The first round of hearings regarding Duke's $2.3 Billion plan to upgrade their grid have concluded, revealing their approach to fund such a project. Duke is attempting to use something called "def feral accounting", which makes it possible for the utility "to recover those in a future rate case without listing those costs as expenses on it is quarterly financial reports ... The key is that deferral accounting lets a utility charge its customers for the financing costs for projects, ensuring that the utility does not have to pay the interest on the money it has to borrow to build them." This is nothing new, as one-time, sudden expenditures for utilities such as construction of generation plants are funded. However, in this case, many believe this is an inappropriate use of the funding method. There are a few concerns from major stakeholders, such as ratepayers, commissioners, and regulators.

Despite the environmental benefits we get from using the wind to generate renewable energy, there was always a somewhat depressing side effect that left environmentalists slightly torn when advocating for wind power. The trade off was that turbines worldwide killed an estimated 300,000 birds per year. The macabre reality is that this is, well, worth it to most people, who point towards the expectation that using turbines saves ecosystems, and thus, not just birds but many animals. However, this blemish on wind-powers otherwise outstanding record got researchers thinking about creative solutions to decrease the mortality rate.

With a dynamic industry such as the energy sector, constant changes in technology, efficiency, and manufacturing dictate how a market responds and plans for the future. It makes sense; why ride a horse and buggy when you can get an automobile? Why use oil lamps when you can use LED bulbs? Many are now asking a similar question: Why go solar now when the future could bring a new generation of more advanced Photovoltaic systems? It's a fair question, especially when you look at the trajectory in solar advancements in recent decades. In 1954, the first silicon solar panel was created, which had an approximate efficiency of 6%. It took until 2010 before the average commercial panel produced at around 12%. Today, panel efficiencies are approximately 17-19%, while many panels are even higher in the low 20%-range. This begs the question (or a host of questions really): how efficient can panels get? How long will they take to get there? How will costs change over this transition? A recent article from BBC tries to provide some clarity in an constantly changing field, and attempts to tackle these hard hitting questions.

Petroleum Goliath BP, or British Petroleum, recently announced a deal with massive implications towards a transition in sources of energy production and manufacturing. The deal was announced July 27th, a decision that came a year before schedule. CEO Bernard Looney, who had been making some moves in the right direction, takes a bounding step towards environmental responsibility with this change. In his words, "As we work to build a more focused, more integrated BP, we have other opportunities that are more aligned with our future direction ... Today’s agreement is another deliberate step in building a BP that can compete and succeed through the energy transition.”

The solar industry is constantly shifting, and at times it can be difficult to get a read on the trajectory. That is why it is so nice to see large companies making decisive movements towards renewable energy and a sustainable future. Although residential solar systems are going to play a large role in transitioning the U.S. towards a sustainable blend of energy, these massive projects are integral in making a statement to commercial industries, paving the road for further investment. CEO Ben Catt summarized this in saying "Ultimately, this means more clean energy for the planet and more jobs for the local community."