community choice energy: recommendations to future repeater projects

Sustainable energy for cities and local governments: Community Choice Energy Business models in California Recommendations to future repeater projects December 2016 -‐ Silvia Zinetti

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

1

Community Choice Energy Existing CCEs offer a

higher percentage of

renewable energy in their

electric service at

competitive prices, and in

only a few years have

contributed, among other

benefits, to local and

regional renewable

development, GHG

emissions reduction, and

local clean energy jobs

creation.

Sustainable energy for ci2es and local governments: Community Choice Energy Business models in California Recommendations to future repeater projects

Introduction

In California, a new interesting business model is evolving around Community Choice Energy (CCE), also known as Community Choice Aggregation (CCA)1, a tool that allows “cities and counties to serve the energy requirements of their local residents and businesses” (California Public Utilities Commission, 2012).

CCE creates competition in the retail market, it provides project financing for renewable energy and energy efficiency investments, and offers several benefits to a local community by giving local control over its energy sources, a choice to the citizens, the potential to provide electricity to its residents at lower costs, and a significant contribution to reduce the GHG emissions. Existing CCEs offer a higher percentage of renewable energy in their electric service at competitive prices, and in only a few years have contributed, among other benefits, to local and regional renewable development, GHG emissions reduction, and local clean energy jobs creation.

1 While Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) is the legal name of the program, in California, the expression

Community Choice Energy (CCE) is generally used to express CCA as much friendlier and consumer-‐facing phrase. The acronym CCE is chosen in this paper to avoid confusion.

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

2

Cities and local governments are increasingly developing and implementing sustainable energy strategies since there is a growing understanding of the importance of local action. The “Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy”, a newly merged initiative between the US Compact of Mayors and the EU Covenant of Mayors, shows how cities and local governments are once again leading the way to fight climate change (Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy, 2016).

CCE concept could be the solution to many cities around the world as a great tool to reduce the GHG emissions in a big way and to shift toward sustainable energy in the years to come. This report aims at providing cities and local governments with some key points and recommendations to take into consideration to develop a robust and sustainable CCE business model. The outcomes are based on the recent analysis of two case studies, Marin Clean Energy (MCE) and Sonoma Clean Power (SCP) in Northern California.

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

3

Table of Contents

Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1

What is CCE? ......................................................................................................................... 4

The Case Studies ................................................................................................................... 6 Marin Clean Energy .................................................................................................................. 6 Sonoma Clean Power ............................................................................................................... 6

The External Environment .................................................................................................. 7 Policy ........................................................................................................................................ 7 Competitors .............................................................................................................................. 7 Regulatory ................................................................................................................................ 7 Key Trends and Global Markets ................................................................................................ 7

The Business Model ............................................................................................................. 8 Offer ......................................................................................................................................... 8 Total Cost of Electricity ............................................................................................................. 8 Initial Process ........................................................................................................................... 8 Energy Supply Portfolio ............................................................................................................ 9 Social and Environmental Benefits ........................................................................................... 9

SWOT Analysis Results ...................................................................................................... 10 Strengths ................................................................................................................................ 10 Weaknesses ............................................................................................................................ 10 Opportunities ......................................................................................................................... 10 Threats .................................................................................................................................... 10

Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................................... 11 Recommendations to future repeater projects ..................................................................... 12 The Strategy Map ................................................................................................................... 13

References ........................................................................................................................... 14

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

4

What is CCE?

Community Choice Energy (CCE) was established by law in 2002 (California State Legislature, 2002). The program allows cities and counties (e.g. regional governments) to aggregate and procure the energy requirements of their local residents and businesses. The figure below visualizes how a CCE model works in California:

Figure 1 CCE energy model (Local Energy Aggregation Network, 2015)

1. CCE becomes the city or county’s default power provider, and procures electricity on the market through Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs)2 with one or more energy suppliers while reinvesting the profits in support of (a) local renewable energy assets development, and (b) energy efficiency programs. Each jurisdiction has to pass an ordinance to participate in a CCE program and to authorize customers’ enrollment.

2. The utility continues to provide services for the transmission and distribution of electricity, maintains existing lines and builds new ones if needed, and is in charge of billing the customers. The bill has two distinct categories, one for transmission and distribution (the utility), and one for generation services (CCE). The utility and CCE have to file to the

2 A PPA is a contract between an Independent power producer (IPP) and a buyer that dictates electricity

production, delivery, and payment.

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

5

California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) a Utility Service Agreement that governs their relationship.

3. Customers within the city or county jurisdiction where the CCE is created are automatically enrolled in the program and benefit from affordable rates, local control of electricity flow, and cleaner energy. CCE has to send several notifications before and after its launch. Customers can choose to opt-‐out and return to the incumbent utility for generation services at any time.

CCE offers a “hybrid” approach between the Investor-‐Owned Utility (IOU) and the municipal public utility, which have different responsibilities and regulatory framework. The IOU is a for profit organization, while the municipal public utility is a non-‐profit organization. They both deal with all generation, transmission, and customer service, whereas CCE deals with the generation part only. Figure 2 illustrates the different energy models’ value chain:

Figure 2 Energy model value chain (Local Energy Aggregation Network, 2015)

Depending on community goals and long-‐term objectives, CCE can have three different administrative frameworks (Stoner & Dalessi, 2009, p. 51):

• Joint Power Authority (JPA): This multi-‐jurisdictional framework is a legal structure where neighboring cities and communities jointly implement a single CCE program through a public, non-‐profit agency.

• Single Jurisdiction / Enterprise Fund: A single city can start and implement a CCE on its own.

• Commercial Managed Service: A private for-‐profit company manages the CCE program, and assists in all aspects from start-‐up to full implementation.

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

6

The Case Studies

Marine Clean Energy (MCE) and Sonoma Clean Power (SCP) are non-‐profit agencies located in Northern California. They were formed as Joint Powers Authorities (JPAs) in 2008 and 2012 respectively under California law (California State Legislature, 2002).

Marin Clean Energy

MCE is the first CCE in California and started to provide service to 8,000 customers in May 2010, while increasing to 170,000 in five years, in 2015. MCE is currently serving customers in Marin County, unincorporated Napa County, the cities in Contra Costa County of Richmond, San Pablo, and El Cerrito, and the city in Solano County of Benicia. Seven additional cities in Napa County are in the phase of join MCE throughout 2016, which will increase the customer base to approximately 256,000 accounts. The agency is based in San Rafael and is governed by MCE’s Board of Directors, consisting of one representative from each Member. A CEO and a staff of about 30 people run the agency. An Executive Committee and a Technical Committee provide the Board with recommendations for policy decisions making (Marin Clean Energy, 2015a).

MCE’s mission is “to address climate change by reducing energy-‐related greenhouse gas emissions through renewable energy supply and energy efficiency at stable and competitive rates for customers while providing local economic and workforce benefits” (Marin Clean Energy, 2016a).

Sonoma Clean Power

SCP started providing service to around 20,000 customers in May 2014. Impressively this increased to approximately 190,000 in only one year, in June 2015. SCP currently serves eight cities (Cloverdale, Cotati, Petaluma, Rohnert Park, Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, Sonoma, and Windsor) and all of the unincorporated areas in the county. The agency is based in Santa Rosa and is governed by the Sonoma Clean Power Authority. The Board of Directors includes local representatives from Sonoma County and each of the participating cities. A CEO and a small staff of about 15 people run the agency. A Ratepayer Advisory Committee, representing the ratepayers when reviewing SCP’s annual budget and rates, and a Business Operations Committee, in charge of reviewing SCP’s internal operations, large business contracts and capital projects advise the Board. Members of both Committees are volunteers (Sonoma Clean Power, 2015b).

SCP’s mission is to “reduce costs and environmental impacts of energy use for customers throughout Sonoma County” (Sonoma Clean Power, 2015a).

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

7

The External Environment

The business model’s external environment that could threat CCE’s business model as well as provide opportunities embrace several areas as markets, competitors, key trends and global markets dynamic (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010). Key findings include:

Policy

California has strong climate and renewable energy goals, with increasing Renewable Portfolio Standard requirements in the total energy mix (California Energy Commission, 2016b). Several incentives are available at the state level and the federal level for renewable energy investments from different sources (California Energy Commission, 2016a) (U.S. Department of Energy, 2016).

Competitors

The primary competitor of CCE is the incumbent utility, PG&E in this study. Its competitive advantages lay on its vertically integrated value chain, and economies of scale for the energy procurement, while it lacks knowledge of local needs. Utilities own the majority of the distribution grid and can lobby against CCEs (PG&E, 2016a).

Regulatory

The utility’s electricity delivery fee and the PCIA fee, charged to CCE customers and regulated by the CPUC, are variable costs. An increase of them by the CPUC, upon utility’s proposal, could negatively impact the margins of existing CCEs programs and the new ones (Local Energy Aggregation Network, 2013).

Key Trends and Global Markets

The renewable energy industry continues to grow globally (REN21, 2016), providing clean jobs to millions of people (IRENA, 2015). New technology will allow a better integration of electricity from intermittent resources while decreasing the overall cost of renewable energy (Deloitte Development LLC, 2016). Several cities around the world are taking the lead in the renewable energy transition. Furthermore, there is a shift in consumer behavior toward clean-‐energy products and services (SolarCity, CleanEdge, 2015).

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

8

The Business Model

The business model of the case studies provides a clear understanding of how the current CCE works to provide value to its customers. The key findings are as follows:

Offer

CCEs are effective in delivering to consumers reliable electricity generated from renewable energy. They both offer a higher percentage of electricity from renewables (MCE 57%, SCP 36%) than the utility (PG&E 27%) at competitive prices (California Energy Commission, 2014).

Total Cost of Electricity

CCEs have local accountability in the electricity generation rate setting, which accounts for approximately 35% of the total electricity costs, and program administration, including the selection of the energy sources. However, the total cost of electricity is highly influenced by the PG&E delivery rate and the PG&E PCIA fee, which together accounts for more than 65% of the total cost, and are both regulated by the CPUC. Figure 3 provides an example of 2016 residential rates for PG&E, MCE and SCP (PG&E, 2016b) (Sonoma Clean Power, 2016b).

Figure 3 PG&E, MCE and SCP residential electricity rates comparison in 2016

Initial Process

The initial process to get CCE up and running required considerable time along with a consistent amount of capital. During their start-‐up phase, the capital was needed for staffing and contractors, program initiation, and working capital for securing the electricity supply (Marin Clean Energy, 2015a) (Sonoma Clean Power, 2015b).

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

9

Energy Supply Portfolio

CCEs have several energy suppliers and a diversified energy supply portfolio, which, thanks also to long-‐term contracts ensures generation price stability. The energy sources are located both in California and out of state (Marin Clean Energy, 2015b) (Sonoma Clean Power, 2014).

Social and Environmental Benefits

CCEs reinvested part of the profits to support local renewable energy projects, providing clean energy jobs, GHG emissions reduction and other benefits. CCEs are also working toward energy efficiency programs. The following table provides a summary of social and environmental benefits achieved by MCE and SCP since the beginning of operations (Marin Clean Energy, 2016b) (Sonoma Clean Power, 2016a):

Table 1 Summary of MCE and SCP Social and Environmental Benefits

MCE SCP

Local clean energy jobs 2,787 n/a

GHG emissions reduction

122,102 MT3 (2010-‐2014)

53,579 MT (2014)

Contribution to renewable development4

20 MW (Local) 195 MW (Regional)

15 MW (Local) 70 MW (Regional)

Energy Efficiency56

1,626 MWh (2014) 414 MWh (2013) n/a

Other 7.7 million gallons of water saved $16 million saved by customer

(2014-‐2015)

$13.6 million in customer savings (2014)

3 Metric tons 4 Completed, under development, or soon to be under construction 5 MCE has received ratepayer funding from 2013 through 2015 under the umbrellas of the CPUC for energy

efficiency programs. MCE has applied to the CPUC for a more robust set of programs, which will allow offering energy efficiency programs in each customer segments.

6 While planning to develop specific energy efficiency programs, SCP may also seek program funding from the CPUC to administer these energy efficiency programs.

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

10

SWOT Analysis Results

To analyze the programs, a SWOT analysis was undertaken. The assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats showed that the business models of the case studies are very similar. Key findings are as follows:

Strengths

The “Social and Environmental” area represents a key strength, in particular, the building block “Social and Environmental Benefits” with GHG emission reduction, clean jobs creation, and local renewable energy development. The “Financial” area is in good shape with recurring revenue streams and frequent repeat purchases in the “Revenue Streams” building block. The “Offer” area is good. The “Infrastructure” area is satisfactory, it has a strong “Key Partners” building block with a diversity of key partners.

Weaknesses

The “Customer” area is a weakness and may need some attention. Significant weaknesses in this area for both CCEs are the building blocks “Customer Relationships” where relationship quality does not correctly match with customer segments and the relationship does not bind customers through high switching costs, and “Channels” with a weak customers’ reach and after sale support.

Opportunities

Major common opportunities are identified in the “Social and Environmental” area, and in particular in the building block “Social and Environmental Benefits,” with additional GHG emission reductions, a further contribution to local renewable energy development and energy efficiency increase. In the “Customer” area major opportunities are in the building block “Customer Relationships,” where it is suggested to tighten customers relationships and improve customer personalization, and in the “Channels,” with suggestions to improve channel’s efficiency and effectiveness. In the “Infrastructure” area a key opportunity is within the building block “Key Partners,” where greater collaboration with them could increase the overall success.

Threats

Although the “Customer” area is not in danger itself, an important common threat is identified in the building block “Customer Segments” where competitors are threatening market share. This threat could negatively impact the “Financial” area, which resulted as the most endangered one. Costs could become unpredictable and grow more quickly than the revenue they support, and margins could also be threatened by competitors or by technology.

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

11

Conclusions and Recommendations

This report provides the main findings of a recent CCE business model’s analysis of two case studies in Northern California.

CCE is a great tool for many reasons, it gives a low-‐carbon choice to the citizens, it creates competition in the retail market, and most importantly, it provides financing for the development of renewable energy sources at the local level7. The last point is crucial for cities and local governments that wish to shift toward a more sustainable energy and decrease their overall GHG emissions. The CCE model could be the key to a faster increase of renewable energy share in the global energy consumption.

While California has a favorable energy policy with ambitious renewable energy and energy efficiency targets, CCEs face strong opposition from the incumbent utility, which is also their main competitor. Any changes in the rules and tariffs in the retail market could negatively impact the CCE business model as well.

The two CCEs analyzed in the study proved to be effective in delivering to consumer reliable electricity generated from renewable energy at competitive prices. However, to overcome arising barriers and remain strong in the market, CCEs need to leverage their internal strengths, while mitigating their weaknesses and business risks. The next two sections provide some key points for future repeater projects and a Strategy Map providing strategic guidance to cities and local governments for the replication of CCE model.

7 With the potential to also finance energy efficiency measures in the future.

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

12

Recommendations to future repeater projects

Many complex elements have to be brought together from the beginning to ensure a successful CCE. To design a sustainable and robust CCE business model that allows an increase in renewable energy and energy efficiency investments at the local level some key points are provided as follows:

Ø Understand the external environment. The external environment plays an essential role in the design of the business model. Different aspects need to be taken into account, on the country’s electricity market, current legislation and regulation, and equally important, the consumer’s trends and choices.

Ø Create a focused mission and long-‐term vision. When starting a CCE, it is important to create a clear and focused mission that reflects the organization’s value propositions and key objectives. A long-‐term vision with interim and measurable goals should be defined at the very beginning and in support of the overall mission.

Ø Plan carefully. To increase the amount of renewable energy and energy efficiency at the local level, CCE needs to plan and carefully consider the different renewable energy sources available locally, the funds to dedicate for the investments, and the continuous changes in technology.

Ø Design a strong marketing campaign. Competitors may lobby against CCEs. A solid marketing campaign should be overseen before, during, and after a CCE is in place showing the CCE’s tangible benefits for the citizens.

Ø Have a diversified energy portfolio and ensure price stability. Market conditions can change quickly, and prices could rise significantly. It is important to build a strong and diverse portfolio of energy resources and to ensure price stability through long-‐term contracts for the power purchase.

Ø Put a particular emphasis on customer & local needs. CCE is local, and so it is extremely crucial to know and fill local needs. Strong customer relationship is key to ensuring their loyalty, along with an effective communication channel that delivers the message to them.

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

13

The Strategy Map

The following Strategy Map visualizes the key objectives derived from the analysis and aims at providing strategic guidance to cities and local governments that wish to start a CCE.

Figure 4 CCE Strategy Map

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

14

References California Energy Commission. (2016a). California renewable energy overview and programs. Retrieved August 13, 2016, from http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/

California Energy Commission. (2014). Labels. Retrieved June 28, 2016, from http://www.energy.ca.gov/pcl/labels/

California Energy Commission. (2016b, August 15). Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) Certification. Retrieved August 18, 2016, from http://www.energy.ca.gov/portfolio/documents/rps_certification.html

California Public Utilities Commission. (2012, December 28). Code of conduct D1212036. Retrieved May 22, 2016, from http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/0534F66E-‐61D3-‐44FE-‐AE9D-‐939BD00CDCAA/0/CodeofConduct_D1212036.pdf

California State Legislature. (2002, September 24). Assembly Bill 117. Retrieved April 23, 2016, from http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/01-‐02/bill/asm/ab_0101-‐0150/ab_117_bill_20020924_chaptered.pdf

Deloitte Development LLC. (2016). Trends to watch in alternative energy. Retrieved May 20, 2016, from https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/tr/Documents/energy-‐resources/trends-‐to-‐watch-‐in-‐alternative-‐energy-‐2.pdf

Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy. (2016). Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy. Retrieved December 16, 2016, from https://www.compactofmayors.org/globalcovenantofmayors/

IRENA. (2015). Renewable energy and jobs -‐ Annual review 2015. Retrieved June 28, 2016, from http://www.irena.org/publications/rejobs-‐annual-‐review-‐2015.pdf

Local Energy Aggregation Network. (2013). PCIA info sheet. Retrieved May 21, 2016, from http://www.leanenergyus.org/wp-‐content/uploads/2013/10/PCIA-‐Info-‐Sheet.pdf

Local Energy Aggregation Network. (2015). What is CCA. Retrieved May 02, 2016, from http://www.leanenergyus.org/what-‐is-‐cca/

Marin Clean Energy. (2016a). About Us. Retrieved June 29, 2016, from https://www.mcecleanenergy.org/about-‐us/

Marin Clean Energy. (2016b). Key documents. Retrieved May 10, 2016, from https://www.mcecleanenergy.org/key-‐documents/

Marin Clean Energy. (2015b). Marin Clean Energy 2015 integrated resource plan. Retrieved June 23, 2016, from https://www.mcecleanenergy.org/wp-‐content/uploads/2016/01/Marin-‐Clean-‐Energy-‐2015-‐Integrated-‐Resource-‐Plan_FINAL-‐BOARD-‐APPROVED.pdf

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

15

Marin Clean Energy. (2015a). MCE revised implementation plan. Retrieved May 15, 2016, from https://www.mcecleanenergy.org/key-‐documents/

Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business model generation. New Jersey: [Kindle version]. Retrieved from Amazon.com.

PG&E. (2016a). Company profile. Retrieved June 28, 2016, from http://www.pge.com/en/about/company/profile/index.page

PG&E. (2016b). MCE rate comparison. Retrieved November 29, 2016, from https://www.mcecleanenergy.org/wp-‐content/uploads/2015/11/JointCostComparison.pdf

REN21. (2016). Renewables 2016 Global Status Report. Retrieved July 15, 2016, from http://www.ren21.net/wp-‐content/uploads/2016/06/GSR_2016_Full_Report_REN21.pdf

SolarCity, CleanEdge. (2015). 2015 survey clean energy. Retrieved May 28, 2016, from https://www.solarcity.com/sites/default/files/reports/reports-‐2015-‐homeowner-‐survey-‐clean-‐energy.pdf

Sonoma Clean Power. (2015a). 2014-‐2015 annual report. Retrieved May 06, 2016, from http://sonomacleanpower.org/flipbooks/SCPAnnual2014-‐2015/

Sonoma Clean Power. (2015b, January). 2015 SCP implementation plan. Retrieved June 27, 2016, from https://sonomacleanpower.org/wp-‐content/uploads/2015/01/2015-‐SCP-‐Implementation-‐Plan.pdf

Sonoma Clean Power. (2016a). Key info archives. Retrieved May 10, 2016, from https://sonomacleanpower.org/key-‐info/archives/

Sonoma Clean Power. (2016b). SCP joint rate comparison. Retrieved November 29, 2016, from https://sonomacleanpower.org/wp-‐content/uploads/2013/12/SCP-‐PGE-‐10_01.pdf

Sonoma Clean Power. (2014). SCP resource plan. Retrieved June 27, 2016, from http://sonomacleanpower.org/scp-‐resource-‐plan/

Stoner, P. G., & Dalessi, J. (2009). California Community Choice Aggregation guide. California Energy Commission, PIER Renewable Energy Technologies Program. CEC-‐500-‐2009-‐003.

U.S. Department of Energy. (2016). Business energy investment tax credit itc. Retrieved June 28, 2016, from http://energy.gov/savings/business-‐energy-‐investment-‐tax-‐credit-‐itc

Sustaina

ble en

ergy fo

r cities and

local governm

ents: C

ommun

ity Cho

ice En

ergy

Busin

ess m

odels in Ca

lifornia

16

About the author

Silvia Zinetti is an independent consultant with broad experience on sustainable energy and energy efficiency policies and technologies at the international level. Ms. Zinetti recently earned a Master’s degree in MBA Renewables at Beuth University of Applied Sciences Berlin.

Ms. Zinetti worked many years in Brussels where she was deputy member of the European Economic and Social Committee, the consultative body of the European Union, and was appointed expert to several opinions on energy, transport, and industry. Ms. Zinetti contributed to different research projects funded by the European Commission and co-‐authored numerous reports and publications on renewable energy and energy efficiency.

For more information, please contact [email protected]