Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower

Washington State Introduces Feed-in Tariff

By Paul Gipe, Contributing Writer
February 2, 2009 | 15 Comments

Do you like this news?

Bookmark

Feed

Washington State, United States [RenewableEnergyWorld.com] Washington State legislators have upped the ante on the West Coast's march toward renewable energy feed laws with the introduction of HB 1086. The bill by Representatives John McCoy (D-38th), Representative Maralyn Chase (D-32nd), Representative Zachary Hudgins (D-11th), and Representative Jeff Morris (D-40th) was introduced mid January amidst a flurry of bills calling for feed-in tariffs in the Washington State Legislature.

Washington State's HB 1086 calls for a full system of feed-in tariffs for all renewable energy technologies. The bill is modeled after Germany's highly successful Renewable Energy Sources Act and includes differentiated tariffs not only for solar energy but also for wind energy as well.

California has previously been the focus of media interest as the legislative and administrative process grinds on toward feed-in tariffs in the Golden State. In December, presiding members of the California Energy Commission recommended that the state move immediately toward feed-in tariffs differentiated by technology and based on the cost of generation plus a reasonable profit. California's Public Utility Commission will hold a workshop on the CEC's proposal February 10th.

Oregon's Governor, Ted Kulongoski, has meanwhile thrown a bill into the hopper that includes a tepid proposal for a pilot feed-in tariff program--and that only for solar energy.

Unlike Oregon's proposal, Washington State's HB 1086 calls for a full system of feed-in tariffs for all renewable energy technologies. The bill is modeled after Germany's highly successful Renewable Energy Sources Act and includes differentiated tariffs not only for solar energy but also for wind energy as well.

On January 28, 2009 a public hearing was held by the House Committee on Technology and Energy & Communications. Representative McCoy chairs the committee.

In a further sign of political support for the bill, co-sponsor Hudgins is Majority Floor Leader, and co-sponsor Morris is Speaker Pro Tempore.

Washington State is among only three states and one province with any form of feed-in tariffs in North America. Several Wisconsin utilities offer limited feed-in tariffs for certain technologies. California offers a basic feed-in tariff that has been largely ineffective, according to data from the California Energy Commission. Ontario has a partially differentiated system of feed-in tariffs and 1,500 MW of contracts since the program went into effect. However, only 50 MW have been installed in the province under the program.

The existing Washington State program uses a sliding scale of payments based on the degree of domestic content in the renewable energy system. The program has resulted in the installation of about 1 MW of solar PV in the state. The policy is the brainchild of Mike Nelson of the Northwest Solar Center.

Nelson, among others, testified at the hearing on HB 1086. Nelson is Washington State's feed-in tariff authority and is on the steering committee of the North American Alliance for Renewable Energy. The Alliance is promoting feed-in tariffs across the US and Canada.

Several states introduced feed-in tariff legislation in 2008, and several states have introduced or will re-introduce bills this legislative session, including Minneosta, Michigan, and Indiana. Several other states are considering such legislation. Ontario is expected to introduce its Green Energy Act, a major revision of its current program, late this winter.

Solar Energy

15 Reader Comments

Comment
1 of 15

hakki-surel-168973

February 3, 2009

A similar bill is on the way for Republic of Turkey.

Comment
2 of 15

mike-holly-17241

February 3, 2009

The author needs to be clear and specific about which renewable energy technologies are covered by which feed in tariffs because utilities and their pocket politicians like to exclude the lowest cost renewables and set others just out of reach, when they allow them at all.

You say "Unlike Oregon's proposal, Washington State's HB 1086 calls for a full system of feed-in tariffs for all renewable energy technologies. The bill is modeled after Germany's highly successful Renewable Energy Sources Act and includes differentiated tariffs not only for solar energy but also for wind energy as well."

Which is it "all renewable energy technologies" or solar and wind?

Comment
3 of 15

brian-ballek-52819

February 4, 2009

Mike,

Germany's renewable energy law includes differentiated tariffs (by technology type, system size and location e.g. roof or ground-mounted, on-shore or off-shore) for solar, wind, hydro, biogass and other renewable energy sources. Versions are available in several languages including English at:

http://www.erneuerbare-energien.de/inhalt/42934/40508/

Comment
4 of 15

mark-thomas-72459

February 4, 2009

Washington's FIT seems to be limited to 5 MW's and below. This is a mistake. I would encourage other states to not have this limit. The land costs and related infrastructure costs are fixed. In regards to biomass systems you need to be able to produce beyond 5 MW's in order to have profitability.

Comment
5 of 15

mark-thomas-72459

February 4, 2009

Washington's bill at first read seems to be a decent attempt. I just don't understand the 5 MW limit. All technologies are covered including geothermal. They got a lot right, but I would like to know the thinking behind the size limitation. I have emailed one of the legislative authors to try to find out.

Comment
6 of 15

mike-holly-17241

February 4, 2009

Gee Mark, just when I started to have respect for you, you ask a naive question like that. In the US, there will always be something wrong with every bill. That is the way the utilities demand it. But they and their pocket pols like to try to placate naive people like you with hope. But that is all people like Obama ever offer is hope.

Comment
7 of 15

mike-holly-17241

February 4, 2009

Mark, I should add that if you right and I don't know that you are, since I no longer want to waste my time looking at anything this corrupt country does, that the 5 MW is the only problem with the bill, then they are throwing you a token bone, while the utility monopolies get the lion's share of the opportunities.

Comment
8 of 15

mark-thomas-72459

February 4, 2009

Gosh Mike,

Cynicism reigns. Lets give the authors a time to respond. I have heard from the House Speaker and he says he will address my point.

Trust me I realize the stranglehold that the utilities have on those of us trying to commercialize various renewable technologies. I can live with $.115 for biomass as long as I can build out a 10 MW size power plant. 15 is much better.

Its been a long time that I have been waiting for FIT to come to reality here in the states let alone my own state of WA. I am not about to trash those who are trying to make it happen despite the flaws that I do indeed see. Maybe you would be better off to work with those who are trying to make it happen than to just bash them?

Comment
9 of 15

mark-thomas-72459

February 4, 2009

Mike and anyone interested. Here is a link to info on the bill.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=1086&year=2009

An additional flaw is the so called "teeth" in the bill. A $100.00 per day penalty to the utility for failure to facilitate interconnection. That'll scare em.

But HB 1086 is a start and I would hope that anyone interested would contact the legislative authors to offer constructive advice.

Comment
10 of 15

mike-holly-17241

February 4, 2009

Mark, sorry but I am done with this country's politicians. I am fed up with fifteen years of reading bills rigged for the utilities. I would like to prevent people like you from wasting your life. I feel sorry for you that you are not about to trash those who you think are trying to make it happen. They are stringing you along like a sucker. Our company is moving overseas. The only reason I even bother to monitor the situation is that I plan to say some nasty things about the US after I succeed elsewhere. To tell you the truth, I wish no pols would even try to pretend they are trying to be fair. Then, I wouldn't have to do any work evaluating their crap and could just blast with the same points all the time.

Comment
11 of 15

mark-thomas-72459

February 4, 2009

See ya Mike. Have a good time.

Comment
12 of 15

mike-holly-17241

February 5, 2009

Thanks, Mark. I am sure I will have a better time than you. Unfortunately, Americans like you, that give credence to the bogus efforts of US pocket pols, will force those that follow you to also suffer.

Comment
13 of 15

mike-holly-17241

February 5, 2009

Hey, RenewableEnergyWorld. Why was my comment below removed? What is this political censorship? What is my offense here? I hope it was an honest mistake but I have seen utilities call the media and force to have them pull stuff before.

Author:
Mike Holly

Date Posted:
February 4, 2009

Thanks Brian, but I am fully aware and appreciative of Germany's fair feed in tariffs. It is the political crap we get in the US that bothers me.

Thanks Mark, I knew the state of Washington's FIT had to be just propaganda. Same crap we get from Washington DC. including Obama.

Comment
14 of 15

IanDiamond

February 5, 2009

The most interesting Feed In Tariff in the USA is being introduced in Gainesville, Florida by the Gainesville Regional Utility.

They are offering 32 cents/kWh for solar pv. Particularly impressive in that they charge only around 11 cents/kWh for electricity in the sunshine state.

Comment
15 of 15

knabe19

May 18, 2009

Who's paying for the Gainesville program? Where does the money come from?

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!