Tumblr Icon RSS Icon

Massachusetts mandates more renewable energy

By Climate Guest Contributor on August 1, 2008 at 6:54 am

"Massachusetts mandates more renewable energy"

Share:

google plus icon

Massachusetts recently enacted a bill called the Green Communities Act to promote renewable energy with mandates an incentives. Massachusetts already had a Renewable Portfolio Standard, but this legislation doubles the adoption rate required, increases net metering for wind and solar from 60 kilowatts to 2 megawatts, and requires utilities to sign 10 to 15-year contracts for renewable energy. Masschusetts plans to have 4% renewables by 2009, increasing by 1% each year (e.g. 15% in 2020), with no cap. It allows utilities to put solar on their customers’ roofs.

The legislation also promotes efficiency with rebates for lighting and air conditioning, and mandates all utilitiy efficiency improvements that cost less than it does to generate power.

–Earl K.

‹ PREVIOUS
Bush’s ‘Sprint To The Finish’: Destroy The Planet

NEXT ›
Can This Planet Be Saved? Not if conservatives rule

3 Responses to Massachusetts mandates more renewable energy

  1. Chris says:

    Great news thanks for sharing

  2. john says:

    Earl:

    The efficiency provisions for this legislation flow right from New England ISO’s forward capacity market bidding — a strategy that allows efficiency measures to bid into all capacity auctions, and awards the lowest cost capacity (be it negawatts or megawatts) first in all capacity decisions — it is the most elegant form of decoupling going, and the most effective. Used in conjunction with an aggressive RPS, it can transform energy markets and infrastructure effectively, and at low cost.

    New England states are all flocking to put measures in place to require all cost-effective efficiency measures in place before new generation, and it all comes from the NE ISO’s FCM.

    I prefer this to most other de-coupling strategies which ALLOW utilities to recover and profit from efficiency. It’s one thing to allow it, it’s quite another to require centralized generation to compete head to head with efficiency, on-site power, and load management. One gets you some efficiency, the other gets you all cost-effective efficiency possible.

  3. Earl Killian says:

    John, thank you for the helpful explanation.