California Renewable Energy: Can The Golden State Retake Its Lead? (VIDEO)

When it comes to wind power, California lags behind some unlikely competitors: Texas and Iowa. Both of those states, despite their less "green friendly" images, use more megawatts of wind power to generate electricity.

That could soon change, however, with California's new renewables portfolio standard (RPS), signed into law on April 12 by Governor Jerry Brown. The RPS mandates that California get 33 percent of its power from renewable energy sources like wind and solar power by the year 2020, and no other state pushes for such an aggressive target on such a short timeline.

The Golden State's goal is possible, according to Ryan Wiser, a staff scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. But it's ambitious.

"It's definitely a tough target," Wiser told HuffPost. All the same, Wiser said, "I'm quite confident that we'll make very good progress towards the 33 percent standard, and we may even achieve it."

One of the biggest unanswered questions? How much economic activity this goal will create within the state, based on how many wind farms and solar power arrays are designed, manufactured and placed inside California's borders. Utilities will be allowed to purchase power from across state lines, and turbine or solar manufacturers may decide to place their plants in states where growing a manufacturing business is easier.

Governor Brown chose to sign the renewables portfolio standard law at a solar panel manufacturing plant, citing the law's potential for "stimulating investment in green technologies in the state, creating tens of thousands of new jobs." The law's author, state Sen. Joe Simitian (D), claims it could create between 100,000 and 200,000 jobs.

Other states, however, may also be able to capture some of the renewable energy market. Even places as far away as Montana are excited about the potential to supply California with some of its power. The rules are complicated, but the law mandates that by 2017, 75 percent of renewable energy credits come "from in-state or in-state equivalent products," according to law firm Davis Wright Tremaine.

"At the present time there is still quite a lot of uncertainty as to the relative viability of out-of-state renewables as opposed to in-state renewables," Wiser said.

Much will depend on how quickly California builds transmission lines to connect solar and wind power in remote locales like the desert, how easily those projects can attain the necessary permits and how strictly the new renewables standard is enforced. Complaints about costs could slow the rise of renewables; for example, the state's Public Utilities Commission estimated in 2009 that a 33 percent energy standard could raise prices by 7.1 percent.

Take a look at Don Furman, senior vice president of external affairs for Iberdrola Renewables, explain how his company responds to the new standards below. Iberdrola is the largest wind energy producer in the world and plans to build a 200-megawatt wind farm near San Diego.

WATCH:

Comments

[aligatorhardt]

06:51 AM on 06/04/2011

It is amazing how dishonest moderators are allowed to interfere with commenting, far beyond the rules. With reference links being stripped off posts, to blocking of favorite selections. This is an issue that management needs to address.

[aligatorhardt]

10:47 AM on 06/03/2011

The Ontario "buy local" renewable energy program is bringing an export base, jobs, and clean energy. This is a good example of providing opportunity for it's citizens. http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2011/05/ontarios-buy-local-energy-program-growing-rapidly

[aligatorhardt]

09:48 AM on 06/03/2011

The California renewable energy standard has been determined to raise prices by 7%, according to this article. Prices go up every year, but what would be the increase if fossil fuel and nuclear are not replaced by renewable energy? http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/24/us-utilities-smartgrid-epri-idUSTRE74N7O420110524

[Samuel Huntington]

02:12 AM on 06/03/2011

So who cares, you dont like evil corporations and big business. Right, but then who is going to pay the taxes so you can sit on your behind and be non productive. Who is going to pay for all the windmills no one will need anymore as all serious industry will be gone. Since there will be no one to pay for all the social program money, the non productive will have to leave to get a better check elsewhere, or actually try to get a now non existent job, or starve.

It is a certainty, it will happen, it is only a matter of time, if things continue the way that they are here. We are bankrupt and need a bankruptcy receiver to get us out of the unsustainable contracts, and to make real decisions on what goes and what stays and what to cut.

[Davey Johnson]

06:57 AM on 06/03/2011

You are missing the point, buddy. Corporations have exported all of the jobs and closed all of the manufacturing in the country, in the quest for $1/hour labor while maintaining product pricing at high levels. They want profit margins that are grotesquely unsustainable. Do you think that GM going to Mexico led to lower sticker prices? Did knocking down starting auto worker salaries give us lower sticker prices? No and no.

You blame government for all of the country's ills while giving a bye to the economic predators who caused (and continue to cause) the problem. The endless quest for growth in profits, versus continuous/sustainable profits, is the problem.

The only thing in nature that grows uncontrollably is cancer. And that is what corporate America is to this country: a cancer.

[Samuel Huntington]

02:09 AM on 06/03/2011

What's Next?

I will tell you. Brown will figure a way to raise taxes under threat of having a plague of 40,000 criminals released on the public to extract their pound of flesh. You will see high wealth taxpayers flee the state at an even higher rate than they are now.

Combine the tax increases with the coming enforcement of the Ca Final Solutions Global Warming Act, and you will see business taxpayers flee the state at an even higher rate than they are now. Add higher taxes to high regulation to high energy bills to cap and tax array, and you will see them leave and take their jobs to surrounding states that dont have the combined tax load, regulation, and cap/trade. They are already leaving at about 34 a day. Just wait, it will happen and the outflow will be hundreds a day.

Example consider the poor concrete mfg plant, that consumes a lot of energy to bake the concrete mix to meet specs. Once Cap and tax is enforced, every concrete plant in Ca will close. They will move to Oregon, to Nevada, to Arizona, to Mexico. Their product will come in on rail and all the jobs and taxpayers will be gone, never to return. That is just a scratch on the surface.

[Samuel Huntington]

01:54 AM on 06/03/2011

Who really cares!
The state is bankrupt, Brown's first action is? Yep you guessed it to sign sweetheart public employee union contracts as pay back for the $Millions in union campaign contributions and foot leather. The contracts increased the deficit and the unfunded pension liabilities that the Taxpayer must make up the difference for to the tune of $billions each year.

$8Million in exchange for billions, seems the unions made a good decision to buy off practically every candidate at every level of government to insure the spending madness will continue forever. Or at least until we get a bankruptcy receiver placed to make the hard decisions on spending cuts that the legislature and Brown seem unwilling and incapable of making.

CalPers the state employee pension program is the second largest pension plan in the world, and is one of the sickest. If it were not for the full faith and credit of the state, essentially the taxpayer's wallet, CalPers would have been seized long long ago. Quite possibly the CalPers pension officials might well have been subjected to criminal investigations.

We are bankrupt and what does Brown do as his 2nd official action, he passes an expansion to the Ca Dream Act, allowing illegal aliens to secure state subsidized grants, loans and other tuition assistance. You have to be kidding, What! What's Next! And Brown wants to raise an array of taxes and does this straight out of the box. Sad, nothing but sad. Bring on the receiver. Please.

[sheila]

08:59 PM on 06/02/2011

Thankfully, Jerry Brown actually understands that we should NOT be killing our deserts for Big Solar and Big Wind, and instead has decided to promote energy democracy and efficient use of the built environment to reach our RPS.

Anyone who still says that we need Big Transmission for Big Solar and Big Wind has seriously NOT been paying attention - these projects are being completely discredited as devastating to the environment (tortoises, water table, GHG emissions, concrete, steel, migration corridors, erosion, etc.) and hugely expensive (Sunrise Powerlink alone will cash in at over $3 billion for 120 miles of powerline, with NO power!).

It's past time for America to get over the Big Energy Robber Baron paradigm, not to perpetuate it. Energy independence does not mean shifting from Chevron Oil to Chevron Solar in the desert. It means each structure and community going as far as possible towards producing clean, local power, and reducing consumption without sacrifice. Affordable, fast, clean and non-destructive - that's what we need, not centralized, expensive, GHG spewing and monopoly owned.

[Samuel Huntington]

02:21 AM on 06/03/2011

We are bankrupt! Did you hear me? We ARE BANKRUPT!

If you think Brown can and will save the state, you are in fairy land with little wands and fairy dust and little music boxes playing tiny tunes.

We are bankrupt! Did you hear me? We ARE BANKRUPT!

The CA Final Solutions Global Warming Cap and trade array will spell the death of all manufacturing in Ca. So we wont need all the wind mills and costly new power grid to support the geographically widely distributed, high environmentally impacting, wind farms.
If you drive industry and jobs out of state, there will be a large decline in demand for kilowatts.

The wind farms and long gleaming high power lines, from rural areas to the cities will stand as a monument to stupidity. Driving the users of that energy out of the state and then building costly facilities as a tribute to legislative incompetence and arrogance.

[sheila]

11:30 AM on 06/03/2011

you are not only hysterical but have serious reading comprehension issues. not really an ideal combo for someone so anxious to spout opinions.

nothing i suggest will cost the state a cent, it will increase manufacturing and other jobs, while reducing peoples' energy bills and if handled correctly, creating a fair return on investment for the individuals and businesses who produce more high-value peaker power than they use, all while increasing property values.

it is not cap and trade, which I oppose, nor is it giant windmills or transmission, which i also quite clearly oppose. It is about making efficiency upgrades and rooftop solar affordable through no-risk PACE loans and feed in tariffs. energy independence, you know?

[Dave McRae]

11:43 PM on 06/15/2011

We need Transmission lines. I do know that. CA doesn't generate enough power on it's own to cover its usage.

[Deep Thinking Man]

07:48 PM on 06/02/2011

hhmmm... i really DON'T LIKE this headline !!!!!...i've always been taught that things such as this, should be a COOPERATIVE among each other , and NOT a competition !!!!!...competition is why this country is messed up now !!!!!

[Samuel Huntington]

02:22 AM on 06/03/2011

See you on May Day Comrade.

[TYRANNASAURUS]

06:50 PM on 06/02/2011

California Renewable Energy: Can The Golden State Retake Its Lead?

Not to worry...California is always ahead of the curve on almost everything, sorry other tired states.

[Samuel Huntington]

02:31 AM on 06/03/2011

yeah maybe we will be the first to the bankruptcy court, or to default on our tremendous debt, or default on bonds for bullet trains that will cost billions that will never be recovered.

Or releasing criminals if we dont pass tax increases that have failed to balance the budget, as the legislature just doesnt get it.

Or maybe you mean the Ca Final Solution (aptly named) Global Warming Act that will institute a cap and trade array for the state, where no other state is willing to go out on that curve and drive off the road. Any manufacturing business will flee the state to surrounding states that do not have the higher taxes that are being proposes, the high regulation that Ca has, and the new costly cap and trade array that will enrich commodity traders and drive business away. It is certain. It will happen.

And in case you cant figure out what that means comrade. It means all those jobs will be gone. Unemployment will rise. The consumption of social program funds by the unemployed will rise, the deficit will rise. and there will be ever fewer and fewer actual taxpayers to pay for the programs. More people will leave the state, so your house is going to continue to go down in value.

And we will be BANKRUPT! We will have to shut down the free money store, after it was far far far too late.

[Michael K Martin]

02:48 PM on 06/02/2011

It's fantastic that CA, can focus state policy towards getting the benefits from large-scale renewable energy, because their regulation of solar panel installation on houses SUCKS. I have never seen such a rat's nest of hoops to jump through to get state funding for solar panels. The like them and want people to put them up, to be sure, but they let a solar committee of Experts design the rules, and to get the state rebate requires an installer with the skills of a tax attorney. It should be easier.

[Fnordpocalypse]

08:48 PM on 06/02/2011

CA needs to go the way of Vermont and remove the obstacles. I live in LA and it's crazy that every new apartment building going up doesn't have solar panels built right in. It's only cloudy here for like 20 days a year.

[Samuel Huntington]

02:35 AM on 06/03/2011

I guess if you are asking the taxpayer, me to pay for your free stuff, too bad, keep whining. Maybe it should be harder.

Or maybe it wouldn't be economically viable to do without the rebates and tax credits, as the technology is not cost effective, thus leading to waste and inefficiency

[forestnfama]

05:59 AM on 06/03/2011

Energy should be a national security issue meaning the government could spend some of those hundreds of billions of dollars they give to foreign aid outfitting low income families outfit solar on there homes. It would reduce the amount of energy Americans are using and it would stimulate the economy because lower income people would have more to spend on products Americans make. I am sick of hearing all the cry babies crying about taking our tax dollars and giving it to someone else. You people who are doing all the crying (Samuel Huntington) are probably the ones who don't pay taxes or cheat. Where are all the tears for the trillions of dollars we give to Pakistan, Turkey, and the rest of the world through the State Dept and Pentagon. People get your priorities right......Its time we give something back to ourselves. Our infrastructure is crumbling, are cities are defaulting, education is suffering all the while we spend more on the military than all militarys combined in the world.

[aligatorhardt]

10:07 AM on 06/03/2011

If I pay for solar power for 10 years, then get power for 25 years guaranteed, then how can that be losing money? Save your propaganda and irrational fears for someone who wants to hear it.
Toys 'R' Us To Build North America's Largest Rooftop Solar Installation | Reuters

[TabaskoKat]

01:17 PM on 06/02/2011

hopefully cali can commit to their plan. where im at in oregon our electric grid is overburdened by the extra electricity being generated by our 'wind farms', so instead of upgradeing the grid, or shutting down coal fired energy plants to loosen the load being carried by the grid, we are closing down the wind farms. not the coal plants. seems pretty stupid to me, but then i do live in a state where dems act like repubs, repubs act like terrorist and they're all kuntry bumpkin hicks (can you tell im not a native)

[Samuel Huntington]

02:36 AM on 06/03/2011

Because the wind power is not economically viable. Its cost is too much at this time.

[forestnfama]

06:00 AM on 06/03/2011

Untrue

[aligatorhardt]

10:12 AM on 06/03/2011

What time capsule did that statement come from?  Proposed wind energy development will bring billions in economic investment to Illinois | American Wind Energy Association

[Dave McRae]

11:47 PM on 06/15/2011

All the wrong reasons. The reason they shut down some wind is because the thermal plants cannot shut down. They shutting down of a thermal unit requires 3 days or more to restart, dependingon the unit. If you shut off the real power plants and the wind dies (after a few hours like it does) and then you all sit in the dark for 3 days? No, the people who run the grid (like me) are smarter than that. As for grid upgrades, those are called "tranmission towers and lines" not microchips. So I guess you're going out to protest for MORE powerlines and massive towers across your state! Good job!

[TabaskoKat]

08:58 PM on 06/22/2011

so on one hand you imply you are one of the 'smart' people working on the project and the next you imply 'my state' as if you are not part of the state too. and if your not part of the state than you are not one of the 'smart' people working on the problem. then you throw in some non issues like thermal. i dont recall thermal being a part of the story or my post, but just the same you make it up as you go along. interesting set of ass- umptions for such a smart person. so what does that have to do with shutting down coal fired plants to finally make the alleged switch clean renewable energy? and your passive aggresive tone is gross, it makes you sound like a sniveling pansy

[Donald Rumsfeld XIV]

12:35 PM on 06/02/2011

Now look at all the tools here. With renewable energy, we catch 3 flies with one stone:
-We tackle global warming and create hundreds of thousands of permanent, competitive green collar jobs.
-We get energy independent and thus avoid a lot of trouble.
-We reduce pollution and thus the cases of asthma and cancer which would reduce our cost of health care.

If anything doesn't pay off, then being dependent from big oil.

[Dave McRae]

11:51 PM on 06/15/2011

1) Maybe we do. Probably we will in 50 years.

2) We will not be energy independent. What does that mean, anyway?

3) We do reduce pollution, but not really by as much as you tend to think. But we do reduce it. A little, anyway. While creating new forms of pollution. In time, they will show themselves. THe internal combusion engine was once the greened invention of all time also.

[Bubba10]

12:19 PM on 06/02/2011

Can we please get back to talking about important things like WEINER AND BONHER?

[saintjoshuax2]

11:00 AM on 06/02/2011

More taxes I see.........

[Samuel Huntington]

02:39 AM on 06/03/2011

Yeah someone has to pay for all the rebates and tax credits that everyone with a panel wants.

Note, tax credits mean that they are paying less taxes to the state. Did you notice, the state is bankrupt, and wants to increase your taxes. meanwhile your neighbor doesnt have to pay because he gets a tax credit and a rebate, so you get to pick up the slack.

Yes you are right, free stuff is costly.

[forestnfama]

06:06 AM on 06/03/2011

Yeah someone has to pay taxes and right now it is not the rich.....Before you cry about paying taxes lets bring back a fair tax code. The rich are the reason our country is bankrupted. Pure and simple........they have accumulated and are hoarding trillions of dollars of un-circulated currency. Bush bankrupted our country and the republicans let him do it.

[Samtheman123]

10:18 AM on 06/02/2011

California currently has 3,200 MWs of wind power capacity, and another 600 under construction according to the AWEA. Meanwhile Texas has over 10,000 MWs of wind power capacity, 400 under construction and is spending 5 billion dollars to construct transmission lines for another 18,000 MWs. I have a lot of respect for California and its support of solar and geothermal power, but it should stick to the resources it has a competitive advantage in, and wind power is not one of them.

[Samuel Huntington]

02:49 AM on 06/03/2011

Did you notice that for example The LA DWP classified Hydro power, the most efficient and low cost source of power, as NOT Green power in their last attempt to secure huge rate increases that were supposedly required to meet the green percentage content of their power grid.

Huge ratepayer increases will be required to make the conversion as the green forms of energy are not competitive.

Watch your wallet. The green police are about to make it a lot lighter. In addition to the higher costs for everything you buy to your home utility bill...add that to the additional cost that The Ca Final Solutions Global Warming Act Cap and trade array will add to every thing you buy. Add that to the taxes you are going to pay to bail out the legislative spending pork barrel, And you wallet is going to be a lot lighter.

Can you say less jobs, less tax receipts, less disposable income less standard of living.

Get ready, because here it comes courtesy of Ca. state govt.

[aligatorhardt]

10:32 AM on 06/03/2011

Renewable energy provides 4 times the jobs as oil industry jobs, and without the health care costs associated with fossil fuels, estimated to be as much $500 billion each year.

[Dave McRae]

11:54 PM on 06/15/2011

LADWP does not get to choose if hydro is considered renewable or green. That's a Federal and State issue. The proposed rate increases were to pay to expand Pine Tree Wind Farm and add a new solar installtion out there in the desert.

[Dave McRae]

11:55 PM on 06/15/2011

Texas over-reliance on wind has already led to two state wide blackouts. Good luck keeping industry!