<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why &#8220;Market-Based&#8221; is Poor Criteria for Solar Policy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cleantechnica.com/2011/10/28/why-market-based-is-poor-criteria-for-solar-policy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2011/10/28/why-market-based-is-poor-criteria-for-solar-policy/</link>
	<description>Clean Tech News &#38; Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. &#38; More.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2014 08:17:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: PManke</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2011/10/28/why-market-based-is-poor-criteria-for-solar-policy/#comment-106699</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[PManke]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Oct 2011 21:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=31762#comment-106699</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[*****If I understand rightly, SREC&#039;s are based on the price solar energy production balanced by carbon payments.. They are regulated by the % of solar requirement set by states PUC&#039;s or similar setting board. &quot;Green Contracts&quot; that pay for installing solar hardware incentivize higher pricing for installations and mandate certified (read- high paid) installers and hardware, and do not incentivize or warrent any volume of energy production. The reason some SREC markets tanked was that the per-cent requirement was set too low to begin with, and not monitored closely enuff. What were they afraid of?, That we would have TOO MUCH SOLAR POWER?. The requirement being set higher means the solar market would not get so easily satisfied and the Ut&#039;e that can&#039;t buy enuff SREC&#039;s can pay the SACP.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>*****If I understand rightly, SREC&#8217;s are based on the price solar energy production balanced by carbon payments.. They are regulated by the % of solar requirement set by states PUC&#8217;s or similar setting board. &#8220;Green Contracts&#8221; that pay for installing solar hardware incentivize higher pricing for installations and mandate certified (read- high paid) installers and hardware, and do not incentivize or warrent any volume of energy production. The reason some SREC markets tanked was that the per-cent requirement was set too low to begin with, and not monitored closely enuff. What were they afraid of?, That we would have TOO MUCH SOLAR POWER?. The requirement being set higher means the solar market would not get so easily satisfied and the Ut&#8217;e that can&#8217;t buy enuff SREC&#8217;s can pay the SACP.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
