A 40-year-old law that\u2019s been key to the growth of renewable energy in the US may be due for an overhaul. Much has changed since the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act, called Purpa, was established in response to the Arab oil embargo of the early 1970s. Concerned about energy shortages, Congress wrote the law in part to encourage alternative energy. But that era of scarcity has since been replaced by one of abundance. And utilities say that Purpa should change with the times. They say power markets have outgrown the 1978 statute, and that it\u2019s burdening customers with billions in extra costs. \u201cChanges to the market need to be refl ected in the law,\u201d said Adam L Benshoff , executive director for regulatory aff airs at the Edison Electric Institute, an industry association. \u201cWe\u2019re certainly missing an opportunity to reduce costs for customers.\u201d They may get their wish. Neil Chatterjee, the new chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which oversees US power markets, has indicated that his agency should take a look at the law. But he hasn\u2019t outlined a timeline or scope of that eff ort. As it\u2019s written, Purpa requires utilities to purchase power from renewable energy projects under certain circumstances.<\/p>\n
If a developer can build a project for less than a utility can build a new power plant, then they can request a contract to sell power to the utility. But utilities argue that developers have fi gured how to take advantage of the system. They\u2019re asking for immediate fi xes to prevent market abuses, and curb instances in which developers break up their projects into smaller ones to qualify for higher rates, according to the Edison Electric Institute. Reducing the threshold for mandatory purchases could also be looked at. \u201cWe\u2019re asking for Purpa to be modifi ed in a way that more truly refl ects avoided cost and stops some of the gaming,\u201d said Benshoff . Purpa proponents, including solar and wind developers, reject the notion that it\u2019s outdated, saying it\u2019s essential to giving renewables a leg up in states that aren\u2019t traditionally green leaning. \u201cPurpa has been a backdoor option to get some renewable projects to states that have few other policy levers that are incentivising renewable energy,\u201d said Timothy Fox, vice president at ClearView Energy Partners LLC. \u201cIf the implementation of Purpa is reformed, we could see a slowdown in some of the states with more conventional resources,\u201d he said. About 15% of US solar capacity and 3% of wind planned to come online in the next few years may rely on Purpa, according to Bloomberg Intelligence.<\/p>\n
The solar industry argues that any changes should be focused on making sure the law is enforced. \u201cIt\u2019s been a highly successful policy tool and continues to be a highly successful policy in markets where there is not otherwise access,\u201d said Abigail Ross Hopper, who heads the Solar Energy Industries Association. Pushback from utilities is unsurprising, she said, since \u201cwe\u2019re threatening their market, we\u2019re threatening their monopoly.\u201d It\u2019s all a far cry from when Charles Copeland was working as an engineer on an abandoned building in New York City\u2019s Lower East Side back in the 1970s. He designed a solar collector system for a group of residents that generated power for the building and sent the excess to Con Edison. The utility sued the residents, but the Public Service Commissioner ruled in favour of the building, and the ruling became a crucial forerunner of Purpa. Forty years later, Copeland says the law is as essential as ever. \u201cIt\u2019s even more urgent now, in terms of global warming,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A 40-year-old law that\u2019s been key to the growth of renewable energy in the US may be due for an overhaul. Much has changed since the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act, called…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1972,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[46,57,90,96,107,137,139,160,174,184,201,202,209,232,233,244,246,249,256,267,277,279,288],"class_list":["post-1971","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-aramco","tag-baroudi","tag-democracy","tag-doha","tag-embargo","tag-gas","tag-gazprom","tag-international-maritime-disputes","tag-lebanon","tag-maritime-disputes","tag-offshore","tag-oil","tag-opec","tag-putin","tag-qatar","tag-rosneft","tag-roudi","tag-russia","tag-saudi","tag-straddling-hydrocarbons-reserves","tag-total","tag-trump","tag-usa"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/emimer.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1971","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/emimer.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/emimer.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emimer.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emimer.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1971"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/emimer.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1971\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emimer.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/1972"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/emimer.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1971"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emimer.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1971"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emimer.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1971"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}