Colorado Governor Bill Ritter

Colorado Governor Bill Ritter has made it official: By 2020, utilities in that state must generate 30% of their electricity from renewable sources such as wind and solar power. As reported here recently, the Colorado legislature passed HB 1001 to upgrade its Renewable Energy Standard (RES) on March 8th, with strong public support.

Only California has a more aggressive RES: 33% by 2020.

Colorado’s new rules also support distributed power, with a requirement that 3% of electricity comes from home and business solar arrays.

Colorado Raises International Energy Profile

Also on Monday, Leocadia Zak, director of the U.S. Trade and Development Agency, announced that Colorado would be hosting two renewable energy trade mission with representatives from Latin America.

The “Clean Energy Exchange Program for the Americas-Wind” takes place May 22-29, with meetings held in Golden, CO; Dallas, TX; and Washington, DC.

The “Clean Energy Exchange Program for the Americas-Solar” event will be held October 9-16, with stops in Golden, Los Angeles and DC.

According to Zak, the trade missions are part of the National Export Initiative created by President Obama on March 11. The NEI goal is to double US exports in the next five years.

“As part of the International Business Partnership Program,” explained Zak in Denver on Monday, “the purpose of these reverse trade missions is to bring buyers to the United States.”

Saguaro Solar Thermal Plant

While the Arizona state legislature attempted to end the state’s RES program recently, there is mounting pressure on the Arizona Corporation Commission to at least match Colorado’s standard or risk falling farther behind in the expanding green jobs/green energy movement.

Arizona has been sending mixed signals about its desire to play a leadership role in moving to a renewable energy economy.

Governor Jan Brewer, who assumed office when President Obama named then-Governor Janet Napolitano to head up the Department of Homeland Security, in 2009 signed into law a bill providing tax credits for manufacturers of renewable energy equipment relocating to the state.

Cut and Run

Last month, Brewer prohibited Arizona from participating in a seven-state regional climate program. Sandy Bahr, head of the Sierra Club’s state chapter, called the move “embarrassing for the state of Arizona….It demonstrates a real lack of understanding of how significant of a threat climate change is to the state. We ought to be standing at the front of the line to look at solutions.”

Benjamin Grumbles

Brewer’s top environmental official defended the action. “Arizona needs a green-and-grow approach rather than a cap-and-trade approach,” said Benjamin Grumbles, director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.

Grumbles was a top official at the federal Environmental Protection Agency under President George W. Bush, an administration known for its opposition to environmental regulations.

Fast on the heals of the Arizona legislature’s attempt to pull support from in-state solar power generation, Colorado’s legislature passed a bill yesterday to boost dramatically the amount of electricity produced by renewable sources in their state.

The Arizona bill would have ended a state program requiring utilities to generate 15% of electrical power from renewable sources (such as solar and wind) by the year 2025. (The program is called the Renewable Energy Standard, or RES.) The bill was withdrawn, at least temporarily, following an outcry by the public, businesses and even the state’s largest utility.

Colorado Sees Daylight

Meanwhile, back at the Colorado legislature, House Bill 10-1001 was winding its way through committee hearings. On Monday, both houses of the Colorado legislature had passed the bill creating a RES of 30% of electrical power by 2020. (Or, twice as much renewable power as Arizona, five years sooner.)

In the highly competitive field of green jobs and technology, last month Arizona clearly fumbled the ball. The real damage is becoming apparent this month, as Colorado recovered the fumble and now heads down the field.

Just When You Thought it Was Safe to Catch a Few Solar Rays

Needs Some Work

As I wrote here recently, the hasty demise of anti-solar House Bill 2701 raised more questions than it answered. One of those questions is: Why did Arizona’s Speaker of the House, Representative Kirk Adams (R), say that HB2060 was evidence that he and his colleagues support solar power and are “send[ing] a clear message to global industries: we want you in Arizona.”

Speaker of the House Rep. Kirk Adams (R)

The bill he cited is about land conservation and state parks. It says nothing about renewable energy.

Speaker Adams didn’t return a call, but I reached a House Republican spokesperson and asked him for an explanation.

The bill, he said, may not mention renewable energy, but it shows support for parks and the environment. I pointed out that in his statement, Adams specifically said that HB2060 provides incentives for renewable energy. After a pause, the aide said he’d look into it.

Adams Takes a Mulligan: HB2676

Apparently, he did.  Representative Adams’ Web-based press release has been updated. It still has Thursday’s date at the top, but the example of support for renewable power has been changed. The “solar friendly” bill is now listed as  HB2676.

On his second try, Adams’ has grabbed what appears to be a plausible brass ring: HB2676. It’s titled: Energy Park Authority.

That sounds solar friendly — or at least supportive of renewables.

On the other hand, the Bush Administration’s “Healthy Forests Act” was a Luntzian device which would have been more properly titled “Leave No Tree Behind.” A measure of strict scrutiny is in order.

The official bill summary reads:

HB 2676 creates the Energy Park Authority (Authority), which administers monies primarily received from a new property class designation for electric generation facilities, in order to facilitate new transmission and renewable or noncarbon based generation facilities.

The bill has two items to please supporters of renewable energy. Under definitions, an Energy Park is defined as:

At least two renewable or noncarbon-based generation facilities and the associated transmission lines interconnected together that are codeveloped for the purposes of receiving incentives…

So far, so good.

Those familiar with the inside workings of the Arizona Corporation Commission — the single most powerful governmental ally of solar and renewable energy in Arizona — tell The Phoenix Sun that the worst part of HB2701 was the legislature’s attempt to destroy ACC’s independence — to take for itself, the commission’s ability to set energy standards and regulations.

No one who knows anything about Arizona politics would claim that if it had been up to the legislature, the state would have adopted a renewable energy standard of 15% by the year 2025.

Clear as Mud

HB2676 seeks to allay the fears of ACC supporters. It includes a clear statement on turf:

Nothing in this chapter diminishes the authority or jurisdiction of the Arizona Corporation Commission as provided by Article XV, Constitution of Arizona.

End of power grab?

Not so, says Sandy Bahr.

While [the bill] says there is no conflict with the powers of the Arizona Corporation Commission, it most certainly seems there is. The people who crafted it either have no idea how the current system works or are deliberately trying to create a big mess or both.

Sandy Bahr, Sierra Club

Bahr is the director of the Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon Chapter. She’s either an excellent advocate for the environment or a gadfly slowing down and sometimes stopping the important working of the Arizona legislature — depending on your outlook, ideology and, of course, who signs your paycheck.

Asked to explain her remarks, Bahr points out that the proposed Energy Park Authority would be responsible for power station siting decisions — a job now reserved for the ACC. It’s like proposing a new lawrequiring a panel of pet store owners to set air pollution standards — and inserting a section stating that nothing in the new law diminishes the authority of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.

Stalling in the Court

HB2676 would create a constitutional crisis that could take a year or two to be resolved. And during that period the ACC’s hands would be tied. Which is why Bahr thinks it’s possible that the “solar friendly” bill might be designed to create maximum chaos and choke the life out of the state’s solar industry.

Bahr also points to the makeup of the board of directors for the new Energy Park Authority, which would include a senator, a house member, someone from a regulated utility, an expert in transmission planning and a few other members. Looking a the list, Bahr poses a reasonable question:

“If [the Energy Park Authority] is going to be used for siting renewable energy,” she asks, “why no experts with backgrounds in renewable?”

For a bill that’s supposed to be a model of “renewable friendly” legislation, the bill has some other peculiarities. We’ll turn to them, tomorrow.

Then we’ll look at Plan C, which is the greatest threat to the future of solar power in Arizona. It’s also the one most likely to succeed.