State Renewable Energy Requirements and Goals: Update Through 2005 |
AEO2005 provided a summary of 17 State renewable energy programs in existence as of December 31, 2003, in 15 States [9]. They included RPS programs in 9 States, renewable energy mandates in 4 States, and renewable energy goals in 4 States. Since 2003, 7 more States and the District of Columbia have established renewable energy programs (Table 5), including 6 RPS programs and two renewable energy goals. No new mandates have been enacted since 2003, although a renewable goal instituted in Vermont will become mandatory if it has not been met by 2012. In addition, major changes and refinements have been made in a number of the State programs that were in existence before 2004 (Table 6). No Federal renewables requirement currently exists, although a nationwide RPS was again considered in 2005. Although generally resembling earlier versions, some of the new programs and changes to existing programs include unique or unusual features:
The 23 State renewable energy programs in effect in 2005 generally are concentrated in three broad geographic areas, with 11 jurisdictions along the Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic seaboard (Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont), 6 in the Southwest (Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Texas), 4 in the upper Midwest (Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin), and Hawaii and Montana each standing alone. No Southern, Southeastern, or Northwestern State (except Montana) currently has a renewable energy program. Although efforts to coordinate renewable energy programs among adjacent States have begun, no formal or informal coordination systems have been finalized. An example of efforts to establish such a system include the newly formed Mid-Atlantic Organization of PJM States, Inc. In order to prevent double counting, however, States in most interconnected regions now coordinate identification and tracking of the origins and contracted destinations of renewable energy transactions via power pools or other organizations. The New England States use the Generation Information System of the New England Power Pool (NEPOOL), and the Mid-Atlantic States employ PJMs Generation Attribute Tracking System (GATS). Although the Midwestern Power Pool does not currently track the regions renewable generation, a multi-State Midwestern effort is underway to establish the Midwest Renewable Energy Tracking System (MRETS). Similarly, the California Energy Commission and the Western Governors Association are collaborating to establish a Western Renewable Energy Generation Information Tracking System (WREGIS). New Renewable Energy Capacity, 2004-2005 Table 7 summarizes EIAs understanding of new renewable energy capacity entering service in 2004 and 2005. However, it is difficult to quantify the specific impacts of State renewable programs. First, neither the individual States nor other sources identify all the new renewable energy capacity that is built, and some new capacity may not be reported. Although large wind projects typically are recognized, smaller projects, such as landfill gas (LFG) or end-user sited PV installations, may go unreported. Further, new capacity is not necessarily added in response to State renewable energy programs. Projects may be constructed for other reasons, and they may or may not qualify for the State programs. Projects located in one State may serve the requirements of another State or different States over time. Projects located in States without renewable programs may be explicitly or implicitly targeted to serve programs in other States and, therefore, may be at least partially caused by another States renewable program despite not being enumerated as such. New renewable energy capacity built today that appears unsupported by a State renewable program may result from an earlier favorable experience with a State program. For example, Table 7 does not include 362 megawatts of wind capacity from new projects in Iowa in the With Standards category, because Iowas mandate was fully met by 2000; nor does it include 62 megawatts of new wind capacity built in North Dakota, which has no requirement, although the new capacity serves Minnesotas RPS. Nevertheless, Table 7 provides some indication of the extent to which renewable programs are resulting in the construction of new renewable energy capacity and also suggests the extent to which other key factors (for example, the Federal PTC) may promote growth in renewable capacity. Differences among renewable energy capacity additions in different States can result from a range of factors separate from State renewable programs, including differences in natural endowments, electricity consumption levels and rates of demand growth, the availability of alternatives, the presence or absence of renewable energy proponents and champions, and variations in consumer preferences. On the other hand, while States with renewable energy requirements accounted for only 45 percent of total U.S. electricity supply, they accounted for almost 60 percent of all new renewable energy capacity added in 2004 and 2005. EIAs analysis indicates that State-level requirements probably have led to somewhat more biomass, geothermal, LFG, and solar capacity than would otherwise have been built, although the additional amounts are small. Hydroelectric capacity does not appear to have been advanced by State-level renewables requirements. Expansion of wind power capacity appears to be strongly affected by the combination of State requirements and the Federal PTC, as evidenced by the substantial construction of new wind capacity in 2005, particularly in States with RPS programs. Among States with requirements and goals, the amount of renewable capacity added in 2004 and 2005 varies significantly. Of the 23 States with renewable requirements in 2004 and 2005, 4 have reported no new renewable energy capacity (although requirements in Delaware, the District of Columbia, and Maryland are new, and Connecticut is estimated to have met its program requirements already). In another 7 States (Arizona, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin) 15 megawatts or less has been added over the 2-year period. In 3 States (Maine, Nevada, and Pennsylvania), between 25 and 35 megawatts has been added; in 2 (Colorado and Illinois) between 65 and 75 megawatts has been added; and in 4 (Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, and New York) between 100 and 200 megawatts has been added in each State over the past 2 years. California, with nearly 500 megawatts, and Texas, with more than 700 megawatts, together account for 55 percent of all new U.S. renewable capacity attributed to State-level renewable energy requirements and goals in 2004 and 2005. In contrast, Oklahoma and Washington, which have no renewable energy requirements, each installed between 250 and 300 megawatts of new renewable capacity in 2004 and 2005, and other States without programs added smaller amounts. Most of the new capacity in those States is wind power, suggesting that good resources and the Federal PTC may be the primary factors leading to new wind power installations there. Despite the expansion of State renewable energy programs, new renewables capacity accounted for a fairly small fraction of new U.S. electricity supply added in 2004 and 2005. Including conventional hydroelectricity, all renewables currently account for 9.3 percent of total U.S. electricity generation, with nonhydroelectric renewables accounting for 2.2 percent. The 3,700 megawatts of new renewables capacity added during 2004 and 2005 accounted for 12 percent of the 32,000 megawatts of new generating capacity that entered service during the period.
[9] Energy Information Administration, “State Renewable Energy Requirements and Goals: Status Through 2003,” Annual Energy Outlook 2005, DOE/EIA-0383(2005) (Washington, DC, February 2005), pp. 20-23, web site www.eia.gov/oiaf/archive/aeo05/index.html. [10]Vermont Senate Bill 52, Sec. 2 (8002)(2) (June 14, 2005).
Contact: Robert Smith |