-    The solar industry wants more, much more rooftop solar and bigger, much bigger subsidies to support solar   installations

-    The energy efficiency folks what more, much more investment in measures to stem the demand for electricity

-    The renewables and energy efficiency representatives want separate goals/requirements for renewables and energy efficiency to match the mandates of the ACC

-    Industrial customers appreciate the move to greater sustainability through renewables and energy efficiency, but are concerned about having to pay more in their bills to support these investments

-    Residential customers want more energy from renewables, particularly from solar and are willing to pay more to get them – but are not willing to pay much more to get them.

-    And, as SRP struggles to find the proper level of spending on renewables and energy efficiency, AIC wants SRP’s financial health to remain strong in support of investors and investment

Having attended all three workshops, it’s clear to me that SRP management is serious about reducing its reliance on fossil fuels and moving toward a cleaner energy future.  It’s also clear to me that the effort to balance the self-interests of solar stakeholders against the rate increase pressures on customers, while maintaining strong financial footing with current and future investors is daunting, to say the least.

Unlike the investor-owned utility (IOU) power companies who fall under the “command and control oversight” of the ACC, SRP’s decisions on renewable and energy efficiency investments are made by its Board of Directors, since it is technically an agricultural improvement district and, therefore, a type of government entity that provides electric power to customers.  Nevertheless, it has been SRP’s practice to somewhat mirror its portfolio after the mandate imposed on IOUs by the ACC.  That requirement requires obtaining 15 percent of its power from renewable sources by the year 2025.  In all fairness, SRP includes energy efficiency and hydro power in its sustainability portfolio.

SRP currently spends $100 million on its portfolio of sustainable resources with an average price tag to residential customers of about $4.50 per month.

A big difference between SRP’s approach in setting its sustainability goals and that undertaken by the ACC is that SRP went directly to its residential customers with a survey to assess attitudes toward renewables, energy efficiency, and related price increases.  The ACC, while inviting input from stakeholder groups, did not probe residential customer tolerance for renewables/price tradeoffs by undertaking a systematic survey of customer attitudes.

So, SRP management surveyed, then listened through 3 days of discussions and presentations from stakeholders and customers to arrive at a recommendation to present to its Board of Directors for action on May 23 (the Board will also discuss the recommendations with the public on April 18).  The recommendation presented at the final workshop held April 1st includes:

-    Increasing the FY 2012 goal to 8% (the current mid-term goal is 5% by 2015)

-    Increasing the goal to 18% from 15% by 2025

-    Further increasing the goal to 20% by 2020 through building codes and standards, behavioral programs and purchasing renewable energy credits.

Will this recommendation please all stakeholder groups? No, absolutely not.  In fact, some participants might lip-sync to another Rolling Stones song, “I can’t get no satisfaction” to describe the outcome.

At the end of the day, though, I thought the result was balanced.

And, it is true – you can’t always get what you want.  But we WILL get what we need – safe and reliable power, less pollution, and reasonable costs.