The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News, Information, and Companies.

A Tipped Scale in California: Time to See the True Value of Geothermal

In 2004, California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) passed the least-cost best fit (LCBF) rule as part of California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard procurement. This statute required utilities to select renewable resources that have the lowest cost and that best fit their system needs.

While this rule had good intentions, it also had unintended side effects. While it meant to clarify which renewables should be selected to meet California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard and ensure the stability and reliability of California’s electrical grid, it created a system that tipped the scale toward certain renewables while leaving out others. Over the past few years, procurement of resources such as wind, solar thermal, and solar PV has gone up dramatically, while the procurement of baseload geothermal and biomass resources has declined significantly.

According to the CPUC, during the RPS period from 2003 to 2013, 6,000 MW of wind and 6,000 MW of solar were contracted by the Commission. Meanwhile, only 100 MW of geothermal resources were contracted for the same period. Geothermal generation is growing at a slow crawl in California as a result of this existing policy despite operating economically in the state for decades.

Why? The absence of integration costs in valuation is one reason for the bias. Without accounting for these costs, it’s impossible for utilities to make accurate cost comparisons among different renewable resources.   Specifically, the basis of this tipped scale came from how LCBF was calculated. In the past, a non-zero integration adder was used for technologies like solar. This zero-adder was chosen because in 2004 there wasn’t enough evidence to estimate integration costs from respective technologies. And despite many reviews, policies, and mounting evidence over the last 10 years, which conclude that integration costs need to be considered, the CPUC has not changed its policy.

Integration cost, simply put, is the cost of connecting a power plant to the electrical grid. Different technologies can cost different amounts to connect. The most common factors in the integration cost include those for transmission upgrades and ancillary services. These costs can vary depending on the type, penetration levels and the supporting infrastructure of the resource in question that is selected to fulfill a power purchase agreement.

To understand how and why integration cost was left out when the CPUC was instructing utilities to estimate which technologies were the most affordable for their grids, it’s important to understand the difference between certain types of electricity sources. Not all renewables generate electricity equally; each technology has different strengths and weaknesses. There are intermittent sources that do not continuously generate electricity due to some factor outside direct control of the operator. Think of clouds blocking sunshine from reaching solar panels, for example. While intermittent power sources may be predictable with advanced meteorological techniques, the operator is dependent on nature for their electricity.

Other generators produce baseload power.  This type of power is the minimum amount of energy that a utility or distribution company must generate for its customers and is usually supplied by technologies that can be controlled by human operation such as coal, nuclear, biomass or geothermal power where available. In the Western States particularly, geothermal power can be a sustainable and emission-free option.

There is also fast-peaking power. These are power plants that generally run only during peak demand when there is a high demand for electricity. Although these plants supply only occasional power, the power supplied commands a much higher price per kilowatt hour than a plant supplying baseload power. In the past, most of these plants have been natural gas power plants, but the current cheap price of natural gas has made it more common to use for baseload power.   

Under the current system, LCBF has placed a significant amount of peaking and intermittent power sources on the grid by unintentionally making these resources appear more affordable. In truth, the unseen integration and ancillary costs are not factored in the equation, which makes for an inaccurate calculation that disregards baseload energy sources like geothermal power. If California continues on its current path, electricity rates will go up for the consumer as utilities scramble to rebalance their grids after procuring too much intermittent power. 

When the CPUC wrote the zero-adder into law, they stated “that the further addition of intermittent renewables to the system may, in future years, cause us to change [zero-adder] determination.”

The future is here. It’s time to adjust the zero-adder for integrations costs in order to more accurately reflect the true costs of integrating different renewable technologies. It’s becoming a well-accepted fact in the electricity business that a diverse portfolio of renewable resources is best to ensure a low cost, well-balanced electrical system. The current construction of the law is pushing California away from a diverse renewable system and toward a high-cost, intermittent power system that could become unbalanced.

Lead image: Geothermal plant via Shutterstock

RELATED ARTICLES

Renewable Energy Is Beginning To Power Africa

Andrew Burger, Contributor According to the International Energy Agency, sub-Saharan Africa will require more than $300 billion in investment to achieve universal electricity access by 2030. Committing more than $7 billion in U.S. government support ...

First Anniversary of The Balkan Floods Highlights Renewable Energy Market Opportunities

Ilias Tsagas, Contributor One year ago this month, severe flooding in Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia killed 79 people, displaced about half a million and caused economic paralysis of the region. In the wake of these the catastrophic events, ...
Canadian Climate Goals

Canada Announces Weak Climate Target

Danielle Droitsch, NRDC Last week, Canada has announced its contribution to the global effort to reduce greenhouse gases by announcing its post-2020 target. The target announced today is off-track to the 80 percent cut by 2050 they committed to in...
Renewable Energy Stocks

What Drives Alternative Energy Stocks?

Harris Roen, The Roen Financial Report Alternative energy became a serious market player after the turn of the millennium. Since that time, solar, wind, smart grid and other alternative energy stocks have experienced both strong up and down trends. The forces at...
Ben is the Industry Analyst and Research Projects Manager at the Geothermal Energy Association where he leads GEA’s research efforts to prepare several major publications and white papers per year on the geothermal industry and renewable energy po...

CURRENT MAGAZINE ISSUE

Volume 18, Issue 3
1505REW_C11

STAY CONNECTED

To register for our free
e-Newsletters, subscribe today:

SOCIAL ACTIVITY

Tweet the Editors! @megcichon @jennrunyon

FEATURED PARTNERS



EVENTS

Doing Business in Brazil – in partnership with GWEC, the Global Win...

Brazil is one of the most promising markets for wind energy.  Ranke...

EU PVSEC 2015 (European PV Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition)

The EU PVSEC is the largest international Conference for Photovoltaic re...

Sponsor/Exhibitor: MIREC Week 2015

Solectria, Pillar, and Variadores together are co-Silver Sponsors! Come ...

COMPANY BLOGS

EU PVSEC 2014 extends its Scope

Added focus on application and policy topicsAbstracts for conference con...

Teun Bokhoven, President of the Dutch Renewable Energy Federation, ...

Munich, 08 April 2014 – The 29th European Photovoltaic Solar Energ...

EU PVSEC 2014: Call for Papers Receives Great Response

More than 1,500 contributions apply for presentation in AmsterdamScienti...

NEWSLETTERS

Renewable Energy: Subscribe Now

Solar Energy: Subscribe Now

Wind Energy: Subscribe Now

Geothermal Energy: Subscribe Now

Bioenergy: Subscribe Now  

 

FEATURED PARTNERS