Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

FW: PUCT Efficiency Rule to be Considered

Expand Messages
  • David Power
    Here is a letter from Bob King on the new Energy Efficiency rule in front of the PUC, its open for public comment, More support means more money for energy
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 15, 2008
      PUCT Efficiency Rule to be Considered

      Here is a letter from Bob King on the new Energy Efficiency rule in front of the PUC, its open for public comment, More support means more money for energy efficiency.

       

       

       

      Friends,
      It was great to be with all of you at the recent TREIA policy workshop, and I look forward to working along side you toward the next legislative session in 2009.  As we discussed in the solar policy group meeting, however, there is an important opportunity to help affect policy right now!  As we discussed in the roundtable, the legislature passed legislation that increases funding for demand-side management programs in areas of Texas where there is competition (Coops and Muni areas remain self-regulating).  The law has stimulated the PUCT to reconsider and revise the existing rules underwhich utilities operate the efficiency incentive programs.  At this point the PUCT has held hearings, taken public comment, and published a proposed Rule (Project 33487).  We anticipate that the rule will come up on the 22nd of February for consideration and final adoption by the Commissioners.  Mostly the news is good.  The commission rules have already allowed on-site solar or "demand-side renewable" resources to qualify for the program incentives, and this new rule will set a higher "avoided cost" value for defering or delying the need for additional power generation.  And that will in turn allow utilities to increase energy payments. But, the proposed rule does not include in the value of energy savings, or renewable energy, the value of transmission and distribution costs that are delayed or defered or avoided.  Fortunately, we were able to have the staff include in the preamble to the proposed rule a question as to whether T&D avoided costs should be credited to demand-side resources.  WE SAY YES, and ask you to help us communicate the importance of this to the Commission.  While this will not avoid the need to go back to the legislature for further support, it will be a step in the right direction.

      Attached is a letter dealing with the avoided cost calculation formula.  Thank you in advance for your support.

       

      <<...>>   <<...>>

      Robert J. King, PE
      President
      Good Company Associates
      816 Congress Avenue, Suite 1400
      Austin, Texas 78701
      512-279-0751 phone
      512-279-0760 fax
      www.GoodCompanyAssociates.com


      No virus found in this incoming message.
      Checked by AVG Free Edition.
      Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.10/1241 - Release Date: 1/24/2008 9:58 AM

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.