SRECTrade

Archive for the ‘State RPS’ Category

Pennsylvania Solar Bill Goes to Committee

Tuesday, January 17th, 2012

On Wednesday, 1/11/12, Pennsylvania House Bill (HB) 1580 sponsored by Rep. Chris Ross (R-Chester) was presented to the House Consumer Affairs Committee for debate.  HB 1580 is a proposal to move forward the Pennsylvania SREC requirement to the current compliance requirement for 2015 without changing the overall number of SRECs required after 2015. This would alleviate the over-supply of SRECs and increase the value of Pennsylvania SRECs.  While the hearing was a critical first step for HB 1580, followers of the Pennsylvania solar industry will have to wait on the Consumer Affairs Committee’s vote before the fate of the bill is known. Should the bill make it out of committee it will also need to pass the House and Senate where both the House and Senate have voiced initial majority support for bill.

During the hearing solar industry representatives and solar consumers testified in support of the bill while utility groups and the Pennsylvania Chamber of Business spoke against it. The PA Environment Digest put together a detailed account of the testimonies. Generally those in support of the bill argue: 1) that the bill is essential for maintaining highly skilled solar jobs in Pennsylvania; 2) doesn’t increase the overall requirement for SRECs; 3)merely accelerates the requirement and 4) brings Pennsylvania’s SREC market more in line with the design of other SREC markets by closing the market to out-of-state sited systems (currently PA accepts SRECs from anywhere in the PJM region i.e most states in the mid-Atlantic and some states in the Midwest). Utility companies that testified against the bill argue that it would place an undue burden on rate payers by forcing utilities to charge more for the electricity that they supply. According to the PA Environment Digest article, there was some disagreement over the actual cost of the bill to rate payers, but on the high side utilities estimate that it would be an increase of $120 million over four years to four million Pennsylvania rate payers, which equates to an increase of about $3.33 per year to each rate payer.

SRECTrade will continue to closely monitor the development of HB 1580. Stay tuned to our blog for updates.

Pennsylvania Solar Bill Goes to Committee

Pennsylvania House Bill 1580 Update

Monday, January 9th, 2012

House Bill (HB) 1580 will go before The Pennsylvania Commerce Committee on Wednesday, 1/11/12. This is the third date that has been scheduled for the committee hearing. HB 1580 is a proposal to accellerate the Pennsylvania SREC requirement by three years from 2013 to 2015. If the Bill passes committee on Wednesday then it will also need approval by the House and Senate. Currently the House is majority in favor of the current bill and the Senate looks to be in favor of passing a similar version should the House come to a resolution. SRECTrade will post a blog update once we get word on the Commerce Committee decision.

Pennsylvania House Bill 1580 Update

Governor Christie backs solar in New Jersey’s final 2011 Energy Master Plan (EMP)

Wednesday, December 7th, 2011

Governor Christie’s administration has released the 2011 Energy Master Plan, which can be viewed in its entirety here.  The Plan is generally positive for the stability of NJ SREC markets, and signals overall support by the Governor’s Office for solar in NJ.  The plan specifically lists support for the following:

1. Accelerate the RPS:

A temporary acceleration of the RPS would provide some interim relief for the current market in SRECs and an opportunity for the industry to adjust. This acceleration would require increasing the RPS over the next three years and reducing the outlier years of the RPS schedule to minimize the impact to ratepayers.”

and

2. Give preference to smaller, distributed projects:

Projects that offer a “dual benefit” should take priority for approval and any legislative expansion of SREC eligibility by modifying the definition of “distribution system” should also provide the BPU with the ability to review and approve subsidies for grid-supply projects to ensure compatibility with land use, environmental and energy policies. Additionally, the development of solar projects should not impact the preservation of open space and farmland.

We read that second bullet as support for giving the BPU the ability to manage large utility scale projects so that they don’t flood the SREC market.

Other interesting points include support for extending Electric Distribution Company contracting programs and support for a requirement to set up a supply queue that will give the market insight into pipeline of future non-residential systems.

The Governor also calls for reducing the Solar Alternative Compliance Payment (SACP) schedule to minimize impact of the previous changes to ratepayers.  This seems to be a reasonable concession on the part of SREC sellers, especially given that the current oversupply situation makes the SACP irrelevant.

The EMP by itself does not make policy or change the current NJ renewable portfolio standard.  However, it does signal the Governor’s position on any legislation that he may be asked to sign that would change the portfolio standard law, like Assembly Bill 4226 which contains many of the items listed in the EMP.

The EMP process itself has been illuminating, revealing a Governor’s office that is responsive to stakeholder input and seems to be responsive to data over dogma.  The draft EMP released earlier in the year was far less positive toward solar, however over several public meetings and hundreds of public comments the Governor’s office heard a great deal about the impact of solar on jobs and NJ’s energy supply.  The final Plan reflects much of this input and is a very different document from the draft.

Overall, the 2011 EMP indicates that the Governor supports solar, but he isn’t willing to write the industry a blank check.  The solar industry will need to continue to prove it’s value to New Jersey, and as long as it continues to do so it appears to have the support of Governor Christie.

 Accelerate the RPS
A temporary acceleration of the RPS would provide some interim relief for the current market in
SRECs and an opportunity for the industry to adjust. This acceleration would require increasing
the RPS over the next three years and reducing the outlier years of the RPS schedule to minimize
the impact to ratepayers.

Governor Christie backs solar in New Jersey’s final 2011 Energy Master Plan (EMP)

PSEIA: HB1580 creates thousands of jobs for less than half a penny a day

Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011

On November 16th, 2011, the Pennsylvania Solar Energy Industries Association (PASEIA) released its Ratepayer Cost Analysis regarding PA House Bill #1580. HB1580 was introduced on October 3rd, 2011 by Rep. Chris Ross, and includes 109 co-sponsors as of November 10th, 2011.

The Bill was introduced to address the recent collapse of the PA SREC market by accelerating the solar share requirement from 2012 through 2015. While the solar share requirements from 2012 through 2015 have been accelerated, the solar share requirements in 2016 through 2018 remains the same as SREC prices are expected to have stabilized by then regardless of the present situation. HB1580 will also close the solar market in Pennsylvania to out-of-state systems, thus limiting the supply of SRECs available which will drive up their value. While undoubtedly a blessing for the solar industry within Pennsylvania, some concerns have been raised regarding the impact this program will have on ratepayers. The Ratepayer Cost Analysis aims to address these issues.

Here is the breakdown of HB1580, using figures derived from the Cost Impact Report. The introduction of HB1580 imposes an additional $113,315,417 distributed amongst all residential and commercial power users in Pennsylvania.

Current Scenario

Reporting Year Solar Share SRECs SREC Price* Cost
2012 – 2013 0.0510% 75,189 $50 $3,759,453
2013 – 2014 0.0840% 123,012 $50 $6,250,621
2014 – 2015 0.1440% 216,338 $50 $10,816,879
2015 – 2016 0.2500% 379,150 $70 $26,540,513
2016 – 2017 0.2933% 449,047 $80 $35,923,723
2017 – 2018 0.3400% 525,500 $85 $44,667,471
Total - 1,770,235 - $127,958,661

Proposed Scenario (HB1850)

Reporting Year Solar Share SRECs SREC Price* Cost Increment
2012 – 2013 0.1500% 221,144 $190 $42,017,420 $38,257,967
2013 – 2014 0.1700% 253,001 $150 $37,950,200 $31,699,579
2014 – 2015 0.2040% 306,478 $125 $38,309,780 $27,492,901
2015 – 2016 0.2500% 379,150 $100 $37,915,019 $11,374,506
2016 – 2017 0.2933% 449,047 $90 $40,414,188 $4,490,465
2017 – 2018 0.3400% 525,500 $85 $44,667,471 $0
Total - 2,134,320 - $241,274,078 $113,315,417

* SREC price is based on aggregator feedback, as well as average weighted PA SREC prices in GATS

The cost imposed on each ratepayer is than calculated based on an estimated use of 10,716kWh/yr for residential and 150,000kWh/yr for commercial usage.

Reporting Year Estimated Elect Sales Estimated Increased Cost

Cost Increase per kWh

Estimated Increased Residential Cost Estimated Increased Commercial Cost
Annual Monthly Annual Monthly
2013 147,429,544 $38,257,967 $0.0002595 $2.78 $0.23 $38.93 $3.24
2014 148,824,315 $31,699,579 $0.0002130 $2.28 $0.19 $31.95 $2.66
2015 150,234,430 $27,492,901 $0.0001830 $1.96 $0.16 $27.45 $2.29
2016 151,660,076 $11,374,506 $0.0000750 $0.80 $0.07 $11.25 $0.94
2017 153,101,443 $4,490,465 $0.0000293 $0.31 $0.03 $4.40 $0.37
2018 154,558,725 $0 $0 - - - -
Total $113,315,417 - $8.14 $0.68 $113.97 $9.50
Average - $0.0001520 $1.63 $0.14 $22.79 $1.90

As the table shows, the residential bill on average increases by less than 14 cents over five years and under $2 for commercial customers with an assumed annual electric usage of 150,000kWh/yr. This amounts to less than half a penny a day for residential owners. In addition, these are pre-tax costs, so for-profit commercial and industrial customers will pay less than these estimates based on their effective tax rates..

For more information, please contact:
Ron Celentano
PASEIA – President
CelentanoR@aol.com

PSEIA: HB1580 creates thousands of jobs for less than half a penny a day

PA Market Update

Thursday, July 28th, 2011

The Pennsylvania 2011 SREC compliance year has seen a substantial amount of solar development. Solar capacity registered within the state has lead to a significant oversupply resulting in an 85% decline in spot market trading throughout the course of the 2011 reporting year.

Since September of 2010, PA SRECs have dropped from $300/SREC to $50/SREC.  As of July 25, 2011, the 115.7 MW of registered generation has far outpaced the 2011 RPS requirements of 18 MW.  This has been the result of additional PA solar incentives, on top of the SREC program, and a large influx of out-of-state systems; of the 115.7 MW registered in PA, 24.7 MW are located out-of-state.

Fortunately, Representative Chris Ross has proposed an amendment to the PA Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard.  The amendment would modify the eligibility criteria so that only in-state systems could register in Pennsylvania after January 1, 2012.  Furthermore, the solar carve-out requirements for energy years 2013, 2014, and 2015 would increase from approximately 71 MW, 118 MW and 205 MW to 207 MW, 238 MW, and 290 MW, respectively.  These proposed changes should strengthen the market by increasing solar requirements and closing off out of state supply.  However, the oversupply of SRECs in 2011 and 2012 will carry over into the 2013 solar year and may keep prices low.  Given the legislature is out of session until October, further development will not occur until late 2011.

If new legislation does get passed, the market may shift from an oversupplied market to an undersupplied market.  This shift could result in an increase in future SREC pricing. One of the determining factors for price is the Alternative Compliance Payment (ACP).  In some states, NJ for example, the ACP is set by law and is known for future years.  Buyers know exactly what the alternative payment will be, and thus have a basis for the maximum value of an SREC.  In PA however, the future ACP is not known.  The ACP is calculated based on the average price paid for an SREC during the current year with weighting to include solar rebates.  For Chris Ross’s amendment to be truly successful, it will not only have to address the oversupply, but the ACP price as well.

To get involved with advocating for solar legislation, the Pennsylvania Division of the Mid-Atlantic Energy Industries Association (PASEIA) is a group of solar professionals who advocate for the interests of solar energy and a strong local PA industry.  Their blog has some good information on the status of the bill.

PA SREC Market – Proposed Legislation and Current Capacity

PA MW Forecast

Note: Capacity (MW) forecast based on PA RPS requirements and SRECTrade estimates.  Capacity (MW) figures presented for May 2010, May 2011, and July 2011 based on registered systems in GATS as of date listed. The current requirements (i.e. green line) as of July 2011 demonstrates the capacity (MW) required for the 2012 reporting year; approximately 44 MW. Figures for 2013-2015 represent the estimated amount of installed capacity (MW) needed on average throughout the compliance year.

PA Market Update

DC Closes Borders to Out-of-State Solar Systems

Tuesday, July 12th, 2011

The Council of the District of Columbia unanimously voted, today July 12th, to close the DC SREC market to out-of-state systems. The Distributed Generation Amendment Act of 2011 (Bill 19-10) increases the SREC requirement in 2011 as well as establishes an SACP schedule through 2023.  Once in effect, the bill will allow out-of-state systems registered prior to 1/31/2011 to continue to sell SRECs in the DC market. The DC Public Services Commission has not provided clarification on how the bill will affect out of state systems that have already granted DC registrations after the January 31st 2011 grandfather date. For more information on the bill please refer to our previous blog postings here and here.

The bill is not yet law. It first must go through a 30-day Congressional Review process before it can go in to effect. Given these mechanistic delays we don’t expect the bill to go in to effect for at least another month.

The following chart illustrates which out-of-state systems will be effected by the legislation.


State Eligible Markets (after B19-10 is effective)
DE DE, PA
IN OH; PA (if in American Electric Power territory)
IL PA (if in Com Ed territory)
KY OH; PA (if in American Electric Power territory)
MD MD; PA
MI OH; PA (if in American Electric Power territory)
NC NC; PA (if in Dominion Electric Territory)
NJ NJ, PA
NY -
OH OH; PA
PA PA; OH
TN PA (if in American Electric Power territory)
VA PA
WV OH; PA
WI -

DC Closes Borders to Out-of-State Solar Systems

NJ 2011 Energy Master Plan – Solar RPS on Track

Friday, June 10th, 2011

On June 7, 2011, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie announced the issuance of the state’s draft of the 2011 Energy Master Plan (EMP). By way of background, the EMP is a road map describing the energy goals of the state’s executive branch. The plan is required to be issued and updated every 3 years.  For details of the 2011 draft please click here. For details on the 2008 EMP click here.

Overall, the report outlines the continued implementation of the NJ Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) solar carve-out. As the report stands, there is no commentary made that would indicate a substantial change to the existing program. The following provides more insight into the aspects of the report that touch specifically on the RPS solar requirements.

The currently legislated RPS target in New Jersey is 22.5%. Of the several goals set forth in 2008 EMP, one sought to surpass this RPS target by achieving 30% of the state’s electricity needs from renewable sources by 2020. The recently released 2011 Draft EMP lays out 5 goals, one of which is to “Maintain support for the renewable energy portfolio standard of 22.5% of energy from renewable sources by 2021.”

The 2011 Draft EMP demonstrates support for behind-the-meter PV installations, highlighting solar’s ability to achieve reduction in carbon emissions and supporting a solar industry in the state,  while also taking into consideration the cost associated with solar incentives to ratepayers. The document does not call for a reduction in the existing solar carve-out, but does indicate the following,

“As the all-in capital costs for diverse solar technologies continue to decline, the Board should take action to reduce the SACP through 2025.  Doing so will not undermine new solar projects that are worthwhile, but will reasonably minimize the cost burden borne by nonparticipants.”

The Christie administration explains the benefit of larger scale solar projects while noting that they “…should be considered in addition to, not in lieu of, smaller-scale, grid-connected applications.”

The document highlights the fixed SREC requirements implemented by the Solar Energy Advancement and Fair Competition Act (SEAFCA) introduced in January 2010. Instead of a percentage-based solar requirement, this act insulated the requirement from fluctuating electricity usage by implementing targets in fixed gigawatt-hour terms. This proves beneficial, as part of New Jersey’s energy goals include demand response and energy efficiency initiatives that plan to reduce overall electricity usage.

Solar Alternative Compliance Payment (SACP):

1) The current SACP extends through 2016; the SEAFCA requires the BPU to set the schedule through 2026.

2) No time frame is required, but industry stakeholders suggest the implementation of a schedule to provide certainty to debt and equity investors enabling solar development.

EMP Policy Direction and Recommendations regarding the solar carve-out are as follows:

1) Reduce the SACP: One proposal recommends the reduction of the SACP by 20% in 2016 and 2.54% each year thereafter.

2) Subject Solar Renewable Incentives to a Cost Benefit Test: The EMP mentions, “Solar generation can contribute to the reliability of the grid…” and continues by stating, “…subsidies should enhance job growth and retention objectives and should contribute to reduction in taxes without inadvertently transferring wealth from non-participants to participants throughout New Jersey.”

3) Promote Solar PV Installations that Provide Economic and Environmental Benefit: Support for community solar power is encouraged, allowing economies of scale to give residents access to what otherwise could be an expensive individual solar system. Community solar projects help provide decreased electricity usage through the local utility and can spread the cost of distribution system upgrades among the ownership group.

Overall, the 2011 Draft Energy Master Plan lays out the goals for a diversified mix of energy sources throughout the state of New Jersey. The existing overall RPS targets and specific solar carve-out requirements appear to be a priority of the Christie administration. It is clear that the Governor’s office is focused on reducing the economic impact of implementing the RPS while enhancing electricity security and job creation. The EMP has no substantive proposals that should cause concern for stakeholders participating in the state’s SREC market, but at the same time does not include any discussion of expanding New Jersey’s solar goals to continue adoption beyond the current targets.

Maintain support for the renewable energy portfolio standard of 22.5% of energy
from renewable sources by 2021.

NJ 2011 Energy Master Plan – Solar RPS on Track

CA 33% Renewable Target Onward!

Wednesday, October 20th, 2010

At the end of September, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) voted unanimously to approve a measure that would require entities delivering power to the state to acquire one-third of their power from renewable resources.

This measure is different than the existing 20% target in that it covers both investor-owned utilities and publicly owned utilities. The existing RPS comes under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) while the CARB has a more far reaching mandate to regulated GHG emissions under A.B. 32.

Earlier in the month, the state legislature was unable to pass the 33% renewable portfolio standard into law. A spokeswoman for the governor’s office commented that the CARB’s approval carries the same legal weight as a bill passed by the legislature and signed by the governor.

CARB stated that the target is forecast to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 12-13 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year by 2020. In addition to the environmental impacts, the CARB and Governor Schwarzenegger expect the measure to incentivize and attract more clean energy project development to California. The California Energy Commission (CEC) recently approved a 392 megawatt solar thermal power plant to be constructed by BrightSource Energy LLC. Other projects are hurrying to receive approvals before the end of the year when federal stimulus incentives expire.

CARB, CPUC, CEC and CA’s independent system operator will all work closely to help implement the new standard. The measure targets a phased approach with 20% by 2012, 24% by 2017, 28% by 2019, and 33% by 2020.

Click here for the full article.

Subscribe

CA 33% Renewable Target Onward!

California TRECs – Making a Comeback

Monday, September 13th, 2010

TRECs in CA

On August 25th, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) issued a Proposed Decision (PD) to lift the moratorium on Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs) utilizing Tradable Renewable Energy Credits (TRECs) to meet California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). In addition to allowing IOUs to use TRECs for RPS compliance purposes, the CPUC’s PD increased the initial 25% TREC limit to 40%. Based on the petitions submitted by the IOUs and the Independent Energy Producers Association (IEP), the CPUC decided to take the IOUs’ points into consideration and increase the cap to 40% of the annual procurement targets. The utilities argument for increasing the cap was based on the thought that accessing a larger market for renewables will lead to a reduced overall cost.

The CPUC has maintained a December 31, 2011 expiration date for the 40% cap. Additionally, the temporary $50 limit of payments for TRECs is to remain in place through the same time period. The CPUC notes that at this point in time both the cap and the price limit are set to expire unless the CPUC takes action to extend or modify it.

Timing

The Proposed Decision will not be on the CPUC’s voting meeting agenda for at least 30 days from the date the PD was issued.

What this means for CA SRECs

Although the implementation of a TREC market in California is a step in the right direction for SRECs, it does not provide the same market dynamics created by a RPS solar carve out as implemented in the other SREC states. Typically, in a general REC program, as structured by the CPUC, larger capacity renewable energy projects, such as wind, dominate the market. Additionally, the current guidelines instituted by the California Energy Commission (CEC) and CPUC on RPS project eligibility do not include customer-side distributed generation (i.e. the majority of residential and commercial rooftop solar systems).

The CEC RPS eligibility guidebook states that both the CEC and CPUC play a role in determining RPS implementation for renewable distributed generation (DG) facilities. The good news is that both the CPUC and CEC allow system owners to retain 100% of the RECs associated with the energy produced even if the owner has participated in a ratepayer-funded program such as the CPUC’s California Solar Initiative (CSI) or the CEC’s New Solar Homes Partnership program. The bad news is that these systems are considered DG facilities and are not RPS eligible unless the CPUC authorizes TRECs to be applied to the RPS.

Now you might be thinking that the proposed decision issued by the CPUC is good news for distributed generation solar, but unfortunately like a lot of things in the REC world it isn’t that clear cut. The PD issued by the CPUC states that, “although there are technologies that can be used for customer-side renewable DG, most current installations are not in fact RPS-eligible because they have not been certified by the CEC.” Seems like a circular argument, but this is what the most recent documents state. The PD goes on to provide similar detail as the CEC that states, “in anticipation of the eventual use of customer-side DG for RPS compliance” the system owner will maintain full control over the RECs associated with their renewable energy generation.

Based on both the PD issued by the CPUC and the revised CEC RPS eligibility guidebook it appears that the groups intend to incorporate distributed generation into the RPS compliance program, but are not ready to make the commitment at this point in time. This appears to follow in line with the process California has taken in implementing a REC market. As indicated by our guest blogger, David Niebauer, California has taken its time in launching a REC program; SB 107 was passed in 2006 and gave the CPUC express authority to use TRECs for RPS compliance. It appears that the CPUC and CEC want to get a feel for how the existing structure of the TREC market will play out before approving DG projects or potentially creating a DG/Solar carve out.

Implementing a CA SREC Program

But couldn’t the CPUC and CEC approve distributed generation projects, create a carve out for these technologies, and slowly increase or reevaluate the requirements over time? From our perspective this would be great and act as a catalyst to continue pushing residential and commercial solar in the state of California. Not only would a solar carve out help increase the generation of renewable electricity, New Jersey is second to California in solar installations, but it would help push a strong solar economy in California. In the PD, the Alliance for Retail Energy Markets (AReM) states that, “…CSI will have provided incentives for approximately 1,100 GWh by 2011.” Based on 2008 electricity figures, 1,100 GWh equates to approximately 0.4% of California’s total electricity sales. This is 0.4% that will not be counted towards meeting California’s RPS targets. Hopefully the CPUC and CEC will consider the implementation of a solar/distributed generation carve out and help drive a strong solar industry in California while achieving the RPS requirements CA’s IOUs are required to meet.

CA RPS Eligible Solar

Solar systems that do not fall into the customer-side DG category may be RPS eligible and could be qualified to participate in the CA TREC market.

We are constantly staying on top of developments in the CA market and are currently working on solutions for both CA RPS eligible and ineligible solar generating units. For more information please contact us at 877-466-4606 or customerservice@srectrade.com.

For access to the CPUC Proposed Decision click here. For access to the revised, draft CEC Renewables Portfolio Standard Eligibility guidebook click here.

Subscribe

California TRECs – Making a Comeback

New Jersey Enacts “OREC” Market for Offshore Wind

Thursday, September 2nd, 2010

To catalyze the development of offshore wind farms, New Jersey has enacted legislation creating a carve-out for offshore wind generation within the NJ Renewable Portfolio Standard.  Commodities known as “Offshore Renewable Energy Certificates” (ORECs), essentially the offshore wind equivalents of SRECs, will have to be obtained by electricity suppliers to demonstrate that a percentage of their electricity has come from offshore wind.  This “Offshore Wind Economic Development Act” was signed by Governor Chris Christie on August 19th and may be necessary for New Jersey to reach its RPS goals from in-state resources.  As currently designed, the NJ RPS requires that 22.5% of energy come from renewable sources by 2021.

Proponents argue that this new OREC market will make NJ a national leader in offshore wind production and create green jobs, just as the high incentives from the SREC market  have made the State a solar powerhouse (In the US, NJ is second only to California in solar installations).  Opponents are skeptical of the costs involved, and estimates from business groups claim the price tag may be as high as $14 billion.  While offshore wind has inherently high fixed costs, due to in part to necessary transmission lines and other construction challenges, a market-based RPS is likely the most efficient way to incentivize a promising technology and ease the financing concerns of developers.

This legislation reinforces New Jersey’s status as a national leader in renewable energy development.  The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities has 180 days to determine the exact design of the OREC program, including the percentage of energy electricity suppliers must obtain from offshore sources.

The move to an OREC market is another example of the success that the SREC market has had in New Jersey.  Since launching in 2004, New Jersey’s SREC program has become a template for reaching RPS solar goals in several states.  That template is now being applied to other types of renewable energy.  In this case, the off-shore wind industry will benefit.

More information can be found here.

New Jersey Enacts “OREC” Market for Offshore Wind