Source: Tampa Tribune, June 23, 2009
As a blazing sun bore down this week, Southwest Florida got a sweltering reminder of true solar power. With the intensity and frequency of its sunshine, Florida should be a world leader in harnessing this potent form of renewable energy.
Yet, the state has only a handful of commercial solar arrays, offers a paltry $5 million rebate program and serves merely as a conduit for federal stimulus funds targeted to renewable energy projects.
Despite good goals set by Gov. Charlie Crist, Florida has done too little to increase the use and generation of solar power or to encourage businesses or jobs in developing, supplying or installing the equipment.
Meanwhile, California's Solar Initiative boasts a $2 billion budget to finance incentives. Arizona and Nevada also offer generous incentives for solar installations. Even New Jersey has surpassed Florida by making solar systems tax-exempt and providing loans and rebates to support installations.
Florida's Legislature had an opportunity in this year's session to move the state forward in the promotion of renewable energy. Crist's call to require electric utilities to generate 20 percent of their power from renewable sources by 2020 was part of an energy bill that passed in the Senate.
But the House never took up energy legislation, citing a need to focus on the budget.
Yet, the House found time, in the closing days of the session, to pass a bill to allow offshore oil and gas drilling as close as three miles from Florida's Gulf Coast. Fortunately, the Senate refused to consider it.
The action and inaction by the House explain why Florida is falling behind in the "green economy" - despite the efforts of a cadre of entrepreneurial companies - while other states and nations benefit from the industries and jobs generated by the push for renewable energy.
While Florida's House continues to embrace fossil fuels - and jeopardizing the coastal environment and tourist economy - nearly 30 states have passed laws similar to what Crist and the Senate were seeking. Congress is on the verge of setting a national standard for increasing the use of renewable energy. And other countries such as Germany - which estimates that it now has 250,000 jobs in renewable energy - have burgeoning industries based to a large degree on the production of solar power.
Emblematic of Florida's solar disarray is the tale of Sarasota County's Triple J Ranch, reported by Zac Anderson in the June 7 Herald-Tribune.
The owners of the ranch spent $500,000 to install a 300-panel solar system. The array generates enough power in one month to run an average house for a year. The owners figured they could produce enough power to reduce the ranch's monthly electric bill from $5,000 to $1,000.
But Florida law got in the way.
A 2008 law regulating "net metering" - the sale of excess, independently generated energy to a power company - expanded the eligible solar systems from home-based arrays to those at businesses and office buildings. But the bill failed to account for homes and businesses - like the Triple J Ranch - that have multiple electric meters.
And a 1969 law largely prohibits combining multiple meter readings on one bill.
Unfortunately for the Triple J, all of its solar panels were installed on two, low-energy-consuming horse barns and feed into two meters. The power generated cannot be applied to seven other metered sites at the ranch. And the excess energy is being sold to Florida Power & Light not for the state-established price of 12 cents per kilowatt hour but for just 6 cents a kilowatt hour. That's FPL's "fuel price," less the cost of its transmission lines and other infrastructure.
As a result of all that, the Triple J's $500,000 solar array saves it very little.
Florida should be in the business of encouraging the use of solar power, not of punishing users who fail to grasp the nuance of the state's arcane laws.
If Florida is to join the vital global gold rush in green energy, the Legislature needs to take some critical steps:
•Establish a renewable energy standard of 20 percent by 2020.
•Thoroughly debate the concept of "feed-in tariffs," by which utilities purchase excess solar power at a premium over conventional rates. The city of Gainesville's publicly owned utility pays such a premium and has created a mini-economic boom in the purchase and installation of solar panels - which is the purpose of the tariffs. Germany and other countries have done the same.
•Rewrite the net-metering law and other laws that could discourage investment in solar energy.
Given the stakes for Florida in the onset of climate change - the potential for rising sea levels, stronger storms and the soaring insurance costs tied to those eventualities - this state has more reason than most to pursue and promote renewable energy, especially solar power.
Next year's legislative session is not too soon to start.
And if legislators fail again to let Florida join the green economy, voters need to send them into the electoral sunset in 2010.
As a blazing sun bore down this week, Southwest Florida got a sweltering reminder of true solar power. With the intensity and frequency of its sunshine, Florida should be a world leader in harnessing this potent form of renewable energy.
Yet, the state has only a handful of commercial solar arrays, offers a paltry $5 million rebate program and serves merely as a conduit for federal stimulus funds targeted to renewable energy projects.
Despite good goals set by Gov. Charlie Crist, Florida has done too little to increase the use and generation of solar power or to encourage businesses or jobs in developing, supplying or installing the equipment.
Meanwhile, California's Solar Initiative boasts a $2 billion budget to finance incentives. Arizona and Nevada also offer generous incentives for solar installations. Even New Jersey has surpassed Florida by making solar systems tax-exempt and providing loans and rebates to support installations.
Florida's Legislature had an opportunity in this year's session to move the state forward in the promotion of renewable energy. Crist's call to require electric utilities to generate 20 percent of their power from renewable sources by 2020 was part of an energy bill that passed in the Senate.
But the House never took up energy legislation, citing a need to focus on the budget.
Yet, the House found time, in the closing days of the session, to pass a bill to allow offshore oil and gas drilling as close as three miles from Florida's Gulf Coast. Fortunately, the Senate refused to consider it.
The action and inaction by the House explain why Florida is falling behind in the "green economy" - despite the efforts of a cadre of entrepreneurial companies - while other states and nations benefit from the industries and jobs generated by the push for renewable energy.
While Florida's House continues to embrace fossil fuels - and jeopardizing the coastal environment and tourist economy - nearly 30 states have passed laws similar to what Crist and the Senate were seeking. Congress is on the verge of setting a national standard for increasing the use of renewable energy. And other countries such as Germany - which estimates that it now has 250,000 jobs in renewable energy - have burgeoning industries based to a large degree on the production of solar power.
Emblematic of Florida's solar disarray is the tale of Sarasota County's Triple J Ranch, reported by Zac Anderson in the June 7 Herald-Tribune.
The owners of the ranch spent $500,000 to install a 300-panel solar system. The array generates enough power in one month to run an average house for a year. The owners figured they could produce enough power to reduce the ranch's monthly electric bill from $5,000 to $1,000.
But Florida law got in the way.
A 2008 law regulating "net metering" - the sale of excess, independently generated energy to a power company - expanded the eligible solar systems from home-based arrays to those at businesses and office buildings. But the bill failed to account for homes and businesses - like the Triple J Ranch - that have multiple electric meters.
And a 1969 law largely prohibits combining multiple meter readings on one bill.
Unfortunately for the Triple J, all of its solar panels were installed on two, low-energy-consuming horse barns and feed into two meters. The power generated cannot be applied to seven other metered sites at the ranch. And the excess energy is being sold to Florida Power & Light not for the state-established price of 12 cents per kilowatt hour but for just 6 cents a kilowatt hour. That's FPL's "fuel price," less the cost of its transmission lines and other infrastructure.
As a result of all that, the Triple J's $500,000 solar array saves it very little.
Florida should be in the business of encouraging the use of solar power, not of punishing users who fail to grasp the nuance of the state's arcane laws.
If Florida is to join the vital global gold rush in green energy, the Legislature needs to take some critical steps:
•Establish a renewable energy standard of 20 percent by 2020.
•Thoroughly debate the concept of "feed-in tariffs," by which utilities purchase excess solar power at a premium over conventional rates. The city of Gainesville's publicly owned utility pays such a premium and has created a mini-economic boom in the purchase and installation of solar panels - which is the purpose of the tariffs. Germany and other countries have done the same.
•Rewrite the net-metering law and other laws that could discourage investment in solar energy.
Given the stakes for Florida in the onset of climate change - the potential for rising sea levels, stronger storms and the soaring insurance costs tied to those eventualities - this state has more reason than most to pursue and promote renewable energy, especially solar power.
Next year's legislative session is not too soon to start.
And if legislators fail again to let Florida join the green economy, voters need to send them into the electoral sunset in 2010.
No comments:
Post a Comment