a hotter world.”- Natural Resources Defense Council

Against Vehicle Performance Standards

“Economists have long been skeptical of fuel economy standards because they are an inefficient means of reducing fuel consumption and emissions. The majority of U.S. consumers demonstrably prefer larger, more powerful vehicles, such as pickups and SUVs. But vehicle manufacturers continue to produce large numbers of small vehicles, which have higher fuel economy, in order to comply with fuel economy standards. As a result, manufacturers and dealers are forced to discount the prices of new cars, undermining their overall profitability.”- Julian Morris, senior fellow at Reason Foundation and executive director of the International Center for Law and Economics

Read more:

Federal Vehicle Standards – Center for Climate and Energy Solutions

The Effect of Standards for New Vehicle Fuel Economy and GHG Emissions on U.S. Consumers – Resources Magazine

Federal Clean Car Standards – Environmental Defense Fund

Vehicle Fuel Fees

What is it: Because the most harmful part of transportation to the climate is the emissions associated with burning fuel, taxes on gasoline are a common tool to make driving more expensive and thus incentivize people to find alternative forms of transportation and drive personal vehicles less. While gasoline taxes have been implemented as revenue-raising measures for transportation infrastructure longer than they’ve been considered a climate policy, they are an increasingly useful way to encourage transportation emission reductions.

Is it enacted anywhere: According to the Tax Foundation, every state in the nation has a gasoline tax, ranging from as low as 15 cents per gallon in Alaska to 59 cents per gallon in Pennsylvania.

In Favor of Vehicle Fuel Fees:

“A gas tax could be one important element of an integrated energy policy.”- Alan Mullally, former CEO of Ford

Against Vehicle Fuel Fees:

“Tax hikes have a negative impact on economic growth. As discussed, higher gas taxes mean higher gas prices which reduce the discretionary income of millions of Americans.  Reductions in discretionary income often correspond with diminished economic growth. In fact, analysts at Goldman Sachs predict “lower gas prices could add as much as half a percentage point to GDP growth this year.””- Emma Boone, Americans for Tax Reform

Read more:

Fuel Taxes: An Important Instrument for Climate Policy – University of Gothenburg

Aborted Fuel Tax Initiative in France: Its Ramifications for Green Growth – Inter Press Service

Vehicle Climate Fee – City of Boulder Colorado

Electric Vehicle Policies

What is it: Electric vehicle policies can encompass a variety of different strategies, from incentives for purchasing new electric cars to supporting the installation of charging infrastructure to converting municipal fleets to be powered by electricity and much more, but the goal is the same: transforming the base of vehicles on U.S. roads to be powered by electricity (already less carbon-intensive than internal combustion engines and getting better as the grid decarbonizes) rather than gasoline.

Is it enacted anywhere: The U.S. government included provisions in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 to provide tax credits for the purchase of electric vehicles, while at least 47 different states, according to the Hybrid & Electric Vehicle Technology Collaboration Programme, offer regulations promoting electric cars.

In Favor of Electric Vehicle Policies:

“By far, the rubric assigns the highest weight to vehicle purchase incentives, which could include grants, rebates or tax credits, along with exemptions from sales tax, registration and licensing fees.”- National Association of State Energy Officials

Against Electric Vehicle Policies:

“To justify these staggering costs, advocates of the credit claim that electric cars as “critical to lowering our emissions and limiting climate change.” But the numbers tell a different story. Research by the Manhattan Institute found that EVs will reduce energy-related U.S. carbon dioxide emissions by less than 1% by 2050. “That reduction will have no measurable impact on world climate—and thus the economic value of CO2 emissions reductions associated with [electric vehicles] is effectively zero,” according to the study, which also found that the spread of EVs would actually increase other harmful pollutants like sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides.”- Steve Pociask, President of the American Consumer Institute

Read more:

Comparing U.S. and Chinese Electric Vehicle Policies – Environmental and Energy Study Institute

Model State & Local Policies to Accelerate Electric Vehicle Adoption – Sierra Club and Plug In America

Electric Vehicle State Policy Resources – Georgetown Climate Center

Urban Mobility Policies

What is it: Urban mobility is the collection of how people move around a given city in efficient and effective manners, including driving, public transit, walking, and biking. Locally, a focus on climate-friendly urban mobility policy will shift the number of trips taken via carbon emitting measures like personal vehicles towards less carbon intensive (public transit) or carbon neutral (walking and biking) means. Examples of climate-focused urban mobility policies includes funding for public transportation systems, installation of bike lanes, and a focus on minimizing sprawl while maximizing affordable housing close to a city center.

Is it enacted anywhere: Any city or region has its own form of urban mobility policy, with varying degrees of a climate focus turned to it. Examples of clean urban mobility policy include the European Union’s aim to free cities of conventionally fueled cars by 2050, extensive networks of bicycle lanes installed in Oslo, and congestion charges in Stockholm.

In Favor of Urban Mobility Policies:

“As the developing world rapidly urbanizes, the demands on transport systems also grow often at a faster pace than the population. Given the above tendency, an effective and coordinated approach to urban transport requires that sound policies be put into place. Such policies enunciate the direction that a government wants to take; they lay the basic framework for downstream planning as well as project identification and prioritization.”- World Bank Group

Against Urban Mobility Policies:

Here’s what the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that Walker told the paper’s editorial writers Tuesday about why he opposed transit improvements in the county he purportedly leads:

 “…Walker said he would like to grow the local economy enough so lower-income people don’t have to rely on transit and could instead afford to buy cars if they chose.”- Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker

Read more:

Formulating an Urban Transport Policy: Choosing between Options – World Bank

European Urban Mobility – Policy Context – European Union

Urban mobility at a tipping point – McKinsey & Company

Building Energy Codes

What is it: Just like buildings must be to code when it comes to fire preparedness and electrical safety, many jurisdictions have codes for the energy systems installed in residential and commercial buildings. Building energy codes typically cover how airtight the building envelope (i.e., walls, floors, and ceiling) is to ensure efficient use of heating and cooling, lighting installations, and required levels of insulation. The goal is to prevent unnecessarily wasted energy in the stock buildings due to cutting corners, and because once constructed buildings will be operating for at least decades, building energy codes are among the energy policies with the longest time of impact.

Is it enacted anywhere: While there is no singular U.S. building energy code, most states have adopted building energy codes of some level, according to the Building Codes Assistance Project.

In Favor of Building Energy Codes:

“Shifting the materials we build our spaces and our urban environments with is something we can do today becaues these superior and beneficial materials for rooftops and walls across the globe already exist. Using optimal roofing materials and strategies will have a substantial energy efficiency impact by keeping our buildings cooler and reducing the need for air conditioning, it improves thermal comfort, and it promotes global cooling in a way that not only reduces the amount of greenhouse gases you’d otherwise emit but it also cancels some of the warming effect of the greenhouse gases you’ve already emitted.” – Kurt Schickman, Executive Director of Global Cool Cities Alliance

 

“Building energy codes that reduce wasted energy, optimize material usage, and ensure safe structures are essential. National codes should set minimum standards that local governments must enact. As a society, we should be working together to conserve resources and ensure the safety of our homes both for our own families and for future owners.” – Don Vandervort, Founder of HomeTips.com

 

“Strong building energy codes are one of the most effective, and cost-effective, mechanisms to increase the long-term energy efficiency of buildings”- Institute for Market Transformation

Against Building Energy Codes:

“When construction teams “build to code,” what does that really mean? Unfortunately, it often means complying with the bare minimum of legal requirements. No reputable builder will defy codes intentionally, but if builders’ only goal is to make sure a property isn’t illegal, they may not have incentive to go above and beyond with quality or safety.”- Carla Williams of Williams Brothers Corporation of America

Read more:

Building Energy Codes: Policy Overview and Good Practices – National Renewable Energy Laboratories

Building Energy Codes Program – U.S. Department of Energy

Global Approaches: A Comparison of Building Energy Codes in 15 Countries – American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy

Appliance Energy Standards

What is it: While building energy codes cover the structure of a building, appliance energy codes instead cover the energy efficiency of products that typically go within buildings. Between federally mandated minimum efficiencies and voluntary stretch goals for the most energy efficient products (such as ENERGY STAR), this type of policy analyzes how much energy common products (e.g., light bulbs, washing machines, ceiling fans) use and push the manufacturers to match the most efficient ones on the market.

Is it enacted anywhere: The United States, through the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, covers the efficiency of residential and commercial appliances in accordance with a 1975 act of Congress.

In Favor of Appliance Energy Standards:

“Efficiency standards for appliances and federal buildings set in the first and second terms combined will reduce carbon pollution by at least 3 billion metric tons cumulatively by 2030, equivalent to nearly one-half of the carbon pollution from the entire U.S. energy sector for one year—while continuing to cut families’ energy bills.”- Former President Barack Obama

“We find no evidence to suggest that more stringent energy efficiency standards hurt consumers by increasing price or lowering quality. Rather, we find evidence that price declines and quality improvements accelerate with stricter standards, which unambiguously improves consumer welfare, excluding external pollution-related benefits”- Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment

Against Appliance Energy Standards:

“The goal is to reduce energy bills, but even DOE admits that for some consumers, these standards raise the up-front price of appliances more than what will be earned back in the form of energy savings. This was particularly true of air conditioner standards but also refrigerators and several others. Low-income and senior households are most likely to experience net costs, according to the agency.”- Ben Lieberman, senior fellow with the Competitive Enterprise Institute and former counsel for House Energy and Commerce Committee

Read more:

Appliance and Equipment Standards Program – U.S. Department of Energy

Fact Sheet: Energy Efficiency Standards for Appliances, Lighting and Equipment – Environmental and Energy Study Institute

National Standards – Appliance Standards Awareness Project

Energy Storage Support

What is it: As intermittent renewable energy sources, namely solar and wind, become more concentrated on the grid, it becomes imperative that energy storage capacity is built out to allow for power generated during time of peak generation (e.g., mid-afternoon when solar panels are receiving the most sunlight) to be use during times of peak demand (i.e., in the early evening hours when the sun isn’t shining but families are using energy-intensive devices). Public support for energy storage, such as R&D funding, tax incentives, and energy storage prescriptions for utilities, can push the use of energy storage to be more of a pervasive clean energy solution.

Is it enacted anywhere: The Union of Concerned Scientists notes that the U.S. government, specifically through the Department of Energy and Department of Defense, is funding advancement of electricity storage R&D.

In Favor of Energy Storage Support:

“A joint demonstration program between DOD and DOE will also be able to utilize existing test-bed infrastructure and provide key field data at both agencies that will help accelerate commercial deployment of long-duration energy storage technologies to increase energy resilience and security”- Senator Angus King of Maine

Against Energy Storage Support:

“Many implausible technological changes would have to happen before batteries will be capable of doing what clean-energy visionaries hope.”- Ross Marchand, policy director at the Taxpayers Protection Alliance

Read more:

U.S. Grid Energy Storage Factsheets – University of Michigan

Managing the Future of Energy Storage – Institute for Policy Integrity

Energy Storage for the Grid: Policy Options for Sustaining Innovation – MIT Energy Initiative

Net Metering

What is it: Net metering, often a lightning rod for debate in the energy communities, is defined as a billing arrangement that compensates on-site producers of energy (such as customers with rooftop solar systems) for any excess generation that they do not use and instead export to the utility grid, though the level and format of the compensation varies by location.

Is it enacted anywhere: According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, at least 17 states have authorized the use of net metering.

In Favor of Net Metering:

“Customers with rooftop solar systems are not only paying their fair share, they’re actually helping to reduce costs for their neighbors as well. Specifically, the benefits of solar DG exceed the retail cost of electricity and the value of solar is greater than the compensation solar DG customers receive under net metering programs.”- Commissioner of Michigan Dan Scripps

Against Net Metering:

“The private solar lobbyists in Lansing are pushing for a system that allows private homeowners to put a Cadillac-style energy system on their rooftops and pass the bill for maintaining the roads on to the rest of us.”- Bishop W.L. Starghill Jr, Michigan Democratic Black Caucus

Read more:

State Net Metering Policies – National Conference of State Legislatures

Net Metering – Solar Energy Industries Association

Net Metering: State, Local, & Tribal Governments – National Renewable Energy Laboratory

Industrial Energy Efficiency Measures

What is it: The industrial sector, which encompasses business including (but not limited to) manufacturing, refining, and mining, is an incredibly significant source of energy use globally. The public policy levels that can be used to encourage or mandate efficiency across industry are varied, and include requirements to purchase more efficient equipment, encouraging best practices, and incentivizing retrofits and behaviors that reduce energy use.

Is it enacted anywhere: According to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, federal industrial efficiency measures include incentives, technical assistance, and R&D, while some states offer these measures and further some local jurisdictions also provide incentives to industrial efficiency improvements.

In Favor of Industrial Energy Efficiency Measures:

“The industrial sector represents a big opportunity for low-cost energy savings from utility energy efficiency programs. In general, investments in energy efficiency lower operating costs for manufacturers, which increases their productivity and improves competitiveness. When these investments are made through utility programs, businesses get the added value of access to technical expertise, project implementation support, and financial incentives that reduce initial costs.”- Meegan Kelly, Senior Research Analyst at the    American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy

“Governments play a vital role in driving industry to adopt energy-saving and low-carbon practices. Most countries now have some kind of energy efficiency policy in place, and efforts are also ramping up in many developing countries that have large, energy-intensive industry sectors”- Jigar Shah, President of Generate Capital Inc.

 

“It’s not the sexiest of topics, but proper maintenance of the cooling coils in cooling and refrigeration equipment—which means coil cleaning, filter replacement– is associated with a 17-20% energy savings, and currently 500 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent are emitted each year globally in indirect emissions from poor cleaning and servicing of HVAC and refrigeration equipment. Policymakers need to know about this, and governments need to require coil cleaning of refrigeration units if they’re running in either food service or healthcare. In these industries, if you run a unit with clogged coils then the food and medicine contained therein might not be held at the right temperature, which is a health concern. These requirements would be analogous to auto emissions and safety maintenance and inspections that are required, so policymakers can the same approach to improve safety and reduce industrial emissions.” – Richard P. Fennelly, COO of CoilPod LLC

Against Industrial Energy Efficiency Measures:

“Producers have a much better ability to meet consumers’ demands than any government mandate or subsidy program. Congress should recognize how markets have improved energy efficiency in the U.S. It should:

 Prevent new efficiency standards for any new appliances and federal funding for efficiency improvements in manufacturing processes and residential, industrial, and commercial buildings.”- Nicholas Loris, Deputy Director of Thomas A. Roe Institute

Read more:

Industrial Energy Efficiency Programs – American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy

Making the Case for Inclusive Industrial Energy Efficiency Policy – Midwest Energy Efficiency Alliance

Energy Efficiency: Industry – International Energy Agency

Industrial Emission Restrictions

What is it: In addition to tackling climate change through improving industrial sector efficiency, policy measures can also directly mandate restricted carbon emissions from industrial players.  Such measures can be necessary in tandem with efficiency because they will help to restrict indirect emissions, such as those from the oil and gas production industries, which is accomplished through industry-specific measures (such as covering emissions from oil and gas wells or pollutants emitted by cement kilns) or measures covering all subsectors, such as performance standards for greenhouse gases generally.

Is it enacted anywhere: The United States has covered emissions in the industrial sector through the Clean Air Act, though the current administration has indicated an intent to review and possibly rescind such regulations, according to the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions.

In Favor of Industrial Emissions Restrictions:

“Policymakers working on climate change at the federal and state level have so far largely shied away from regulating heavy industry, which directly contributes about one-sixth of the country’s carbon emissions. Instead, they’ve focused on decarbonizing the electricity sector through actions like promoting wind and solar power.

But even as power generation has gotten cleaner, those overlooked industrial plants and factories have become a larger source of climate pollution.”- Brad Plumer, energy and climate reporter for the New York Times

Against Industrial Emissions Restrictions:

“This study highlights the fact that regulatory measures are an inefficient way to achieve climate goals. While all examined scenarios resulted in significant job and economic impacts, scenarios that allow more flexibility achieve the same or greater emission reductions at a lower economic cost. The analysis also shows that in the next 10 years, regulating the industrial sector to achieve NDC goals would be responsible for most of the overall impact on the economy. Additionally, the study illustrates that electric sector reductions are relatively less expensive than reductions from the industrial sector, which generally is comprised of far smaller emissions sources. It would be much less costly to allow other sectors to purchase credits from the electric sector for emission reductions than to meet NDC targets on their own. The study also illustrates the challenges associated with emissions leakage. Regardless of which regulatory scenario is pursued, substantial leakage is likely to undermine environmental goals unless other countries impose similarly stringent emissions restrictions.”- American Council for Capital Formation

Read more:

Controlling Industrial Greenhouse Gas Emissions – Center for Climate and Energy Solutions

Industry: Tracking Clean Energy Progress – International Energy Agency

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Industrial Sector: Policies, Programs and Opportunities for Energy-Efficiency – American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy

Carbon Capture and Storage

What is it: The goal of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology is to harness the emissions that are emitted at the source (such as when coal is burned or oil is refined but before those emissions are able to leave the plant) and is then stored permanently in underground geological rock formations, typically. Policies to encourage the innovation and use of CCS mainly includes financial incentives through loan guarantees, tax credits, and other similar measures.

Is it enacted anywhere: According to the Brookings Institute, CCS has been incentivized by the U.S. federal government in both the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008.

In Favor of Carbon Capture and Storage:

“If coal is to be used, the only response- because it is the dirtiest of all fuels- is that we have to learn how to do carbon capture and storage and we have to learn how to do it quickly on a commercial scale.”- Nicholas Stern, former chief economist of the World Bank

Against Carbon Capture and Storage:

“The beguiling appeal of relying on future negative emission technologies is that they delay the need for stringent and politically challenging policies today – they pass the buck for reducing carbon on to future generations. But if these Dr Strangelove technologies fail to deliver at the planetary scale envisaged, our own children will be forced to endure the consequences of rapidly rising temperatures and a highly unstable climate.”- Professor Kevin Anderson, deputy director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research

Read more:

Development of a Policy Framework for CO2 Carbon Capture and Storage in the States – Center for Climate and Energy Solutions

Policies to commercialize carbon capture and storage in the United States – Brookings Institute

Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) in the United States – Congressional Research Service

R&D Support

What is it: Generally speaking, one of the most important policy mechanisms the government is able to support is financially through research and development (R&D). R&D support can include funding development of clean energy technology, new and innovative business cases, and moon-shot attempts to provide leaps in the energy industry.

Is it enacted anywhere: The U.S. federal government has long supported R&D in the energy industry, going back to the early days of the U.S. Department of Energy (then the Atomic Energy Commission) and through to today via ARPA-E, the network of National Laboratories, and across individual offices of DOE.

In Favor of R&D Support:

“This is undoubtedly a tough problem. It is not obvious what the big breakthroughs will look like. Most likely we will need several solutions to each challenge. That is why we need to invest in lots of research and development, across all five areas, now”- Bill Gates, Iconic businessman, philanthropist, and climate change advocate

“In rural western Alaska, we do not have an interconnected electrical grid, so microgrids are the way to go. Each town has its own generators so we burn a lot of diesel to make electricity and it’d be nice to get off the petroleum market. The funding for tax kickbacks and support for research and implementation of microgrids and renewables is currently being slashed by the State. There are a lot of great ideas out here because we’re paying way more for electricity, but the Governor is pulling back the funds so we’re struggling to get it done.” – Todd Radenbaugh, Professor of Environmental Science at the University of Alaska Fairbanks

“Hydrogen is a central pillar of the energy transformation needed to limit global warming to two degrees Celsius. The ambitious yet realistic approach of harnessing hydrogen energy would enable a deep decarbonisation of transport, industry and buildings, as well as a renewable energy production and distribution system. To achieve this vision, investors, industry and government will need to intensify and coordinate their efforts.” – Guy Delbaen, Professor at Université libre de Bruxelles

Against R&D Support:

Ryan’s website calls for “getting Washington out of the business of picking winners and losers in the economy,” including the energy sector.- Paul Ryan, Former Speaker of the House, 2012 Republican candidate for Vice President

Read more:

Impact of Clean Energy R&D on the U.S. Power Sector – National Renewable Energy Laboratory

Renewable Energy R&D Funding History: A Comparison with Funding for Nuclear Energy, Fossil Energy, Energy Efficiency, and Electric Systems R&D – Congressional Research Service

Renewable Energy Technology Innovation Policy – International Renewable Energy Agency

Land Use Policies

What is it: While most of the man-made emissions come from the production of energy, the industrial manufacture of goods, and from transportation vehicles, the way the Earth’s land is used has a significant impact on total global emissions. In particular, how the use of the planet’s land is changing is a huge driver of the state of global emissions. Massive deforestation in tropical areas removes a natural source of carbon sequestration, drilling for fossil fuels on public lands brings new hydrocarbons into the world’s inventories to be burned, and improper management of land can lead to ecosystem degradation and undue release of greenhouse gases and loss of carbon sequestering greenery. As such, land use policies can be deliberately used to protect and bolster these natural defense’s of the planet against the build up of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

Is it enacted anywhere: According to this article in Science Findings, Oregon has protected 1.2 million acres of forest and agricultural land since 1973 and thus maximized carbon storage. On a larger scale, Brazil has enacted policies to try and protect its massive tropical forests with the goal of reducing the emissions that had risen from deforestation.

In Favor of Land Use Policies:

“Public lands not only enhance carbon sequestration, but their protection often removes them as a fossil fuel development opportunity. As an example, on the Arctic Refuge, not only do we oppose the drilling of this land because of the human rights issues and conservation issues, but also because the indirect emissions that would come from such drilling would be equivalent to about a million new cars on the road. Protecting public lands is protecting the climate.”- Lindsay Bouroine, Director of Policy & Advocacy at Protect Our Winters

Against Land Use Policies:

“Developing our resources on the coastal plain is an important facet for meeting our nation’s energy demands and achieving energy dominance.” – Joe Balash, Assistant Secretary for land and minerals management at the Department of the Interior

Read more:

Introduction to Land Use: United Nations Climate Change

Climate-Friendly Land Use: Union of Concerned Scientists

Planning and Land Use: U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit

Focusing on a Just Transition

What is it: Certain experts look at the market forces at play and find that federal energy policy is no longer necessary to push a clean energy transition away from coal and fossil fuels towards a clean energy future, as the work of previously mentioned policies like feed-in tariffs, tax incentives, and R&D resources has given these technologies the push they need. While localized policies might be necessary by state or local governments to encourage regional adoption of the technologies, the thinking here is that the federal government should instead shift its focus to the bigger picture of what the wider impacts are as the inevitable energy transition takes hold: how will those whose jobs are made unnecessary be retrained and/or propped up, how will we make sure all classes and groups are able to reap the benefits of clean energy, and how will we ensure unintended consequences don’t take hold? These ideas support a focus on a just and equitable transition.

Is it enacted anywhere: According to the Stockholm Environment Institute, some examples of policies in this regard include Canada’s Coal Workforce Transition Fund and Scotland’s Oil Worker Transition Fund.

In Favor of Focusing on a Just Transition:

“Green New Deal type policies that focus on employment and on fair and reliable access to power and transportation will be central to ensuring that the social benefits of a rapid transition to clean energy are widely spread, and that the transition is not cut short due to policy opposition” – Eban Goodstein & L. Hunter Lovins, MBA in Sustainability at Bard College

Against Focusing on a Just Transition:

“What many experts call false hopes for a coal resurgence have mired economic development efforts here in a catch-22: Coal miners are resisting retraining without ready jobs from new industries, but new companies are unlikely to move here without a trained workforce. The stalled diversification push leaves some of the nation’s poorest areas with no clear path to prosperity.” – Valerie Volvcovici, Reuters

Read more:

The Ecosystem of Networks Advancing a Just Energy Transition- Climate Justice Alliance

Realizing a just and equitable transition away from fossil fuels – Stockholm Environment Institute

A global energy transition is happening; let’s make it just, fair and equitable – World Wildlife Fund

The post What are the Best Policy Mechanisms to Combat Climate Change appeared first on Solar Tribune.

When the National Football League joined the Green Sports Alliance in 2018, it did so with the intent to support and grow sustainability initiatives across the whole league. The Carolina Panthers jumped at the opportunity right away, and with POWERHOME Solar, one of the nation’s fastest growing solar companies, located in their backyard, solar energy was the obvious place to start.

Photo source: POWERHOME Solar

In March 2019, POWERHOME Solar began the process of installing solar panels on Bank of America Stadium to feed into the venue’s renewable energy goals and join the ranks of other ‘green’ stadiums across the league.

I had the pleasure of chatting with POWERHOME Solar about this exciting partnership and their role in bringing the Panthers into the clean energy mix.

POWERHOME Solar Background

Matt Chester: Can you give a little background on POWERHOME Solar as a company? When was it formed, how big has it grown, and what’s the guiding mission?

POWERHOME Solar: Jayson Waller is a serial entrepreneur and has successfully created multiple businesses, including ISI Alarms NC Inc. and Power Home Technologies (PHT). ISI earned $12 million in sales annually in less than eight years while PHT achieved $30 million sales annually in just three years.

Jayson launched his latest venture, POWERHOME Solar, in 2015. He is the founder and CEO. The company eclipsed $100 million in sales in 2018 and has grown to service customers in seven states with nearly 700 employees. POWERHOME is currently ranked as the number 12 residential solar contractor in the nation according to Solar Power World.

The company’s goal is to help customers achieve energy independence by selling renewable energy at prices below utility rates.

Bank of America Partnership

MC: Will there be any kind of educational resources for fans attending the games to learn about solar panels, their benefits, and how to get started on installations at their home?

PS: POWERHOME Solar has activation teams in place outside of the stadium at each home game to help educate fans about solar energy benefits and generate sales leads. Additionally, POWERHOME signage can be found within the stadium.

MC: How did the partnership with Bank of America Stadium come together?

PS: Jayson also oversees POWERHOME Solar’s partnerships with professional sports teams, including the Carolina Panthers, Cleveland Browns, Detroit Lions, and Pittsburgh Steelers, as well as with Duke University. The partnerships help each entity reduce dependence on grid energy and decrease their carbon footprints.

These strategic partnerships also help raise consumer awareness about the features and benefits of solar energy, creating a ripple effect for potential customers throughout North Carolina. POWERHOME is based in the Charlotte, North Carolina area and is a short drive to Bank of America Stadium. It made sense to see if we could work with the team closest to our backyard.

As a part of the deal, we also shot a commercial where the team’s Pro Bowl Center, Ryan Kalil (who retired at the end of the 2018 season), served as director. You can see the 90-second cut of the commercial on YouTube, and we also published a behind-the-scenes article about the shoot.

Photo source: POWERHOME Solar

Panel Specifics

MC: Can you tell me more about the panels installed? And how long did installation take?

PS: Our contracts with stadiums don’t allow for the disclosure of detailed information, but POWERHOME installs monocrystalline silicon solar panels from Silfab, based in Bellingham, Washington. The panels used have a power production warranty of 30 years, meaning that the panel provider will guarantee the panels will function at 80% of the original capacity at the end of 30 years. A POWERHOME Solar panel will generate about 36 kilowatthours per month.

The Bank of America installation took four days to complete.

MC: What are some unique aspects of Bank of America Stadium that had to be taken into account when designing this solar system?

PS: We placed the solar panels on the top of entrance archways, which is a different challenge from typical commercial buildings that have flat roofs. But our team was up for the challenge of installing panels on this curved surface, and they look great!

Photo source: POWERHOME Solar

Solar Trends

MC: Bank of America is the third NFL facility to use POWERHOME– can you tell me about the other two? What makes sports facilities primed to harness the benefits of solar power?

PS: We also installed solar panels for the Cleveland Browns at FirstEnergy Stadium and for the Detroit Lions on the parking garage at Ford Field, as well as the team training facility in Allen Park, Michigan.

Sports franchises in general have high energy costs for their stadiums, and it only makes sense for those franchises to try and offset some of their power bills with clean, renewable energy. On top of that, these franchises can own a portion of their power for the long haul. These teams’ responsiveness to hearing and heeding the benefits of clean energy are a benefit to all.

MC: North Carolina has become a national leader when it comes to solar generation– what about the state has made it embrace solar so thoroughly? How do Bank of America Stadium and the Carolina Panthers fit into that?

PS: North Carolina is a great state for solar because of the abundant sunshine available in the southeastern U.S. and state-based legislation that has embraced solar. And with costs to install solar having gone down more than 70% since 2010, homeowners and business owners have increasingly become aware of the benefits of going solar at their homes and places of business. When the financials behind going solar become as apparent as the value that using clean energy brings, it becomes a no-brainer for customers on multiple levels.

For more information on POWERHOME Solar, visit their website.

About the author: Matt Chester is an energy analyst in Washington DC, studied engineering and science & technology policy at the University of Virginia, and operates the Chester Energy and Policy blog and website to share news, insights, and advice in the fields of energy policy, energy technology, and more. For more quick hits in addition to posts on this blog, follow him on Twitter @ChesterEnergy.

The post Solar Power Keeps Pounding with Panels Installed on Bank of America Stadium appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Solar power has rapidly transitioned from a niche technology into one which only businesses or households with lots of disposable income could buy to a truly democratic energy source available to all. And it’s not hard to understand why, since the ‘fuel’ behind solar power is literally all around us every day via the sun’s rays. But beyond the ubiquity of solar generation capability, as well as the increasing efficiency and decreasing capital costs that are making solar power more accessible, innovative companies and creators are finding new ways to allow solar panels to become a part of the daily lives of consumers, even when solar photovoltaic (PV) panels are not an option.

Going from the largest to the smallest personal solar energy technologies someone can embrace, here are some examples (and if you happen to know a clean tech enthusiast with a birthday coming up, consider the following a great gift list ranging from high-ticket items to budget buys):

Solar panels

When you think of taking advantage of solar power as a consumer, the first and most obvious way that comes to mind is in installing solar panels on the rooftop of a home. The ability of a home to be well-suited to solar installations varies based on a variety of factors: layout of the roof, pattern of the sun hitting the rooftop during an average day, region of the country, and more. Even when a home is well-suited to physical installation of solar, issues like cost and regional policies come into play.

In an ideal world for a solar fanatic, he or she will be able to navigate the upfront costs and the red tape in order to install rooftop solar. For homes where that’s not an option, perhaps because the costs are too great (even after subsidies) or they rent rather than own the home, community solar is an emerging trend. Community solar programs allow people to ‘subscribe’ to a local solar facility (unattached to their actual homes) and receive a share of the economic benefits of renewable energy, while also doing their part to promote a clean energy transition.

Photo Source: NYSERDA

All told, only nine states across the country have exceeded 10,000 homes with solar panel installations, demonstrating just how few people are actually in a position to embrace rooftop solar. If going all-in with a rooftop installation to power a home is a leap too far, though, homeowners can still embrace solar to replace part of their home energy use…

Solar water heater

While the average residential solar rooftop installation costs nearly $16,000 according to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, homes can invest in solar water heaters for as little as $2,000 to $6,000, on average. Solar water heaters are still a hefty investment, even after the 30% tax credit for which they qualify, and they also still require the commitment of the homeowner. However, the threshold is lower than it is for solar panels and the benefits are just as tangible.

Water heating accounts for 14% of energy use in an average U.S. household, equal to over 1,450 kilowatthours per year and nearly $200 in power bills. As a strategy to minimize those costs, solar water heaters can reduce the need for electric or gas heating for water heating needs. Direct solar water heaters circulate water through pipes on the roof to get heated up by the solar concentrating equipment, while indirect solar water heaters use non-freezing heat transfer liquid to transfer the heat from a rooftop solar collector to the water.

Photo Source: Air Conditioning Oklahoma

While solar water heaters won’t replace the need for a regular water heater, they can typically replace 50% of a home’s water heating needs and can pay for themselves in just 3 to 6 years (well under the 15 to 30 year lifespan of a solar water heating system). For consumers in warm locations, solar water heating systems can also be installed for pool heating needs with a payback period of 1.5 to 7 years on the initial investment of $3,000 to $4,000.

Again, though, these upfront costs and home-ownership requirements mean large portions of the U.S. population won’t be able to take advantage of these solar products. However, those people still may desire to get involved with solar power. Luckily, the tools available to solar power enthusiasts come in smaller packages still…

Solar generator

Solar panels and solar water heaters are built into home systems to offset direct energy demand that would otherwise be experienced, but another option for utilizing the power of the sun is to purchase a solar generator. A solar generator refers to an all-in-one solution to generate and store energy in a single device, typically coming with storage capacities between 0.1 and 2 kilowatthours. That amount of power is not sufficient to run a house or even most large appliances for more than a few hours, and they can cost from a few hundred dollars up to $2,000 while weighing over 100 pounds, meaning these aren’t solutions for running a home off the grid.

Photo Source: Climate Counts

So, who actually can use a solar generator and for what purpose? Having a solar generator on-hand can make for good backup power for critical devices in the event of a power outage (and a carbon-neutral alternative to the more typical gasoline generators), on boats, or to charge devices needed on a camp site. In each of these use cases, personal solar generation demonstrates the clean energy resource’s immense flexibility to generate and store power for use with regular devices. However, we can get even smaller and more affordable by moving from solar generation to devices powered directly by the sun’s rays…

Solar-charged camping devices

As mentioned, a solar generator can be a great option for powering the off-grid campsite, but outdoor enthusiasts can also embrace the sun by finding devices that are designed to be powered by the sun on their own. This solar-powered camping equipment is a rapidly growing sector with a wide variety of products available:

• A solar water purifier that’s verified by the Environmental Protection Agency
• A plethora of solar ovens to cook food in the sun without the need to build a fire or use gas or charcoal

Photo Source: GoSun

• Solar-powered lanterns for less than $20 to light up the campsite
• A pouch designed to warm up five gallons of water via the sun for a warm shower while roughing it in the wilderness
• Bluetooth speakers powered entirely by the sun to keep the tunes cranking around the campfire

A new solar-powered camping product seems to get released every day and there’s no shortage of new ideas on crowdfunding websites either. But campers aren’t the only off-grid customers for solar innovation…

Solar satellite television

Studies found that while Kenya has 10 million homes across the country, only 3.9 million of those have television due to lack of power, difficulty in getting service coverage, and unaffordable upfront costs. As a result, many Kenyans don’t receive the benefit of information and news that affects their daily lives, a detriment to these households. To solve that problem, Azuri Technologies announced a pay-as-you-go solar satellite television system that would allow off-grid households in Africa to have access to television.

Photo Source: Azuri Technologies

The benefits of this television access for rural areas go beyond just entertainment. According to Azuri, a survey of customers found that 98% were more aware of important local and international news because of the solar television, 92% reported improvement in their communication skills, and 60% said their children were able to read, write, and speak better thanks to the engagement from the TV. These figures show that solar technology goes beyond just cool technologies, but can actually affect positive change.

While such transformative technology shows how great the effect of solar power can be, even smaller products can bring users important benefits…

Solar charger for phones

As smartphones become more and more necessary for daily life– for entertainment, work, and security– the dread of a phone running out of battery has become more prevalent than ever. Many portable chargers exist that allow boosting of a phone’s battery on the go, but those chargers must also be kept at full charge themselves in order to be useful, and thus they aren’t particularly useful when the user hasn’t planned for them.

To solve that problem, countless solar-powered phone chargers have hit the market, each with their own niche use case. For extended expected use, such as during camping or tailgating, some solar power banks come with multiple PV panels. When you want to save the energy from the sun to power your phone at a later time, invest in a solar-powered battery bank. To prevent the need to carry an additional device, some solar phone chargers even double as a protective cased for your phone.

Photo Source: The Outdoor Spirit

Whichever you use for your needs, solar chargers are critical because of the prevalent uses for phones that now include GPS, emergency calls, flashlight, and more. Though, to be sure, these solar chargers can also extend the use of your phone for games and other fun. But that’s not the only entertainment you can get solar-powered…

Solar toys

Getting to the smallest and least costly abilities of solar power, they’ve become useful even for children’s toys. Whether a solar-powered remote control car or educational knickknacks to be fueled by the sun, solar energy can let parents entertain their children without constantly needing to swap out AA batteries. On top of that, providing kids with solar toys is a proven way to inspire and educate the clean energy enthusiasts of tomorrow.

Photo Source: Amazon

The sun is the source of all energy used on Earth, whether directly or indirectly, so it should come as no surprise that any application you may think of has either a commercially-ready solar product or such technology is already in development. Harnessing the power of the sun is useful, economical, and can even be fun, so find the application and budget that fits your desired use case and go to town!

About the author: Matt Chester is an energy analyst in Washington DC, studied engineering and science & technology policy at the University of Virginia, and operates the Chester Energy and Policy blog and website to share news, insights, and advice in the fields of energy policy, energy technology, and more. For more quick hits in addition to posts on this blog, follow him on Twitter @ChesterEnergy.

The post Investing in Solar: Beyond Rooftop PV appeared first on Solar Tribune.

A major inspiration for many people fighting for a future filled with solar power is to leave our children a healthy planet, one with clean air and free from climate change. Such motivation is surely noble, but rather than simply leaving built up solar resources for the next generation, we must also teach children about the how and the why of solar energy. The science of solar power doesn’t have to be mysterious or intimidating to young people, rather many opportunities targeted specifically at children make it immensely simple to show (rather than tell) just how normal and beneficial solar energy is in the world of today and tomorrow.

Let’s examine a few opportunities that have integrated solar power to capture the attention of the solar enthusiasts of tomorrow.

Disney World Solar Installation

Photo Source: NY Times

Through a combination of great marketing and parental nostalgia, Walt Disney World in Orlando, Florida, has remained the premier vacation destination children (and Super Bowl MVPs) clamor to visit. The magic of Disney World has spanned generations, and the people working behind the scenes want to let that continue for future generations through their pledge to fight climate change by cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by 2020.

As a part of that pledge, in 2018 Disney World unveiled a 270-acre, 50-megawatt solar power array that could power two of their parks when operating at full utilization. The solar installation is located right outside of Disney’s Animal Kingdom and, like many parts of Disney’s theme parks, it’s built in the shape of giant Mickey Mouse ears.

Not only are the executives of Disney shrewd enough to recognize the financial benefits of installing solar generation, but they also know that their parks operate with a unique ability to shape the outlook of its young visitors. Disney World has long looked to fulfill Walt Disney’s vision to not only look forward to the future, but to play a part in building that futuristic world of tomorrow– as shown with Disney’s own desire to build the Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow (EPCOT). As this vision for the future evolves, solar power is a key aspect of any plan for the coming years. Most importantly, as with the rides and features of various parks that are meant to teach children about the importance of energy and conservation, this solar power installation is both practical and educational.

You can just envision families driving up to Disney World and children seeing this playfully-shaped solar power installation, sparking their natural curiosity. By creating yet another opportunity for parents to have conversations with their children about what solar power is and why renewable energy is important, this type of solar installation might just inspire the imaginations of future solar engineers or prompt them to ask their parents whey they don’t have solar panels at home.

Solar Panels on Gingerbread Houses

Photo Source: NY Times

The past decade has seen a relative explosion in the ubiquity of solar power on rooftops and on the power grid, and with it has come an unexpected correlative trend: the ‘installation’ of solar panels on gingerbread houses.

During recent Christmas seasons, those looking to make rooftop solar a fun topic on children’s radars have recognized the ease of doing so using gingerbread houses. Kids inherently love the construction projects that bring together cookies, candy, and frosting, but such endeavors can also create teachable moments for parents and teachers surrounding solar power.

A quick Google search will reveal plenty of examples of clean energy enthusiasts creating such gingerbread houses, with the trend even resulting in the annual Essex County Environmental Center’s Sustainable Homes and Habitats Gingerbread Contest. This fun competition brings together gingerbread house builders, young and old, by challenging them to include at least three identifiable sustainable building elements– with candy solar panels on the roof often being a key component on many entries.

By creatively integrating solar PV on gingerbread houses– whether using chocolate, fruit bars, or even seaweed– children can again find opportunities to ask questions and learn about solar panels in a way that sometimes only happens with hands-on projects.

Educational Videos about Solar

Photo Source: Visual Rhetoric Blog

One of the beautiful aspects of modern educational entertainment created for children is that, when done right, they may not even realize they’re learning. Integrating important topics into programming that children watch regularly is a time-honored strategy, and sustainability-related topics are no exception.

Growing up, the educational shows I would clamor for in the classroom included the Magic School Bus, Captain Planet, and Bill Nye the Science Guy. Luckily for me (and perhaps these played a small role in my current career in clean energy), each of these programs had episodes discussing solar energy. The ‘Getting Energized’ episode of the Magic School Bus saw the children use solar power to get out of a tricky situation, the ‘Isle of Solar Energy’ episode of Captain Planet touted that “we could build solar panels, hot water heaters, even solar cars…The more we shift to solar power, the healthier our planet will be,” and the Bill Nye (who today is a notable investor in solar companies) episode ‘Electricity’ taught that solar cells can change light into usable energy.

But these shows are from my childhood, so I can already hear today’s children scoffing at the ancient TV tastes. The insatiable modern palettes of the youth of today for video content, though, can also find great solar edu-tainment:

• Nova, on PBS, has a great introductory video for young people to learn about the science behind solar generation.
• The Fixies is a YouTube series billed as one following “the comical misadventures of Tom Thomas and his secret friendship with Simka and Nolik, the chlidren of the Fixie [author note: think fairies + pixies but with STEM skills] family that lives in his apartment. In one episode, they create a solar battery to solve their puzzle.
• Ready Jet Go is a PBS Kids cartoon that sneakily teaches kids about science while entertaining them, including one episode where the gang races solar-powered cars.
• Planet Bonehead is another YouTube cartoon series, with this one focusing entirely on current environmental issues and green technology that talks to kids and “empowers them to act now and make planet Earth a great place to live.” Many renewable energy topics of course come up, including an episode about solar batteries for kids and another episode called The Cannonball Run Race for Renewable Energy.

These are just a few examples, with parents being able to research and find even more fun educational (and entertaining) videos that their kids will want to watch that will also teach them about solar power.

Solar Powered Toys

Photo Source: Fractus Learning

Many companies manufacture toys with the goal of getting solar PV technology in kids’ hands, allowing for direct learning. The wide variety of solar-related toys parents can buy reflects the various interests and styles of learning children may have.

Sometimes these toys take the form of more traditional science kits for children, which can be used in schools or at home. These kits tell kids up front they’re going to be learning science, which for the right child can be extremely exciting. For example, one science kit might include various knickknacks to be powered with a small solar cell to show the possibilities of harnessing energy from the sun, while others provide bigger tasks the solar cells can accomplish for inclusion in a science fair, such as solar-powered remote control cars or solar-powered robots.

Other children, though, might resist such obvious attempts from educational toys to teach them. For these stubborn children, you can sneak in the learning on solar topics through toys they’ll want to play with that just happen to embrace solar PV principles. Take, for example, the OWI Solar Space Fleet— this solar-powered kit is disguised as cool spaces toys like a shuttle, space station, astronaut, space rover, and more. The science-resistant kid will just find these sci-fi looking toys fun to play with, not even registering that the ability of them to be powered by the sun is not only really cool but also educational.

About the author: Matt Chester is an energy analyst in Washington DC, studied engineering and science & technology policy at the University of Virginia, and operates the Chester Energy and Policy blog and website to share news, insights, and advice in the fields of energy policy, energy technology, and more. For more quick hits in addition to posts on this blog, follow him on Twitter @ChesterEnergy.

The post Inspiring the Next Generation of Solar Power Enthusiasts at a Young Age appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Minimizing these soft costs presents great opportunity to increase the access to residential solar and hasten payback periods for homeowners, breaking down a significant barrier for families to take advantage of solar and for installers to gain customers.

Given that solar PV systems can cost customers tens of thousands of dollars, any improvement to the affordability of solar can provide great impact to installers and the industry as a whole. Despite the focus on improving solar technologies, both in efficiency and cost, many strategies exist to minimize these initial and one-time soft costs that can be just as impactful to the propagation of clean and renewable solar power to homes and businesses across the world. The Solar Energy Industries Association agrees, noting that “the biggest cost-decline opportunity in residential and small commercial solar exists in soft costs.”

What Are Soft Costs?

Specific cost breakdowns of solar panel systems for homes vary according to numerous factors, including 1) size of the installation, 2) region in which the installation takes place, 3) government incentives available, 4) manufacturer and installer chosen, 5) periphery technology like tracking the sun, 6) the permitting process in a particular community, and much more. Regardless, though, soft costs actually make up a majority of the final investment for homes installing solar panels. 

Soft costs are any costs that do not pay for direct hardware of the solar panels or the inverter themselves. Those hard costs, according to the U.S. Department of Energy, only make up about 36% of a customer’s initial investment and the remaining 64% goes to the variety of soft costs. Assuming an average 5.7 kilowatt residential solar rooftop system (a size used as a benchmark by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory) that would cost $15,960, the breakdown of costs might look something like the following:

Hard Costs:

• Solar Panel Costs: $3,990.00
• Inverter Costs: $1,436.40

Soft Costs:

• Permit Fee: $319.20
• Permitting, Installation, Interconnection Labor: $319.20
• Sales Tax: $798.00
• Transaction Costs: $957.60
• Installer/Developer Profit: $1,436.40
• Indirect Corporate Costs: $1436.40
• Customer Acquisition: $1436.40
• Installation Labor: $1,755.60
• Supply Chain Costs: $1915.20

While solar hardware costs have dropped dramatically in recent years, the low-hanging fruit of soft costs have not been addressed as widely. That said, soft costs are universally burdensome and any efforts to bring them down will be of wide benefit to the solar community. Obviously not all of those soft costs mentioned above can be targeted by everyone in the process (e.g., a customer can’t do anything about the indirect corporate costs), but some effective strategies to minimize the soft costs follow.

Photo Source: SEIA

Targeting Time Required for Installations

The first place to start when it comes to minimizing soft costs to solar systems is to address any inefficiencies during the installation process, both cost efficiencies and time efficiencies. The strategies for making installations quicker and easier expand across technology and process. According to a study from the Rocky Mountain Institute, the greatest opportunities in this regard include:

• Enhancing technologies and processes to the point that installations can be completed in a single day; 
• Integrating strategies to improve the racking base installation process; and
• Using standardized solar systems, where possible, to eliminate the need for excessive design work for each individual project.

Each of these methods will have significant results in bringing down the length of time workers need to labor in order to get solar systems up and running. To complete installations in a single day, careful planning of the install strategy can ensure the right workers are there to maximize efficiency and reduce the iterative costs of various fixed costs associated with each individual visit. This goal can be achieved through task specialization, designing systems consistently so workers know exactly how to implement them upon arrival on site, or even with the aid of satellite/aerial imaging of the install site to get ahead of any potential challenges. 

Improving the rack base installation process could require periodic evaluations of the racking base systems used by installers to determine if new products come available to the market that can cut install times and costs. Esdec, for example, recently came to the U.S. market offering its innovative twist on solar rooftop mounting that utilizes self-levelizing baseplates that are designed to reduce installation times (read more about Esdec in Solar Tribune’s interview with Esdec’s CEO of U.S. operations, Bart Leusink). 

Photo source: Esdec

Lastly, solar installers who manage to integrate a handful of standard solar designs for common roof types will find design time and costs drop. Rather than create a fully custom solar installation design for each project, best practice says to identify when designs can be reused or adapted and have the solar design completed more quickly for the customer. They’ll get their solar panels installed sooner, need to pay less for design labor, and everyone involved will be better off for it. 

Innovative Market Disruptions to Customer Acquisition

From the perspective of solar installers, becoming creative with their part of the process can be critical. Finding innovative ways to increase their market reach and decrease their customer acquisition costs can bring down the overhead costs for solar installers. Many organizations have harnessed new software solutions to these issues, such as centralized marketplaces to address inefficiencies in supply chain processes. Other solar installers have notably taken to embracing online platforms and e-commerce to more effectively and affordably reach customers. These digital solutions increase the total efficiency of finding customers and installing solar, which can in the end bring the soft costs (and overall costs) down for the consumer. 

Embracing the Second Life of Components

The solar industry is, in the grand scheme, rather young, and so the conversations and actions related to end-of-life equipment is starting to really heat up for the first time. While much of the focus on used solar equipment has focused on how to dispose of and/or recycle solar equipment in an environmentally responsible manner, some growing buzz has come from finding ways to effectively reuse old equipment. Whether that equipment comes from old installations a specific installer replaces or from “developing a marketplace for what happens with the second life of components,” effectively embracing used, recycled, or refurbished parts can drop down supply chain costs– not to mention the sustainability benefits of reusing products and avoiding their disposal needs. 

Photo source: Saur Energy

Campaign to Reduce Local Solar Permitting Costs and Other Bureaucratic Processes

The process to get new solar projects permitted can be notoriously cumbersome, especially because every jurisdiction (both local and state governments) can have a different process that installers and customers must follow. This variance requires significant additional resources for companies conducting solar system installations, both in terms of time and money. Additionally, these lengthy permitting processes often result in customers purchasing their solar system but needing to wait long times before getting them installed, frustratingly pushing out the time period before the savings from the solar system will pay back the upfront costs. 

These types of soft costs are difficult to address on a case-by-case basis for individual customers, but a number of programs and campaigns have been organized by the solar power industry to try and solve the problem. The Department of Energy (DOE) implemented the SunShot Prize competition to “motivate local governments, communities, solar companies, and electric utilities to collaborate towards improving the ‘going solar’ experience.” Similarly, the DOE-funded SolSmart program recognizes “communities that have taken key steps to address local barriers to solar energy and otherwise foster the growth of mature and local solar markets.” By highlighting the local jurisdictions who minimize permitting costs and barriers, the SolSmart program holds up examples and road maps for other localities who want to embrace rooftop solar in their communities.

The continued focus of the solar PV industry will likely remain on technological breakthroughs in efficiency and price. While those aspects are certainly critical to solar power’s continued upward trajectory, recognizing that the hardware of rooftop solar doesn’t even account for 40% of the cost to customers should serve as an eye-opener about the vast additional opportunities afforded by attacking solar costs. 

About the author: Matt Chester is an energy analyst in Washington DC, studied engineering and science & technology policy at the University of Virginia, and operates the Chester Energy and Policy blog and website to share news, insights, and advice in the fields of energy policy, energy technology, and more. For more quick hits in addition to posts on this blog, follow him on Twitter @ChesterEnergy.

The post Strategies to Minimize the Oft-Overlooked Soft Costs of Solar Installations appeared first on Solar Tribune.

The Open PV Project, run and operated by NREL, tracks and makes publicly available such solar data and provides vital information for any stakeholders across the solar energy industry. The dataset is undoubtedly massive, so a first glance proves intimidating. However, digging through Quora for the most common type of questions about the solar industry provides the ideal opportunity to walk through the data for anyone (even those who aren’t experts in solar) on how to take advantage of such a valuable resource.

Photo Source: Ridge

What is The Open PV Project?

As stated on the dataset’s homepage:

The Open PV Project is a collaborative effort between government, industry, and the public that continues to compile a database of available public data for photovoltaic (PV) installation data for the United States. Data for the project are voluntarily contributed from a variety of sources including solar incentive programs, utilities, installers, and the general public.

NREL’s data represents the best crowdsourced resource to identify the country’s solar installations, both large and small. NREL, one of the laboratories under the umbrella of the U.S. Department of Energy, offers this information to the public to help people, government entities, and industry to understand past and current trends of the U.S. PV industry.

Keeping the data complete, up-to-date, and accurate is critical for The Open PV Project to retain its value, so NREL notes that data are collected from all contributors willing to offer data– including state-run incentive programs, utilities, PV businesses and installers, solar advocacy organizations, consumers, and more.

Photo Source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory

Exploring the dataset

When opening The Open PV Project, the homepage you’ll find appears as follows:

Screenshot via The Open PV Project

Users have the option to “Search and Download” the data, “Upload Data” to contribute information, learn “About” the project, and see some of the visualizations created with the data in the “Gallery.” For the purposes of learning how to use this data yourself, let’s step through the “Search and Download” option.

Search and Download

The Search page appears as follows:

Screenshot via The Open PV Project

From here, you can search the dataset in the browser, download the full dataset for your own review, or download Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory’s Tracking the Sun report that summarizes the important trends in the data for you. But, to answer specific questions you may have, you’ll likely have to search through the data yourself.

The “Solar Search” option allows you to zero in on the type of solar installations in which you’re interested. This option can be particularly useful if you want a quick answer to questions such as “How much solar capacity was installed in Virginia since the beginning of 2016?” Simply fill out that criteria and find the following view:

Screenshot via The Open PV Project

As we can see in the top right corner of the screen, this dataset includes 25 such installations for a total capacity of 1.39 megawatts (MW) with an average cost of $2.75 per watt (W). You can also download the information for each of the relevant installations to analyze them in more detail yourself. This “Solar Search” option is ideal if your question is brief and only concerns the criteria of: state, zip code, size, date of installation, or contributor.

However, the full data include many more details to sort through, so more in-depth questions will require you to download the full Open PV Dataset. To explore through the full data, click the download button, but be forewarned– this dataset has over one million entries and the file is a behemoth. Make sure you’re on a computer that can handle processing such a large file before diving in.

In collecting this completed dataset, NREL encourages contributors to include as much information as they have and find relevant, with categories including (but not limited to) the following:

• State/city/county/zip code
• Date installed
• Incentive program used
• Type of installation
• Size, in kilowatts (kW)
• Installation type (e.g., residential, commercial, or utility)
• Installer
• Cost per watt
• Total cost
• Annual production

Not every entry includes data for each category– the only data fields required to be filled out are date installed, size, location, and total installed cost (before any incentives).

Photo Source: Solar Energy Industries Association

Answering Quora’s pressing solar questions

To prove how useful this dataset can be, I’ll now answer some of Quora’s most pressing questions on the solar industry using just the information found on The Open PV Project. For those unfamiliar, Quora is an online question-and-answer resource where community members can seek out answers from experts to any question, with the top answer often ending up the top result on Google when someone asks the same question.

Equipped with the invaluable information from The Open PV Project, we can now provide the solar industry answers demanded by the Quora community:

Which U.S. state has the most solar powered homes?

This question is exactly the type that The Open PV Project was built to answer. By downloading the full dataset and filtering so only the residential installations are shown, we’re still left with over 908,000 entries from the original 102,000,000 entries, but where are those residential installations focused? By sorting the 908,000 residential installations by state, we get the following top 10:

Author created table; data courtesy of The Open PV Project

California is head-and-shoulders above the rest of the country with almost 600,000 residential solar installations for over 4,000 MW. Other states in the Southwest join California in the top 10 of residential solar, including Arizona, Nevada, and Texas. The Northeast joins as the other region of the country highly represented, with large solar installation counts in Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania.

We must consider, though, that some of these states might only fall in the top 10 because they are populous states. To check for that, we can factor in each state’s population to find the top 10 states  in per capita installations:

Author created table; data courtesy of The Open PV Project

As this list shows, many states are represented in the top 10 when calculated on a per capita basis. Even though California is so populous, they are still kings based on one residential solar installation for every 69 residents. However, Texas, New York, Maryland, and Pennsylvania fall out and are replaced with Delaware, Washington DC, New Mexico, and New Hampshire, who are each doing more with their smaller populations.

Why are there no solar panels installed on the Southwestern deserts?

Answering this question shows how publicly accessible datasets like The Open PV Project represent an opportunity to quash misinformation. Assuming this question is asking why the deserts of the American Southwest, with their abundant sunshine, are not being utilized for utility-scale solar power, then a quick analysis shows that there in fact are plenty of solar panels in these areas.

The Southwest almost always refers to Arizona and New Mexico and can also include California, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Texas, and Oklahoma, depending on the context and who you ask. Given these states, a quick analysis of the data shows the following count of utility installations across the Southwest states:

Author created table; data courtesy of The Open PV Project

Based on this, we can see that most of the states do indeed utilize their solar resources on a utility scale, and in fact they’ve done so for going on a decade or longer. But the person who asked this question is correct to ask why more isn’t being done, particularly in Utah and Oklahoma where no utility installations of solar are recorded.

Are solar installations expensive?

After questions about the prevalence of different types of solar installations, the other most common inquiries are those asking about the costs. This question gets straight to the point, asking if solar installations are expensive.

Such a broad question cannot be answered with a simple yes or no, but The Open PV Project provides us with the necessary data to describe cost trends. Focusing on the three most common installation types– residential, commercial, and utility– the range of total system costs are shown in the following table:

Author created table; data courtesy of The Open PV Project

Overall, residential systems appear the least expensive and utility the most expensive. Such a trend is unsurprising, as residential systems are typically the smallest, with commercial installations somewhat larger and utility-scale solar by far the largest. To gain further insight, we can look at the cost per watt information in the dataset:

Author created table; data courtesy of The Open PV Project

Based on the more informative cost-per-watt numbers, we can see that residential and commercial systems tend to be about the same price, as they use the same rooftop solar technologies. Utility-scale installations, though, are somewhat more expensive because they are not simple rooftop installations, but rather full-fledged power generating sites that must include additional features– cooling considerations, transmission and distribution systems, etc. However, those additional features reportedly do lead to higher utilization rates and capacity factors, meaning the ultimate cost for electricity generation is more economic for utilities than for residential or commercial operations. However, all types of solar are already cheaper than new fossil fuel generation projects in many parts of the United States.

Photo Source: Energy Innovation

Not only does The Open PV Project elucidate the affordability of installations, but we can also plot the data over time to see how prices have evolved:

Author created graph; data courtesy of The Open PV Project

As is evident from the scattering of data points, much goes into the determination of a solar installation’s cost– factors such as size, location, installer, and unique aspects of the rooftop. Thus, coming up with a one-size-fits-all answer to “How expensive are solar installations” is difficult. But the trend lines do demonstrate that, on the whole, the cost per watt of solar is consistently falling across these three most common sectors. The dataset would also let you separate data to see what trends pop up across different regions, time periods, rebate programs, and more. But I can’t have all the fun on my own, so dive into the data for your own analysis.

But in short: solar installations do have significant upfront capital costs, but those prices are dropping and becoming cheaper than other conventional energy generation sources. For residential and commercial installations, solar typically pays for itself in six to eight years through energy savings, with all savings after that point pure profit.

What’s the average cost of a 2-kilowatt solar installation?

Ending with a narrower question, this person wanted to specifically know how much a 2 kW solar system would cost. To answer the question we can focus on all entries of the dataset within 10% of 2 kW, of which there 32,788 installations (88% of which are residential, so we can also narrow our view into those entries since the person asking is likely asking about such residential systems).

Graphing the total system costs of residential solar installations between 1.8 kW and 2.2 kW gives the following:

Author created graph; data courtesy of The Open PV Project

Unsurprisingly, given our previous findings, the costs have been trending downward but remain spread over a wide range. Across data from The Open PV Project, the price range of ~2 kW residential solar installations extends from $1,800 (1.8 kW system installed in 2015 in California) to $62,608 (2.1 kW system installed in 2010 in Arizona). On average, 2 kW residential solar systems cost $13,968. To demonstrate how that’s changed over time, though, note that from 2000 through 2009 the average 2 kW system cost was $17,317 and that average cost over 2010 through 2018 fell to $12,540.

As you can see, The Open PV Project makes available countless opportunities for everyone to analyze the U.S. solar industry. The only question left is: what questions will you find the answers to next?

About the author: Matt Chester is an energy analyst in Washington DC, studied engineering and science & technology policy at the University of Virginia, and operates the Chester Energy and Policy blog and website to share news, insights, and advice in the fields of energy policy, energy technology, and more. For more quick hits in addition to posts on this blog, follow him on Twitter @ChesterEnergy.

The post Answering the Internet’s Pressing Solar Questions Using The Open PV Project appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Installation of rooftop solar panels can require one to three days, with labor times averaging 75 man-hours and associated labor costs eating up about 10% of total system costs. While improving the rate at which solar photovoltaic (PV) panels can convert sunlight into usable energy will continue to make such installations more worthwhile, installation costs don’t typically receive the same degree of attention despite their significant contribution to upfront capital costs. As such, any innovation that can minimize installation costs will likewise decrease the payback period before residential and commercial solar systems become profitable and make solar energy accessible to more people. Such efforts encompass the goals that Esdec hopes to achieve by finally coming over to the United States.

Esdec, a European leader in solar rooftop mounting, has been operational for 14 years, having approached 2 gigawatts (GW) of total installed capacity as the leading market share holder in several countries. Featured as their initial U.S. product offering, the FlatFix system uses “self-levelling baseplates” and utilizes “innovative design [to] enable rapid assembly, allowing commercial projects to significantly reduce installation times compared with other systems on the market.” Esdec made a splash with this product at Solar Power International (SPI) 2018, the site of their U.S. coming out party.

The CEO of Esdec’s U.S. operations, Bart Leusink, graciously agreed to answer some questions I had about Esdec’s history, what finally brings them to the U.S. market, and how their products differ from other mounting and installation systems already commercially available:

Esdec’s Debut at Solar Power International

Matt Chester: Thanks so much for agreeing to speak with me today. To start at the beginning, what’s the origin story behind Esdec as a company?

Bart Leusink: Esdec was started by a group of rooftop solar installers who became increasingly dissatisfied with solar mounting and racking systems and the level of customer service– or, more accurately, the lack of consistent service– available at the time in the Dutch residential market.

Chester: You used Solar Power International (SPI) 2018 as your platform to officially launch into the U.S. market. What was the reception at the conference? How excited was your team to have such a large stage on which to debut?

Leusink: Frankly, the show exceeded our expectation. We had high hopes going into SPI, as we believe we’re bringing an innovative commercial and residential mounting system to the United States, offering installers a simpler, quicker-to-install solution compared with what is currently available. However, as with any debut, we were also a bit nervous as to how the U.S. solar community would respond.

Across the three days, we received more leads and higher traffic at the booth than we anticipated. Our commercial rooftop system, FlatFix, generated fantastic feedback from installers, distributors, and developers who were very enthusiastic about its clickable assembly, aesthetics, and durability. Among the most memorable quotes were “The product speaks for itself” and “I’ve never seen anything like this.”

People also loved the videos we created that helped tell our story, as well. SPI was a great way to start our U.S. journey and we can’t wait to build on it in the coming months.

Chester: Not only that, but you were selected as the official PV mounting system for the SPI Smart Energy Microgrid outside the convention center. How did you land that? What type of opportunities did that provide? 

Leusink: Yes, that was an excellent opportunity for us. We were approached by the organizers of SPI who knew our FlatFix product was very quick and easy to install. It ended up being an ideal way for us to demonstrate what our product can do in a real-life use case. My colleague and I, who are not installers, were able to install the 27-panel system adjacent to the convention center in just over an hour, which shows how quick and easy it is to install. The microgrid powered over 90 booths through SPI.

A two-panel FlatFix system was also featured on the Smart Energy Microgrid Marketplace inside the convention center, and I presented our products at the official MarketPlace, bringing further visibility to FlatFix and Esdec.

Esdec Changing the U.S. Market

Chester: Esdec has long been a force on the European market, but you are only now entering the United States. What felt right about entering the market at this moment?

Leusink: It’s true that Esdec has established itself as a leader in PV roof mounting systems in Europe. Since 2004, we’ve delivered nearly 2 GW of systems and worked with some of the biggest global corporate brands to deliver commercial solar systems in Europe. We’ve always known there was plenty of room in the U.S. solar market for an agile, customer-centric innovator like Esdec to help installers and EPCs (Engineering, Procurement and Construction) accelerate their installation velocity and improve their bottom line with a reliable, proven world-class product. And our experience at SPI affirms this belief. People at the convention had great feedback on our system, and the success of the product over 14 years in the industry provided U.S. visitors with evidence that we are a reliable partner.

Chester: Are there unique aspects to installations in the United States compared with in Europe that require an adjustment in how your products are made or marketed?

Leusink: The key difference between the U.S. and European solar markets is the various regulations and code compliance requirements for mounting solar panels, which are more stringent in the United States than in Europe. We incorporated these requirements into our specially designed U.S. systems. We have UL1703 Class A fire rating on all products and are also UL2703 listed for bonding, grounding, and loading. This gives us added credibility and helps us stand out as a new company in the U.S. market.

Esdec’s Products

Chester: Usually when new and exciting solar innovations are reported, they’re related to the efficiency of panels or the price of solar cells. What is it you think Esdec mounting solutions will bring that can excite people?

Leusink: Esdec is not an ordinary mounting solutions company. We’re driven by innovation. Unlike other PV mounting manufacturers, Esdec combines large-scale R&D, patented advanced technology, and customer input into rapid product development. We 3D print most of our prototypes and use lightweight space-grade plastics and self-repairing metals on our components.

I mentioned earlier that Esdec was founded by installers who were unsatisfied with the systems and customer service within the industry. Since then, we have worked closely with installers to identify improvements for our systems and their key points for residential and commercial installations. It is this collaboration that inspires our next generation of mounting system innovations.

Last month, we opened our innovation center at our Netherlands headquarters in Deventer, taking our installer collaboration to the next level, with the goal of delivering the most reliable, highest quality mounting systems on the market.

Chester: Within the mounting solutions arena, what do your products bring to customers that they haven’t seen before? What’s the differentiator?

Leusink: Esdec brings many key differentiators to the U.S. market. FlatFix features self-leveling baseplates unlike anything available to U.S. installers. Our one-tool design is completely unique, with integrated snap-on attachments that make installation quick and simple. FlatFix also provides a unique cable management approach that installers at SPI loved.

Add to that our flexible setup: single or dual; south; east-west; or north-south; and a 20-year warranty. Together it’s a complete package that U.S. installers have never seen before. We are also one of the few companies that offer both commercial and residential, flat and pitched roof solutions. This complete suite of products is another differentiator.

Chester: Among the advantages that Esdec touts are the speed and ease of installation. Can you quantify how much time and, more importantly, money can be saved on a typical installation by using your systems?

Leusink: FlatFix has been shown to significantly reduce installation time on rooftops across Europe, in some cases up to 40%. On one recent project in the Netherlands, 400 panels were installed using our system with just four people in only four hours.

We will soon be launching our calculator on our U.S. website that allows installers and developers to see just how much time and cost our mounting system can save them, based on the exact specs of their project.

Chester: Are there any misconceptions about your products or solar mounting in general that you’re eager to clear up? Anything people don’t know but they should?

Leusink: As we’re new to the market, and the majority of U.S. installers haven’t come across Esdec before, there aren’t any existing misconceptions about the company in the United States. One misconception we quickly quashed for any visitor to our booth at SPI, though, is that we are like every other mounting system supplier in the United States.

For more information on Esdec’s continued developments, visit their website for regular updates and follow them on LinkedIn.

About the author: Matt Chester is an energy analyst in Washington DC, studied engineering and science & technology policy at the University of Virginia, and operates the Chester Energy and Policy blog and website to share news, insights, and advice in the fields of energy policy, energy technology, and more. For more quick hits in addition to posts on this blog, follow him on Twitter @ChesterEnergy.

The post Ensuring Installation Costs Don’t Slow Down Solar Progress with Esdec appeared first on Solar Tribune.

While improvements to solar technologies have been among the most exciting renewable energy developments in recent years, solar energy is not without its naysayers who point out that “solar energy barely moves the needle in the U.S. energy mix.” Such pessimism evokes the quote from Energy: A Human History regarding the Industrial Revolution, which states that the average Englishman:

“Would be in no doubt about the occurrence of a revolution across the Channel in France, but he would have been astonished to learn that he was living in the middle of what future generations would also term a revolution.”

The Industrial Revolution was the most significant transformation in energy use in human history, so the idea that those living at the precipice of it did not recognize its significance is eye-opening. Perhaps the recent rise in solar power is only beginning to move the needle, but like the Industrial Revolution we are in fact at the foot of a similar solar power (and, more broadly, renewable energy) revolution in the United States.

To test this idea, looking at the prevalence and growth trends of U.S. solar provides more than a handful of clues. Let’s examine this evidence through five sets of maps and graphs.

Important to note is that the data for these graphics comes from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) and their detailed state data for the U.S. electric power sector in 2017— and this data thus does not include residential and commercial solar setups, which account for about 1/3 of the country’s total overall solar generation. This analysis focuses on utility-scale power to capture the applications most likely to displace fossil fuel baseload generation. 

1. Demonstrating current penetration of solar power across states

Overall, the United States saw over 53 million megawatthours (MWh) of solar generation in the electric power sector in 2017, accounting for 1.3% of total generation. To zoom in a bit, the following maps represent the total solar power generation in the electric power sector for each state.

Data Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

Data Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

These maps reveal the wide range of penetrations solar power has made in the electric power sectors among various states. While California leads the nation by a wide margin at over 24 million MWh generated (more than four times the generation of second place North Carolina), eight different states exceeded 1 million MWh of solar generation in 2017. For reference, the average U.S. household consumes about 10,800 kilowatthours (kWh) per year– meaning 1 million MWh is enough to power almost 100,000 homes for a year. On a percentage basis, solar power accounted for 11.8% of California’s electric power sector and 10.9% of Nevada’s, the nation’s leader in that regard.

On the other end of the scale, though, 5 states had no solar generation by utilities in 2017 and another 14 states fell below 50,000 MWh of solar generation, accounting for quite a small portion of the energy mixes in those states. In terms of portion of the energy mix, 12 states saw solar power between 1% and 6% of their electricity in 2017  and another 36 falling below 1%.

The breakdown of where solar generation in the electric power sector is prevalent or not as common largely lines up with the following map, generated by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, that displays the strength and prevalence of solar irradiance (a proxy for how much sunlight hits a region during an average day and thus how much potential solar power could be generated):

Source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory

The miniscule solar generation totals of certain regions are the numbers solar pessimists are seeing when pointing out the supposed non-viability of solar as a national energy solution (while ignoring the massive generation in California and other U.S. leading states). But like the Englishmen who failed to see how the nascent steam engine was about to change the world, these critics are only seeing part of the story.

2. Identifying age of solar power in each state

A chief aspect of electric power sector solar generation that too often gets overlooked is how young the industry is in most of the United States. To demonstrate that idea, the below map highlights when each state first saw solar generation contribute to the electric power sector, while the graph below the map shows the annual growth in number of states with solar generation and overall U.S. solar generation.

Data Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

Data Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

The important takeaway here is how starting in 1990 (when EIA data on the state-by-state electric power sector is first available), only three states had any utilities with solar generation. From then through 2007, that figure remained below five states. The fact that solar did not account for a significant portion of the U.S. energy mix through then should thus come as no surprise. In the past decade, though, solar has expanded into about 4 new states per year, reaching a total of 45 states in 2017. With that presence in new states came an increase in total generation that averaged about 61% per year. That type of sustained growth is the harbinger of solar revolution, corroborated by further analysis of this data.

3. Comparing solar with other renewable energy sources in state electric power sectors

Another telling approach to the solar data is comparing solar generation with other notable generation sources. While some states generate a majority of their electricity from a single fuel (such as Rhode Island’s electricity sector being 92% reliant on natural gas and West Virginia’s 93% on coal), most states rely more evenly on numerous energy sources. Solar power is not yet the greatest source of generation in any state, and as of 2008 (the first year in which at least 10 states had solar generation in their electric power sectors) solar was not even among the top two most prominent renewable energy sources in any state. But, as the following maps show, that has changed in the years since:

Data Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration                                  Click to enlarge

Among the six renewable energy sources tracked in EIA’s data (hydroelectric, wind, solar, geothermal, wood and wood derived fuels, and other biomass), solar power went from the least prevalent across the United States to the third most prominent (behind only hydroelectric and wind). Meanwhile, on a state-by-state basis, solar power went from:

• 41 states with no solar generation in 2008 to just 5 in 2017
• 1 state where solar was present but below all other renewable sources in 2008 to 0 in 2017
• 3 states where solar was the fifth most common renewable source in 2008 to 11 in 2017
• 4 states where solar was the fourth most common renewable source in 2008 to 16 in 2017
• 1 state where solar was the third most common renewable source in 2008 to 9 in 2017
• 0 states where solar was the second most common renewable source in 2008 to 7 in 2017
• 0 states where solar was the most common renewable source in 2008 to 3 in 2017

Given that 6 states rely on renewable energy generation sources for a majority of their electric power sector and 16 get at least a quarter of their total energy mix from renewables, solar’s rise in the renewable ranks is telling. Renewable energy is becoming critical to the grids across the nation, and solar is an increasingly vital part of that push.

4. Analyzing absolute growth of the solar sector on a state-by-state basis

In addition to seeing how solar power has grown in rank among renewable energy sources in each state, examining which states have seen their solar power grow most quickly in the electric power sector provides insights into different regions of the country. The top 45 states (excluding the 5 with no solar in 2017) in absolute generation growth over the past 5, 10, and 20 years can be ranked as such:

Data Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

Data Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

Data Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

These different windows of time are typically useful to examining how trends have changed over the years, but what these three maps instead demonstrate is that the ranking of growth remains mostly uniform over the different time periods– 33 of the 45 states don’t move more than three spots in the rankings between time periods. Two aspects of the solar growth in utilities factor into this trend:

1. The early solar adopters got ahead of the learning curve by entering the market a decade or two before many other states (the top 4 states in growth over each of these time periods– Arizona, California, North Carolina, and Nevada– account for over two-thirds of total solar growth and were each among the first 10 states with electric power sector solar generation) which got the ball rolling early and kept them in the lead.
2. Almost 92% of solar generation growth in utilities across the nation has come online since 2012, so the states that added the most over that 5-year period are mathematically also the states that added the most over the 10-year and 20-year periods as well.

These facts are compelling proof about the quite recent nature of solar growth and the further room solar still has to grow in the electric power sector.

5. Breaking down the top years for solar growth across the country

The last evidence for the blossoming solar revolution comes in the following tables that demonstrate the most notable years of growth. Starting with overall U.S. solar growth in the electric power sector, the data shows the following:

Data Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

Looking at the top 10 years for electric power sector solar growth across the country, the 8 individual years of most significant growth have come over the past 8 years, with the growth increasing in magnitude in 7 of those years. That’s what forecasters (and future historians) might look at as an inflection point of revolutionary growth.

Investigating the data on a state-by-state basis, the following table lists each instance when a state added more than one million MWh of solar generation to the electric power sector:

Data Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

Two notable takeaways jump out from this table:

• Across the country, seven unique states have had a year of such tremendous growth, which shows that the revolution is not restricted to just one or two states.
• Of the 14 times such growth has happened, 11 instances have occurred in the past two years and the other 3 happened since 2013, which shows that the most significant and important growth is happening today and such growth shows no signs of plateauing or dropping off.

In the end, the discussed data and graphs tell a story quite different from those who knock the potential of solar power. Solar only really gained significance in the electric power sector of the United States in the past decade, with no presence in 46 states until 2008. These new markets and this quickly advancing growth is the story to watch– not just where solar generation is today but how quickly and recently it has ascended and will continue to grow. The technology is only improving and the costs are dropping. As those characteristics of solar continue to be refined, future generations will look back at these several years and wonder how we saw anything but potential for revolution in solar power.

About the author: Matt Chester is an energy analyst in Washington DC, studied engineering and science & technology policy at the University of Virginia, and operates the Chester Energy and Policy blog and website to share news, insights, and advice in the fields of energy policy, energy technology, and more. For more quick hits in addition to posts on this blog, follow him on Twitter @ChesterEnergy.

The post Identifying Signs of the Solar Revolution Using Maps and Graphs appeared first on Solar Tribune.

This interview with the company’s CEO taps into his thinking on the solar market and how their approach to thin film technology will fulfill promises long made by researchers.

Despite widespread desire to buck to promote solar power globally, many constraints still surround solar power, whether they be political, economic, or institutional. A non-controversial way to make progress outside of these roadblocks is to advance the technology. While such technological progress often takes immense investment and resources, which are not easy to come by, when breakthroughs in renewable technologies do emerge from this R&D they can be embraced across the world without much debate.

Sol Voltaics is showing that universal truth, particularly with their nanotechnology called SolFilm. This company is driven to take their innovations to advance the efficiency of solar panels across the world. By adding their lightweight nanowire SolFilm technology, Sol Voltaics boasts that this cost-effective and easy-to-install material can improve panel efficiency by a mind-blowing 50% (safe to say that would represent the largest even single jump in the efficiency of mainstream solar power).

Photo source: Solvoltaics.com

What exactly is SolFilm? According to the company, it is a “lightweight photonic film consisting of high-efficiency, gallium arsenide PV nanowires [that] converts high energy sunlight directly into power and is transparent for infra-red light. The infra-red light can be converted into power…enabling a far greater power conversion efficiency than found in current leading-edge conventional modules.” That’s quite a mouthful, and the more technical among us can read more from their recently published scientific paper, but essentially enables existing solar panels to produce significantly more energy. Best of all, Sol Voltaics will ensure solar panel manufacturers could integrate their product without much cost or effort– SolFilm can be used alone as a replacement for thin film/silicon cells in the manufacture of solar panels, or even better, they can be stacked on top of the conventional PV module (during the latter stages of manufacturing) to create an even more high-efficiency product.

I recently had an opportunity to ask a few questions to Erik Smith, CEO of Sol Voltaics, about this technology that will inevitably be a true disruptor of the solar power industry.

Sol Voltaics

Matt Chester: Erik, I wanted to first thank you for making yourself available to answer my questions about Sol Voltaics, the exciting SolFilm development, and the solar market in general. I’ve read a decent amount about SolFilm on your website, in Forbes, and other publications, and the future appears bright. But before getting into the future, I wanted to get a sense of the past. Can you provide a quick overview about how Sol Voltaics got here?

Erik Smith: Sol Voltaics was founded in 2011. Our roots are firmly embedded in Lund, Sweden, and Lund University. The University’s NanoLund organization is one of the international pioneers of nanoscience and nanotechnology.

World-renowned nanotechnologist Lars Samuelson is a scientific founder of the company and the vice director of NanoLund. Sol Voltaics’ intellectual property is based on a combination of Professor Samuelson’s 25 years of Silicon (Si) and III-V nanowire research and Sol Voltaics-generated IP. I have spent over 20 years in technology development and leadership in solar, semiconductor equipment, and materials and global contract manufacturing. Our wider team is a nexus of science and industry. It is important that the managers understand not only their scientific fields, but also the requirements of being in a company with the ultimate objective of providing a product. The company consists of 55 people representing 15 different nationalities.

The impetus for the founding of Sol Voltaics was the invention of Aerotaxy by Dr. Samuelson. Aerotaxy is a continuous flow manufacturing process that enables Sol Voltaics to produce gallium arsenide (GaAs) solar cell nanowires at a very low cost. The ability to bring GaAs, the best solar material in the world, to market at a low cost was the idea that attracted the investors. Since being founded, Sol Voltaics has raised $64 million of total investment, with 20% coming from non-dilutive sources.

Chester: Continuing with that thread, how does SolFilm factor into the whole story of Sol Voltaics? Was the SolFilm technology the reason behind Sol Voltaics being formed, or is it one in a line of multiple products? Are there other innovations into which you’re looking to branch out? 

Smith: Sol Voltaics was formed to realize the vast solar energy potential of GaAs through nanotechnology. GaAs has tremendous solar energy-generating properties and holds the single-junction conversion efficiency record. It is also an extremely robust and reliable material. It has been used for many years in concentrated solar PV systems and in space applications. However, until now, the high cost of GaAs has prevented it from being manufactured into a scalable, economically acceptable product for the mass solar power market. Through our patented Aerotaxy process and the nanophotonic effects of the nanowires, we are able to produce a highly-efficient, low-cost GaAs PV cell called SolFilm.

SolFilm will be the first commercial product produced by Sol Voltaics. But given the ability of Aerotaxy to produce numerous kinds of sophisticated nanowires and our ability to align and organize these nanowires, we see vast potential to apply these two core technologies to other applications.

Chester: What are the biggest hurdles facing Sol Voltaics today? Do they come from the technology side, the economics or market side, any sort of political obstacles, or something else?

Smith: As with many start-ups, obtaining funding is always an obstacle to bring product to market. However, we’re in a good position because we have demonstrated all the key technological aspects of SolFilm. The next round of funding will be used for process optimization to produce prototype samples. This is the final stage before we can commercially manufacture SolFilm.

The SolFilm Technology

Chester: I found that your marketing materials give a great ‘elevator pitch’ summary of the SolFilm technology. Generally, do you find people get on board and understand what you’re trying to do quickly, or do you find that people get a bit lost in the weeds of understanding the tech?

Smith: For those within the solar market, particularly cell and module manufacturers, they understand our value proposition and the benefits of SolFilm very quickly. The solar industry has an urgent need to innovate and bring to market technologies that can enable greater module efficiencies. The industry has seen only incremental increases in efficiencies over the past 10 years. SolFilm’s great success has been the ability to reduce costs to the point where, in many regions, it is competitive with traditional energy sources. To ensure the world complies with COP21 targets, innovation is paramount at acceptable costs. SolFilm represents a technology that will help meet those targets and catapult mainstream solar module efficiencies towards 30%.

Chester: A few companies have come in recent years promising thin film technology that could provide a breakthrough in the solar space, but little progress has been made and investors were resistant to bet on the technology. What makes SolFilm different? How will the story play out this time?

Smith: One key difference for Sol Voltaics is our patented Aerotaxy process. Aerotaxy provides a low-cost path to bringing the well-accepted, sought-after GaAs material to the marketplace. Aerotaxy generates GaAs PV nanowires within seconds, at yields comparable with semiconductor industry standards, and can produce them on a continuous basis. A second key to our low cost is the nanophotonic properties of nanowires. Acting like waveguides, one only needs to cover the module with 20% nanowires. This is the optimum light gathering density. These two critical aspects of SolFilm enable us to bring efficiencies in the upper 20% range at a comparable cost per Watt peak (Wp) to standard low-cost silicon modules.

Photo source: Solvoltaics.com

Finally, it is important to note that many of the locations where solar is and will continue to be deployed are in high temperature regions. The temperature coefficient of GaAs as a material is significantly better than silicon. In a region like the Middle East, this can translate to 15-20% more power output with the same efficiency module because GaAs degrades significantly less than silicon in high heat.

Another important point of difference is our association and continued collaboration with the University of Lund and NanoLund. The depth of nanowire understanding at NanoLund in conjunction with its ability to supply a flow of excellent scientists to Sol Voltaics makes it a very valuable partner.

Chester: A main application for SolFilms is to integrate directly into existing PV module lines. Have you had any pushback from the PV cell manufacturers about your product and its integration strategy?

Smith: We have numerous letters of intent from the PV industry to integrate our SolFilm into modules. The integration is an extremely simple process that requires virtually no alternation of the manufacturing process. To execute these LOIs, our job is to produce full-size samples.

Chester: Because the technology applies right to the cell, it seems like SolFilm is equally applicable to utility-scale solar, residential rooftop solar, and any other solar installation. This is obviously valuable for your market to be so wide, but are there any specific applications where SolFilm is especially suitable and the gains are even more impressive?

Smith: We see vast potential for SolFilm in utility-, commercial-, and residential-scale solar. We believe residential and commercial solar are particularly well-suited for SolFilm because of the significantly increased power the cells can generate per square meter of rooftop, thus reducing the overall cost per watt of the system. Its excellent all-black aesthetic and heat resiliency are also key benefits.

Photo source: Solvoltaics.com

Market Appetite for SolFilm

Chester: The technology seems like a game changer, but better tech can’t do much unless it’s successfully implemented in the market. With that in mind, what’s the current market of SolFilm? Is the technology still in the development phase or are there any modules in commercial operation today?

Smith: Our technology is still in the optimization phase, so there are no commercial projects featuring SolFilm. We have LOIs and NDAs with all the major solar module manufacturers, all of whom are interested in adopting SolFilm. We are working toward shipping samples to our partners by the end of 2019.

Chester: The solar industry is notorious for being slow to change and adopt new technology. What sort of feedback have you gotten from the solar community– skepticism and doubt or excitement at the potential to disrupt the market?

Smith: Given the urgent need for innovation at the cell and module level, the vast majority of module manufacturers are interested in and excited about the prospect of SolFilm.

The solar industry has been aware of the properties and potential of GaAs in PV for many years since it has been successfully deployed on concentrator PV projects and in outer space. We are on the path to becoming the first company manufacturing mainstream GaAs solar technology at low cost, which has generated significant anticipation of SolFilm in the industry.

The boost that a GaAs material in tandem conjunction with Si/CIGS is also well known. The record is 33% efficiency in this combination. It is our job to demonstrate the product. We have shown that the process of SolFilm works, and we have demonstrated with a world-record nanowire cell that nanowires can make good solar cells. We now need the funds to optimize and scale the form factor. It’s more a matter of when it will happen than if it will happen.

Chester: I’ve seen you talk about how strong the solar market, both commercial and residential, is and how that shows the high, high ceiling of Sol Voltaics’ market potential. Are you seeing a future where SolFilm is in most of the world’s solar panels? What sort of rollout strategy would get you to that point?

Smith: There are a number of rollout strategies we can take. The good news is that the terrestrial solar panel market is already $40 billion a year. So, there is plenty of room for growth.

For more information on Sol Voltaics’ continued developments, visit their website for regular updates and follow them on LinkedIn.

About the author: Matt Chester is an energy analyst in Washington DC, studied engineering and science & technology policy at the University of Virginia, and operates the Chester Energy and Policy blog and website to share news, insights, and advice in the fields of energy policy, energy technology, and more. For more quick hits in addition to posts on this blog, follow him on Twitter @ChesterEnergy.

The post SolFilm Technology from Sol Voltaics: An Interview with CEO Erik Smith About this Disruptive Solar Panel Technology appeared first on Solar Tribune.

I recently had the opportunity to interview James about the work SHOS does, his thoughts on the long-term future of renewable energy, and what keeps him driven towards his admirable goals.

Solar Head of State

Matt Chester: Thanks so much for taking the time to answer a few of my questions, James. Let’s just jump right into it– when it comes to the mission of Solar Head of State to install solar systems on the Executive Buildings, what has been the overarching response you’ve received from countries? Were they skeptical or resistant, or were they quick to jump on board with your projects?

James Ellsmoor: Solar Head of State started with a campaign in the United States asking President Obama to install solar on the White House. It then became pretty clear that we could get a lot of traction in small island developing states (SIDS), and we have since done projects in the Maldives, Saint Lucia, and Jamaica. Solar Head of State installations are small projects aiming to showcase the benefits of renewable energy, and we work in countries that are already pursuing renewable energy goals. SIDS are ideal in that sense because they have some of the highest electricity costs in the world, and an over-reliance on imported diesel. Additionally, they are very vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and so many SIDS countries feel that they have a moral imperative to lead by example. Despite mostly having minute greenhouse gas emissions, SIDS can be demonstration sites for clean technology. In turn, Solar Head of State projects are a useful media tool for highlighting the wider work happening in these small but ambitious nations.

Chester: There are only so many Executive Buildings in the world on which to install solar, so what’s the long-term game plan for Solar Head of State if you hypothetically reach saturation? Obviously, many more places could benefit from solar, would you then move on to recognizable landmarks or other cultural and tourist destinations?

Ellsmoor: Solar Head of State is of course limited in scope but there is still plenty of work to be done! There are still many other countries that we hope will work with us to install solar on government buildings, in addition to cities, states, provinces, and territories. Each country is different, so the most suitable building could be an executive residence, parliament building, or any other notable public building. In some countries, we have found that the energy ministry could be more appropriate, and we would use the installation as a capacity building exercise for ministry staff. We recently signed agreements with the Pacific Island Development Forum and Organization of Eastern Caribbean States to work with all of their members, and so we have our work cut out to finalize funding and implement these projects. Next year, Solar Head of State will be expanding the scope to include a solar schools and education program– stay tuned for updates!

Chester: Has Solar Head of State put effort into branching out its educational opportunities towards solar power to also include the accessory technologies that can further enhance the viability of solar, things like microgrids, energy storage, etc.?

Ellsmoor: Storage is becoming increasing affordable and so I hope that we can find ways to incorporate it into future Solar Head of State projects. There is also a great argument for storage as part of building climate resiliency: if there is a power outage during a natural disaster then we want public buildings to be able to stay in operation, so they can be used to coordinate response and recovery. The main limitations to incorporating this is the additional funding needed, but governments are waking up to the importance of storage and microgrids, so I expect we will be doing more of this for future projects.

Chester: The part about microgrids and solar power being important during power outages in the all-too-common natural disasters is a great one. I know in the wake of last year’s hurricanes that decimated the grid of Puerto Rico, a number of solar companies stepped up to try and help rebuild and turn the lights back on through new solar installations— but if those are installed before a disaster strikes, then recovery can be much safer and go more quickly!

Moving back in time to the origination of Solar Head of State, can you speak to how you went about getting investment in the early stages– were the potential investors you approached immediately excited with this idea or did you more often finds yourself having to do move convincing than maybe you had expected?

Ellsmoor: Every Solar Head of State project has a substantial contribution made by the recipient government– it is important that this project is done in partnership so that all parties benefit. We also work with some private sector companies that have donated panels (Solaria), microinverters (Enphase Energy), and design expertise (Solar Island Energy). We have also worked with local project developers Envisage Energy (Jamaica) and Noah Energy (Saint Lucia). Funding really varies hugely from project to project, but overall we have found partners very receptive to the initiative. The high-profile nature of Solar Head of State installations means that we can have a lot of impact and really change the public perception on renewable energy.

Renewable Energy Efforts in Small Island, Rural, and Remote Nations

Chester: You’ve previously noted that some unique challenges in installing renewable energy projects in developing and rural communities include the knowledge and education barriers, as well as unique financing issues. What have you found to be the most significant challenge to overcome?

Ellsmoor: It is difficult to make any generalizations here because there is so much variation between countries. In SIDS nations many people are aware of the socioeconomic benefits that renewables can have, but the big barrier is finance. Financing is just not available enough for renewable energy in SIDS and we really need to see a greater involvement of the private sector. Despite potentially high returns (consumers in many SIDS may pay between 20 and 55 U.S. cents per kilowatthour), there are some big policy and transaction barriers that need to be overcome, and economies of scale are always going to be an issue.

Chester: On the other hand, can you give an example or two of what sort of opportunities lay before these nations and communities regarding renewable energy and innovative grid systems and the tangible benefits they may offer compared with traditionally-established grids in Western countries?

Ellsmoor: Most SIDS have a high percentage of households connected to the grid, with the real issue being the cost of supply. Two notable exceptions are Haiti and Papua New Guinea, both of which have much lower electrification rates than their neighbors. There is a growing trend towards privately-run micro-utilities in Haiti, with companies like Sigora operating private grids in rural parts of the country. This ‘leap-frogging’ of technology was something we also saw in the communications industry where many developing countries have a high rate of mobile phone ownership and skipped the now obsolete landline era. I think that the microgrid technology being implemented in many developing countries (particularly parts of East and Southern Africa) is going to be something we can learn a lot from and could be implemented in North America as localized storage changes our relationship with electricity supplies.

Chester: As you well know, one of the tragedies of the current climate crisis is that many of these island and rural nations that contributed by far the least to global CO2 emissions are the very ones that are most immediately vulnerable to the perils of climate change. Regarding installing renewable energy and climate solutions, would you say this harsh reality results in a sense of national pride in being the ones to so willingly embrace renewable energy, or is there a sense of hostility towards the industrialized nations that took advantage of the dirty fuels to get an economic leg up at the expense of the developing nations? I guess put another way, do you see renewable projects being installed with a sense of optimism or more a fear of the future?

Ellsmoor: In islands around the world, there is a sense of pride in being leaders in developing cutting-edge solutions to environmental issues. In Scotland, the Orkney Islands have some of the most advanced marine energy projects in the world and are pioneering underwater data centers. SIDS like Aruba and Palau are on their way to meeting ambitious targets that have been set for renewable energy.  As well as the moral imperative for developing these solutions, it gives a great deal of optimism in regions that have long been considered ‘peripheral’ to the global economy. Islands have to deal with high energy costs and the first impacts of climate change, and so it makes sense that they would be the ones pioneering solutions.

I also think industrialized nations that continue to emit greenhouse gases need to put more money forward to pay for the damage being done through climate change. We have seen efforts to develop this with the Green Climate Fund, but many small nations have found this money difficult to access due to the complex bureaucracy involved.

Questions About Your Experience

Chester: You’ve made such an impact with Solar Head of State at such a young age, even being named to the Forbes ’30 Under 30′ list.  I imagine that being so young while working on these grand projects can come with a unique set of benefits (lack of familial responsibilities tying you to one place and having the energy that youth provides) but also some challenges (perhaps getting people to take you as seriously upon first meeting). Can you tell me a little bit about how you were inspired to make such an impact so quick out of the gate and what challenges and opportunities you have found your age to provide?

Ellsmoor: While at university, I played a game that maximized the advantages of being a student while downplaying my youth at other times. Universities have so many resources that students often take for granted and I was able to access these to a maximum effect. At other times I would not mention that I was an undergraduate, so I would be taken more seriously! Now I am two years out of college and my lifestyle is pretty ‘nomadic.’ I’m able to work from anywhere and so that has given me opportunities to travel to many conferences and meet people face to face while keeping to a budget. I even completed a Masters in Island Studies online while traveling. After a while, moving somewhere new every week became tiring and so now I aim to stay in the same place for at least a few months at a time.

Chester: Where do you see your career in solar and renewables going next? You seem like the type of guy who already has his next five big ideas lined up– care to give a preview of what direction you might head next?

Ellsmoor: Solar Head of State has some exciting developments coming up and so the next year is going to keep me very busy! I am also trying to grow out team within our existing funding constraints which will free me up to work in other areas. The nonprofit model has opened so many doors, but also has its constraints, so I am currently in the process of registering my own media company to allow more time for private sector work. This will include communications and social media and I also will be running some courses and events to work with other entrepreneurs with a global outlook. I have a blog site under development that will merge my interests in travel and energy. So, I am very excited for what 2019 will bring!

Chester: Lastly, does your passion for renewable energy at all influence your choice of drink? I ask because if you find yourself in Washington DC anytime soon, I’d love to buy you a beer– perhaps even one from the list of breweries I compiled that use the most renewable energy!

Ellsmoor: Well now I need to find an excuse to visit DC! Let’s choose one of those solar-powered beers (or ciders?) and go for a drink!

For more information on sustainable development, follow James’ newsletter ‘Island Innovation’ by clicking here, and you can follow James on Twitter (@jellsmoor) for regular updates.

About the author: Matt Chester is an energy analyst in Washington DC, studied engineering and science & technology policy at the University of Virginia, and operates the Chester Energy and Policy blog and website to share news, insights, and advice in the fields of energy policy, energy technology, and more. For more quick hits in addition to posts on this blog, follow him on Twitter @ChesterEnergy.

The post Solar Head of State: An Interview with Director and Co-Founder James Ellsmoor appeared first on Solar Tribune.