By Ariel Stavitsky, Emily Schimelpfenig, and Sudha Basu[1]
For nearly a decade, tension has grown in Oregon between the desire for agricultural and wildlife conservation and the desire for renewable energy development. In 2023, the Oregon Legislature passed House Bill 3409, directing the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC), the body that administers the
On July 15, 2025, the Department of Interior (DOI) issued a memorandum titled, “Departmental Review Procedures for Decisions, Actions, Consultations, and other Undertakings Related to Wind and Solar Energy Facilities” (the Memo). The Memo directs federal agencies within DOI to elevate a nonexclusive list of 69 categories of routine permitting activities related to
In its first move since hitting “pause” on the California Public Utilities Commission’s (Commission) consideration of a controversial December 2021 proposed decision (Proposed Decision or PD) that would have overhauled the existing net energy metering (NEM) tariff for California’s solar customers, the presiding administrative law judge (ALJ) issued a ruling on May 9 to reopen the record and invite party comments on a limited scope of issues.
Background
The Commission adopted California’s existing solar tariff, known as NEM 2.0, on January 28, 2016 in Decision (D.) 16-01-044. Customers opting into this tariff pay a one-time interconnection fee (less than $150 for systems under 1 MW and $800 for systems over 1 MW). Customers taking service on the NEM tariff are automatically opted into a time-of-use rate plan and are subject to select non-bypassable charges (NBCs) that are used to fund general customer programs such as contributions to the wildfire fund, nuclear decommissioning, and the public purpose program, among others. NEM customers receive a bill credit for any excess generation produced by their system and exported to the electric grid, which credits may be used to offset customer energy costs. Under NEM 2.0, any excess generation credits are applied to the customer’s bill at the same retail rate (including generation, distribution and transmission charges) the customer would have paid for the energy consumption.
Continue Reading Commission Ruling Reopens the NEM 3.0 Record to Invite Comment on and Consider Limited Issues
In June 2021, the California Public Utilities Commission (Commission) issued its Mid-Term Reliability Procurement Decision, Decision (D.) 21-06-035, which directed load-serving entities subject to its jurisdiction (investor-owned utilities, community choice aggregators, and energy service providers) to procure at least 11,500 megawatts (MW) of net-qualifying capacity (NQC) for reliability for the period 2023 through 2026. The decision established cumulative annual procurement requirements: 2,000 MW in 2023, 6,000 MW in 2024, 1,500 MW in 2025, and 2,000 in 2026. The decision also states that the Commission expects all of the resources procured pursuant to that decision to be zero-emitting, unless they otherwise qualify under renewables portfolio standard eligibility requirements (biomass, for example).
Continue Reading CPUC Issues Net-Qualifying Capacity Values to Be Used for Mid-Term Reliability Procurement
In a stakeholder call yesterday, the CAISO discussed the Revised Draft Final Proposal in the Generator Deliverability Assessment stakeholder initiative. During the call, the CAISO addressed outstanding stakeholder questions, including confirming key upcoming dates for project developers.
Background on the Proposal
The CAISO is proposing revisions to its deliverability assessment methodology in response to the rapid increase in the amount of solar resources and the California Public Utilities Commission’s (CPUC) resulting transition to an Effective Load Carrying Capability (ELCC) approach to calculating qualifying capacity (QC). The CAISO’s revisions are intended to more closely align the capacity studied in the deliverability assessment with the generator’s anticipated QC under the CPUC’s new ELCC methodology. Under the current deliverability assessment methodology, generators are studied at a higher capacity than the projects can qualify for under the ELCC methodology. Under the revised deliverability methodology, projects are expected to retain their full capacity deliverability status (FCDS) and their NQC value will not be reduced, but the proposed change should be beneficial to future interconnection customers because it will free up some unused deliverability and likely result in fewer required network upgrades to receive FCDS.
As part of the proposal the CAISO is also creating a new sub-status for solar and wind projects: Off-Peak Deliverability Status (OPDS). New solar and wind OPDS resources will receive market scheduling priority by continuing to be allowed to self-schedule as an incentive for resources to develop in locations that do not trigger upgrades or trigger only low-cost localized transmission upgrades.
Continue Reading CAISO Clarifies Generator Deliverability Assessment Proposal
On July 29, 2019, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s decision in Winding Creek Solar LLC v. Peterman et al., ruling that California’s feed-in tariff for small qualifying facilities (QFs), the Renewable Market Adjusting Tariff (ReMAT), violates the federal Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) (Ninth Circuit Case No. 17-17531). ReMAT provides small QFs of three megawatts (MW) or less with a standard contract for energy offtake, on a first-come, first-served basis. Under ReMAT, rates available to any given generator fluctuate based on the price the developers ahead in the contract queue will accept. The California investor-owned utilities must offer ReMAT contracts up to a program cap of 750 MW, which is proportionately split among the utilities, and then further divided across different types of generation, including baseload and peak/non-peak resources.
The Ninth Circuit ruled that ReMAT violated two tenets of PURPA. Under PURPA, subject to certain exemptions, utilities are required to buy at the avoided cost rate all the power produced by a QF. First, contrary to PURPA’s requirement that a utility buy all of a QF’s output, the Ninth Circuit found that ReMAT limits the amount of energy that utilities are required to purchase from QFs by placing caps on procurement. Second, ReMAT sets a market-based rate for energy from participating QFs, rather than a price based on the utilities’ avoided cost as required under PURPA.
Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Strikes Down California ReMAT in Winding Creek Solar Case
In 2017, the California Legislature passed a bill that resulted in Business and Professions Code (BPC) section 7169, which ultimately would require Home Improvement Contractors, which include contractors that install solar systems on residences, to issue specific disclosures to any residential consumers who may want to purchase, finance or lease, and install a solar system on their property. Recently in August, the California Public Utilities Commission “endorse[d] the solar energy systems disclosure document as being compliant with [BPC section 7169]….” The Disclosure terms include:
On June 1, 2018, only two days after the completion of 12th SNEC International Photovoltaic Power Generation Conference, the world’s biggest solar conference and a central gathering of all the Chinese PV manufacturers, the Chinese central government announced a nation-wide solar subsidy cut that resulted in the Chinese solar stocks tumbling with the falling range from 7% to 31%.[1] Specifically, the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Finance and the National Energy Administration of China issued the “2018 Solar PV Generation Notice” (the “Notice”)[2], imposing caps and reducing the feed-in tariff (“FiT”) mechanism in connection with China’s domestic PV projects[3], and at the same time setting rules at the central government level to urge marketization of China’s solar industry.[4]
Firstly, the Notice imposed a 10 GW cap on capacity for distributed generation projects and stopped utility-scale project for 2018. This is a steep drop from last year’s installation of 19 GW distributed generation projects (out of 53 GW of all PV projects in China).[5] Also, the Notice provided that only those distributed generation projects that are connected to the grid no later than May 31, 2018 would be covered by central government’s budget, whereas the financial responsibility for other distributed generation projects would be shifted to local governments.[6] In addition, the Notice encouraged the local governments to come up with more solar supportive policies, to reduce non-technological costs, and as a result to reduce the needs for central and local governments’ solar subsidies.[7] Separately, the Notice abolished the utility-scale projects and instructed local governments not to approve any utility-scale projects until central government’s further notice.[8]
Continue Reading China’s Renewable Policy Shift and its Global Implications
Or so Secretary Rick Perry and the DOE would have us believe. Approximately three weeks ago, the DOE made its pitch to FERC and the energy industry that a lack of “resiliency” threatens the U.S. power grid. The responses are in. And the shock and bewilderment that immediately followed the release of the Secretary’s surprising
By a notice issued yesterday, September 28, Rick Perry, the Secretary of Energy, utilized section 403 of the DOE Act to require FERC to cause organized energy market operators (ISOs/RTOs) to compensate “fuel secure generation”, i.e., coal power, for grid “resiliency”–something that apparently puts Americans at risk despite statements by NERC to the contrary or