SunRun, the nation’s leading home solar company, has released an official report on how local governments can save $1 billion over the next five years and make solar affordable for 50 percent of American homes.  The report, “The Impact of Local Permitting on the Cost of Solar Power,” reveals that inconsistent local solar permitting and inspection processes add an average of over $2,500 per home installation. A direct response to the Department of Energy’s (DOE) request for granular data on non-equipment solar costs, the report specifies how the DOE can take immediate action to solve local permitting problems and reduce unnecessary costs.

“Every city and town has its own set of regulations and requirements for solar installations. Our research identifies inconsistencies in local permitting as one of the most critical roadblocks to a sustainable, subsidy-free solar industry,” said SunRun CEO and Co-founder Edward Fenster. “To tackle this challenge head-on, the DOE can use existing guidelines it has already funded to standardize local permitting and deliver the equivalent of a new $1 billion solar subsidy over five years.”

In the report, solar installers nationwide say repeatedly that local permitting is the most stubborn cost they face, preventing them from making solar affordable for millions of Americans. By comparison, countries such as Germany have simpler processes that keep solar installation costs 40 percent lower than in the United States. Germany reports about one million new home solar power installations in the past two years alone, whereas the total number of homes ever to go solar in the United States has just broken 120,000. SunRun’s report recommends the DOE lead a new Residential Solar Permitting Initiative, starting with high-volume cities that impact more than 50 percent of the solar market. The recommendations include a contest with grant rewards for cities that make the most effective and comprehensive improvements.

“Local permitting red tape keeps solar off of millions of American homes and businesses and seriously jeopardizes our ability to be competitive with entrenched fossil fuels,” said Rhone Resch, president and CEO of SEIA. “Policymakers need to recognize that these additional costs put an undue burden on new, clean technologies like solar that are trying to create jobs in the U.S.”

Endorsements for SunRun’s report underscore the industry’s sense of urgency when it comes to standardizing the permitting process. A coalition of 22 leading installers from across the country endorse the report, including HelioPower, as well as industry organizations such as The Sierra Club, SolarTech, and Vote Solar. The report is currently under review with the DOE and available at www.sunrunhome.com/permitting.

Source: SunRun

Moderated by Eric Wesoff of Greentech Media, the panel includes Mike Arenson, President, Arenson Solar; James Hoffman, President of solar startup, Sun Synchrony; Noah Long, Energy Program Attorney, National Resources Defense Council; Marc St Raymond, Recurve and Mary Tucker, City of San Jose Environmental Services Department. 

The panel will explore the investment and innovation opportunities needed for California to meet the state's energy needs and the RPS goals for 2020 at an 'affordable' price.  It will explore:  What are the 2010 California needs vs. projected 2030 needs? What part of the gap will renewables be able to fill?  What policy and legislation are needed to bridge the gap? What is the impact of delaying the implementation of AB-32?  What are the investment and job growth opportunities in bridging the gap?

Ty Jagerson, recently named president of energy solutions firm, HelioPower, will address “Integrated Renewables: Building and Financing Profitable New Energy Solutions.”  As part of the panel, “Forward Looking Analysis of the Energy Gap” his subject will cover : Why and how a more integrated approach to renewables is needed;  PV: a key building block in the renewables mix;  Energy Efficiency: the lonely stepchild;  The role of finance in expanding clean energy and On the horizon for new technology solutions.

Startup company Sun Synchrony will talk about their solar-energy products based on their revolutionary ArcSol modular architecture of self-orienting CPV (concentrating photovoltaic) elements.

For more information and registration including onsite ticket sales, please go to the EcoGreen registration page at http://ecoggfallforum.eventbrite.com/

HelioPower Solar Energy Consultant

Like most of my colleagues at HelioPower, I joined the solar industry because of my concern for our environment.  As a recreational outdoorsman, I appreciate the need to escape the city and spend time in our undeveloped wilderness areas as often as possible. The more I understood the detrimental effects on both our environment and our health from conventional energy production, the more I wanted to be a part of the solution! With it’s proven technology, helping homeowners and businesses go solar is one of the fastest and best ways to make an impact.

Although the environment is what attracted me to solar, I find myself spending most of my time discussing money. While almost everyone would agree that we should be environmentally responsible, our own budgets usually are a big determinant in our ability to commit. Fortunately over the last few years, solar electricity generation has become affordable and an extremely attractive investment. Investment in the form of government tax credits and stakeholder subsidies has driven this cost reduction and prices are now the same or lower as utility rates in many parts of the country.

Economics aside, we must never forget the environment.

By almost every measure, the energy source that causes the greatestdestruction of our environment and degradation of our health is coal. Burning coal generates 54% of the electricity consumed in the U.S. (and 70% in China!) and virtually every step of the process including mining, transporting, burning, and disposing of the remnants represents an environmental as well as human catastrophe.

To start, the most economical method of getting to the coal is by using explosives to literally blow away the surface of earth covering the veins of coal. In 2006, 1.72 million metric tons of explosives were used for coal removal. The remaining contaminated earth is then pushed into adjacent areas destroying life and fouling nearby watersheds.

Next the coal must be broken up and transported via trucks to be burned at the power plants. This uses a tremendous amount of fossil fuel. The trucks also require new roads and introduce tons of exhaust fumes into the mountains of the mostly rural coal-rich areas. Burning the coal to generate electricity then releases millions of more tons of pollutants into the atmosphere. In fact, burning coal is the number one source of air-pollution in the US.

The coal industry, sensing a turning tide, markets the term “Clean Coal.” This is an oxymoron. Their theory is that scrubbers will remove many of the solid particulates that become airborne during combustion. These particulates are then collected into toxic slurry, which is then transported, again via truck to be buried underground further threatening groundwater supplies. Remarkably, some of this by-product called fly ash is used as a soil amendment!

Two recent events underscore the dangers of coal –  the billion ton sludge spill in Harriman, Tennessee in  20o8 and the West Virginia mine explosion that killed 29 miners in April of this year. These events drive home the fact that coal is devastating to the environment and puts human life at risk. As James Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Sciences, concludes phasing out emissions from coal “is 80% of the solution to the global warming crisis.”

By contrast, solar panels, once assembled and installed, passively sit in the sun producing electricity for decades and emit nothing!

Installing a solar power system today will not eliminate coal-generated

HelioPower solar installation team!

electricity. But millions of homes and businesses installing solar panels as well as other energy efficiency measures over the next decade will reduce our coal dependency significantly!

My mid-life career change into solar was motivated by my desire to positively effect our environment. Every system HelioPower brings online represents a step in the right direction.

We don’t have to drop what we’re doing and go back to the stone age; I’m a firm believer in the possibility of a future of sustainable energy and food sources, one that creates a future where our children enjoy an even higher quality of life than ours! However, to realize this future, we must assume responsibility and become part of the solution. Relatively small steps like eliminating bottled water, buying sustainable foods, and backyard composting, or more substantial commitments like installing solar panels on your home repeated hundreds of thousands and soon millions of times by concerned consumers will start this process. Don’t wait for your utility company or grocer to change their ways – you can help get this green ball rolling in the right direction right now!

Contact Derek at DGirling@HelioPower.com

To many people, Memorial Day means a hot barbeque, a much welcome three-day weekend, and the beginning of summer vacation. It's easy to forget the significance of the holiday, which, originally called Decoration Day, is a commemoration of U.S. citizens who died while in military service.

Memorial Day, originally enacted after the American Civil War, is an historical reminder of the virtues and values that our country has believed to be worth fighting for—equal rights, democracy, freedom.

This Memorial Day, I'd like to pay special homage to the individuals who have sacrificed their lives for the sake of our nation's current leading cause: energy. These courageous warriors have given us the tremendous gift our luxurious Western lifestyle.

In honor of the people have who died this past year in the explosion on the Deep Water Horizon, in collapsed mines, and on the battlefields of the Middle-East, I challenge each of us this Memorial Day weekend to determine what we can do to turn the tide in the losing battle for oil.

It's time to fight for a new kind of freedom—freedom from the tyranny and hypocrisy that enables terrorism; freedom from closed markets that enable the suppression of clean energy alternatives; freedom from the business greed that enables horrific disasters like the runaway BP oil spill.

It's time for our nation, and our global community, to add proper stewardship to the list of values that we hold dear. A religious man would say that this type of stewardship is our God-given right. A scientist would say that it is a responsibility that we need to respect in order to ensure the proper functioning of global environmental services. An atheist would say that it is simply good common sense.

It's time to enter into the Sustainability Age. Let us turn our swords into plowshares and our military might into creative ideas that will stimulate our economy and preserve our natural world.

Please write to me at sara@greenbuildermag.com with your thoughts about how we can win our energy wars.

For more information about clean, green "USA energy" generated from solar power please visit us at HelioPower.

The world is poised for the third industrial revolution, said economist Woodrow Clark, a keynote speaker at Butte College's third annual Sustainability Conference, which continues today.

Clark was among members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with former Vice President Al Gore.

That effort, which included members from 130 countries, created greater understanding of man-made climate change and shared information about what remedies are needed.

Before the report to the United Nations, there was not consensus that climate change was due to human activity, and the United States (then under the Clinton Administration) provided the most vocal opposition to that idea.

With the report and stronger consensus among leaders across the globe, those protests have waned.

The second industrial revolution relied on fossil fuels and has lasted 100 years, Clark said during an afternoon presentation.

The third industrial revolution will involve renewable resources and "leveraging resources in a way that doesn't keep violating our environment," he said.

"We live in a world where what we do here impacts other parts of the world," and vice versa, he said.

And the way that developed countries use resources is affecting the world climate.

But things can change.

He used the example of Mongolia. The area is rich in coal, a resource used throughout the world for energy production. Clark said that current discussions are about "clean coal," which he said is an oxymoron.
Mongolia is intriguing because the area does not need to transition from coal to fossil fuels, he said.

Mongolia, with natural resources including wind, geothermal and sun, has the opportunity to leap-frog past the fossil fuel era and go right into what Clark envisions as the third industrial revolution.

He cited Germany, which most Americans do not realize is the leader in solar energy.

The country is cold and rainy, but the nation's willpower to use solar has put it at the top of the solar list.

He said the rest of the world should not wait to shift over to renewable resources merely because existing energy sources are cheaper right now.

The hybrid car is nothing new, Clark continued. However, as the use of automobiles grew there was a decision that fossil fuels would be the route taken.

"We have now reached the peak of oil and gas" supplies, Clark said, showing charts of current dwindling supplies.

Some people argue that nuclear power generation is the next step, but there, too, known supplies are dwindling. Clark's slides stated that uranium supplies would only last another 61 years.

The current state of resources "allows us to all have a paradigm change," he continued.

Recent history has shown us that supply-side economics does not work, Clark said. If it did, the current economic recession would not have hit world leaders by surprise.

Another recent economic disaster was California's energy reform, which was, in theory, to increase competition and lower prices. Instead, profits for energy suppliers skyrocketed, Clark noted.

He lauded the community colleges, including Butte, that have invested in renewable energy and have not waited for the rest of the world to lead the way.

Businesses, such as the car industry, have failed to capitalize on new innovations. As an example, Clark pointed to technology used in the Toyota Prius. The car has a regenerative braking system, developed by the U.S. Department of Energy, which allows the battery to be recharged through the vehicle's braking system.

The U.S. auto industry was given first right of refusal on the technology, he said.

Now, Japan is selling the Prius to consumers in the United States.

"We have to stop this," he said.

He predicted China will soon become the biggest producer of electric and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.

Clark also said that the current energy grid system, with central production and mass distribution, should become history.

For renewable energy, different technologies should not be isolated, but can be considered as a whole, he said. Each building can be considered for how it can be self-sustaining — solar panels on roofs, wind generators along freeways.

Other options, not yet fully developed, could include anaerobic digesters that create fuel from waste products.

He also said in California, water districts could be working with the energy sector on how to move water while generating power.

Clark also criticized the state government leadership. Four years ago, the state had Proposition 98 on the ballot, which narrowly failed in a state vote. The measure would have taxed oil and gasoline in ways similar to what is done in Texas and Oklahoma.

If that had been done, the state would have an estimated $4 billion to $6 billion in tax revenue, he said.

Instead, the state is now bankrupt, Clark continued. "Chevron funded the opposition."

He also was critical of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's actions to lower automobile licensing fees, which would have generated billions in revenue.

For a national approach to a new energy path, Clark said he would like to see the president create a new department of sustainability. This would take an overall look at things such as energy, agriculture, transportation, defense, economics and the environment, so that these issues do not overlap, and all have a sustainable goal.

Clark's book "Qualitative Economics: Toward a Science of Economics," was published in 2008. His next work "Sustainable Communities" will be published in November.

America confronts three interrelated crises: an economic crisis, a climate crisis and an energy security crisis. We believe there's a fourth: a competitiveness crisis. This crisis is particularly evident in America's worldwide standing in the next great global industry, green technology.

There is no topic of greater importance to America's economic future. The question is whether the United States will lead or lag in tomorrow's global energy markets. And the difference between these two futures is dramatic.

Energy in the United States costs more than $1 trillion a year — for oil, coal, natural gas, nuclear and renewables. This is on top of a similar sum spent on the things that use this energy — our homes, shops, factories and cars. That means about $2 trillion a year is at stake right here.

Do we want to win the race to lead the next great global industry, clean energy? That is the choice before us.

We are clearly not in the lead today. That position is held by China, which understands the importance of controlling its energy future. China's commitment to developing clean energy technologies and markets is breathtaking.

Consider: Chinese cars are more than one-third more fuel-efficient than U.S. cars. China is investing 10 times as much on clean power, as a percentage of gross domestic product, as the United States is. China is on track to create 150,000 jobs through the deployment of 120 gigawatts of wind power by 2020 — an amount equivalent to today's global total and nearly five times America's. As a result, China is already curbing its carbon emissions substantially. This year alone, it will abate almost 350 million tons of CO2, as compared with business as usual. That's as much as is emitted by Argentina.

What do Amazon, eBay, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo have in common? Two things: They are the world's five leading Internet technology companies, and they are all American. But when it comes to wind power, the most mature of the clean-energy sectors, of the top five manufacturers (Vestas, GE, Gamesa, Enercon and Suzlon) only one is American. Similarly, the United States is home to only one of the 10 largest solar panel producers in the world and two of the top 10 advanced battery manufacturers. How can we catch up? Not through protectionism or massive government intervention but through the power of good old home-grown innovation.

We are American businessmen. Our job is building businesses and commercializing innovation. Every year, GE invests 6 percent of its industrial revenue in research and development to produce more efficient and cleaner wind turbines, jet engines, locomotives, power turbines and appliances. Kleiner Perkins has invested $680 million in 48 of the most compelling new clean-energy technologies, with $1.1 billion more to invest. We are trying to do our part. But our government's energy and climate policies are our principal obstacle to success.

Right now, the United States has no long-term market signal to tell companies and consumers that it values low-carbon energy. It has no policies to discourage sending hundreds of billions of dollars a year overseas for energy. It does not offer adequate sustained R&D funding to be a serious competitor in this huge business.

Today's policies stifle American innovation and competitiveness. But good policy can flip this dynamic. Five basic changes are needed:

– Send a long-term signal that low-carbon energy is valuable. We must put a price on carbon and a cap on carbon emissions. No long-term signal means no serious innovation at scale, which means fewer American success stories.

– Get the rules of the road right for utilities. We must make our utilities a driving force for repowering America, driving efficiency through incentives, a renewable electricity standard and a national unified smart grid.

– Set energy standards that grow steadily stronger. America should strive to have the most efficient buildings, cars and appliances in the world. The savings will land in the pockets of U.S. consumers and businesses.

– Get serious about funding research, development and deployment, at scale. The federal government currently spends only $2.5 billion on clean-energy R&D a year — 0.25 percent of our annual energy bill. Sen. Jeff Bingaman's Clean Energy Deployment Administration is a good idea that would be fast and flexible. But more such programs are needed.

– Fulfill President Obama's commitment to "become the world's leading exporter of renewable energy." We need a robust trade policy that seeks to open markets abroad — including the Chinese market — for U.S. clean-energy products through new trade agreements. Such policies unleash American competitiveness disciplined by market forces. This is widely endorsed by U.S. companies that compete internationally and by the broad-based President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board.

We should carefully design policy to bring in other nations. Think of the Copenhagen climate summit in December as an opportunity to create world markets and momentum for a low-carbon future, just as the Internet set the world on course for an information-rich future. Some say we shouldn't move until China moves. In fact, China is moving full speed ahead — with or without us.

There is still time for us to lead this global race, although that window is closing. We need low-carbon policies to exploit America's strengths — innovation and entrepreneurs. We know that building such policies is a heavy political lift. But, without doubt, bad energy policy has cost our country dearly, and the costs of continuing it are incalculable.

John Doerr is a partner in the venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. Jeff Immelt is chairman and chief executive of General Electric.

Repower America reports "The House of Representatives has just passed a landmark bill that will propel our nation toward a clean energy future. "

Statement from Al Gore, Chairman of the Alliance for Climate Protection:

“Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the Leadership of the House, and Chairmen Waxman and Markey have, through their leadership, secured an important bipartisan victory for the American people.

The American Clean Energy Security (ACES) Act is one of the most important pieces of legislation Congress will ever pass. This comprehensive legislation will make meaningful reductions in global warming pollution, spur investment in clean energy technology, create jobs and reduce our reliance on foreign oil.

The next step is passage of this legislation by the Senate to help restore America's leadership in the world and begin, at long last, to put in place a truly global solution to the climate crisis.

We are at an extraordinary moment, with an historic opportunity to confront one of the world’s most serious challenges. Our actions now will be remembered by this generation and all those to follow – in our own nation and others around the world.”

Ecopreneurist Editor’s Note: The is a guest contribution by Ian Rogoff, Chairman of the Nevada Institute for Renewable Energy Commercialization, and Chairman and CEO of The Helio Group (parent company to HelioPower). This is the sixth post in a series from the CEO’s of major solar companies. You can follow the complete series here.

There is a long overdue debate underway in industry and political circles regarding the merits of federal funding for renewable energy (RE) commercialization.

Distinct from RE projects and RE deployments, commercialization involves identifying specific technologies and entrepreneurs based on their perceived commercial potential and financing the respective project teams along a vector towards commercial success.

The types of commercialization activities typically funded include scaling benchtop prototypes to meet market requirements, characterizing technologies to understand performance and limits, testing boundary conditions, designing for manufacturability, testing for real world conditions, scaling refinery processes, among others.

Commercialization is quite distinct from basic research, and expressly does not seek to fund pure science or unproven claims. Typically, commercialization funding stops at a point where the private sector steps in and either assumes the next funding milestone or market acceptance/rejection obviates the need for additional financing entirely.

Two types of barriers exist today in the commercialization of renewable energy technology: the “valley of death” and the “mountain of death.”

Renewable Energy’s Valley of Death

Basic RE research is being conducted at numerous institutions around the world and much of this technology remains trapped in labs for want of commercialization know-how and funding. Basic and applied research is likewise being conducted in commercial enterprises, but much of that research is often constrained through short-term return on investment requirements.

In addition, renewable energy technology often fails to garner the resources and funding needed in order to reach commercial viability as a result of existing regulatory and fiscal regimens that bias markets towards incumbent technologies. Absent investment and institutional know-how, the commercialization of renewable energy will continue to be hampered in its application and hindered in its ability to cross the so-called “valley of death.”

Renewable Energy’s Mountain of Death

What makes renewable energy different from many other technology-based industries, however, is not just the valley of death which is common to many technology-based industries, but more the “mountain of death,” or specifically the amount of capital and time required to take promising but nascent energy technologies to widespread deployment. The energy industry tends to be an asset-based industry, and those assets are usually expensive. Early stage private capital tends to shun capital intensive businesses, and unlike information technology, for example, the energy industry does not generally provide some highly desirable “must-have” new capability, but simply supplants an existing commodity, be it the flow of electrons, or a transportation fluid, or whatever.

Unfortunately, even in good economic conditions, there is limited funding available for pilot and demonstration phases for scaling renewable energy technology. Add to this the lack of resources required to create and implement commercialization roadmaps and it becomes clear why half-hearted attempts at developing this industry have stalled.

Given the uncertainty, costs and times frames involved in overcoming the mountain of death, there needs to be a very strong enabler in order to stimulate renewable energy commercialization on a large scale. Absent regulation, market signals (like pricing carbon), or specific incentives, there are simply no compelling economic reasons in the short term for the incumbent industry leaders to switch from existing feedstocks to renewable sources. As mentioned above, in other technology-based industries, early-stage capital funds innovative disrupters, but there is simply not enough equity financing available to stimulate the early stage energy companies in such a capital intensive industry, and start-ups simply do not have the balance sheet strength typically required for project finance and other sources of financing.

The renewable energy industry is different from other technology-based industries. Granted, it is slowed by the valley of death, but widespread deployment is truly hampered by the mountain. If we are committed to the potential of renewable energy as a solution to many of our climate, economic and national security concerns, we need to recognize the need for strong federal and state support for commercializing renewable energy technologies or we run the risk of looking back on this period and wondering why (to paraphrase Rahm Emanuel) we wasted a crisis.

(AP Photo/Isaac Brekken)

On his tour today of the photovoltaic array at Nellis Air Force Base, President Obama saw first-hand how solar energy is being used to generate clean electricity supplies – including 25% of the base’s total power.

Located in Las Vegas, NV, the Nellis Air Force Base solar array generates more than 30 million kilowatt-hours (kWh) of clean electricity annually and supplies approximately 25% of the total power used at the base, where 12,000 people live and work.  The solar power system was completed in December 2007, and is America's largest solar photovoltaic array.

President Obama was led on the tour by Col. Howard D. Belote, the Commander of the 99th Air Base Wing, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Excerpts from President Obama's speech today:
"Because right now, we're standing near the largest solar electric plant of its kind in the entire Western Hemisphere — the entire Western Hemisphere. More than 72,000 solar panels built on part of an old landfill provide 25 percent of the electricity for the 12,000 people who live and work here at Nellis. That's the equivalent of powering about 13,200 homes during the day.

It's a project that took about half a year to complete, created 200 jobs, and will save the United States Air Force, which is the largest consumer of energy in the federal government, nearly $1 million — $1 million a year. It will also reduce harmful carbon pollution by 24,000 tons per year, which is the equivalent of removing 4,000 cars from our roads. Most importantly, this base serves as a shining example of what's possible when we harness the power of clean, renewable energy to build a new, firmer foundation for economic growth.

Today, projects like the one at Nellis are still the exception to the rule, unfortunately. America produces less than 3 percent of our electricity through renewable sources of energy like wind and solar — less than 3 percent. In contrast, Denmark produces 20 percent of their electricity through wind. We pioneered solar technology, but we've fallen behind countries like Germany and Japan in generating it, even though they get less sun than we do. They certainly get less sun than Nevada.

Nellis Air Force Base installation of over 72,000 Sunpower solar modules

So we've got a choice. We can remain the world's leading importer of oil, sending our money and our wealth away, or we can become the world's leading exporter of clean energy. We can hand over the jobs of the future to our competitors, or we can confront what they've already recognized as the great opportunity of our time: The nation that leads the world in creating new sources of clean energy will be the nation that leads the 21st-century global economy. And that's the nation I want America to be and I know that's the nation you want America to be."

For the text of his speech, click here.
The White House briefing document including information on the Nellis Air Force Base installation, click here.

Democrats largely held together in support of the 946-page bill shaped over several months of closed-door negotiations and nearly 40 hours of debate this week. Only one Republican supported the bill, as GOP opponents unified against the measure, insisting it was a costly and unattainable measure to be pushing in a tight economy.

While Democrats have long been promising success in committee, several Democratic swing votes remained at the center of attention. Reps. John Barrow of Georgia, Jim Matheson of Utah, Mike Ross of Arkansas and Charles Melancon of Louisiana voted with the Republicans against the bill.

On the GOP side, Rep. Mary Bono Mack of California bucked her party leadership and supported the legislation. Mack was the only committee Republican to publicly remain neutral on the climate bill.

"While I still have significant concerns about this bill, particularly with regard to its cost and its failure to recognize innovative technologies like advanced nuclear energy, I believe this is the right direction for our district, for our nation and for our future," Bono Mack said in a statement.

This bill, written by Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Representative Ed Markey (D-MA), lays the foundation for a vibrant 21st century economy fueled by cleaner energy.  It places an economy-wide cap on carbon pollution that will reduce emissions by 17 percent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050; requires utilities to generate about a fifth of all energy from renewable sources by 2020; invests in energy efficiency, cleaner vehicles, and carbon capture technology; gives Federal nod to feed-in tarifs and much.