Archive for the ‘New Jersey’ Category

First 2012 New Jersey Auction and Market Conditions

Posted August 10th, 2011 by SRECTrade.

Our August auction was the first auction of the NJ2012 reporting year (RY2012). In New Jersey, the reporting year runs from June 1 to May 31, and dictates the vintage year of a given SREC. June SRECs, the first generation month of RY2012, were first available for trading in the August auction and showed a significant price drop compared to RY2011 SRECs. The price drop reflects the anticipated oversupply of SRECs for RY2012. Previously, in RY2011 and prior, buyers had faced an under-supplied market and were willing to pay high prices. RY2012, however, will be the first year in the NJ market with an oversupply of SRECs.

RY2012 SRECs traded on July 29th at $276.16, approximately 50% less than the RY2011 prices. Prices for RY2011 SRECs (June 2010 – May 2011) remained high at $564.99. Given that compliance buyers have until the end of September to purchase their required RY2011 SRECs, RY2011 SRECs should remain in demand until that time.

For RY2011, SREC compliance buyers are required to purchase 306,000 SRECs, but SREC production fell short of this goal as the energy year came to a close. As of this posting, PJM-GATS reported that approximately 276,000 NJ2011 SRECs have been issued, representing a shortage of 30,000 SRECs. In RY2012, 442,000 SRECs will need to be procured, an increase of 136,000 SRECs, or approximately 113 MW. Given this increase the market is intended to only average 10 MW of solar development each month, though as the graph below shows, growth has averaged 20.1 MW per month since the beginning of 2011.

NJ blog post 8_10_11

New Jersey started the 2012 reporting year in June at 339.6 MW of installed capacity, approximately 28.7 MW less than the targeted average of 368.3 MW. As of the end of July, the NJ Board of Public Utilities announced the state surpassed 380 MW of installed capacity, adding more than 40 MW in June. Considering recent capacity added and additional growth through RY2012, the market will have enough supply online to create 442,000 SRECs in the 2012 reporting year.

On the legislative front, the New Jersey State Senate recently passed S2371, a bill intended to help stabilize the NJ SREC market. The bill has yet to move to the State Assembly and the Governor’s desk, but if passed, it would move the SREC compliance requirements forward one year, with RY2014 SREC requirements replacing those in place for RY2013.

Tags: New Jersey SREC forecast, New Jersey SREC Prices, New Jersey SREC volatility, NJ Solar Requirements, NJ SREC forecasts, NJ SREC Prices
Posted in New Jersey, SREC Markets, SREC Pricing | 2 Comments »

New Jersey SREC market experiences volatility for first time in 3 years

Posted July 14th, 2011 by SRECTrade.

The July New Jersey SREC auction on SRECTrade.com cleared at $555 earlier this week, an $85 drop from $640 where NJ SRECs have traded since the beginning of the year. Today, the results of the NERA SREC auction on behalf of the four regulated Electric Distribution Companies (EDCs) closed at $475 per SREC. This is the auction used by PSE&G, ACE, JCP&L and RECO to sell the SRECs they purchase from the solar facilities that contracted in the various long-term SREC RFPs, such as the Solar Loan Program.

Meanwhile, the most recent data on SRECs created in New Jersey was reported by the Office of Clean Energy through May (generation through April). After 11 months, the state has created 220,000 2011 SRECs. The requirement is 306,000 SRECs. In April, there were about 40,000 SRECs created by the installed capacity and with one month to go, and over 80,000 SRECs short, it is highly unlikely that the state will meet its target. New Jersey will probably end up with somewhere between 85% and 90% of the requirement – which is pretty successful given how low relative capacity was at the beginning of the year.

That said, SREC prices have fallen despite the under-supply. The market could either keep falling to levels similar to the $475 price in the NERA auction or it could turn out to be a lull in the market before 2011 trading comes to a close in September. Here are few possible explanations as to why prices might fall at this time of year despite a shortage:

1. The 4th of July holiday coupled with a large influx of supply from May SRECs created July 1 means buyers may not been as active, while the volume of sellers increased.
2. At this point in the year, the aggressive buyers have purchased the SRECs they need, leaving the market to less-competitive buyers, who will pay less or opt for the fine.
3. Since New Jersey has a fixed SREC requirement, the BPU must notify each buyer what their total SREC requirement is based on their pro rata share of electricity sales. Without that information, buyers have a harder time estimating their requirement than in past years when it was based on their own electricity sales. Until the BPU publishes the final requirements, buyers will likely hold off on their final purchases.

Either way, 2011 trading will end in September and 2012 trading will pick up next month as the first 2012 SRECs are created. Next year will be a big year for the SREC concept in general. For the first time since 2008, SREC prices in New Jersey will be set by the market, not by the SACP. The SREC market concept will be tested on a large scale with a pure SREC-only policy – something that was missing in Pennsylvania when supply shot through the roof last year. If dropping SREC prices have the intended effect, the rate of installation in New Jersey will slow down to 10-12 MW per month for the next few years. If it doesn’t slow down, prices could be in trouble.

For now, the immediate concern has to do with whether or not buyers will return to the 2011 market before the trading period ends. Given what 2012 has in store, at the very least, it would be prudent to make sure to sell 2011 SRECs before September 30.

Tags: New Jersey SREC forecast, New Jersey SREC Prices, New Jersey SREC volatility, NJ SREC forecasts, NJ SREC Prices
Posted in New Jersey | Comments Off on New Jersey SREC market experiences volatility for first time in 3 years

DC Closes Borders to Out-of-State Solar Systems

Posted July 12th, 2011 by SRECTrade.

The Council of the District of Columbia unanimously voted, today July 12th, to close the DC SREC market to out-of-state systems. The Distributed Generation Amendment Act of 2011 (Bill 19-10) increases the SREC requirement in 2011 as well as establishes an SACP schedule through 2023. Once in effect, the bill will allow out-of-state systems registered prior to 1/31/2011 to continue to sell SRECs in the DC market. The DC Public Services Commission has not provided clarification on how the bill will affect out of state systems that have already granted DC registrations after the January 31st 2011 grandfather date. For more information on the bill please refer to our previous blog postings here and here.

The bill is not yet law. It first must go through a 30-day Congressional Review process before it can go in to effect. Given these mechanistic delays we don’t expect the bill to go in to effect for at least another month.

The following chart illustrates which out-of-state systems will be effected by the legislation.

State	Eligible Markets (after B19-10 is effective)
DE	DE, PA
IN	OH; PA (if in American Electric Power territory)
IL	PA (if in Com Ed territory)
KY	OH; PA (if in American Electric Power territory)
MD	MD; PA
MI	OH; PA (if in American Electric Power territory)
NC	NC; PA (if in Dominion Electric Territory)
NJ	NJ, PA
NY	–
OH	OH; PA
PA	PA; OH
TN	PA (if in American Electric Power territory)
VA	PA
WV	OH; PA
WI	–

Posted in Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, SREC Markets, State RPS, Tennessee, Virginia, Washington, DC, West Virginia, Wisconsin | 2 Comments »

New Jersey Senate votes to advance solar RPS

Posted July 5th, 2011 by SRECTrade.

While the New Jersey Governor has recently raised some uncertainty over the state’s commitment to solar energy in the Energy Master Plan, there certainly is no doubt where the state Senate stands on the subject. Last week the Senate voted 30-7 to pass S2371 to accelerate the solar renewable portfolio standard. This Bill was originally intended to create a requirement for long-term SREC contracts in the New Jersey market, but that measure was shot down fairly quickly given the strong opposition from the deregulated energy industry in New Jersey. A later version of the Bill included a mechanism for a floor price, similar to the one introduced in Massachusetts in 2010. The version of the Bill that was passed only increases the SREC requirement in 2013, moving forward all the SREC requirements by one year in each year after 2012.

Though the initial intent of this Bill was to provide stability and lower long-term SREC prices to a fluctuating SREC market, the revised Bill will essentially double the additional capacity required in 2013. With a pending oversupply in New Jersey (the state installed 145 MW last year and needs only 115 MW before it hits an oversupply), the increase in 2013 will help support the current rate of solar adoption. The change will allow for 275 MW of additional capacity in 2013, allowing the state to maintain its current build rate. That said, it is only a temporary fix to what will continue to be a problem past 2013 as the requirements in 2014-2016 only allow for approximately 150 – 175 MW of solar per year. The bottom line is that the rate of solar development in New Jersey needs to slow down. Whether this bill passes or not only effects how fast the industry must apply those brakes.

If development doesn’t slow down, SREC prices will not only fall, but many sellers will not be able to find buyers in an oversupplied market. Hopefully the current drop in SREC prices are providing the intended signal to would-be solar projects that the market can’t handle continued development. This past month, an additional 23 MW became active in the NJ SREC market. Moving forward, the market cannot handle any more than 10-12 MW per month for the next 5 years if it is to reach an equilibrium.

Tags: New Jersey S2371, New Jersey Solar RPS Advancement, NJ S2371, NJ SREC market, NJ SREC Prices, NJ SRECs
Posted in New Jersey | 2 Comments »

New Jersey falls short of 2011 SREC target

Posted June 22nd, 2011 by SRECTrade.

The New Jersey SREC program runs on a June 1 to May 31 Energy Year (EY), referred to by the year in which it ends. EY2011 concluded last month on May 31, 2011. The final EY2011 SRECs will be minted for May 2011 generation beginning next week, commencing the end of year true up period. Load-Serving Entities will have until the end of September to finalize their purchases to meet state requirements. Though most of the remaining 2011 SRECs will be sold in the July auction, SRECTrade will continue to host auctions for remaining EY2011 SRECs in August and September. Given the shortage of EY2011 SRECs, prices should remain high, trading near the $640 mark that has cleared throughout the year.

According to the BPU, as of April 30, 2011, there was 330 MW of solar installed in the state. Due to interconnection and other delays, by the end of May, the actual number of solar facilities that were active in the SREC market was 310 MW. A common misperception in the SREC market relates to how supply and demand interact. Since there was a 255 MW requirement in New Jersey for 2011, it would appear that the state would experience an oversupply of SRECs having achieved 310 MW by the end of EY2011. In fact, New Jersey will fall short of its SREC requirement by approximately 40,000 SRECs. Here’s how we arrive at that number:

The New Jersey RPS requires a fixed number of SRECs each year:
EY2011 RPS Requirement = 306,000 SRECs or MWhs

The common annual production factor used in New Jersey is 1200 MWh per MW of installed capacity:
306,000 MWh / 1200 = 255 MW of required capacity

It is important to keep in mind that this is the capacity required to be running on average throughout the year. At the beginning of EY2011, on June 1, 2010, there was 133 MW of solar installed and active. Using the 310 MW installed and active at the end of the year, we can estimate the average capacity:
EY2011 Average Active Solar Capacity: (133 MW + 310 MW) / 2 = 222 MW

Converting back into SRECs, we can estimate the number of SRECs produced through EY2011:
222 MW * 1200 = 266,000 MWhs or SRECs

With this estimate, we can calculate the shortfall in New Jersey for EY2011:
306,000 SRECs required – 266,000 SRECs projected = 40,000 SREC shortfall

This is the same number projected by the BPU in the April report on the status of the SREC program. This should be good news for market participants with EY2011 SRECs, however, this is only a 13% shortfall and as the compliance period comes to an end in September, it is unclear if outside factors may influence pricing as the year closes out. For example, some buyers may opt to pay the SACP instead of procuring SRECs in the market. In other cases, prices may be influenced by oversupply concerns and falling prices for EY2012. With 310 MW active as a starting point and a 368 MW requirement for EY2012, the picture is not as bright for the future of New Jersey’s SREC market. A potential 2012 oversupply will most likely drive prices down in August when the first 2012 SRECs are created for June generation.

With 3 months left for buyers to procure EY2011 SRECs, it is unclear if market prices will finish the year on a strong note despite the under-supply.

Tags: New Jersey SREC, New Jersey SREC Aggregation, New Jersey SREC Aggregator, New Jersey SREC Broker, New Jersey SREC Prices, NJ SREC, NJ SREC Aggregation, NJ SREC Aggregator, NJ SREC Broker, NJ SREC Prices, SREC Prices
Posted in New Jersey | 1 Comment »

New Jersey Energy Master Plan Myths

Posted June 14th, 2011 by SRECTrade.

Governor Christie’s Energy Master Plan (EMP), released last week, is a document published every 3 years that lays out the energy agenda for the Christie administration. The plan itself has no impact on the existing Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) in New Jersey. Any changes to the RPS would need to come from the legislative branch since the SREC program has been written into law. That said, the EMP could begin to influence the general thinking in the state, which could be cause for concern given that some of the conclusions are inaccurate. Here are some ideas that have been suggested in the EMP that need to be challenged:

Myth 1. Solar may be too costly and needs to be reigned in by a cost-benefit test

The general theme of Christie’s view on solar is concern over the impact on electricity costs of the SREC program. To that point, the EMP suggests that the SREC program be subjected to a cost-benefit test. Prior to 2010, the program had a cap on the cost to ratepayers that was removed by the legislature in the NJ Solar Energy Advancement and Fair Competition Act. The removal of the cap was likely intended to bring more stability to the SREC market which would face a collapse if the cost threshold were reached, making it very difficult to finance projects with such a wildcard in play. Since the 2010 Act, solar installation in New Jersey has soared and the state is on target to reach its aggressive solar goals in 2012. One of the more concerning assertions in the EMP is the cost that solar has had on the ratepayer. A recent Op Ed on NJSpotlight.com by R. William Potter, reaches different conclusions based on the information provided in the EMP. According to Potter, the data shows that the solar program has been a bargain for the state of New Jersey.

Myth 2. The SACP in New Jersey is higher than other states and should be lowered

Figure 38 compares the New Jersey SACP (Solar Alternative Compliance Payment), effectively the ceiling price for SRECs in New Jersey, to those in other states. What it fails to mention is that other states also offer additional upfront rebates and incentives that New Jersey has intentionally moved away from in favor of a greater dependence on SRECs. The elimination of upfront incentives was coupled with an increase in the SACP in 2009 so that SRECs could carry solar projects in New Jersey. This is a key reason why the SREC market in New Jersey has been stable, while other markets, like Pennsylvania, have faltered. Unlike other SREC markets, New Jersey relies entirely on SRECs. There’s no rebate + SREC combination in New Jersey. This means that a project is highly sensitive to SREC financing in the state, whereas in other states, with lower SREC values, the economics aren’t as dependent on the SREC values, and the markets have become unstable due to an influx of projects built with little regard for what the SREC market is doing.

Myth 3. SREC prices are trending upwards, while the cost of solar comes down

Another entirely inaccurate assessment of the data provided in the EMP plan comes in Figures 39 and 40 on page 91 of the document. Historical SREC prices quoted by the New Jersey Office of Clean Energy are displayed, demonstrating an increase in SREC prices over time, while Figure 40 shows that the cost of solar has come down over time, drawing the conclusion that the SREC markets aren’t tracking with the economics of solar. For starters, the data they point to from the Office of Clean Energy is flawed, leading to these incorrect conclusions. The data is pulled from the prices self-reported in GATS each time an SREC is transferred. The problem is that many SREC transfers represent contracts that were signed years ago. If you installed a solar system in 2008 and entered into a 3-year contract, the price was likely around $100-$150 per SREC at that time, when the SACP was $300 (and there was a generous upfront rebate). 3 years, later, you are still transferring your SRECs over at $100-$150 per SREC in an SREC-only market where prices are now trading at $650 per SREC. These legacy contracts have weighed down the average SREC prices over the past 3 years, but as they expire, new contracts will be signed with the post-2009 SACP schedule in place. The average prices published by the New Jersey Office of Clean Energy will naturally rise until the final legacy contract expires. Until then, any conclusions drawn based on the increase in the average price will be terribly flawed.

The EMP’s understanding of SRECs would likely have been more informed if it were published in 2012. Now that New Jersey is finally catching up to its solar goals (and most legacy contracts are expiring), average SREC prices will begin dropping soon. If you were to review historical NJ SREC prices on SRECTrade.com, you will see a step down each year as the SACP is lowered. Prices remained in alignment with the SACP because of a significant shortage of solar and SRECs. In 2012, we will likely see the market transform into a competitive market, based on the cost of solar, and not on the SACP. This is because, for the first time in a few years, there is an end in sight to the shortage and the market will soon begin acting as a market.

Establishing the new SACP:

In 2010, the solar Act called for an extension of the SACP through 2026. It is currently scheduled through the 2016 Energy Year, and cannot be lowered without legislative action. In addition, the law currently states that the BPU must extend the schedule through 2026. The EMP softly suggests a 20% reduction in 2016 followed by a 2.54% reduction moving forward. Ultimately the BPU will decide what the schedule should be, but it shouldn’t make a decision based on the analysis put forth in the EMP. There is limited downside to keeping the SACP high, since it will only factor into SREC prices when utilities fail to meet their goals (the case in 2009-2011). If the SREC market acts as it should, when supply is up and the state is reaching its goals (starting in 2012), the SACP should be a non-factor. However, if the SACP is set too low, SRECs will not be enough to finance solar, stifling growth and compromising the “competitive market” aspect of what makes the SREC program such a powerful force in making New Jersey the 2nd largest solar industry in the U.S. There’s no reason not to extend the SACP at the current rate of a 2.5% annual reduction through 2026, remaining consistent with the precedent.

Tags: Chris Christie, Governor Christie, New Jersey Energy Master Plan, New Jersey Solar, New Jersey SRECs, NJ EMP, NJ Energy Master Plan
Posted in New Jersey | 1 Comment »

NJ 2011 Energy Master Plan – Solar RPS on Track

Posted June 10th, 2011 by SRECTrade.

On June 7, 2011, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie announced the issuance of the state’s draft of the 2011 Energy Master Plan (EMP). By way of background, the EMP is a road map describing the energy goals of the state’s executive branch. The plan is required to be issued and updated every 3 years. For details of the 2011 draft please click here. For details on the 2008 EMP click here.

Overall, the report outlines the continued implementation of the NJ Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) solar carve-out. As the report stands, there is no commentary made that would indicate a substantial change to the existing program. The following provides more insight into the aspects of the report that touch specifically on the RPS solar requirements.

The currently legislated RPS target in New Jersey is 22.5%. Of the several goals set forth in 2008 EMP, one sought to surpass this RPS target by achieving 30% of the state’s electricity needs from renewable sources by 2020. The recently released 2011 Draft EMP lays out 5 goals, one of which is to “Maintain support for the renewable energy portfolio standard of 22.5% of energy from renewable sources by 2021.”

The 2011 Draft EMP demonstrates support for behind-the-meter PV installations, highlighting solar’s ability to achieve reduction in carbon emissions and supporting a solar industry in the state, while also taking into consideration the cost associated with solar incentives to ratepayers. The document does not call for a reduction in the existing solar carve-out, but does indicate the following,

“As the all-in capital costs for diverse solar technologies continue to decline, the Board should take action to reduce the SACP through 2025. Doing so will not undermine new solar projects that are worthwhile, but will reasonably minimize the cost burden borne by nonparticipants.”

The Christie administration explains the benefit of larger scale solar projects while noting that they “…should be considered in addition to, not in lieu of, smaller-scale, grid-connected applications.”

The document highlights the fixed SREC requirements implemented by the Solar Energy Advancement and Fair Competition Act (SEAFCA) introduced in January 2010. Instead of a percentage-based solar requirement, this act insulated the requirement from fluctuating electricity usage by implementing targets in fixed gigawatt-hour terms. This proves beneficial, as part of New Jersey’s energy goals include demand response and energy efficiency initiatives that plan to reduce overall electricity usage.

Solar Alternative Compliance Payment (SACP):

1) The current SACP extends through 2016; the SEAFCA requires the BPU to set the schedule through 2026.

2) No time frame is required, but industry stakeholders suggest the implementation of a schedule to provide certainty to debt and equity investors enabling solar development.

EMP Policy Direction and Recommendations regarding the solar carve-out are as follows:

1) Reduce the SACP: One proposal recommends the reduction of the SACP by 20% in 2016 and 2.54% each year thereafter.

2) Subject Solar Renewable Incentives to a Cost Benefit Test: The EMP mentions, “Solar generation can contribute to the reliability of the grid…” and continues by stating, “…subsidies should enhance job growth and retention objectives and should contribute to reduction in taxes without inadvertently transferring wealth from non-participants to participants throughout New Jersey.”

3) Promote Solar PV Installations that Provide Economic and Environmental Benefit: Support for community solar power is encouraged, allowing economies of scale to give residents access to what otherwise could be an expensive individual solar system. Community solar projects help provide decreased electricity usage through the local utility and can spread the cost of distribution system upgrades among the ownership group.

Overall, the 2011 Draft Energy Master Plan lays out the goals for a diversified mix of energy sources throughout the state of New Jersey. The existing overall RPS targets and specific solar carve-out requirements appear to be a priority of the Christie administration. It is clear that the Governor’s office is focused on reducing the economic impact of implementing the RPS while enhancing electricity security and job creation. The EMP has no substantive proposals that should cause concern for stakeholders participating in the state’s SREC market, but at the same time does not include any discussion of expanding New Jersey’s solar goals to continue adoption beyond the current targets.

Maintain support for the renewable energy portfolio standard of 22.5% of energy

from renewable sources by 2021.

Tags: Governor Chris Christie, New Jersey RPS, New Jersey Solar Alternative Compliance Payment, NJ Renewable Portfolio Standard, NJ SACP, NJ Solar Renewable Energy Certificates, NJ SRECs, SACP, Solar Renewable Energy Certificates, SREC aggregation, SREC Aggregator, SRECs
Posted in New Jersey, SREC Markets, State RPS | 1 Comment »

NJ Backs Out of RGGI, Support Remains Strong For NJ SREC Market

Posted May 27th, 2011 by SRECTrade.

Yesterday Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey announced that he would be removing the state from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a 10-state program intended as a carbon dioxide cap-and-trade program intended to reduce the power sector’s emissions levels of the greenhouse gas 10% by 2018.

The move, according to Governor Christie, seeks to cut state budget costs by eliminating participation in a program that he deemed “a failure”. The regional program, however, remains backed by the other Northeast states, and the consequences of the New Jersey withdraw to the RGGI market will most likely be nominal.

Most important for solar customers in New Jersey is to understand that Governor Christie’s decision is not connected to the state’s SREC program. Participation in RGGI does not affect the state’s participation, goals, or support for the SREC market in NJ. Please see our March post describing Christie’s previous endorsement of the SREC market.

Tags: Chris Christie, Christie, Govern, Governor Chris Christie, Governor Christie, NJ RGGI, NJ SREC Prices, NJ SRECs, Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, RGGI, Solar Renewable Energy Certificates, SREC Aggregator, SREC Programs
Posted in New Jersey, SREC Markets | Comments Off on NJ Backs Out of RGGI, Support Remains Strong For NJ SREC Market

Governor Christie throws support behind NJ SREC program

Posted March 18th, 2011 by SRECTrade.

Many wondered what might happen to the New Jersey SREC program when the state Governor’s office shifted into Republican control. Since taking over, Governor Christie has initiated a review of all the state renewable programs to understand the effect they have on ratepayer costs. SRECs make up such a small percentage of the overall electricity market, that the cost increases should be relatively minor across the ratepayer base. Furthermore, as a cornerstone of the solar industry in New Jersey, the impact that the SREC program has had on the growth of investment and jobs in the Garden State will likely overshadow any nominal increase in electricity rates.

To this effect, New Jersey has out-distanced every other state in the region, particularly in establishing an SREC market that can support an industry – not a few utility scale solar projects. The primary driver of this success has been the emphasis on smaller, distributed projects and accessibility to a market of buyers. In the early years of the SREC market, New Jersey had a cap of 2 MW, limiting the size of any single entrant in the market and ensuring that many stakeholders could benefit from the program. This is in stark contrast to a state like Ohio, where the SREC program has been tripped up out of the gates by large projects that have cornered the market for SRECs.

The divergent stories of AEP and FirstEnergy in Ohio demonstrate a perverse incentive set up by a poorly designed SREC program. With no cap on the size of projects eligible for the SREC market in Ohio, AEP chose to make plans for utility scale projects. The first was a 10 MW project in Upper Sandusky Ohio and the next project is slated for 50 MW by 2015 in southeastern Ohio. Meanwhile, FirstEnergy chose not to develop these utility scale projects in favor of sourcing SRECs from the in-state solar industry. The RFPs (requests for proposal) they issued with the help of Navigant Consulting were ineffective and at the end of the year FirstEnergy was unable to find any supply of SRECs. In their request to the Ohio Public Utilities Commission to be relieved of their SREC obligation in 2010 due to a shortage of supply, FirstEnergy accurately cited that AEP was successful in sourcing SRECs because it went with utility scale projects, whereas FirstEnergy attempted to purchase from distributed projects. The problem in Ohio with SRECs is that a robust market for spot transactions or bilateral contracts was not developed early on because a few utility scale projects corner most of the market, while the rest of it is made inaccessible by bureaucratic RFPs that just don’t cut it in a burgeoning solar industry filled with startup entrants.

This is where New Jersey has been successful. Since the beginning, the SREC market was established in a way that made it accessible to homeowners and businesses, local installers and upstart developers. The New Jersey Office of Clean Energy has meticulously reported statistics on a monthly basis of how many SRECs are created, traded and the prices at which they are trading. Combined with the knowledge that the market was secure from the threat of utility scale entrants, the installation companies and solar development firms that entered the industry were able to make informed decisions that ultimately led to investments in solar. This is why New Jersey has a legitimate solar industry with a diverse group of entrants that will eventually be self-sustaining as the cost of solar continues to come down. Governor Christie gets this.

In the passing of AB 2529, a New Jersey Bill that would expand the eligibility of the SREC program, the Governor rejected a change that would allow utility scale projects to bypass the scrutiny of the BPU in being accepted into the SREC program. As the New Jersey market stands, a utility scale project can be accepted into the SREC program only if the BPU deems that it will not have an adverse impact on pricing in the SREC market. This Bill would have created an exception to that rule that could have jeopardized the SREC market. Governor Christie writes:

Accordingly, I recommend that this exception be eliminated. I am concerned about the impact that these solar facilities may have on ratepayers, the impacts these facilities may have on the solar power and SREC market and, the impact these facilities may have on the land use. The role of the BPU and DEP is vital in determining the impacts that large scale solar facility projects will have in New Jersey and should not be by-passed.

This is a major vote of confidence in Governor Christie’s support of using the SREC market as a cornerstone for building a solar industry in New Jersey. It demonstrates that he sees the value of protecting this market for the entrepreneurs and small businesses that have made a living on solar in New Jersey. Many of those businesses have taken their expertise into other markets, creating more opportunities in nearby states. As a result of the SREC program, the state has created opportunities for its solar-smart residents both at home in New Jersey and beyond the state line.

Tags: New Jersey SRECs, NJ SREC Prices, NJ SRECs, Utility Scale Solar, Utility Scale SRECs
Posted in New Jersey | Comments Off on Governor Christie throws support behind NJ SREC program

Solar Capacity in the SREC States in 2010

Posted July 28th, 2010 by SRECTrade.

SRECTrade’s State of the SREC Markets in 2010
The New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Delaware Energy Years came to a close on May 31, 2010. The following is a report of the solar capacity in megawatts (MW) certified and registered to create SRECs in all states at that time.

Solar generators by state located: This table is based solely on the location of the facility and does not include multiple state listings. All facilities must have been registered by May 31st, 2010.

As you can see New Jersey has by far the largest amount of solar installed and eligible for SRECs with 146 MW. Pennsylvania is a distant second at 17 MW. Meanwhile, Ohio and Illinois are third and fourth respectively, however of the 16 MW in Ohio, 12 come from one facility and of the 10.1 MW in Illinois, 10 come from one facility. Delaware and Maryland both have sizable markets at around 6 MW each. Volumes in other state are much smaller since there is no local SREC market.

Solar generators by size: Projects certified for SREC markets range in size from as small as 0.5 kW to as large as 12 MW, however, only 20 out of the 7,700 projects are over 1 MW. Of those 20 projects all are well below 5 MW, with the exception of a 10 MW facility in Illinois and 12 MW facility in Ohio. The lack of multi-MW facilities in the SREC markets is a function of both the complexity involved and constraints on demand. The only state SREC market today with any legitimate appetite for multi-MW facilities is New Jersey.

Solar generators by state eligibility: Because some states accept out-of-state SRECs, the in-state supply listed above differs from the total supply available to buyers in that state. For instance, Ohio’s market also includes facilities located in PA, WV, KY, IN, and MI. The table below lists the total solar capacity in megawatts eligible for each SREC market, along with the percent of the market that is sourced in-state. Note: many facilities will be counted multiple times in this table since they are eligible in several states. For example, the 10 MW facility in Illinois is eligible in both DC and PA.

In Ohio 89.6% of the market is in-state SRECs. Some of our customers have asked why in-state Ohio SRECs do not sell at a premium because of the 50% in-state requirement. The reason is that, as you can see, buyers are not having difficulty meeting the 50% requirement with the large supply of in-state SRECs. In the future as the requirements increase, in-state SRECs could be harder to come by and may indeed sell for more than out-of-state SRECs.

Interpreting the data: One important thing to notice is that the 2010 Capacity Requirement column details the capacity required to be sustained throughout the entire energy year. The Volume column shows the capacity registered through May 2010. For example, New Jersey needed approximately 160 MW of capacity running on average from June 2009 through May 2010 in order to meet the 2010 SREC requirement. The state is actually farther away from the 160 MW capacity mark than the 145.69 MW volume would suggest. Capacity in New Jersey grew approximately 65 MW over the course of the year and so there were probably only enough SRECs created to meet approximately 110-115 MW of the 160 MW requirement. That requirement increases in the 2011 Energy Year to approximately 260 MW. For more information on the growth of the New Jersey market and any other state market, please visit our page devoted to State SREC Markets.

Assumptions used in calculations: Solar capacity required is based on 2007 Department of Energy electricity sales figures, assuming a 1.5% growth rate. The resulting solar megawatt-hours required (i.e. SRECs) are converted to megawatt capacity requirement at a rate of 1200 MWhs per MW.

Share||Subscribe

Tags: dc srec market, delaware srec market, maryland srec market, new jersey srec market, new jersey srec shortage, ohio srec market, pennsylvania srec market, Solar Carve-Out, srec market capacity, srec market data, srec production, srec requirements, srec sales figures, srec targets, state srec capacity, state srec sales
Posted in Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, SREC Markets, Washington, DC | Comments Off on Solar Capacity in the SREC States in 2010