K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Projecting the Impact of State

Portfolio Standards on Renewable

Energy and Solar Installations

Ryan Wiser and Mark Bolinger

January 20, 2005

2

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Project Scope Estimate and summarize potential impacts of

existing state renewable portfolio standards (RPS) on renewable energy capacity and supply

Estimate and summarize potential impacts of state RPS solar set-asides on solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity and supply

Compare both data series with expectations for California RPS and solar capacity and supply

3

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Data Sources and MethodsRPS Demand Used updated estimates from Union of

Concerned Scientists (1/03/05) for non-CA RPS states

UCS assumes mix of renewable resources, which can vary by state, to translate MWh of renewable energy supply to MW of capacity (44% average capacity factor among states)

Used estimates from CEC’c Accelerated Renewable Energy Development report for CA MW and MWh, assuming accelerated 20% by 2010 target and that entire state meets target

Assumes that RPS requirements are achieved

Solar PV Demand Constructed own estimates of demand from

solar set-asides within existing state RPS Compared to CA 2004 PV installations, and

3,000 MW solar goal by 2018, based on Governor’s Initiative

Generally assumes that solar set-asides are achieved

Detailed assumptions on obligated load, load growth, use of credit multipliers, PV/CSP compliance, extent of compliance, capacity factors detailed are in excel worksheets

Low/high scenarios used to bound plausible assumptions

Because RPS demand and solar PV demand are estimated differently, they are not entirely comparable

4

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Additional Details on Solar Estimates New York: Low case assumes PV capacity and energy as estimated in NY RPS cost study (which

predicts that 9% of customer-sited resources will come from solar); high case assumes that 50% fraction of customer-sited project tier comes from solar; 15% PV capacity factor and full compliance assumed

Arizona: Low case assumes PV credit multiplier of 2.5, 40% compliance with solar set-aside given limits on funds for compliance, and that 75% of solar set-aside generation comes from PV; high case assumes PV credit multiplier of 1.75, full compliance with set-aside, and that 100% of solar set-aside generation comes from PV; 20% PV capacity factor assumed

Nevada: Low case assumes 30% of solar credits comes from PV; high case assumes 80% of solar credits from PV; 2.4 credit multiplier for PV, 18% PV capacity factor, and full compliance assumed

Colorado: Low case assumes 60% of solar set-aside comes from PV; high case assumes 100% of solar set-aside comes from PV; 1.25 credit multiplier, 18% capacity factor, and full compliance assumed

Pennsylvania: 20% of load obligated in 2007, 30% in 2008, 50% in 2009, 100% in 2010 and thereafter; 15% PV capacity factor and full compliance assumed

New Jersey: Full compliance, all of solar set-aside met with PV, and 15% PV capacity factor assumed Washington, D.C.: Full compliance, all of solar set-aside met with PV, and 15% PV capacity factor

assumed; ignore early-year modest credit multipliers California: 18% PV capacity factor; 88 MW PV installed in 2004; 3000 MW goal by 2018

Additional details on solar requirements and assumptions provided in Excel workbook

5

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Existing State RPS Requirements: 18 States and Washington D.C.

WI: 2.2% by 2011

NV: 15% by 2013

TX: 2880 MW by 2009

PA: 8% by 2020

NJ: 6.5% by 2008

CT: 10% by 2010

MA: 4% new by 2009

ME: 30% by 2000

NM: 10% by 2011

CA: 20% by 2010

MN (Xcel): 825 MW wind by 2007 + 10% by 2015

IA: 105 aMW

MD: 7.5% by 2019

RI: 16% by 2019

HI: 20% by 2020

AZ: 1.1% by 2007

NY: 24% by 2013

CO: 10% by 2015DC: 11% by 2022

6

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Solar Set-Asides: 6 States and Washington, D.C.

NV: 0.75% solar by 2013PA: 0.5% solar PV by 2020 NJ: 0.16% solar by 2008

AZ: 0.66% solar by 2007

NY: 0.1542% customer- sited PV, fuel cells, wind by 2013

CO: 0.4% solar by 2015 (half from customer-sited projects)

DC: 0.386% solar by 2021

7

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Key Conclusions – RPS Demand Aggregate cumulative RPS demand among 18 states and D.C.

expected to exceed 100,000 GWh (25,000 MW) of new renewable energy capacity by 2017

30% of cumulative RPS-induced new renewable energy demand by 2017 (in GWh) comes from California’s accelerated RPS target, down from 38% in 2010 because 20% RPS target remains constant in California after 2010

In terms of RPS-induced new renewable energy demand by 2017 (in GWh), other significant state RPS markets are: New York (14%), Pennsylvania (11%), Nevada (7%), Minnesota (7%), Texas (6%), Massachusetts (6%)

As percent of 2002 load and 2003 population, California’s accelerated RPS target alone no longer looks as aggressive, relative to other states

8

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Key Conclusions – Solar PV Demand By 2010, existing solar set-asides in other states (not including California) may create demand for

180 – 337 MW of solar PV capacity Largest markets outside of California are: New Jersey (96 MW) and Arizona (19 - 96 MW)

By 2025, existing solar set-asides in other states (not including California) may create demand for 940 – 1,190 MW of solar PV capacity

Largest markets outside of California are: Pennsylvania (640 MW), New Jersey (110 MW), and Colorado (78–131 MW)

California’s current 88 MW of capacity (as of late 2004) is comparable to the predicted 2025 capacity required by the existing goals of many states; 3,000 MW goal is considerably larger than all other markets combined (other markets total 553 – 792 MW in 2018)

Goals often do not officially extend to 2025, making comparisons above somewhat contrived (e.g., AZ goal extends to 2007, NJ to 2008, NV and NY to 2013, CO to 2015; these standards may be increased beyond these end points)

As percent of 2002 load and 2003 population, California’s current installed capacity looks less aggressive, but 3,000 MW goal remains aggressive in comparison to other states

Non-RPS driven solar demand associated with existing renewable energy fund programs (i.e., rebate programs, outside of CA) unlikely to generate sizable PV demand relative to aggregate impact of solar RPS set-asides estimated here – we therefore ignore this demand driver

9

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Figures Generated – RPS Demand

Cumulative New Renewable Energy Capacity – CA and Other RPS States (2000-2017)

Cumulative New Renewable Energy Generation – CA and Other RPS States (2000-2017)

Non-California New Renewable Energy Capacity (2000-2017)

Non-California New Renewable Energy Generation (2000-2017)

2017 New Renewable Energy Capacity

2017 New Renewable Energy Generation

2017 New Renewable Energy Generation as Percent of 2002 Load and 2003 Population

10

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Cumulative New Renewable Energy Capacity: CA and Other RPS States (2000-2017)

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Cumulative New Renewable Energy Capacity (MW)

California Other RPS States

11

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Cumulative New Renewable Energy Generation: CA and Other RPS States (2000-2017)

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Cumulative New Renewable Energy Generation (GWh)

California Other RPS States

12

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Non-CA New Renewable Energy Capacity (2000-2017)

New York

Pennsylvania

Minnesota

Texas

Nevada

Massachusetts

Maryland

Colorado

New JerseyConnecticutArizonaNew MexicoWisconsin

Iowa, Rhode Island, Hawaii, D.C.

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

20,000

200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017

Cumulative New Renewable Energy Capacity (MW)

13

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Non-CA New Renewable Energy Generation (2000-2017)

New York

Pennsylvania

Nevada

Minnesota

Texas

Massachusetts

Maryland

New JerseyColoradoConnecticutNew MexicoWisconsinArizona

Iowa, Rhode Island, Hawaii, D.C.

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017

Cumulative New Renewable Energy Generation (GWh)

14

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

New Renewable Energy Capacity by 2017

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

CaliforniaNew YorkPennsylvania

MinnesotaTexasNevada

Massachusetts

MarylandColoradoNew JerseyConnecticut

Arizona

New MexicoWisconsin

Iowa

Rhode Island

Washington, D.C.

HawaiiMaine

New Renewable Energy Capacity by 2017 (MW)

Total: 25,778 MW

15

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

New Renewable Energy Generation by 2017

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

CaliforniaNew YorkPennsylvania

NevadaMinnesota

Texas

Massachusetts

MarylandNew Jersey

ColoradoConnecticutNew Mexico

WisconsinArizona

Rhode Island

Washington, D.C.

IowaHawaiiMaine

New Renewable Energy Generation by 2017 (GWh)

Total: 102,650 GWh

16

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

New Renewable Energy Generation by 2017 as Percent of 2002 Load and 2003 Population

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

CaliforniaNew YorkPennsylvania

NevadaMinnesota

Texas

Massachusetts

MarylandNew Jersey

ColoradoConnecticutNew Mexico

WisconsinArizona

Rhode Island

Washington, D.C.

IowaHawaiiMaine

New Renewable Energy Generation by 2017as Percent of 2002 Total Retail Sales (%)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5 New Renewable Energy Generation by 2017per Capita (MWh divided by 2003 population)

% of retail sales (left scale)

MWh per capita (right scale)

17

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Figures Generated – Solar PV Demand

Non-California PV Generation, Low Case (2000-2025)

Non-California PV Generation, High Case (2000-2025)

Non-California PV Capacity, Low Case (2000-2025)

Non-California PV Capacity, High Case (2000-2025)

2020 PV Generation

2020 PV Capacity

2020 PV Generation as Percent of 2002 Load and 2003 Population

18

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Non-California PV Generation, Low and High (2000-2025)

Low Case High Case

New York lowArizona lowNevada low

Colorado low

Penn. base

D.C. base

N.J. base

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1,600,000

1,800,000

20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022202320242025

Solar Photovoltaic Generation (MWh)

New York high

Arizona high

Nevada high

Colorado high

Penn. base

D.C. base

N.J. base

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1,600,000

1,800,000

20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022202320242025

Solar Photovoltaic Generation (MWh)

19

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

Non-California PV Capacity, Low and High (2000-2025)

Low Case High Case

New York lowArizona lowNevada low

Colorado low

Penn. base

D.C. base

N.J. base

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022202320242025

Solar Photovoltaic Capacity (MW)

New York high

Arizona high

Nevada high

Colorado high

Penn. base

D.C. base

N.J. base

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022202320242025

Solar Photovoltaic Capacity (MW)

20

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

PV Generation by 2020

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1,600,000

1,800,000

2,000,000

low high low high low high low high base base base low high 2004 2018

New York Arizona Nevada Colorado Penn. D.C. N.J. Total Non-CA California

Solar Photovoltaic Generation by 2020 (MWh)

4,730,400

21

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

PV Capacity by 2020

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

low high low high low high low high base base base low high 2004 2018

New York Arizona Nevada Colorado Penn. D.C. N.J. Total Non-CA California

Solar Photovoltaic Capacity by 2020 (MW)

3,000

22

K E M A - X E N E R G Y

PV Generation by 2020 as Percent of 2002 Load and 2003 Population

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

low high low high low high low high base base base 2004 2018

New York Arizona Nevada Colorado Penn. D.C. N.J. California

Solar Photovoltaic Generation by 2020 as Percent of

2002 Total Retail Sales (%)

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0Solar Photovoltaic Generation by 2020 per Capita

(kWh divided by 2003 population)

% of retail sales (left scale)

kWh per capita (right scale)