Author Archives Laura Arnold

WSJ: Germany to Forsake Its Nuclear Reactors; How will it affect renewable energy policy such as their feed-in tariff?

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   June 01, 2011  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

Original article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303657404576354752218810560.html?mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsThird I'm not sure how long this link will work so don't dawdle to check out the original article with additional links, etc.

Editor's Note: There is already a follow-up to this story in the Wednesday, June 1, 2011, Wall Street Journal entitled, "German Nuclear Operator Threatens Suit Over Ban". To me the significance of this new development in Germany is less about the political decision to abandon nuclear power and more about how Germany plans to make up the 22.6% of its energy supply it currently receives from nuclear power from the renewable energy sector.  It will be very interesting to see how this change in energy policy will affect recent changes in Germany's feed-in tariff. Laura Ann Arnold

 

By PATRICK MCGROARTY And VANESSA FUHRMANS

[GERNUKEjp] AFP/Getty ImagesGerman Chancellor Angela Merkel, center, received Monday a report on safe energy supply from the newly formed so-called Ethics Commission in Berlin.

BERLIN—Germany on Monday said it would close all of its 17 nuclear reactors by 2022, a sharp policy reversal that will make it the first major economy to quit atomic power in the wake of the nuclear crisis in Japan.

WSJ's Patrick McGroarty reports German Chancellor Angela Merkel's decision to close all nuclear power plants by 2022 in response to the nuclear disaster in Japan following March's tsunami. Photo: THOMAS KIENZLE/AFP/Getty Images

German Chancellor Angela Merkel announced that she plans to follow a government-appointed commission's recommendation to shut eight of the country's reactors immediately and close most of the others by 2021. Three plants may be kept online into 2022 as a source of reserve power, she added.

[GERNUKE]

Journal Community

 "After what was, for me anyway, an unimaginable disaster in Fukushima, we have had to reconsider the role of nuclear energy," Ms. Merkel said, announcing the decision at a news conference with several of her cabinet ministers.

"This path sets out a great challenge for Germany," she added, but "we can be the first industrial country to make the transition into an age of highly efficient and renewable energy."

Germany's move—marking a contrast with the U.S. and other countries that have largely stuck to plans to continue pursuing nuclear power—is a U-turn from a contentious plan that Ms. Merkel engineered just last fall that would have extended the lifetimes of some of Germany's reactors into the 2030s, more than a decade longer than previously scheduled. Ms. Merkel's latest move is effectively a return to an agreement to phase out nuclear power approved in 2002 by a center-left Social Democrat-Green coalition.

It's unclear whether a formal ban on nuclear-energy imports will be a part of the final law, but Ms. Merkel has said that it would be senseless to scuttle Germany's nuclear industry only to import electricity produced by reactors in neighboring countries.

FMK / DemotixProtesters holding antinuclear banners marched through the streets of Hamburg on Saturday.

gernuke0530

gernuke0530

Just days after the first explosion at Japan's tsunami-stricken Fukushima Daiichi plant in March, Ms. Merkel shut down seven of Germany's oldest reactors and ordered a review of its nuclear strategy. Germany's youngest nuclear-power plant, the Neckarweistheim II reactor north of Stuttgart, went online in 1989. The government's decision Monday, based on the outcome of that review, marks the most dramatic shift yet in a nation's nuclear-energy policy in reaction to the Japanese crisis. Switzerland's government also has approved a plan to decommission its nuclear plants. Under the Swiss plan, however, the nuclear phase-out may not be completed until well after 2030.

But apart from Japan, which has quit plans to build more reactors, few countries have altered long-term nuclear energy policies. Many, instead, are still examining how or whether to proceed with plans for new reactors. More than 150 are planned world-wide, in addition to the 64 under construction, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency. China, Taiwan and Italy have suspended plans for new reactors, pending safety reviews, while the U.S. and the U.K. have also conducted reviews.

On Monday, the Obama Administration repeated that the U.S. intends to push ahead with efforts to revive the U.S. nuclear-power industry while learning lessons from the accident in Japan. "The administration is committed to increasing our nation's clean energy share through a broad range of energy sources," White House spokesman Clark Stevens said. President Barack Obama, whose home state of Illinois relies on nuclear power for nearly half its electricity, has long supported expanding nuclear energy as part of an effort to increase power sources that emit little or no carbon dioxide.

Since the Japan accident, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which oversees civilian uses of nuclear power in the U.S., has been conducting special investigations of nuclear reactors. The chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Gregory Jaczko, has expressed confidence in the safety of U.S. nuclear reactors, but recently threw the industry a curve by saying there are "technical issues" with a new type of reactor some U.S. operators are using for their next-generation nuclear plants.

German officials decided late Sunday night to close all nuclear power plants by 2022. Video courtesy of Reuters and photo courtesy of AP.

Germany's largest neighbor, France—where nuclear energy makes up three-quarters of the electricity mix—said Ms. Merkel's move wouldn't sway its nuclear policy. "I respect the choice that Germany made," French Prime Minister François Fillon said in Strasbourg on Monday, but "it's not the choice that we are making—we think that nuclear energy is a solution for the future."

 In few countries is nuclear energy the hot-button issue it is in Germany, where polls show some 70% of the populace opposes it, the legacy of a broad-based antinuclear movement that harks back to the 1986 Chernobyl accident. Since the Fukushima accident, antinuclear protests have taken place across the country.

Ms. Merkel's change in course, though, hasn't produced the desired political effect. Conservative allies have been frustrated by her turn away from a cherished policy victory, and nuclear opponents have seen the move as opportunistic. Those perceptions contributed to several stinging regional election losses for the Christian Democratic Union this spring, and have led to a surge in clout for the opposition Green Party.

The center-left Social Democrats said Monday they would approve the government's new plan in parliament only if a stronger commitment is made to build up wind and solar capacity, and if the legislation leaves open the possibility of closing all nuclear plants sooner than 2022.

German industry leaders, while not surprised by the announcement, lashed out at what some called a politically driven decision that would increase energy prices and threaten German competitiveness.

"The clearly political intent to fix a final and irreversible end-date for German nuclear energy with such unprecedented haste gives me increasing worry," Hans-Peter Keitel, head of Germany's BDI business lobby, wrote in an open letter to German business leaders Monday.

Dieter Zetsche, chief executive of Germany luxury car maker Daimler AG, aired qualms about Germany's shift in nuclear policy. "People expect orientation, and with that in mind, too many changes in direction are to be viewed critically," Mr. Zetsche said in an interview in the German tabloid Bild-Zeitung. Mr. Zetsche added that the huge power requirements of Germany's heavy manufacturing companies—a pillar of its economy—need to be considered alongside the concerns raised by the Fukushima disaster.

Germany's electricity prices, which have more than doubled in the past decade, are a sensitive issue for industry, whose domestic sites consume nearly 50% of the country's electricity.

Currently, Germany derives 42.4% of its energy supply from coal-fired plants, but phasing out nuclear power, which now makes up nearly 23% of the country's energy supply, could force it to rely more on coal. The big variable is the cost of natural gas, the preferred, cleaner alterative. But procuring cheaper gas from other countries is complicated, in part because long-term contracts that many German utilities have signed with Russia lock them into a price tied to the price of oil.

On Monday, Ms. Merkel said the new nuclear policy wouldn't affect Germany's renewable energy targets, which call for generating 80% of Germany's energy supply from sources such as wind and solar, by 2050. Renewable energy capacity currently makes up about 16.9% of Germany's electricity consumption.

The move boosted stocks of German renewable energy companies. SolarWorld AG and solar-cell maker Q-Cells SE jumped more than 8%, while wind turbine maker Nordex SE rose 13%.

Shares in German utilities E.ON and RWE AG, which operate most of Germany's 17 nuclear reactors, fell sharply Monday on news of the plan. Though the utilities will no longer reap the potential profits of operating their nuclear plants longer, the government said they will still be subject to a new tax on nuclear-fuel rods introduced this year to offset those potential gains.

—Max Colchester, Jan Hromadko, Rebecca Smith, Stephen Power and Gary Fields contributed to this article.Write to Patrick McGroarty at patrick.mcgroarty@dowjones.com and Jan Hromadko at jan.hromadko@dowjones.com

IURC Approves Final Net Metering Rule

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   May 11, 2011  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

I received this message this afternoon following the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) weekly conference today (5/11/2011).

Dear Interested Parties,
 
Thank you for your participating in the administrative rulemaking for net metering.  This afternoon, the Commission approved the attached Final Rule.  The rule will now be circulated through the State process for full approval.  Because of statutory timelines, we estimate this process will take between three to four months to complete. I will email again when the rule is fully promulgated and becomes law.  Several people have asked what changes took place between the Proposed Rule and the Final Rule.  Please see the “Changes” document for a list of those changes.  Please let me know if you have any questions about the rulemaking process or have problems opening the attachment.
 
DeAnna L. Poon
Assistant General Counsel
Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission

Here is a description of the changes. Changes from Proposed Rule to Final Rule[1]

Here is a copy of the final rule approved today. LSA No 10-662 Final Rule[1]

IURC Weekly Conference Agenda 5/11/2011 Lists Final Net Metering Rule

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   May 11, 2011  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) weekly conference agenda for Wednesday, May 11, 2011 at 2:00 pm lists RM#09-10 which is the new net metering rule. The agenda indicates that the new rule--if approved--will become effective 30 days after filing with the Publisher. I assume this notation refers to publication in the Indiana Register.

It looks like our long and hard fought battle to update Indiana's net metering rule is coming to an end. Although there have been several unsuccessful attempts to revise these net metering regulations, the Commission initiated a series of public hearings, technical conference and one-on-one sessions with all the stakeholders including Indiana Distributed Energy Advocates (IDEA).

Watch for more details here after the Commission's weekly conference meeting this afternoon!

Italy changes solar FITs

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   May 09, 2011  /   Posted in Feed-in Tariffs (FiT), Uncategorized  /   No Comments

Editor's Note: This article from Craig Morris is a follow-up on an earlier post entitled, Abound Solar Wants Italian Sun; Will Italian Government Extention of Current Feed-in Tariff Impact Indiana? Craig Morris and I are both members of the Alliance for Renewable Energy Steering Committee. Last week during our monthly telephone conference call I asked if anyone knew the outcome of this pending decision by the Italian government. Craig Morris obliged with this post on Renewables International. Thanks for the update, Craig! Laura Ann Arnold

Original article: http://www.renewablesinternational.net/italy-changes-solar-fits/150/510/30890/ 

The changes were both highly anticipated and long in coming, but last Thursday [05/05/2011] the Council of Ministers adopted a new decree for photovoltaics. The reductions are yet another success story for feed-in tariffs, whose purpose has always been twofold: the widespread deployment of renewables, and bringing down cost.

On Thursday Italian ministers adopted a degree that would cut solar feed-in tariffs by between 22 and 30 percent in 2011, by 23 to 45 percent in 2012, and by 10 to 45 percent in 2013 depending on how much is actually installed. A ceiling has also been imposed depending on system size to prevent speculation: one megawatt on rooftops and 200 kilowatts foreground-mounted systems according to Reuters, which also explains that one goal is to limit the cost of solar feed-in tariffs at 6 to 7 billion euros by the end of 2016, when roughly 23 gigawatts is to have been installed.

According to a report at PV Tech (which includes a chart of specific rates), there is now to be a monthly degression, which could cause a headache for developers, but those who can get their projects completed by August 31 will reportedly still be eligible for the previous tariffs. Interestingly, PV Tech also reports that Italy has come up with a new way of approaching the "domestic content" issue: a five percent bonus is paid if 60 percent of the investment cost comes from within the EU – not from within Italy. Finally, PV Tech writes that Conto Energia IV stipulates that grid operators have 30 days to connect completed arrays.

 

Reuters cites a number of firms and investors who are not pleased by the cuts, one of which even plans to sue the Italian government for losses stemming from the changes, but not everyone agrees. For instance, Germany's Photon Magazine argued recently that Italian feed-in tariffs for solar are too high in comparison to Germany, especially in light of the much greater insulation conditions in Italy. The limit on project size will also help ensure that the market is not gobbled up by a small number of large corporate investors. And PV Tech quotes Jeffrey's International, which says that the new feed-in tariffs are "more positive for the solar industry" than its prior estimates.

Italy has become the world's second-largest market for photovoltaics behind Germany, and the goal of 23 gigawatts by 2016 remains ambitious. As Renewables International recently reported, Italy has probably already met its photovoltaics target for 2020 at 8,000 megawatts. In comparison, the United States – which has more than five times as many inhabitants as Italy and per capita power consumption nearly 4 times greater – installed less than 500 megawatts last year. Italy will obviously remain a gigawatt market over the next five years, and to match that performance on a per capita consumption basis, the US would have to install nearly 20 times as much – around 20,000 megawatts per year. In fact, market researchers at Solarbuzz recently estimated that the photovoltaics pipeline has "now soared past 12 gigawatts" – but apparently for the next five years according to the chart in the announcement, not per year.

Solarbuzz says that "the PV industry is facing the effects of large cuts in feed-in tariffs across Europe," but that the Request for Proposal process in the US is making the country "one of the most promising growth markets over the next 24 months." That's true, but a comparison of feed-in tariffs in Germany and Italy with RFPs in the US also clearly shows that the US will have a hard time keeping up with PV growth in Italy and Germany in absolute terms (not to mention per capita consumption). Furthermore, the US seems unable to bring the costs down without feed-in tariffs. Solarbuzz writes that "the largest US projects are now being completed in the range of $3-4 per watt," but that price only makes the largest systems in sunny deserts in the US competitive with systems smaller than 100 kilowatts in cloudy Germany (Renewables International reported).

Although the full text of Conto Energia IV has yet to be published in Italy's Gazette, it has been made available online at the Industry Ministry's website in Italian. The decree becomes law once it is published in the Gazette, and the law is expected to take effect on June 1. (Craig Morris)

Mike Pence: Best energy strategy is independence; Is Pence running in 2012 for Indiana Governor?

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   May 04, 2011  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

 Editor's Note: We could know by the end of the week if Mike Pence will run for Indiana Governor. The Sixth District Republican told reporters Monday that he and his family have made their decision. The announcement could have taken place Monday, but was postponed because of news of the death of Osama bin Laden. If he declares for the governor’s race, Pence is thought to be a heavy favorite among any other GOP candidate. Former Indiana House Speaker John Gregg is said to be the top Democrat considering a gubernatorial run.

In an effort to begin educating my blog readers about the expected Indiana candidates for Governor in 2012, please find below an article submitted by Pence that ran recently in the Indianapolis Star.

You might also be interested in a search on Mike Pence from a relatively new website called, DirtyEnergyMoney. Here is what has been written recently By Tor 'Solar Fred' Valenza  on his blog at RenewableEnergyWorld.

The ending oil subsidy debate has begun in Congress. The debate is framed not around the environment or the fact that oil companies have received these subsidies for 100 years, but around the budget deficit and the mertis of giving $4 billion a year in tax breaks to oil companies. 

Politicians who support continuing oil subsidies claim that removing them will cost oil company jobs and not help to lower gas and heating oil prices. They hint that continuing subsidies and driil-baby-drill will lower gas prices today, but that's a fantasy. Of course, the oil subsidy supporters don’t mention how eliminating those subsidies could lead to solar jobs and make America energy independent while protecting, you know...breathing. But let’s let that go for now.

Want to see the search results for Mike Pence? Check it out for yourself at: http://www.dirtyenergymoney.com/view.php?searchvalue=mike+pence&search=1&type=search

Laura Ann Arnold

 Best energy strategy is independence

Written by Mike Pence, 6:55 PM, Apr. 29, 2011 

Original article: http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2011105020317

The average price of a gallon of gas in Indiana has gone over $4 per gallon. The "pain at the pump" has the potential to get even worse for Hoosiers with the summer travel season just around the corner.

It is long past time to implement an energy strategy that will reduce our dependence on foreign sources of oil. Especially with the ongoing unrest in the Middle East and North Africa, we cannot continue to rely on foreign countries for our energy needs.

Producing more energy here at home will help to provide the United States with the independence it needs while creating jobs, providing a cleaner environment and strengthening national security.

As past chairman of the American Energy Solutions Group in Congress, I have consistently supported efforts to implement an "all-of-the-above" energy plan that includes more domestic exploration for oil and natural gas, continuing development of clean coal technology, investments in renewable and alternative energy technologies and incentives to spur greater conservation.

Unfortunately, President Barack Obama does not seem to share this view. Under his administration, there is a de-facto moratorium on oil exploration in the Gulf of Mexico. There are drilling bans off both coasts, on Alaska's continental shelf and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Yet, on his trip to South America last month, Obama told Brazilian leaders that the United States would stand at the ready to assist that country in helping to develop its oil reserves, adding that when Brazil is "ready to start selling, we want to be one of your best customers."

Committing to even more foreign energy resources is not sound energy policy. America's oil, natural gas and coal resources are equivalent to 1.3 trillion barrels of oil, the largest proven reserves in the world. American energy is the solution to America's energy crisis.

One way we can do so is by ending the de-facto drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico. This would start to provide economic certainty by allowing employers and workers to get back on the job and open up more domestic supply.

In addition, for the first time since 1958 there will be no offshore lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico. To address this, I am advocating legislation that would require the administration to move forward promptly to conduct offshore lease sales in the gulf and off the shore of Virginia that have been delayed or cancelled.

Finally, I am advocating that the administration move forward with the 2012-17 lease plan with energy production in areas containing the most oil and natural gas resources.

These measures, taken together with a broader push to utilize an "all-of-the-above" strategy for energy production here at home, will increase our long-term prospects for growth. Hoosiers shouldn't have to pay $4 for a gallon of gas. I will continue to push for domestic energy solutions that will create jobs, reduce costs, eliminate our dependence on foreign oil, and grow our economy.

Pence, a Republican, represents Indiana's 2nd District in Congress.

Copyright 2013 IndianaDG