Create account Log in

Archive for the ‘SREC Markets’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Rhode Island National Grid Seeks Standard Contracts

Posted December 7th, 2011 by SRECTrade.

National Grid Rhode Island is currently procuring applications for standard contracts from eligible Distributed Generation projects. The enrollment started on December 1, 2011 at 9am EPT, and will close on December 14, 2011 at 5pm EPT. The contracts will last for 15 years, and will cover a total of 5MW of capacity, with 1.5 MW allocated to wind and 3.5 to solar in the following distribution and ceiling price.

2011 Class Nameplate 2011 Target(kW) Nameplate 2011 Ceiling Price (cents/kWh)
Solar-PV: 10-150 kW 0.5 MW 33.35
Solar-PV: 151-500 kW 1.0 MW 31.60
Solar-PV: 501-5,000 kW 2.0 MW 28.95
Wind 1.5 MW 13.35

In order to be eligible for this procurement, systems must

  • Be an electric generation unit that uses exclusively an eligible renewable energy resource (as defined under R.I.G.L S39-26-5  and section 5 of the rules and regulations governing the implementation of a renewable energy standard)
  • Neither have begun operations, nor completed financing for construction
  • Be located in the Narragansett Electric Company ISO-NE load zone
  • Not have a nameplate capacity greater than 5MW
  • Be connected to the electric distribution company’s power system.

In addition, project owners must have submitted an Interconnection application and have a completed Feasibility or Impact study as defined in the Rhode Island Distributed Generation Interconnection Act and The Narragansett Electric Company Standards for Connecting Distributed Generation.

A performance guarantee deposit will have to be paid at the time of execution of the contract. It will be assessed based on $15.00 per REC for small distributed generation projects (<500kW), and $25 per REC for large distributed generation projects (>500kW) estimated to be generated per year. The total sum will be no lower than $500 and not more than $75,000. Should the distributed generation facility not produce the output proposed in its enrollment application within (18) months of contract execution, the contract will be voided automatically, and the performance guarantee deposit forfeited.

For facilities that are also being employed for net metering, a proposal may be submitted to sell the excess output from the project. In this case, the class in which the project belongs is determined by total project size, not the excess output offered.

The project must obtain qualification as a renewable resource as per Rhode Island’s Renewable Energy Standard, and must register with NEPOOL-GIS. Once qualified, National Grid must be designated to receive all the RECs produced by the project through NEPOOL-GIS.

More information and the application forms can be found on the National Grid Procurement Website.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Rhode Island | Comments Off on Rhode Island National Grid Seeks Standard Contracts

Hearing on Pennsylvania SREC Bill (HB 1580) delayed again

Posted December 7th, 2011 by SRECTrade.

A critical Pennsylvania House Consumer Affairs Committee hearing on the Pennsylvania Solar Jobs Bill (HB 1580) scheduled for Thursday, December 8th was delayed again, according to a news flier sent out by the Pennsylvania advocacy group PennFuture. This is the 2nd time that the hearing has been delayed in as many weeks. According to the PennFuture flier, the bill hearing was delayed due to a death in Committee Chair Rep. Godshall’s family. No reschedule date has been announced yet.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Pennsylvania | Comments Off on Hearing on Pennsylvania SREC Bill (HB 1580) delayed again

Governor Christie backs solar in New Jersey’s final 2011 Energy Master Plan (EMP)

Posted December 7th, 2011 by SRECTrade.

Governor Christie’s administration has released the 2011 Energy Master Plan, which can be viewed in its entirety here.  The Plan is generally positive for the stability of NJ SREC markets, and signals overall support by the Governor’s Office for solar in NJ.  The plan specifically lists support for the following:

1. Accelerate the RPS:

A temporary acceleration of the RPS would provide some interim relief for the current market in SRECs and an opportunity for the industry to adjust. This acceleration would require increasing the RPS over the next three years and reducing the outlier years of the RPS schedule to minimize the impact to ratepayers.”

and

2. Give preference to smaller, distributed projects:

Projects that offer a “dual benefit” should take priority for approval and any legislative expansion of SREC eligibility by modifying the definition of “distribution system” should also provide the BPU with the ability to review and approve subsidies for grid-supply projects to ensure compatibility with land use, environmental and energy policies. Additionally, the development of solar projects should not impact the preservation of open space and farmland.

We read that second bullet as support for giving the BPU the ability to manage large utility scale projects so that they don’t flood the SREC market.

Other interesting points include support for extending Electric Distribution Company contracting programs and support for a requirement to set up a supply queue that will give the market insight into pipeline of future non-residential systems.

The Governor also calls for reducing the Solar Alternative Compliance Payment (SACP) schedule to minimize impact of the previous changes to ratepayers.  This seems to be a reasonable concession on the part of SREC sellers, especially given that the current oversupply situation makes the SACP irrelevant.

The EMP by itself does not make policy or change the current NJ renewable portfolio standard.  However, it does signal the Governor’s position on any legislation that he may be asked to sign that would change the portfolio standard law, like Assembly Bill 4226 which contains many of the items listed in the EMP.

The EMP process itself has been illuminating, revealing a Governor’s office that is responsive to stakeholder input and seems to be responsive to data over dogma.  The draft EMP released earlier in the year was far less positive toward solar, however over several public meetings and hundreds of public comments the Governor’s office heard a great deal about the impact of solar on jobs and NJ’s energy supply.  The final Plan reflects much of this input and is a very different document from the draft.

Overall, the 2011 EMP indicates that the Governor supports solar, but he isn’t willing to write the industry a blank check.  The solar industry will need to continue to prove it’s value to New Jersey, and as long as it continues to do so it appears to have the support of Governor Christie.

 Accelerate the RPS
A temporary acceleration of the RPS would provide some interim relief for the current market in
SRECs and an opportunity for the industry to adjust. This acceleration would require increasing
the RPS over the next three years and reducing the outlier years of the RPS schedule to minimize
the impact to ratepayers.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in New Jersey, State RPS | Comments Off on Governor Christie backs solar in New Jersey’s final 2011 Energy Master Plan (EMP)

December 2011 SREC Auction Results

Posted December 2nd, 2011 by SRECTrade.

SRECTrade’s December 2011 SREC Auction has closed. Below are the clearing prices at which SRECs traded this month.

December SREC Prices Energy Year Ending
State 2010 2011 2012*
Delaware – $60.00 $60.10
Maryland In-State – $210.00
Maryland Out-of-State – –
Massachusetts – $530.00
New Jersey – $225.00 $225.00
Ohio In-State – $370.00
Ohio Out-of-State $30.00 $30.00
Pennsylvania $20.00 $10.00 $18.00
Washington, DC $176.00 $201.00

Notes:
*Delaware, New Jersey and Pennsylvania operate on a June-May energy year.
Green text represents a price increase over the last auction clearing price for that vintage, red text represents a decrease.
“-” reflects no sale, which would result if there were no matching bids and offers that cleared for a sale in the auction.

State Market Observations:

Please note, all capacity references are from the latest SRECTrade capacity analysis and reference the amount of supply registered as of the end of November. Additional details regarding SREC issuance are provided in the capacity analysis.

Delaware (Supply: 22.8 MW | Demand: 19.5 MW): Legislation increasing the SREC requirement went into effect this past June but the market has yet to pick up in response. The Delaware PSC approved the SREC Procurement Pilot Program for long term contract solicitations. Meanwhile, the SREC market will likely pick up at the end of the energy year when electricity suppliers are more active.

Maryland (In-State Supply: 33.5 MW | Demand: 26.9 MW): SRECs increased 5.0% in value to $210 this past auction period. The state seems on pace to maintain a balanced supply relative to demand for the compliance year. As 2011 comes to an end, a shortage of SRECs in the state, if any, will be reflected by an increase in prices at the end of the trading period in the first quarter of 2012. Out-of-state SRECs continue to be a non-factor in Maryland.

Massachusetts (Operational Supply: 30.9 MW | Demand: 55.7 MW): Mass SREC values declined slightly to $530, from $535, in the December 2011 auction. Volume during this period was lower as most supply traded in the auction post the Q2 2011 issuance on October 17, 2011. The next big quarterly MA SREC auction will close on Monday, January 16, 2012.

New Jersey (Supply: 448 MW | Demand: 368 MW): The 2012 market stayed flat at $225 this trading period. Oversupply continues to grow as the state has averaged 27.1 MW installed per month since the beginning of the compliance period. Estimates for October 2011 are forecast at approximately 44 MW. For a more in depth look at New Jersey’s capacity and SREC issuance see this post.

Ohio (In-State Supply: 27.7 MW  Out-of-State Supply: 61.3 MW | Demand: 37.7 MW) : In-State SRECs dropped 2.5% to $370/SREC. The out-of-state SREC market saw activity, but declined in value from $55/SREC to $30/SREC.

Pennsylvania (Supply: 152.0 MW | Demand 40.4 MW): PA2011 SRECs stayed flat at $10/SREC and PA2012 declined from prior periods to $18/SREC. HB 1508 was recently introduced to address the state’s SREC market. This marks the beginning of a long process to rescue the PA SREC market. Until then, SRECs will continue to bottom out.

Washington, DC (Supply: 21.5 MW | Demand: 41.9 MW): Prices continue to increase as new legislation closing the DC market borders and increasing requirements take effect on the market.

For historical pricing please see this link. The order window for the January 2012 auction will close on Friday, January 6, 2012 at 5:00 p.m Eastern. For more information, please visit www.srectrade.com.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in SREC Markets, SREC Pricing | Comments Off on December 2011 SREC Auction Results

Will the California RPS and TREC program promote solar and SRECs?

Posted November 30th, 2011 by SRECTrade.

Many solar advocates are hoping that the California TREC program will boost solar development the way SREC markets have in the country’s fastest growing solar markets on the East Coast. After much delay, the program is finally set to launch on December 10th. Unfortunately, the odds are stacked against the distributed solar industry and here is why:

The first hurdle was whether or not the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) would allow distributed generation (DG) projects to be eligible for the state Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). For the sake of clarification, DG is often referred to as smaller, commercial size projects, but in California, the technical definition extends to all projects that are considered onsite generation, meaning the electricity produced by the system is used locally, rather than transmitted through the broader electricity grid (think residential, small commercial and community solar projects. Based on recent proposed revisions (pdf), the CPUC will likely approve DG projects for RPS eligibility and has already started to layout the process for approving projects (a service that will be provided by SRECTrade).

The next hurdle centers around how DG TRECs are classified within the RPS. There are three categories used for RPS compliance:

  1. In-State: At least 50% of the renewable energy must be sited in California.
  2. Out-of-state: Up to 50% of the renewable energy can come from projects outside California that supply electricity to the California grid.
  3. TRECs: Up to 25% of the RPS can be met through the purchase of Tradable Renewable Energy Certificates, a cap that will be reduced to 10% by 2020.

This is a key battle for the relevance of TRECs in supporting DG projects in California. Proponents for DG have argued that TRECs from in-state distributed projects should be included in the 1st bucket. A few reasons supporting this position include the added benefits from reduced transmission costs inherent in DG projects and the fact that the state should favor supporting distributed renewable energy projects sited in California over utility-scale projects outside of California. In a rare occurrence, advocates for the solar industry and the major utilities in California share this opinion. The only opponents we can think of are regulators and lawyers choosing a strict interpretation of a poorly written portion of a legislative mandate and unfortunately, it appears the only way to fix this would be to go back to the legislature. It is likely that the legislature envisioned tradable RECs as those coming from systems sited outside of regional territories and/or outside the state of California, without proper consideration for what that meant for legitimate, local, distributed renewable projects. The CPUC is scheduled to vote on this issue tomorrow, December 1st ahead of the December 10 launch.

The impact of this decision will effectively curtail the ability for distributed solar projects to count towards the RPS, while also making TRECs a non-factor in the financing of distributed solar projects. The RPS incentive scheme will first favor utility-scale hydro, wind and solar from within the state borders, followed by counterparts outside California and then, TRECs produced by renewable facilities anywhere in the Western U.S. and a portion of Canada (WREGIS). This means TREC prices will be next to nothing and the market will be dominated by regional utility-scale hydro and wind projects able to produce at a much larger scale than local DG solar. To put that into perspective, the fastest growing solar markets in the U.S. today (SREC states driven by RPS laws such as New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts) are made up primarily of DG solar projects! As a result, California will need to find ways outside the RPS to encourage the growth of distributed solar energy. This most likely means a continuation of short-term, taxpayer funded, grant/rebate based programs like the California Solar Initiative (CSI).

Even if the CPUC decides to include DG in the in-state bucket, questions still exist around whether or not the potential TREC values will be enough to impact solar DG development. Compared to other states, California is backward in its approach to DG projects. Here we have an industry fighting to be on a level playing field with utility-scale renewables, where other states (16 at the most recent count) have DG or solar set-asides that recognize the value of distributed generation and favor it in their RPS incentive structure over utility-scale renewables. We have often written about the need for a solar carve-out specifically because of different cost structures and the need to support solar separately. The reality is that wind and other distributed renewables have traditionally been more cost-effective, and therefore more competitive within DG carveouts. In addition, the small-scale inherent with solar relative to wind or hydro add transaction costs that also favor the larger producers. Even in an ideal world, where California distributed solar is in bucket #1, the fear is that it will be crowded out by large scale producers with cheaper alternatives to solar and lower transaction costs. The hope has always been that the RPS and the TREC program could be a stepping stone towards a solar-only SREC program in California with long-term, sustainable growth targets similar to those seen on the East Coast.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in California | Comments Off on Will the California RPS and TREC program promote solar and SRECs?

New Jersey Capacity Update – Solar Continues to Push Forward

Posted November 28th, 2011 by SRECTrade.

NJ2012 Capacity Update

The New Jersey Office of Clean Energy (NJ OCE) published an updated installed solar projects list as of September 30, 2011. According to the NJ OCE, as of 9/30/11 the Garden State installed 447.7 MW of solar capacity. This equates to more than 20 MW added in the month of September, putting the state at an average of 27.1 MW per month and a total of 108.2 MW installed for the 2012 compliance year to date. NJ OCE estimates for October 2012 expect 44 MW of additional capacity to be installed, bringing total installed capacity to over 491 MW.

Although the NJ OCE reports 447.7 MW installed as of September 30, 2011, PJM GATS currently shows 431.2 MW registered to produce SRECs as of 11/26/11. It is common to see a difference in registered projects between the NJ OCE and PJM GATS reported figures as there is typically a delay from when systems are interconnected and installed to when they receive their NJ state certification number and become registered in GATS.

New Jersey’s 2012 reporting year solar requirement is currently set at 442,000 MWhs. Assuming a production factor 1.2 MWh per installed kW per year, the state needs approximately 370 MW operational all year long. As of 11/26/11, GATS has reported 163,507 SRECs issued through September 2011 generation. October 2011 generation will be issued on November 30, 2011. Given the volume issued through September 2011, approximately 37% of the required volume has been generated. This leaves a need of approximately 278,500 SRECs to meet the 442,000 MWh RY2012 target.

Monthly Capacity Analysis_v2-1

Assuming all NJ solar facilities produce at a 1.2 MWh production factor per kW per year, and all systems noted as installed on the NJ OCE installed project list received generation credit from their first full month of operation, the existing installed capacity of 447.7 MW will produce approximately 338,400* SRECs between October 2011 and May 2012. This additional generation will bring the NJ2012 SREC issuance total to approximately 501,900 SRECs, an excess of 60,000 MWhs. Assuming the October 2012 estimates are accurate, the additional of 44 MW in October creates additional oversupply, equating to a forecast of almost 530,600* NJ2012 SRECs minted and an excess of 88,600 MWh. Both of these scenarios only account for the existing installed capacity through September 2011 and estimates through October 2011. Additional supply will continue to come online through the remaining months of NJ2012, with more capacity anticipated to be pushed through at the end of the 2011 calendar year due to the expected expiration of the federal grant incentive. The additional supply coming online throughout the remaining months of NJ2012 will further impact the long SREC market NJ is facing and have an effect on the 2013 market.

NJ2013 SREC Market

As it currently stands, the NJ2013 (June 2012 – May 2013) Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requires 596,000 MWhs of solar generation. This Solar REC requirement equals approximately 496.7 MW to be operational all year long, assuming the NJ2013 requirements are met only using 2013 vintage SRECs. Given the current market, and expected oversupply, the NJ2013 market will start off the year with between 60,000 – 88,600 MWhs already issued and eligible to meet the 2013 requirements. Note, this assumes the September figures and October estimates provided by the NJ OCE are accurate and do not take into consideration any additional capacity to be installed in the remaining months of the 2012 compliance period.

Assembly Bill 4226

Introduced on November 10, 2011, Assembly Bill 4226, sponsored by Assemblyman Upendra Chivakula (District 17), and Assemblyman Daniel Benson (District 14), would implement changes to the current solar RPS requirements. Under the current RPS, the SREC requirements are subject to a 20% increase per year through 2027 should the state meet or exceed its solar requirements three years in a row, while also experiencing a decline in SREC pricing in those same three consecutive periods. The final paragraph of the current format of 4226, states that the 3 year time period would be reduced to 1 year and be applied beginning in the 2013 compliance period.

Should this bill be signed into law, the 20% increase would take effect in 2013. Currently, RY2013 has a requirement of 596,000 MWhs. A 20% increase would adjust the 2013 requirement to 715,200 MWh; equal to an additional 119,200 SRECs required or approximately 99.3 MW operational all year long.

Other solar trade and advocacy groups have actively suggested alternative proposals to the legislation, some of which include a revised SREC requirement schedule as well as a fixed SACP schedule through 2027. We will continue to keep a close eye on the legislative process and provide updates as more information is known and how it will impact RY2013 and future NJ compliance periods.

*This figure uses a PVWatts calculation assuming 1.2 MWh/kW/Year and takes into consideration seasonality for the remaining months left in the compliance period.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in New Jersey, SREC Markets | 1 Comment »

PSEIA: HB1580 creates thousands of jobs for less than half a penny a day

Posted November 23rd, 2011 by SRECTrade.

On November 16th, 2011, the Pennsylvania Solar Energy Industries Association (PASEIA) released its Ratepayer Cost Analysis regarding PA House Bill #1580. HB1580 was introduced on October 3rd, 2011 by Rep. Chris Ross, and includes 109 co-sponsors as of November 10th, 2011.

The Bill was introduced to address the recent collapse of the PA SREC market by accelerating the solar share requirement from 2012 through 2015. While the solar share requirements from 2012 through 2015 have been accelerated, the solar share requirements in 2016 through 2018 remains the same as SREC prices are expected to have stabilized by then regardless of the present situation. HB1580 will also close the solar market in Pennsylvania to out-of-state systems, thus limiting the supply of SRECs available which will drive up their value. While undoubtedly a blessing for the solar industry within Pennsylvania, some concerns have been raised regarding the impact this program will have on ratepayers. The Ratepayer Cost Analysis aims to address these issues.

Here is the breakdown of HB1580, using figures derived from the Cost Impact Report. The introduction of HB1580 imposes an additional $113,315,417 distributed amongst all residential and commercial power users in Pennsylvania.

Current Scenario
Reporting Year Solar Share SRECs SREC Price* Cost
2012 – 2013 0.0510% 75,189 $50 $3,759,453
2013 – 2014 0.0840% 123,012 $50 $6,250,621
2014 – 2015 0.1440% 216,338 $50 $10,816,879
2015 – 2016 0.2500% 379,150 $70 $26,540,513
2016 – 2017 0.2933% 449,047 $80 $35,923,723
2017 – 2018 0.3400% 525,500 $85 $44,667,471
Total – 1,770,235 – $127,958,661

Proposed Scenario (HB1850)
Reporting Year Solar Share SRECs SREC Price* Cost Increment
2012 – 2013 0.1500% 221,144 $190 $42,017,420 $38,257,967
2013 – 2014 0.1700% 253,001 $150 $37,950,200 $31,699,579
2014 – 2015 0.2040% 306,478 $125 $38,309,780 $27,492,901
2015 – 2016 0.2500% 379,150 $100 $37,915,019 $11,374,506
2016 – 2017 0.2933% 449,047 $90 $40,414,188 $4,490,465
2017 – 2018 0.3400% 525,500 $85 $44,667,471 $0
Total – 2,134,320 – $241,274,078 $113,315,417

* SREC price is based on aggregator feedback, as well as average weighted PA SREC prices in GATS

The cost imposed on each ratepayer is than calculated based on an estimated use of 10,716kWh/yr for residential and 150,000kWh/yr for commercial usage.

Reporting Year Estimated Elect Sales Estimated Increased Cost

Cost Increase per kWh

 Estimated Increased Residential Cost Estimated Increased Commercial Cost
Annual Monthly Annual Monthly
2013 147,429,544 $38,257,967 $0.0002595 $2.78 $0.23 $38.93 $3.24
2014 148,824,315 $31,699,579 $0.0002130 $2.28 $0.19 $31.95 $2.66
2015 150,234,430 $27,492,901 $0.0001830 $1.96 $0.16 $27.45 $2.29
2016 151,660,076 $11,374,506 $0.0000750 $0.80 $0.07 $11.25 $0.94
2017 153,101,443 $4,490,465 $0.0000293 $0.31 $0.03 $4.40 $0.37
2018 154,558,725 $0 $0 – – – –
Total $113,315,417 – $8.14 $0.68 $113.97 $9.50
Average – $0.0001520 $1.63 $0.14 $22.79 $1.90

As the table shows, the residential bill on average increases by less than 14 cents over five years and under $2 for commercial customers with an assumed annual electric usage of 150,000kWh/yr. This amounts to less than half a penny a day for residential owners. In addition, these are pre-tax costs, so for-profit commercial and industrial customers will pay less than these estimates based on their effective tax rates..

For more information, please contact:
Ron Celentano
PASEIA – President
CelentanoR@aol.com

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Pennsylvania, SREC Markets, State RPS | Comments Off on PSEIA: HB1580 creates thousands of jobs for less than half a penny a day

Massachusetts SREC Timeline

Posted November 21st, 2011 by SRECTrade.

To help with cash flow planning, it is important to understand the timeline inherent with the Massachusetts SREC program. Customers are often surprised to learn that SRECs are created by the state several months after they are produced. Here is a chart outlining when SRECs are created in Massachusetts.

Production Quarter

In Massachusetts SRECs are created once a quarter on a quarter delay. This means that a system that was installed in say, July 2010, will sell its first SRECs in January. Why the long delay? This is a function of the way the program has been implemented in Massachusetts. The solar system owners must first report solar production to the Production Tracking System (PTS). The PTS is part of the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center and is in charge of collecting all renewable energy production data. At the end of each quarter all of the solar production information is submitted to the NEPOOL-GIS, a third-party organization that is in charge of the software used to register and track SRECs. The NEPOOL-GIS creates SRECs at the end of the new quarter based on the previous quarter’s production data.

SRECTrade holds a Massachusetts specific auction on the day that the SRECs get created or the first business day that they are available. For example, January 15th 2012 falls on a Sunday, so the auction will be held on Monday, January 16th 2012.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Massachusetts | Comments Off on Massachusetts SREC Timeline

Delaware PSC Approves SREC Procurement Pilot Program

Posted November 15th, 2011 by SRECTrade.

The Delaware Public Service Commission approved the SREC Procurement Pilot Program on November 8th, 2011. This program will allow qualified solar energy system owners to sell their SRECs at a fixed price for the next 20 years.

The program will only be open to certain DE solar owners, for example, eligible facility owners must have received approval of their “Accepted Completed Solar System Interconnection Application” on or after December 1st 2010. Another requirement stipulates that the facility must not have received supplemental funding from a public source other than grants associated with the Delaware Green Energy Program “GEP”.

The number of SRECs to be procured is tiered according to the system size from which they are obtained. They will also be priced accordingly. Based on the requirements for June 2011 through May 2012, the numbers and price are

Tier Size (kW) Number of SRECs Percentage of Total SRECs Price, 1st 10 years Price, next 10 years
1 <50 2972 13.4% $260 base, $235 alt+ $50
2a 50 – 250 2,000 9.1% $240 base, $175 alt+ $50
2b 250 – 500 2,000 9.1% Lowest Bid Price* $50
3 500 – 2,000 4,500 20.4% Lowest Bid Price* $50
4 >2,000 10,600 48% Lowest Bid Price* $50
+Alternative pricing for projects that received a GEP grant before December 10 2010.
* Prices for tiers 2b, 3 and 4 will be decided by competitive bidding amongst the applicants.

In the event of oversubscription for facilities in Tier 1 and 2A, systems will be eliminated via lottery, starting with systems enrolled in the equipment or workforce bonus program.

Payments will be made quarterly for Tier 1 and monthly for Tiers 2 and 3. The energy production must be measured by at least a standard, utility grade meter and online monitoring for Tier 1 systems, and a revenue grade meter with online monitoring for Tiers 2 and 3.

Facilities are obliged to deliver the number of SRECs as estimated for their system size when they apply. The Sustainable Energy Utility is obliged to purchase up to 110% of the estimated SRECs, but may choose not to purchase any additional surplus SRECs.

This program will likely commence this winter or spring, and SRECTrade will be supporting this program for all of our installers and their customers. Look out for a future email regarding the SREC Pilot Program.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Delaware, SREC Markets, SREC Pricing | 2 Comments »

FirstEnergy Closes SREC and REC RFP

Posted November 15th, 2011 by SRECTrade.

FirstEnergy’s Ohio utilities announced the close of its Request for Proposal (RFP) for 10 year SREC and REC contracts. The utility issued the RFP seeking 5,000 Solar Renewable Energy Credits and 20,000 Renewable Energy Credits per year for the compliance periods covering 2011-2020.

The utility noted they were able to successfully fill the requested volumes. The contracted supply will allow FirstEnergy to meet its 2011 RPS requirements including the SRECs not retired under their 2010 compliance obligations. The RFP received submissions from 28 qualified participants offering more than two times the requested SREC volumes and four times the requested REC volumes. Contract pricing was not disclosed.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Ohio, SREC Markets | Comments Off on FirstEnergy Closes SREC and REC RFP

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »
Clients
Markets
About
Legal

© 2024 SRECTrade, Inc. All rights reserved.