Nominate Your Favorite Renewable Energy Project for The 2009 Excellence in Renewable Energy Awards
click here for more information
Close
 
Photo Credit: Tennessee Valley Infrastructure Group Inc.
article tools
Increase Text Size Increase Text Size Decreate Text Size Decrease Text Size
Share Email This Story Share Share This Story Reader comments Reader Comments (31) View image gallery Image Gallery (1) Add to favorites Add to Bookmarks Printer friendly version Printer Friendly Version
Article Tool Sponsor:

Advertise with us

More Jobs
Previous Article
Next Article
View All
0 ratings - Sign-in to rate this article
October 3, 2008

Tax Credits Extended: Renewable Energy Industry Breathes Sigh of Relief

by Graham Jesmer and Stephen Lacey, Staff Writers
Washington, D.C., United States [RenewableEnergyWorld.com]

After a disastrous few weeks on Wall Street, the renewable energy industry has come out a winner. It seems there's always a silver lining in even the worst developments.

The long-awaited extension of the Production (PTC) and Investment Tax Credits (ITC) were finally passed as part of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (H.R. 1424) and have now been signed into law by President Bush. The tax credit package, which is the same that passed the Senate on September 24, will extend the PTC for one year and the ITC for eight years. The extensions would be at least partially paid for by a change in the tax code for the oil and gas industry.

The bill also contains removal of the US $2,000 cap for residential solar installations. The controversial US $700 billion bailout package has been in the works in Washington since last week due the failure of several major U.S. banks and financial institutions. The bill was initially voted down in the House on Monday and was re-worked and re-introduced by the Senate on Wednesday.

Wind and solar businesses around the country are breathing a bit easier today.

“The American solar energy industry received a boost today with the passage of H.R. 1424, which included a provision to extend the tax credits for renewable energy by eight years. This legislation will enable companies like SCHOTT Solar to continue to invest in American production, American jobs, and America’s energy independence," said Mark Finocchario, president and CEO of SCHOTT Solar.

Ron Kenedi, vice president of Sharp Solar said that the tax credit extenstions will help the U.S. solar industry become a bigger part of the generation picture and bring down its costs.

"Solar is becoming a competitive energy source that can address our nation’s growing energy demands with a clean, reliable and renewable source of power. The solar industry is now scaling up to bring down manufacturing and installation costs, build its infrastructure, grow public awareness, and attract customers. The 8-year extension of the solar investment tax credit will help the solar industry flourish to its full potential," Kenedi said.

The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) applauded the vote this afternoon.

“We salute Members of Congress in both parties who fought under difficult conditions to keep the renewable energy production tax credit and small turbine investment tax credit on the agenda until the very end, and then pushed them across the finish line," said Greg Wetstone, senior director of governmental and public affairs for AWEA. "These tax credits are essential to the continued growth of wind energy, to the economic and energy security of the United States, and to a successful beginning in the fight against global warming.”
 
Geothermal firm Raser Technologies also thanked Congress for passing the important legislation that will also benefit the geothermal industry.
 
“The extension of the production tax credits encourages aggressive growth in renewable energy development and supports our rapid deployment strategy for building a number of geothermal power plants over the next decade," said Brent Cook, Raser’s CEO.
 
Highlights of the package include:
  • An 8-year extension of the residential and business ITC for solar, small-wind and geothermal systems
  • An elimination of the US $2,000 cap on the residential ITC
  • Elimination of the prohibition on utilities from obtaining the ITC
  • Authorization of US $800 million for clean energy bonds for renewable energy generating facilities
  • A 1-year extension of the PTC for wind projects
  • A 2-year extension of the PTC for geothermal facilities
  • Creates a 2 year ITC for marine energy technologies (tidal, wave, current, ocean thermal)
Image Gallery (1)
 
Previous Article
Next Article
View All
Reader Comments (31)
 
No image available
October 3, 2008
Advocates for Renewable Energy are in a struggle for attention and dollars given to the Nuclear Industry. Here's what I think is an excellent argument for Wind (& Solar, Hydro, Biofuels, and Geothermal) investment Instead of Nuclear:

"The Nuclear Industry is asking the US Department of Energy (DOE) to provide loan guarantees in the amount of $122 billion, which significantly exceeds the $18.5 billion in loan guarantees available under the June 30, 2008 Nuclear Power Facilities solicitation. The aggregate estimated construction cost of 14 projects is $188 billion. If all projects are constructed, they would add 28,800 megawatts."
http://www.energy.gov/news/6620.htm


In the Renewable Energy World article:

Record Growth for Wind: What Comes Next?
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=53436

"The US installed 5244 MW (Wind) in 2007, more than double the 2006 figure and increasing total capacity by 45%. "

"Any forecast for the US market will depend significantly on whether the production tax credit (PTC) gets renewed. "

"overall value to the global wind turbine market at around $300 billion over the next five years."


My (partial and still developing) Case for Wind over Nuclear is:

At 2007 Rates, in 10 years the US could install 10 x 5255 MW = 52,550 MW or 52 Gigawatt

-versus-

the Nuclear Industry's plan for 28,800 MW or 25 Gigawatt at a cost of $188 Billion which includes $122 Billion of Public Taxpayer Loan guarantees.

We have the Best Wind Resources in the World. Global Companies want to invest in developing and profiting from our Wind and Solar resources much like We invested in Middle East Oil.

We can create 2 Million Clean Energy jobs in just 2 years with a $100 Billion investment. . Imagine how many $700 Billion would create (14 Million New Jobs?):

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSN0930092120080909

Change the focus to Job Creation and Invest $100 Billion in Renewable Energy.
Comment 1 of 31
No image available
October 3, 2008
The rest of the story:

Our Government should Change the focus to Job Creation and Invest $100 Billion in Renewable Energy Investment Tax Credits. That alone can generate $700~800 Billion of new Investment into our Economy, along with Millions of Jobs. In the long run it also frees us from sending Hundreds of Billions to the Middle East for Oil.
Report: Global Green Job Market Expected To Explode:

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=53686


TAX REVENUES FROM WIND FARMS OFFSET TAX INCENTIVE

http://www.nawindpower.com/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.2430


Renewable Energy Tops 10% of U.S. Energy Production

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/infocus/story?id=53684


Renewable energy such as Wind, Solar, Hydro, Biofuels, and Geothermal creates Millions of Jobs in Manufacturing, Construction, Maintenance, Electronics, Networking, Mechanics, Fabrication, Steel, New materials development, Education, and dozens of other industries.

We need to do all we can to make our case Public and Loud.
Comment 2 of 31
No image available
October 3, 2008
Will the elimination of the US $2,000 cap on the residential ITC be effective for installations in 2008?
Comment 3 of 31
October 3, 2008
Hi: The cap removal is only after 2008 and ONLY applies to solar electric, not solar thermal. Thermal remains the same for the next 8 years.

.....Bill
Comment 4 of 31
No image available
October 3, 2008
Can some please clarify the following for me as I work in a job that helps market conservation and renewable energy to residential customers....

As William pointed out, the The cap is removed after 2008. Is it 10% or 30%? I have heard both numbers.

And what exactly is the federal tax credits on the solar thermal?

If I understand right, if a person has an $8,500 solar thermal and a $30,000 solar electric system installed the same year, does that mean they get $2000 for the solar thermal and $3000 for solar electric ($9000 if 30%)?

If anyone has a link to the exact wording, that would be great!
Comment 5 of 31
October 4, 2008
Hi again:

It is the same as before... no changes..30% 2000 cap...
Comment 6 of 31
No image available
October 5, 2008
Most of us want to replace legacy generation technology with renewables, but please be careful when comparing intermittent renewable sources with legacy base load generation plants as the inaccuracies will destroy the credibility of renewable advocates. Yes, there are MANY externalities of legacy plants that hide their true cost and impact, but you still have to account for the additional costs associated with renewables, particularly intermittent renewables that require backup power for times when wind, waves, current or insolation is temporarily unavailable. Geothermal is the only "renewable" power source that can be compared MW for MW with legacy base load or on-demand peaking plants, and backup power and/or load averaging transmission systems must be added into the cost of intermittent renewables. Utilities and regulators select new generation systems based on cost so be sure to accurately reflect both the externalities of legacy systems AND additional costs associated with intermittent renewables.
Comment 7 of 31
No image available
October 6, 2008
Tom, I heard a lot of babble, but no solid numbers about the true financial, social and environmental cost of all forms of energy. What exact figures do you have regarding that?

---

Geothermal power now accounts for about 28 percent of the electricity generated in the Philippines. With 90 million people, about 40 percent of whom live on less than $2 a day, this country has become the world's largest consumer of electricity from geothermal sources. Billions of dollars have been saved here because of reduced need for imported oil and coal.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/03/AR2008100303843_Comments.html

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/faqs.html

-------

Additional costs for Nuclear Power include the 2005 Energy Bill's accident liability to the Industry of $10.9 Billion, which puts the Taxpayer on the line for Liablilty up to $600 Billion in case of a Nuclear accident (including damages, lives lost, radiation leaked, etc.,)

http://www.citizen.org/cmep/energy_enviro_nuclear/nuclear_power_plants/articles.cfm?ID=13449


To this, we can add the cost to dispose of Waste, and to decomission a Nuclear power plant (currently extimated betweeen $5~15 Billion) . It's obviously clear that Renewables of Wind, Solar, Geothermal, Hydro, and Biofuel at the future we should fight for and invest in.

---

Oh yes, I forgot to mention, we don't have to fight and die in Iraq for the sake of Oil interests as 3 generations of my family have done over the past 30 years.
Comment 8 of 31
No image available
October 6, 2008
They should put most of the money into very large solar power towers...They are far more efficient than rooftop. Cheaper too by watt. Mc Cain wants to spend ~ $250 billion for ~ 50 conventional nuclear plants. If 1 GW, then that's $5 per watt! I'm sure that we could get more than that amount of power from SPT's.

Even with all the new CST planned, I don't think there is one large enough to store usable heat for more than a few hours. With that kind of subsidy, there should be hundreds capable of round the clock generation!
Comment 9 of 31
No image available
October 6, 2008
Derek, I don't have comparative figures for the true costs of power generation but I think you've got the point that comparative estimates are easy to make and difficult to document. The debate shows the need to have reliable independent comparative valuation of power costs that must be challenged at every level of decision making. Challenge your utility, state regulatory commission, FERC/federal regulators, state/federal legislators and anyone else in the loop to provide a comprehensive valuation of power costs that includes all externalities such as carbon/climate, pollution/health, habitat degradation/species impacts, cultural impacts, etc. The underpinning of capitalism is that society will make the best choice if they have full and free information on the products they are consuming, but…
Comment 10 of 31
No image available
October 6, 2008
Thanks for the update.

My goal is not so much to argue the points of $/kw/hr price, thought that's certainly an enviable task (& I'd like to have those figues), and some comparisons just beg to be Highlighted without delay. As we speak, Public money is being queued for Nuclear, Oil and Coal which are already mature industries.

My goal is to promote a National Policy where Public money for Wars, Nuclear, and Polluting Energy sources is redirected into Tax Incentives to promote the Production of Wind, Solar, Geothermal, Hydro and Biofuels. The Production Tax Credits have proven to be the #1 catalyst for investment into these sources.

I'd certainly like to have all the data to make my case in an easily digestible format so welcome all research and links anyone has.

*What is the cost for the war dead and wounded, and long term care?
*What is the cost for removing a mountain for coal, that otherwise could be used for Wind power?
*What is the cost, from conception to decomission of a nuclear power plant?
*What is the cost for CO2, chemical in our water, Oil spills, Jobs lost and opportunities wasted for not investing green?

I'm sure there are a thousand other costs that could be factored in and that's a job for Team of economists and environmentalists:)

One note about Intermittient power is that when it's On, water or heat can be stored.

I'm intimately aware of the plight of our Soldiers in the Middle East and the lack of Job growth at home that can provide Jobs and opportunity to our returning veterans, not to mention the Tens of Thousands of Automotive, Manufacturing, and Industrial Jobs lost as a result of Bad Policies and Investment.

Next goal, a Campaign making the case for:

1. $100 Billion Annual Production Tax Credit incentive, to attract as much as $700~$800 Billion, Annually, in investment.

There's still a lot of work to be done, and data consolidated, to make the case for that type of aggressive investment into our future.
Comment 11 of 31
No image available
October 6, 2008
Derek, even if you get the PTC you want, you still have to force the utilities into choosing renewables instead of legacy generation. Often they won't consider or will under-value these subsidies and won't consider externalities no matter how may renewable policy statements they issue. Sure, some of these externalities can be captured in subsidies, but as the article shows, these are only temporary and are not therefore caculated to accrue over the life of the facilities considered, while they also assume low fossil/nuclear fuel prices extending over the facility lifetime. We need local and national legislation, if not litigation too, that requires incorporation of the externalities in planning at the utility and the regulator level. By all means stop the subsidies for nuclear incident insurance, plant/waste transport security and waste disposal as this will tend to level the playing field. Existing plants would likely have to be grandfathered but new plants should be forced to assume all of these costs and a high level of compliance.
Yes, hydro, heat and compressed air storage is possible and a better transmission system could level loads over a wide region, but I didn't see those necessary costs included in your initial cost comparison, thus the lecture on credibility. Storage, load leveling and/or backup power is a necessary component of intemittent renewables that must be disclosed is such comparisons or you can only offset the fuel costs of legacy power.
Comment 12 of 31
No image available
October 7, 2008
Very new in the renewable energies. I'm a home and rural builder in Texas and am interested in learning more and incorporating the renewables into my company. I'm ignorant on the tax breaks and such. So, is it 10% or 30%, where did the 30% come from? Here's my take:

So, if one was to spend $120,000 on wind energy (two wind generators) and my customer's current electric expenses were $1,200 a month, taking the 10% rebate would allow for it to repay itself just over 8 years, not counting if you were to have a surplus of power generation that could be pushed back into the electric company, which we probably would with the 2 units.
Comment 13 of 31
No image available
October 7, 2008
Could somebody explain how the ITC benefits the solar power developer financially? and how that subsequently benefits the utility, equipment vendors etc?

Regards,
Sam
Comment 14 of 31
No image available
October 8, 2008
sorry don't know much about US system...your utilities are forced in any way into buying renewable energy? and, if you have any figures, per kW, how much is investment in wind compared to solar?
thank you
Comment 15 of 31
No image available
October 8, 2008
Division B: Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008 - Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008 - Title I: Energy Production Incentives - Subtitle A: Renewable Energy Incentives - (Sec. 101) Extends through 2009 the tax credit for producing electricity from wind and refined coal facilities. Extends through 2010 such tax credit for other facilities, including closed and open-loop biomass, solar energy, small irrigation power, landfill gas, trash combustion, and hydropower. Modifies rules for and definitions of refined coal, trash and biomass facilities, and hydropower production.

(Sec. 102) Includes marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy as a renewable resource for purposes of the tax credit for producing electricity from renewable resources.

(Sec. 103) Extends through 2016 the energy tax credit for solar energy, fuel cell, and microturbine property. Allows a new energy tax credit for combined heat and power system property. Increases to $1,500 the credit limitation for fuel cell property. Modifies energy tax credit rules to allow: (1) offsets of tax credit amounts against alternative minimum tax (AMT) liabilities; and (2) public utility property to qualify for such credit.

(Sec. 104) Allows a new energy tax credit for 30% of expenditures for wind turbines used to generate electricity in a residence and for geothermal heat pump systems.

(Sec. 106) Extends through 2016 the tax credit for residential energy efficient property. Eliminates the limitation on the tax credit for solar electric property. Allows a residential energy tax credit for 30% of small wind energy and geothermal heat pump property expenditures.

(Sec. 107) Allows a new tax credit for investment in new clean renewable energy bonds for capital investment in renewable energy facilities.

Extends through 2009 the authority to issue clean renewable energy bonds.

(Sec. 108) Includes steel industry fuel as a renewable resource for purposes of the tax credit for producing electric
Comment 16 of 31
No image available
October 8, 2008
"(Sec. 104) Allows a new energy tax credit for 30% of expenditures for wind turbines used to generate electricity in a residence and for geothermal heat pump systems.

(Sec. 106) Extends through 2016 the tax credit for residential energy efficient property. Eliminates the limitation on the tax credit for solar electric property. Allows a residential energy tax credit for 30% of small wind energy and geothermal heat pump property expenditures."

So, based on these, if I go out and buy $100,000 in wind energy and set it up, I'd be eligible for a $30,000 tax credit on that?
Comment 17 of 31
No image available
October 8, 2008
Back in the 70's there were public service spots for insulating single family dwellings. Remember Carol Burnett and Woodsey Owl? It helped reduce energy consumption and fueled home improvement contracting. The gov't. produced and distributed tables with the tax credits given for specific items ( caulking, windows, insulated siding, attics, etc.) Homeowners and contractors knew what qualified and how much of each cost could be used as a credit against tax bills.

Home improvement contracting fell off the cliff two years ago. That's when home value declines went into their second year. What intelligent person is going to invest in improving a property that has been declining in value for three consecutive years, and may continue to do so for the foreseeable future? Not many.

The gov't. could throw a lifeline to a suffering industry, cause home owners to at least invest in alternative energy retrofits, and serve the purpose of reducing dependence on foreign energy sources if they would just get their act together and support and publicize tax credits that come with installation of alternative energy systems. This is a two pronged effort; first, inform the home improvement industry; second, home owners themselves.

Many home owners now see themselves as long term owners. The trade-up market is gone. Stable people with mature mortgages will be improving rather than moving. Houses that retrofit green energy systems now will reap benefits later. Their houses will be worth more, and will sell faster than houses using commercial energy.

It worked in the 70's, it will work now.
Comment 18 of 31
No image available
October 8, 2008
Should energy policy in America be debated without regard to the market/government relationship?

Residential solutions to the national energy crisis should have preference because self-sufficient consumers do not beg for government regulation, and because increasingly educated consumers can spur market innovation.

A residence with a single line into the house piping/beaming in a necessity tends to BEG for protective government regulation. A residence which is self-sufficient for heat and light does not beg for government protection.

Because of "inherently monopolistic" technologies, the energy and telephone industries have been regulated by various levels of government since the 1880's. (Yes, "eighteen." FDR couldn't have done it without it being familiar, if not comfortable.)

Now that newer technologies exist, shouldn't American federal energy policy work to re-structure the energy industry into a consumer market, much like the federal policy of the 1980s did for the telecommunications industry?

Ma Bell was not happy about the restructuring, but she'd been in bed with Uncle Sam and had locked us into old technology. Something didn't have to be done, as there didn't seem to be a problem, just lost potential, but Reagan though it was the right thing to do....

Think of all the sexy new telecommunications technology since the 1980s! A large consumer market of residential owners can drive innovation.

In addition, residential energy production means "home economics" would take on a neat techno-angle and provide a really good hands-on reason for 7th and 8th grade kids to LEARN MATH, (says the resigned math teacher.) And home-energy installation/maintenance are skilled jobs which cannot be outsourced; it's in inherently American industry.
Comment 19 of 31
No image available
October 8, 2008
Scott:

To help in answering your question.

You can check out the federal and state incentives for all renewable energy technologies at the DSIRE site in a concise format. It is put out by North Carolina State University.

According to their site, for a business you can only receive up to $4,000 for a small wind system with 100kW or less peak power rating.

The Bergey Windpower Co. site has information on small wind systems. If you already have an installer in mind I would ask them about estimating your "payback" since it depends on your load requirements as well.

I hope there will be more expert people who could add their comments on this thread as well.

DSIRE - http://www.dsireusa.org

Bergey Windpower Co. - http://www.bergey.com

Best of luck!
Comment 20 of 31
No image available
October 8, 2008
"if I go out and buy $100,000 in wind energy and set it up, I'd be eligible for a $30,000 tax credit on that?

Because of the $4,000 max limit listed for corporate tax credit on the DSIRE site, you could get a true 30% tax credit for systems up to about $13,300 in cost. For a system costing above that you are only eligible to receive $4,000.
Comment 21 of 31
No image available
October 8, 2008
Tom Lakosh -

Your statement "Storage, load leveling and/or backup power is a necessary component of intemittent renewables that must be disclosed is such comparisons or you can only offset the fuel costs of legacy power." is not true. This would only be the case if wind power was being relied upon as baseload generation -- it is not. Wind power is best viewed as an "energy resource" -- in other words, it is NOT counted as a baseload generating resource, and therefore we do not need to back up the capacity, as the capacity of wind power is not counted as a baseload generating source.

And wind projects are justified economically on the basis as an energy resource -- for more information, see the article my colleague just wrote at: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=53784

And for even more information, read the US DOE "20% Wind Energy by 2030" report at: www.20percentwind.org

Jeffrey E. Anthony
American Wind Energy Association
Comment 22 of 31
No image available
October 9, 2008
Jeffrey, thanks for the links. It's good to have the facts handy when making the case for Renewables. The need for Coal and Gas plants aren't going away anytime soon, but they are mature industries, and future energy should come from Clean renewables, which also happen to present the greatest potential for Job Growth.

Here's a link for Obama's $150 Billion 10 year investment:

http://www.NewEnergyAmerica.org/Documents/Obama-Energy-Plan-080308.pdf

It's a great start, but more needs to be done to ramp up production in the support industries.
Comment 23 of 31
October 9, 2008
I also would like a bit of clarity on the ITC extension. I have heard, and I'm fairly sure that the residential cap of $2000 has been lifted, and that this will apply only to PV electric projects completed within years 2009-2016. Additionally, I have heard the figures of 10% to 30% for the calculation for this tax credit. Which is correct?

Additionally, I have read that there is a provision for a residential wind energy tax credit of 30%. Is this true, and if so - is there a cap?

Can anyone definitively clarify the percentage of the tax credit amount(s), the scope of alternative energy projects covered, and the qualifying factors set forth within this Bill?

Thanks,

Jeffrey Hall
Solar-Cents.com
Comment 24 of 31
No image available
October 10, 2008
After meeting with a solar project consultant about my impending construction (in November), we agreed to delay construction until January 2009 in order to take advantage of the new federal tax incentives. Instead of a $2,000 cap on federal tax credit, we will be eligible for a 30% direct tax credit of "after rebated" costs which will mean about a $4,600 tax credit on 2009 tax obligation.
Comment 25 of 31
No image available
October 10, 2008
There is no need to delay construction of a residential solar PV system until January 2009. The law says that the new credits apply for systems placed in service after January 1, 2009, so you can build and test the system in 2008, place it in service on New Year's Day, and apply your 2009 tax liability.
Comment 26 of 31
No image available
October 10, 2008
I don't get it!

Why isn't the entire industry behind strict carbon cap and trade? Why do you want the government, with its monolithic, slow to respond, spend large amounts on the flavor of the month, to direct research that may or may not prove profitable, practical, or the most efficient in the future.

First, I refer you to Krupp/Horn "Earth: the Sequel." After years of personal skepticism, I've been persuaded "cap and trade" is the most flexible gambit and will work faster than any other.

For those in the game already, payment for what they don't produce - carbon.

For those who can't change quickly, a way to provide time to convert to carbon reduced diets.

For those who manage profits, time to make reasonable transitions, to assess technology and make rational decisions on what works best.

Profit is a powerful incentive to do things right. Cap and Trade makes profit a reasonable expectation for start ups and, if it's done right, consumers too.

Read the book and get back to me. I think you'll find enforceable, strict, possibly increasingly strict carbon emissions limits the most powerful incentive for the entire economy to move toward renewables.

Beavercreek, OR
Comment 27 of 31
No image available
October 10, 2008
Can households who previously claimed a $2000 PV credit purchase additional PV equipment and claim a 30% credit on the new equipment?

It was my understanding that the previous credit was a one time credit even if one didn't claim the maximum $2000 credit.
Comment 28 of 31
No image available
October 11, 2008
How did the over power payback bill come out? I installed a 2.5 kw system 5 years ago and another this year an I sure would like to be compensated for the excess power. Glad to see the credits passed.
Comment 29 of 31
No image available
October 30, 2008
Is the 30% federal tax credit in addition to other credits, such as state, or is it net of other credits?
Comment 30 of 31
No image available
November 20, 2008
No Nukes, No Nukes!

I have only 2 to 3K in tax libility per year.
How many years can I spread the ITC solar credit over?
Comment 31 of 31
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In
Featured Total Access Partners
Click company logos to learn more
Prism Solar Technologies, Inc European Wind Energy Association Connecticut Clean Energy Fund VentureBeat Alteris Renewables GoGreenSolar.com
WORLD'S #1 RENEWABLE ENERGY NETWORK
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network Logo