Solar energy has been in the spotlight a lot lately and its future looks bright –
The CPUC report demonstrates the success of the state’s program to encourage residents to install solar panels on their homes and businesses. Quoting the CPUC:
“In January 2007, California launched an unprecedented $3.3 billion program with the goal of installing 3,000 megawatts (MW) of new grid-connected solar in 10 years and transforming the market for solar energy by reducing its cost. The CPUC portion of the solar effort is known as the California Solar Initiative, and has a $2.2 billion budget and a goal of installing 1,940 MW by the end of 2016. The report, which is required by the State Legislature, highlights the following key findings:
- California has over 500 MW of solar photovoltaic (PV) connected to the electric grid at customer sites; this is equivalent to one large power plant. With recent rapid growth, California now has over 515 MW of cumulative installed solar PV capacity at nearly 50,000 sites; 226 MW of this was installed in the past 2½ years under the California Solar Initiative.
- The annual rate for new installed solar capacity in California nearly doubled in 2008 over 2007 (from 81 MW per year to 156 MW per year), a marked increase from the 30-40 percent annual growth rate of prior years…
- The program continues to see strong demand, with May 2009 the highest month on record for new solar applications. The California Solar Initiative has over 22,000 solar applications, including both pending and installed systems, which will account for an estimated 373 MW of new solar capacity.”
These results of the CPUC assessment are encouraging, and remind us that California needs to continue to make solar and other renewable energy sources as widespread and accessible as possible to meet the state’s AB 32 targets, as well as to meet the state’s current and proposed Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). Two CLCV-supported bills before the state legislature would raise the RPS to at least 33% by 2020: Assembly Bill (AB) 64 (Krekorian, Bass, and Blakeslee) and Senate Bill (SB) 14 (Simitian). Through different routes, these bills would reduce global warming pollution from fossil-fueled power plants and promote air quality benefits in California. Visit our online action alert to tell your representatives to support the bills:
Speaking of legislation, this timely article (“Keeping the Sizzle in California Solar”) from KQED’s Climate Watch describes how existing smart policies like the California Solar Initiative and new legislation currently in the works, can make the increased use of affordable clean, renewable, carbon-free energy for all of us possible:
“Enter Assembly Bill 560. Net metering is currently capped at 2.5 % of the system’s peak energy demand or ‘load.’ Once the stream of solar electrons coming onto the grid reaches that level, the utility is not obligated to sign more net-metering contracts. AB 560, courtesy of Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner (D-Oakland), would provide some more headroom for that program by raising the cap to 10%… Meanwhile another bill, AB 920, from Assemblyman Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael), would change the way customers with solar installations are paid for surplus power.”
One more important policy that wasn’t explicitly mentioned in the Climate Watch article is the California Energy Commission’s New Solar Homes Partnership – part of the larger California Solar Initiative. Through this program, the Energy Commission encourages Californians to consider purchasing solar when making a new home purchase. The Energy Commission says the program has also been a success thus far – despite the overall challenging condition of California’s, and the nation’s, housing market.
Without environmental champions like the authors of these bills, and without the cutting-edge policies that encourage us to switch to clean, renewable energy, California would be in the dark ages of dependence on dirty, polluting fossil fuels. Smart policies that encourage renewable energy use will not only decrease our dependence on foreign oil, it will also ultimately increase economic opportunities for Californians who design, build, and install new and energy-saving technologies on the smart homes and smart businesses, and in the smart communities, of the future. A bright idea, indeed. (Now go back and count all the puns in this post.)
After the budget propositions failed, you heard it a lot: “voters want Sacramento legislators to do their jobs!” Of course, nobody bothered to ask the important question: how are they supposed to do it? Legislative Republicans were quick to argue that the strike down of the ballot measures made it clear that voters refused to support any more tax increases (they need to take a logic lesson because there’s not enough information to actually conclude that). They claim that California’s problem originates from a legislature that spends too much when spending has actually been proportionate to inflation and the increasing population. Regardless, the reality is that because a tax increase requires 2/3rds of the legislature to approve it, and the Democrats fail to meet this threshold without Republicans, and Schwarzenegger has vowed to veto any budget with tax increases anyway, any budget passed right now must reduce the $24 billion deficit without raising taxes.
It’s harder than it looks and here’s proof. The Los Angeles Times and Next 10 (an independent, nonpartisan organization) have each come out with an application to let you balance California’s budget. If you’ve ever wondered what’s really in it, and what the process is like, this is your chance. You’ve got a $24 billion deficit. Do you resolve it by cutting programs or raising taxes? And how much of each? The programs are great, but even if you figure out a budget you’re satisfied with, the programs don’t take into account some of the other key political realities like:
- Minimum funding requirements for certain programs that are necessary to qualify for additional federal aid.
- Actually getting enough legislators to agree to your budget.
- Direct voter impacts. There are voters who reach out to legislators each day letting them know that for every day the legislature fails to pass a budget or fails to appropriately fund a welfare program, some Californians will suffer, quite school, go bankrupt, starve, or worse.
So good luck in figuring out how you’ll resolve the deficit (the links to the two programs are below). If you want to be more realistic (i.e. challenge yourself), try resolving it without tax increases. If you come up with a feasible solution, be sure to let Sacramento know!
LA Times Application
Next 10 Application
The wait is finally over! Back in 2002, California passed the first US bill to tackle the climate crisis by regulating tailpipe emissions, but for the last six years the Bush Administration (forever a friend to big polluters) had been blocking the implementation of California’s Tailpipe Emissions bill -despite even a Supreme Court decision noting that the EPA has the right to regulate the emissions. Under the Clean Air Act, California is allowed to impose stricter air quality standards than national standards so long as the EPA granted it a waiver to do so. Unsurprisingly, the former EPA Director Stephen Johnson had been denying California its waiver without any scientific reason (actually, it was more a directive from the White House).
Fast forward to the Obama Administration and a new EPA Director, and things have dramatically changed:
The Environmental Protection Agency will announce today that it is granting California’s request to impose tough restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks — reversing the Bush administration’s position and opening the way for the state to take the lead on global-warming policy.
California developed the standards in 2004 but was barred from implementing them.
EPA officials say granting California the waiver from federal standards gives the state wide latitude to promulgate stricter rules, restoring a 40-year interpretation of the Clean Air Act.
“It preserves California’s role as a leader on clean air policy,” particularly on motor vehicles, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said in an interview. “It feels good to know that we are able to move past — address — this issue, responding to the president’s call.”
President Obama had criticized the Bush EPA’s denial and, shortly after his inauguration, ordered the agency to revisit it.
This is a monumental step in the fight to stop the climate crisis. Add the fact that last week the House passed the most comprehensive bill to reduce greenhouse gases in US history, and it’s been a terrific last five days for the environment.
Thousands of environmental voters who called Congressional Representatives to support the American Clean Energy & Security (ACES) Act helped win a major victory for the environment today. ACES will establish a cap-and-trade system for greenhouse gas emissions, and will provide the incentives needed to transition our country and our economy away from our dependence on polluting fossil fuels.
Politico and the Washington Post are reporting that the vote was extremely close – 219-212.
All of us in the environmental community know that compromises were made in order to secure the necessary votes for the legislation in the House of Representatives. Some of the more progressive members of Congress believed the concessions to industries like coal and agriculture weakened the bill too much, and withheld their votes. The perfect could indeed have become the enemy of the good. But you didn’t let that happen.
While we in California are hard at work on statewide priorities including legislation and elections, we helped drum up support for ACES by activating CLCV members through our MAC (Membership Action Campaign). We called members and passed them directly through to legislative offices to voice their support for this landmark bill. Many of you answered the call and contacted your representatives to urge them to support ACES. Thank you for doing your part and making your voice heard.
In celebration of this moment, I’d like to share some of President Obama’s comments yesterday on the urgency of passing this legislation:
“The nation that leads in the creation of a clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the 21st century global economy…. Now is the time for us to lead. The energy bill before the House will finally create a set of incentives that will spark a clean energy transformation of our economy. It will spur the development of low carbon sources of energy… it will spur new energy savings… and most importantly it will make possible the creation of millions of new jobs.”
“Make no mistake; this is a jobs bill. We’re already seeing why this is true in the clean energy investments we’re making through the Recovery Act. In California, 3,000 people will be employed to build a new solar plant that will create 1,000 jobs… The list goes on and on, but the point is this: This legislation will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy. That will lead to the creation of new businesses and entire new industries, and that will lead to American jobs that pay well and can’t be outsourced…”
“We’ve been talking about this issue for decades. And now is the time to finally act. There’s no disagreement over whether our dependence on foreign oil is endangering our security. We know it is. There’s no longer a debate about whether carbon pollution is placing our planet in jeopardy. It’s happening. And there’s no longer a question about whether the jobs and industries of the 21st century will be centered around clean, renewable energy. The only question is: Which country will create these jobs and these industries? And I want that answer to be the United States of America.”
The President outlined why passage of this legislation is so crucial for the future of the United States. This is a climate change bill, a jobs bill, and a national security bill. We celebrate its passage in the House.
I was wondering what our Governor meant by “shared sacrifice” on dealing with the budget short fall but was having a little trouble understanding. Thankfully SEIU and Calitics have helped me understand:
From Calitics:
“SEIU has another volley in their air war with the Governor over the budget. This time it goes after the logic of calling for ’shared sacrifice’ for the poor and middle class while not requiring the Big Oil companies to not also ’share in the sacrifice.’ All in all, it’s a solid ad. It points out the faulty logic in Arnold’s ’shared sacrifice’ in a rather pointed way.”
Under the Governor’s scheme, “shared sacrifice” means that you cancel insurance for hundreds of thousands of children but don’t you dare tax tobacco. Close state parks but don’t even think of putting a fee on oil pumped from our state lands. The list goes on and on in pain and suffering for everyone, but don’t ever roll back billions in corporate tax breaks. Now I understand, hope you do too. Sharing is good; my mother taught me that.
Look for Arnoldbucks in the near future.
Posted on June 25, 2009 by David Allgood at 3:13 pm,
filed under
General
The most authoritative report providing a blueprint for how communities can tackle global warming was released today by the California League of Conservation Voters Education Fund and the Natural Resources Defense Council. The report is a guide to California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, or SB 375, the nation’s first legislation to link transportation and land use planning with global warming.
California made history in 2008 by passing SB 375, authored by State Senate President pro Tempore Darrell Steinberg and cosponsored by the California League of Conservation Voters (CLCV) and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).
“This groundbreaking measure shows us that where we live and how we get to work, go about our daily business, and take our kids to school matters a great deal in the fight against climate change. In fact, household transportation in California is the single-largest and the fastest-growing source of global warming pollution in the state. Locating housing closer to jobs and transportation choices and creating walkable communities can reduce commute times and cut millions of tons of global warming pollution, while improving quality of life.” — Communities Tackle Global Warming: A Guide to SB 375
But, as the authors of this authoritative guide caution, passage of the law (while an enormous achievement) was just the first step. The successful implementation of SB 375 depends on the actions of government agencies, environmentalists, developers, and local governments, among others.
Many around the nation are watching California as the state begins to implement this legislation. The success of California’s efforts is already influencing federal policies; for example, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES) includes a structure that tracks SB 375 by requiring regions to prepare greenhouse gas reduction plans, in coordination with their regional transportation plans. Additionally, policymakers in several other states have introduced legislation modeled on SB 375.
Sustainable development advocates have an unprecedented opportunity to demonstrate that this planning process can work in many kinds of communities. In other words: If you care about the environment and smart growth, read this guide. After all, according to the authors: “SB 375 provides a new planning paradigm, putting California on the path to a new, more sustainable prosperity as well as a cleaner environment.”
Communities Tackle Global Warming: A Guide to SB 375 was written by Tom Adams, Chair of the Board of CLCV, and Amanda Eaken and Ann Notthoff of NRDC. The full report is available on the CLCV Newsroom and on the NRDC Web site.
It’s official: Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa is no longer in the running to replace Arnold Schwarzenegger as governor of the Golden State. Villaraigosa made his announcement today on CNN’s “The Situation Room” with Wolf Blitzer, explaining that his focus must remain on the city of Los Angeles as this critical time. “”I can’t leave this city in the middle of a crisis, it’s as simple as that,” he told Blitzer.
A statewide Field Poll conducted in March 2009 found that by removing Senator Dianne Feinstein (once rumored to be considering a run) from the equation, Attorney General and former Governor Jerry Brown led the Democratic field with 25% of likely voters supporting him, followed by Mayor Villaraigosa with 22% and San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom with 16 percent. Brown has not yet formally announced his candidacy, while Newsom did so months ago.
The obvious question now, is will Brown or Newsom be more successful at winning over Villaraigosa’s supporters? Or will Republican candidates be able to peel away supporters from the remaining Democratic candidates? Former eBay chief executive Meg Whitman is a likely candidate, along with former Congressman Tom Campbell and California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner (both of whom have officially thrown their hats into the race).
For voters who frequently name the environment as a top issue, it may come down to which candidate has the boldest environmental vision for California.
Mayor Villaraigosa, a CLCV Environmental Leadership Award recipient, was widely considered to be among the “greenest” candidates in the race. In his most recent State of the City address in April 2009, he called for the creation of green jobs that would help pull the city out of its economic crisis: “We need to build a future in which clean technology is as synonymous with Los Angeles as motion pictures or aerospace.” It remains to be seen which candidate will have the strongest record on and commitment to protecting the environment and creating new, sustainable economic opportunities—including green collar jobs—for future generations of Californians.
CLCV is already hard at work conducting research, developing questionnaires, and scheduling interviews so we can evaluate and ultimately endorse a candidate who will lead our state down the most environmentally-friendly path. As you may have heard, we’re also planning to launch a fresh, dynamic Web site for our members who want to help California “Build a Greener Governor” in November 2009 – sign up here to receive notification of the campaign’s official kick-off: www.greengov2010.org.
Read more about Mayor Villaraigosa’s decision to abandon his gubernatorial bid on the
CNN Web site and in the Los Angeles Times.
