My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
10A Action Items 2016 1121
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2016
>
Packet 2016 1121
>
10A Action Items 2016 1121
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/16/2016 5:08:45 PM
Creation date
11/16/2016 5:08:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Agenda
Document Date (6)
11/21/2016
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
Reso 2016-160
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Resolutions\2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
121
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
c. Scenario 3 – Aggressive Renewable Growth - The Renewable portfolio set at 50% in the first year and increased to 80% by the fifth year; large hydro could <br />also make up a portion of the non-renewable component; <br />d. Scenario 4 – Very Aggressive Local Renewable Investment – Similar to Scenario <br />2, but with an increased emphasis on in-county renewable development: Assumes that one-half of the CCA’s total renewable energy goals would be met by in-county resources by the year 2030. <br /> <br />The Technical Study concludes: <br /> Feasibility for a CCA in Alameda County is favorable; current and expected market <br />and regulatory conditions suggest that an Alameda County CCA should be able to <br />offer residents and businesses electric rates that are a cent or more per kilowatt- <br />hour (6 – 7 percent) lower cost than that available from PG&E under most scenarios. <br />The sensitivity analyses suggest that these results are relatively robust; only when very high amounts of renewable energy are assumed in the CCA portfolio (such as <br />Scenario 3), combined with other negative factors, do PG&E’s rates become <br />consistently more favorable than the CCA’s rates. <br /> <br /> An Alameda County CCA could help facilitate greater amounts of renewable electricity generation to be developed in Alameda County. The study assumed a <br />relatively conservative amount of local renewable generation, about 175 Megawatts <br />(MW) over 10 years, but other studies suggest that the potential is higher. <br /> <br /> The CCA could reduce greenhouse gas emissions relative to PG&E, but only under <br />certain circumstances. Because PG&E’s supply portfolio has significant carbon-free <br />generation (large hydroelectric and nuclear generators), the CCA must contract for <br />significant amounts of carbon-free power (such as large hydroelectric) beyond the <br />required qualifying renewables in order to actually reduce the county’s electric <br />carbon footprint. If carbon reductions are a priority for the CCA, a concerted effort to <br />contract with hydroelectric or other carbon-free generators will be needed. <br /> <br /> A CCA can offer positive economic development and employment benefits both in <br />the area and beyond. Each Scenario analyzed was found to create hundreds or <br />thousands of jobs at the local and / or regional levels, with the proportion of local <br />jobs dependent on the degree of direct local renewable energy investment, and the total regional jobs dependent mostly on indirect multiplier effects resulting from reduced electric rates and the corresponding additional purchasing power of <br />individual consumers and businesses. In each case, the larger benefit to area jobs <br />shown by the Technical Study comes not from direct investment in local energy, but <br />from reduced electric rates; residents, and more importantly businesses, can spend <br />and reinvest their bill savings, and thus generate greater economic impacts in the local economy. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.