1. The Future of Renewable Energy in New England
Alan Nogee
Director, Climate & Energy Policy & Strategy
Union of Concerned Scientists
Mass. Restructuring Roundtable
Boston, MA
September 17, 2010
NOAA

2. Renewable Electricity Standards
29 States + D.C.
NH: 23.8%
by 2025
ME: 40% by 2017
15% by 2020
VT: 10% of 2005 sales by 2013
15% by 2015
10% by
2015
27.4% by
2025
RI: 16% by 2019
20.2% by 2025
MA: 20+% by 2025
10% by
2015
30%
by 2015
10% by
2015
10% by
2015
CT: 23% by 2020
NJ: 22.5% by 2020
2% by
1999
8% by
2020
25% by 2025
MD: 20% by 2022
12.5% by 2025
25% by 2025
DE: 20% by 2019
20% by
2025
30%
by 2020
DC: 20% by 2020
33% by
2020
20% by 2020
15%
by 2021
VA: 15% by 2022
11.2%
by 2021
15% by 2025
16.2% by 2020
*MN has a 30% by 2020 standard for Xcel Energy, and a 25% by 2025 standard for all other utilities. CO and NM have a 20% by 2020 standard for investor-owned utilities, and a 10% by 2020 standard for other utilities. OR has a 25% by 2025 standard for large utilities, and a 5% or 10% by 2025 standard for smaller utilities, depending on their size.
** In addition to their requirements, IA has a 1,000 MW (~10%) by 2010 goal, and ME has a 10% new resources by 2017 goal. IL, MO, and VA, and VT have renewable energy goals, with no specific enforcement measures.
Standard
Standard and Goal
Voluntary Goal
5,880 MW (~5.5%) by 2015
HI: 40% by 2030

3. Renewable energy needed to meet state standardsHI CA
~ 100,000 MW by 2025 NV
AZ & NM
OR & WA
CO & MT TX MN
IA & WI MO IL MI OH NC MD PA
DC & DE NJ NY
CT, RI & NH MA ME

4. Actual US wind capacity growth thru 2009 > DOE 20% by 2030 ramp-up goal
20x30 annual additions
>2x projected level in DOE study
3-4 years ahead of schedule
Actual annual additions
Data source: AWEA

6. Wind energy generally competitive from 2000-2008
Source: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2008

11. Mass: all the ingredients for leading clean energy cluster
Offshore wind potential:
MA 200 GW
N.E. 456 GW
Source: NREL
Source: Clean Energy Council

12. Care more about RE imports than FF imports
Care more about RE imports than FF imports? 3rd in US for foreign coal imports $206 m leaving Massachusetts

13. Conclusion
Drivers all still in place: diversity, security, global warming, economic development opportunities
Recognize full value of diversity, hedging against
avoiding fossil fuel price spikes, shortages
avoiding carbon reg costs
avoiding other fuel-cycle cleanup risks/costs
Siting reform!
Pioneer emerging technology with long-term low-cost potential
gain competitive advantage, lower long-run costs
Fair consideration of imports
openness to transmission
Find new ways to boost local renewables that avoid trade barrier litigation, risks; build on our strengths
Consider additional life-cycle analysis, e.g., hydro
Federal RES, tax extenders, carbon price!

14. Thank you. Any questions?
Alan Nogee On
There is no easy solution to this problem; the challenge is how best to develop options that are feasible, efficient, viable and scalable.
In closing, I’d like to say that we are on the brink of a major transformation of our energy economy. But we won’t achieve that transformation unless we demand that members of both major political parties put long-term and consistent policies in place to ensure this success. The world is not going to wait for us to decide.
Our investments in science and technology have led to unprecedented prosperity and health. Historically, we have demonstrated the courage to seek the next pioneering frontier even in the face of those who said it shouldn’t or couldn’t be done. We are now at a moment in our history when scientists are telling us that hesitation will cost us dearly. As before, we must not shrink from our responsibility. Thank you very much.

16. All generation construction costs have increased significantly – consider escalation risks of other lo-carbon techs