Duke exec: renewable energy regulations needed

GSA Business
October 18, 2013

By Scott Miller
smiller@scbiznews.com

Regulators and utilities should move cautiously toward a plan that incorporates renewable energies, particularly solar power, into the mix of electricity delivered to consumers without raising costs, an executive with Duke Energy said Thursday.

“Getting the rules right, now, allows the economic impacts of solar to spread throughout the Carolinas. No final set of rules is going to make everyone happy, including the utilities, but doing something sooner rather than later is better,” said Lee Mazzocchi, Duke’s senior vice president and chief integration and innovation officer.

Of the utility’s 7 million customers in the Southeast and Midwest, only about 3,000 use solar power, he said.

“Yet in my typical day, solar creeps into every conversation,” he said. “The big reason: solar’s got a ton of momentum behind it.”

Well-known companies are pushing for solar power, Mazzocchi said, naming Walmart, Ikea, BMW Manufacturing and others, including Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino in Las Vegas.

“When the casinos are betting on solar, you better pay attention,” said Mazzocchi, who served as the keynote speaker at Thursday’s Energy Summit in Greenville, dedicating his 20-minute presentation to the push for solar energy.

Growth in the use of solar energy is expected to reach 50% this year nationally, he said.

“A solar panel gets installed every four minutes in this country,” Mazzocchi said.

Increasing the use of solar power will present opportunities for entrepreneurs to innovate new technologies for its generation, delivery and use, he said.

Duke is embracing renewables, Mazzocchi said, investing around $3 billion since 2007 in renewable energy projects, including wind and solar. The push to add solar, however, must be done without affecting electricity costs, Mazzocchi said.

Utilities need to advance the renewable energy conversation with regulators, he said, and adopt new ways to charge for electricity beyond just the kilowatt-hour, ways to price energy products differently.

“The current regulations, mindset and business model were designed for a different era,” Mazzocchi said.

In states with a higher use of renewable energies, customers that do not use solar power subsidize the higher costs for those that do, he said.

He pointed to service disruptions in California, Arizona and Germany related to renewable energy. In Germany, where the use of renewable energy is high, electricity cost is triple what Duke’s South Carolina customers pay, Mazzocchi said.

South Carolina regulators have long resisted the adoption of a renewable energy portfolio standard that other states have used as a way to jump-start the use of renewable energies and the development of related technologies.

North Carolina regulators, for example, adopted a portfolio standard in 2007, calling for investor-owned utilities to meet up to 12.5% of their energy needs through renewable energy resources or energy efficiency measures. Rural electric cooperatives and municipal electric suppliers are subject to a 10% renewable energy requirement in North Carolina.

South Carolina is one of only 13 states without some form of voluntary or mandatory portfolio standard, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The U.S. does not have a federal standard, though efforts have been introduced in Congress.

http://gsabusiness.com/news/49229-duke-exec-renewable-energy-regulations-needed?rss=0

Why Are Some Big Utilities Embracing Small-Scale Solar Power?

InsideClimate News
September 12, 2013

By Maria Gallucci, InsideClimate News

A handful of U.S. utilities have discovered they can save money by encouraging small rooftop solar projects—the same projects utility industry leaders have insisted were too expensive and unreliable to be practical.

The Long Island Power Authority (LIPA) in New York, for instance, is paying developers to build solar panels on top of buildings in tiny towns that are experiencing population booms but don't have enough electric grid infrastructure to bring in the electricity they need. The pilot initiative will allow the utility to avoid spending more than $80 million to build new transmission lines and grid equipment.

"It's actually cost-effective to add renewables" this way, said Michael Deering, LIPA's vice president of environmental affairs.

Read more

S.C. laws hinder clean energy investment

Columbia Regional Business Reports
August 6, 2013

The state has missed out on millions from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Meanwhile, South Carolina’s laws also are blocking projects on Defense Department sites.

By Mike Fitts
colanews@scbiznews.com
Published Aug. 5, 2013

South Carolina’s laws are holding back growth in promising clean energy fields while other Southeast states are forging ahead, according to several experts on entrepreneurship in the field.

State rules require that solar companies be regulated like full-blown utilities if they sell energy to any third party, even a U.S. military base. This imposes a burden on startups that is blocking the state’s potential, a top expert in financing clean energy projects told attendees of the S.C. Clean Energy Summit on July 11.

“Your state policy doesn’t lend itself to renewable energy development,” said Lee Peterson of Cohn Reznick, an Atlanta-based accounting and tax advisory firm.

Federal tax laws encourage clean energy projects, and there is substantial capital out there from hedge funds and other investment groups looking to back them, Peterson said.

In other states, Peterson said, entrepreneurs can set up and operate a solar or wind farm, for instance, and capital investors will buy a majority interest in exchange for the tax breaks. South Carolina laws shut all that down, except for projects launched by the major utilities, and the capital flows to other states.

Missing out on investment

South Carolina has missed out on millions from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Peterson told the conference. North Carolina has gained more than $700 million in clean energy projects from one of the act’s tax reimbursement provisions, while South Carolina has only drawn $57 million. That shortfall is directly attributable to the state’s outdated laws on clean energy investment, Peterson said.

South Carolina’s laws also are blocking projects on Defense Department sites, according to Dave McNeil, president of Hannah Solar Government Services. The Charleston-based company launches renewable energy projects on military bases, but has none in South Carolina, despite federal incentives.

A bill to change how South Carolina regulates clean energy (House bill 3425 and similar Senate bill 536) failed to advance in this year’s legislative session. The Legislature’s Public Utilities Review Committee has appointed an advisory panel to work on these issues, and South Carolina Electric & Gas is working in that process, according to utility spokesman Eric Boomhower. Boomhower points out that SCE&G has more than 200 customer-owned solar powered generators, providing or displacing nearly 1.3 megawatts of generating capacity. Owning your own solar or wind power system avoids the legal issue that has left entrepreneurs unable to resell power in the state.

The Clean Energy Summit brought renewable energy entrepreneurs and utility leaders into the same room together; SCE&G served as one of the event’s sponsors. The event saw some positive and substantial discussion among the parties, said Tom French, executive director of the event host, the S.C. Clean Energy Business Alliance.

“The issue is complicated, but both sides are trying to define win-win outcomes,” French said after the summit.

In his keynote address at the event, Sen. Vincent Sheheen, D-Camden, noted the differences of opinion in the room and urged the sides to come together so that the state can grow its economy and jobs with clean power.

Keeping dollars at home

Helping clean energy build in the state would keep billions of dollars here that now flow to other states that produce fossil fuels, he said.

“This is an industry we need to get behind,” said Sheheen, considered the likely Democratic candidate for governor next year.

State government needs to show more leadership on clean energy, including showing taxpayers how embracing solar power and energy efficiency can save them money, Sheheen said. Such projects as solar arrays on state office buildings would help with government’s huge power costs and help the industry show what it can accomplish, Sheheen said.

“Our state government certainly should be a good example,” he said. Sheheen described constituents

That shows how much room South Carolina has to improve on energy, Sheheen said. To address this, Sheheen endorsed making small loans for efficiency improvements available, to be repaid through customers’ energy bills.

Not improving energy efficiency and clean energy use would be a waste of the state’s resources, Sheheen said. So far, the state has fallen behind because of a lack of leadership on energy, he said.

“The big vision needs to come from the governor’s office,” Sheheen said.

https://www.columbiabusinessreport.com/news/48495-s-c-laws-hinder-clean-energy-investment?rss=0

Yesterday: Big business wins two, small business picks up one

It was a busy day yesterday for the S.C. Small Business Chamber of Commerce.  Two Senate subcommittees and the House Ways and Means Committee held meetings on legislation we supported.  Unfortunately two of these bills did not get the favorable votes we wanted.

The morning started out with a Senate subcommittee on S.145, a bill that would outlaw most favored nation clauses in contracts between health insurance companies and healthcare providers.  These contracts are used to guarantee that one carrier always gets the best provider reimbursement rates forcing the provider often to charge other insurance companies more for the same services.  The result is that other insurance companies have a harder time competing with the company that has the most favored nation clauses in their contracts.  This leads to lack of competition in our health insurance market which drives up rates for everyone.

Only two people testified at the hearing—a representative of Blue Cross, Blue Shield and myself.  The BC-BS argument against the bill was that they are a major employer in the state, they are the only domestic health insurance company in the state and that the Legislature shouldn’t do anything that would hurt even if that means allowing them to maintain uncompetitive practices. 

One Senator totally bought into that BC-BS pitch and threw the free-market and reduced insurance rates for small businesses and individuals under the bus.  The other Senator didn’t think the state should make any changes in our insurance laws until the Affordable Care Act goes into effect.

So don’t look for this bill to see the light of day again until January, 2014, if then.  Congratulations to BC-BS for having their way once again with our Legislature.

Then a Senate subcommittee met to discuss S.536, a bill that would make it legal for third parties to finance and own solar panels installed on homes and commercial buildings and sell the electricity produced to the occupant.  This practice has worked well in other states and results in the financing company to make money and the building occupant to save money.   After lengthy testimony, including mine, on the merits of allowing the free market to reign, the subcommittee voted to hold another public hearing.  The reason—they wanted to hear from the energy companies (Duke, SCE&G and Progress Energy). 

The question is why would the Senators give these companies another chance to be heard?  The energy lobbyists were sitting in the room but simply chose not to testify in public.  The answer is pretty simple.  By having another meeting probably after the Senate deals with the budget, the deadline for moving any legislation from the Senate to the House this year is lost.  Congratulations to the big utility companies for winning once again over the consumers.

But there was a ray of sunshine yesterday.  The House Ways and Means Committee voted to send H.3125, the Microenterprise Development Act, to the full House.  This bill will empower our Department of Commerce to help our non-profit microloan organizations obtain more money to lend to very small businesses (4 or less employees).

ACTION ALERT!!

Allow 3^rd Party Financing of Solar Panels

Bill would make solar energy affordable for homes and commercial buildings

Don’t let the state’s energy companies do what they did in the S.C. House—stop a bill that will allow 3^rd parties to finance solar panels on buildings and sell the electricity to the occupant owners.

A public hearing will be held on Wednesday, April 17^th, at 10AM in room 308 of the Gressette Building on the “Energy System Freedom of Ownership Act” (S.536). 

Contact the Senators below and ask them to:

Support the free market by allowing 3^rd party financing and ownership of solar panels placed on the roofs of homes and businesses.  Vote for S.536.

This bill would eliminate the biggest obstacle to solar energy—the upfront costs.  The owners of the building would buy the electricity produced by the solar panels at a rate less than off the grid thus saving money while the investors earn a fair return on their investment. The bill limits how much energy can be produced in this way to protect the energy companies from economic loss.

If you can be at this meeting to support the bill, please attend.

You are also invited to join attend the SC Conservation Lobby Day Oyster Roast that evening from 6-9 at the Seibels House in Columbia.

Call Senators:

Luke Rankin (Chair), phone: (803) 212-6410

Brad Hutto, phone: (803) 212-6140

Ross Turner, phone:(803) 212-6148

Thanks for your support.

Bipartisanship breaks out in SC and US Senates

This week a handful of Republican and Democratic Senators in Columbia and Washington found common ground on two important issues.

In Columbia 15 Senators of both parties have introduced legislation to allow a third party to finance and own solar panels on a home or commercial building and sell the electricity to the building owners.  This same legislation had been side tracked in the House thanks to the power companies.

In Congress Senators Levin, McCain and Whitehouse have offered an amendment to close corporate tax loopholes including offshore tax loopholes to reduce the deficit.

The South Carolina Small Business Chamber supports both efforts.

A quick update on the “most favored nation” bill that had a subcommittee this week in the SC Senate.  The bill will receive another public hearing since the two Senators at this week’s meeting were disappointed that no insurance companies or healthcare providers testified.  Thanks to all who responded to our Action Alert.

Action Alert!!!

   You still have time to kick SC solar industry into high gear

Act Now!!  Vote is at 3:00 today

The South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce supports H.3346, which provides for a 35% state tax credit for the installation of solar energy equipment in commercial buildings. We believe that this legislation will greatly help promote the growth of our state’s solar businesses and create many new jobs as it has done in North Carolina.  Most of these new jobs will be created by small businesses in the industry. 

In addition to the economic benefit to the state, a vibrant solar industry will help create a sustainable energy future for our state, reduce the need for construction of expensive new energy producing plants and also reduce carbon emissions that contribute to climate change that threatens our small-business tourism industry.

Contact the Senators below before 1:00 today.  The subcommittee on the bill is at 3:00 today.  Call or email.  Ask that they vote for H.3346

Senators (click on name for email) 
 

Billy O’Dell,  Chairman  (803) 212-6040      

Harvey Peeler (803) 212-6430

Glenn Reese (803) 212-6108

Mike Fair (803) 212-6420

Dick Elliott  (803) 212-6116

Online poll: State should promote solar energy

Union Daily Times

by Charles Warner
Editor

February 23, 2012

The State of South Carolina should use business tax credits to promote the growth of solar energy in the state according to the majority of the readers who participated in an online poll conducted by The Union Daily Times.

The Finance Committee of the SC Senate is currently considering House Bill 3346 which would provide tax credits of 35 percent for the installation of solar equipment on commercial buildings. The bill is supported by the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce (SCSBCC) as a means of stimulating economic development and job growth.

In a telephone interview with The Union Daily Times earlier this month, SCSBCC President Frank Knapp pointed out that passage of the bill would provide South Carolina with “a great opportunity to jump start a renewable energy industry” similar to what North Carolina has done. Knapp said North Carolina used tax credits to make solar equipment more affordable for businesses in the state. He said passage of House Bill 3346 would make South Carolina more attractive to the solar energy industry, promoting the growth of the state’s renewable energy sector including small businesses and even solar farms.

While South Carolina currently offers some residential solar tax credits it does not provide them for commercial facilities. Despite this, Knapp said some companies are already installing solar panels on their facilities to heat water and/or generate electricity. Among them is Boeing, which Knapp said has already installed solar panels on its new plant in North Charleston and the Columbia Museum of Art in Columbia which has also installed solar panels on its building.

For many businesses, however, especially small ones, installation of solar equipment is not currently cost-effective without the kind of tax incentives that would be provided with the passage of House Bill 3346. Knapp said that with the tax credits, South Carolina would reap the economic benefits of increased revenue through economic development and job creation resulting from the growth of the solar energy industry.

In addition to the benefits of economic development and job creation, the SCSBCC website states that the growth of the solar energy industry would reduce the need for building expensive new energy producing plants. It would also help reduce the carbon emissions that contribute to climate change which threatens South Carolina’s tourism and recreation industries.

Taken together, Knapp said this makes solar equipment credits for business a good investment for the state.

Poll

An overwhelming majority of those who participated in an online poll conducted last week by The Union Daily Times agreed.

The poll asked readers “Should the State of South Carolina use business tax credits to promote the growth of solar energy?”

A total of 50 votes were cast with 68 percent or 34 voting yes and 32 percent or 16 voting no.

Knapp welcomed the poll results as a sign of growing public support for the use of tax incentives to promote the growth of the solar power industry in South Carolina.

“This is very good news, we’re very happy that the readers of The Union Daily Times agree with the position that we need to offer financial incentives for commercial solar equipment to both create small business jobs and reduce our energy demands,” Knapp said Wednesday afternoon. “Alternative and renewable energy really is the future for South Carolina and the country and passage of this bill will put us on the road to that end.”