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
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

2
K E M A - X E N E R G Y
Data Sources and Methods
RPS Demand
Solar PV Demand
Used updated estimates from Union of
Concerned Scientists (1/03/05) for nonCA 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






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
3
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
4
K E M A - X E N E R G Y
Existing State RPS Requirements: 18
States and Washington D.C.
ME: 30% by 2000
MN (Xcel): 825 MW wind by
2007 + 10% by 2015
WI: 2.2% by 2011
NY: 24% by 2013
NV: 15% by 2013
IA: 105 aMW
CA: 20% by 2010
CO: 10% by 2015
PA: 8% by 2020
MD: 7.5% by 2019
MA: 4% new by 2009
RI: 16% by 2019
CT: 10% by 2010
NJ: 6.5% by 2008
DC: 11% by 2022
NM: 10% by 2011
AZ: 1.1% by 2007
HI: 20% by 2020
TX: 2880 MW by 2009
5
K E M A - X E N E R G Y
Solar Set-Asides: 6 States and
Washington, D.C.
NY: 0.1542% customer- sited
PV, fuel cells, wind by 2013
NV: 0.75% solar by 2013
PA: 0.5% solar PV by 2020
NJ: 0.16% solar by 2008
DC: 0.386% solar by 2021
CO: 0.4% solar by 2015 (half
from customer-sited projects)
AZ: 0.66% solar by 2007
6
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

7
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
8
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
9
K E M A - X E N E R G Y
Cumulative New Renewable Energy Capacity:
CA and Other RPS States (2000-2017)
Cumulative New Renewable Energy Capacity (MW)
30,000
California
Other RPS States
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
10
K E M A - X E N E R G Y
Cumulative New Renewable Energy Generation:
CA and Other RPS States (2000-2017)
Cumulative New Renewable Energy Generation (GWh)
120,000
California
Other RPS States
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
11
K E M A - X E N E R G Y
Non-CA New Renewable Energy
Capacity (2000-2017)
18,000
16,000
Iowa, Rhode Island,
Hawaii, D.C.
Wisconsin
New Mexico
Arizona
Connecticut
New Jersey
Colorado
14,000
Maryland
Massachusetts
12,000
Nevada
10,000
Texas
8,000
Minnesota
6,000
Pennsylvania
4,000
2,000
New York
0
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
20
15
20
16
20
17
Cumulative New Renewable Energy Capacity (MW)
20,000
12
K E M A - X E N E R G Y
Non-CA New Renewable Energy
Generation (2000-2017)
70,000
60,000
Iowa, Rhode Island,
Hawaii, D.C.
Arizona
Wisconsin
New Mexico
Connecticut
Colorado
New Jersey
Maryland
50,000
Massachusetts
Texas
40,000
Minnesota
30,000
Nevada
Pennsylvania
20,000
10,000
New York
0
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
20
15
20
16
20
17
Cumulative New Renewable Energy Generation (GWh)
80,000
13
or
ni
a
al
if
e
Pe w Y
or
nn
k
sy
lv
an
M
ia
in
ne
so
ta
Te
xa
s
N
M
e
as
v
sa a da
ch
us
et
ts
M
ar
yl
an
d
C
ol
or
a
N
ew do
Je
r
C
on sey
ne
ct
ic
u
Ar t
iz
N
ew ona
M
ex
ic
W
o
is
co
ns
in
R
ho Iow
W
a
as de I
sl
hi
a
ng
to nd
n,
D
.C
.
H
aw
ai
i
M
ai
ne
N
C
New Renewable Energy Capacity by 2017 (MW)
K E M A - X E N E R G Y
New Renewable Energy Capacity by 2017
8,000
7,000
Total: 25,778 MW
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
14
or
ni
N
ew a
Pe
Yo
nn
rk
sy
lv
an
ia
N
ev
M a da
in
ne
so
ta
M
T
as
ex
sa
as
ch
us
et
ts
M
ar
yl
N
a
ew nd
Je
rs
e
C
ol y
or
C
on ado
ne
c
N
ew ticu
M t
e
W xico
is
co
ns
in
Ar
R
i
ho zon
W
d
a
e
as
Is
hi
ng lan
d
to
n,
D
.C
.
Io
w
a
H
aw
ai
i
M
ai
ne
al
if
C
New Renewable Energy Generation by 2017 (GWh)
K E M A - X E N E R G Y
New Renewable Energy Generation by 2017
35,000
30,000
Total: 102,650 GWh
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
15
ifo
N rnia
e
Pe w
nn Y o
sy rk
lv
an
N ia
e
M vad
in
ne a
so
ta
M
as Te
sa
x
ch as
us
M etts
a
N ryla
ew n
d
Je
r
C sey
ol
C ora
on
d
ne o
c
N
ew ticu
M t
e
W xic
o
is
co
ns
in
A
R
riz
h
o
W
o
as de na
hi
I
ng sla
to nd
n,
D
.C
.
Io
w
a
H
aw
ai
M i
ai
ne
al
30%
25%
3.5
% of retail sales (left scale)
MWh per capita (right scale)
5%
0%
3.0
2.5
20%
2.0
15%
1.5
10%
1.0
0.5
New Renewable Energy Generation by 2017
per Capita (MWh divided by 2003 population)
C
New Renewable Energy Generation by 2017
as Percent of 2002 Total Retail Sales (%)
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
0.0
16
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
17
K E M A - X E N E R G Y
Non-California PV Generation, Low and
High (2000-2025)
High Case
Low Case
1,800,000
1,800,000
1,600,000
1,600,000
N.J. base
D.C. base
1,000,000
800,000
Penn. base
600,000
400,000
200,000
0
Colorado low
Nevada low
Arizona low
New York low
1,400,000
1,200,000
Penn. base
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
Colorado high
400,000
Nevada high
200,000
Arizona high
New York high
0
20
0
20 0
0
20 1
0
20 2
0
20 3
0
20 4
0
20 5
0
20 6
0
20 7
0
20 8
0
20 9
1
20 0
1
20 1
1
20 2
1
20 3
1
20 4
1
20 5
1
20 6
1
20 7
1
20 8
1
20 9
2
20 0
2
20 1
2
20 2
2
20 3
2
20 4
25
N.J. base
Solar Photovoltaic Generation (MWh)
1,200,000
20
0
20 0
0
20 1
0
20 2
0
20 3
0
20 4
0
20 5
0
20 6
0
20 7
0
20 8
0
20 9
1
20 0
1
20 1
1
20 2
1
20 3
1
20 4
1
20 5
1
20 6
1
20 7
1
20 8
1
20 9
2
20 0
2
20 1
2
20 2
2
20 3
2
20 4
25
Solar Photovoltaic Generation (MWh)
D.C. base
1,400,000
18
K E M A - X E N E R G Y
Non-California PV Capacity, Low and
High (2000-2025)
High Case
Low Case
1,200
1,200
N.J. base
D.C. base
800
D.C. base
600
Penn. base
400
Solar Photovoltaic Capacity (MW)
1,000
N.J. base
800
Penn. base
600
400
Colorado high
Nevada high
200
200
Arizona high
Colorado low
Nevada low
Arizona low
New York low
New York high
0
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
20
15
20
16
20
17
20
18
20
19
20
20
20
21
20
22
20
23
20
24
20
25
0
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
20
15
20
16
20
17
20
18
20
19
20
20
20
21
20
22
20
23
20
24
20
25
Solar Photovoltaic Capacity (MW)
1,000
19
K E M A - X E N E R G Y
PV Generation by 2020
2,000,000
Solar Photovoltaic Generation by 2020 (MWh)
1,800,000
4,730,400
1,600,000
1,400,000
1,200,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
0
low
high
New York
low
high
Arizona
low
high
Nevada
low
high
Colorado
base
base
base
Penn.
D.C.
N.J.
low
high
Total Non-CA
2004
2018
California
20
K E M A - X E N E R G Y
PV Capacity by 2020
1,200
Solar Photovoltaic Capacity by 2020 (MW)
3,000
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
low
high
New York
low
high
Arizona
low
high
Nevada
low
high
Colorado
base
base
base
Penn.
D.C.
N.J.
low
high
Total Non-CA
2004
2018
California
21
K E M A - X E N E R G Y
PV Generation by 2020 as Percent of
2002 Load and 2003 Population
140.0
% of retail sales (left scale)
kWh per capita (right scale)
120.0
2.0%
100.0
1.5%
80.0
60.0
1.0%
40.0
0.5%
20.0
0.0%
Solar Photovoltaic Generation by 2020 per Capita
(kWh divided by 2003 population)
Solar Photovoltaic Generation by 2020 as Percent of
2002 Total Retail Sales (%)
2.5%
0.0
low
high
New York
low
high
Arizona
low
high
Nevada
low
high
Colorado
base
base
base
Penn.
D.C.
N.J.
2004
2018
California
22