Electronic devices and their components marketed in the European Union and European Economic Area are subject to a morass of environmental and product safety requirements that is only likely to increase with the EU's implementation of its Circular Economy Strategy in the near future.  The requirements apply to all types of equipment, from sophisticated information technology equipment, to military equipment, aircraft components, electronic medical devices, household electronics, consumer devices, and industrial tools.

The requirements affect the products' environmental design and recyclability, energy efficiency, chemical composition, electromagnetic compatibility, radio frequency and electrical safety, labelling, and disclosure and waste take back obligations.  They affect the electronic devices and components, as well as their batteries and packaging.

In effect, the requirements are imposed by a variety of legislation that often overlaps, such as the Directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment ("WEEE Directive"), the Directive on the Restriction of the Use of Certain Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment ("RoHS Directive"), the Directive on Energy Related Products, different Regulations on Energy Efficiency Labelling, the Directive on Batteries and Accumulators and Waste Batteries and Accumulators, the Directive on Packaging and Packaging Waste, the Directive on Electromagnetic Compatibility, the Low Voltage Directive, the Radio Equipment Directive, the Regulation the Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restrictions of Chemicals ("REACH Regulation"), the Regulation on the Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Mixtures and Substances ("CLP Regulation"), the Biocidal Products Regulation, and the Fluorinated Gases Regulation.  In addition, electronic devices marketed in the EU/EEA are subject to the General Product Safety Directive, and to specific product safety standards adopted under that Directive.

The following table provides an illustrative and non-exhaustive check list of the different requirements that apply to electronic devices and their components, batteries and packaging when marketed in the EU/EEA.

As part of an ongoing effort to address issues raised by, and encourage the entry of, distributed energy resources, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) last week issued a Policy Statement clarifying the flexibility electric storage resources have regarding rate designs to recover their costs.  FERC earlier proposed rules to remove barriers to the participation of storage and other distributed resources in the organized wholesale electricity markets administered by Regional Transmission Organizations (RTOs).  These policies and rules are of interest to storage operators and investors, grid managers, other participants in RTO markets and consumers of storage services.

Storage resources, such as large-scale batteries and flywheels, are able to both absorb and discharge electricity.  These resources can provide multiple services almost instantaneously and thus may fit into more than one of the traditional asset functions of generation, transmission, and distribution.万博体育app手机登录The Policy Statement provides guidance for storage resources that want to charge rates for providing multiple types of services.FERC has rate jurisdiction over wholesale sales and transmission of electricity in interstate commerce, and has fundamentally different rate policies for those two types of services.  Wholesale sales are made from generation facilities and are generally provided competitively, especially in RTO markets.  Accordingly, FERC allows prices to be determined by market forces.  In contrast, transmission grid services are traditionally provided by wires facilities and are generally regarded as not capable of being provided competitively.  In exchange for agreeing to provide transmission service, cost recovery is assured but, to protect customers from excessive rates, providers are restricted to rates that recover only their costs.

Storage resources can provide both types of services and can switch from one to the other almost instantaneously.  They can provide generation capacity and energy services, for which they may make offers into the RTO competitive auction markets, and they can also provide transmission-type grid support services, such as voltage support or thermal overload protection, for which they receive cost-based rate compensation.

In November 2016, FERC held a technical conference to examine compensation for storage resources used for multiple purposes.  According to the Policy Statement, most participants and commenters support multiple uses and market-based and cost-based revenue streams for storage resources, noting it would be inefficient to let them sit idle when not providing grid service.  However, concerns were raised about allowing an electric storage resource to recover its costs through both cost-based and market-based rates concurrently.万博体育app手机登录The Policy Statement provides guidance as to how these concerns could be addressed.

Double recovery of costs.  This concern arises from a provider earning profits from market sales from storage resources, the costs of which are borne by cost-based ratepayers.  In such circumstances, captive customers could be subsidizing public utility shareholders.  The Policy Statement says that proposals for electric storage resources to use cost-based rates paid by captive customers should address the potential for the recovery of those same costs through market-based sales.  The statement clarifies that crediting market revenues back to the cost-based ratepayers is one possible solution, but there may be other ways to address the issue.

Adverse impacts on markets.  The concern here is that electric storage resources would bid to supply  market services in a way that suppresses market clearing prices.  Because they recover  costs through cost-based rates, storage resources could offer at lower prices.FERC不赞同这一关切,也不确信其他市场竞争者会受到不利影响。 政策声明指出,许多参加RTO市场的资产也得到某种形式的成本回收率万博体育app手机登录For example, some utilities make cost-based sales to captive wholesale customers and off-system market-based sales to others.  In these circumstances, FERC requires crediting market revenues to the cost-based customers but has not required anything more to address concerns that dual revenue streams undermine competition.  Accordingly, the Policy Statement says that the market impact concern also could be addressed  through revenue crediting.

RTO independence.  A fundamental requirement of an RTO operator is to remain independent of market interests.  However, coordination is needed between the RTO and an electric storage resource that offers both transmission and market services.  For example, the storage resource should be maintained so that the necessary electrical charge can be achieved when needed to provide a cost-based service.  The Policy Statement notes that if this need is reasonably predictable as to size and the time it will arise each day, the storage resource should be permitted to deviate from the needed  charge level at other times of the day in order to provide market-based rate services.  But if the need for the cost-based service is not reasonably predictable, the cost-based rate service may be the only service that the electric storage resource may provide.

The Policy Statement offers additional guidance on the independence issue:

• When the need arises for a cost-based service, the dispatch of the storage resource to address that need should receive priority over the resource's provision of market-based services.电存储资源当前不执行可课以性能罚法。
• 提供市场服务应置于存储资源而非RTO控制之下成本服务不需要存储资源时,RTO将依赖存储资源出价运行 。

These two rules, which go into effect in 2018, are DOE's ninth and tenth energy efficiency standards finalized in 2014.  Their announcement marks DOE achieving its goal of finalizing ten energy efficiency standards in 2014 as part of the White House's Climate Action Plan.  The DOE estimates that the ten standards–which apply to dishwashers, water heaters, and other products–will collectively reduce CO₂ emissions by over 435 million metric tons and save $78 billion in electricity bills through 2030.

Additionally, 2014 saw the final phase-out stage of certain types of light bulbs.  Originally a bipartisan success story, one aspect of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 established increased minimum energy efficiency standards for various types of light bulbs that were to be phased in from 2012 through 2014.  The DOE was poised to begin enforcing the new rules, which effectively ban certain types of incandescent light bulbs, but recent appropriations bills have effectively blocked DOE from enforcing the rules.  Light bulb manufacturers, however, have already begun complying with the standards.

Older efficiency standards have also been quietly succeeding.  For instance, a new refrigerator meeting the current federal energy efficiency standards would use roughly a quarter of the energy of a refrigerator from 1973, despite offering more storage space and costing significantly less.

Source: Appliance Standards Awareness Project

Last week, the White House announced a goal of acquiring $2 billion in energy efficiency upgrades at federal buildings over the next three years.  This $2 billion goal is in addition to existing commitments that the Obama Administration made in 2011, under which $2.7 billion has already been committed to fund energy efficiency upgrades.  The new goal, which was announced along with a series of other new energy efficiency and solar deployment initiatives (including the return of solar panels on the White House roof), is part of the Obama Administration's focus on developing a clean energy economy.

The White House intends to meet its new $2 billion goal through energy savings performance contracts ("ESPCs") under which the private sector finances the cost of upgrading a building in exchange for a portion of the cost savings resulting from the upgrades.  In the past, agencies have used ESPCs to acquire a wide variety of energy-efficient upgrades, including more efficient windows, doors, and insulation!自动控件主动管理能源使用and solar arrays and other green-energy generation capacity.  The Department of Energy, the General Services Administration, and the Department of Defense have established indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity ESPCs, which provide a mechanism for agency buyers to contract in a more stream-lined fashion.  Recently introduced legislation, if enacted, would authorize the Department of Defense to expand the use of ESPC contracting to upgrade transportable vehicles, devices, and equipment, such as ships and deployable generators.

ESPCs have emerged as an important contracting tool since the late 1990s.  They have the benefit of not requiring an initial federal capital investment and can avoid the use of appropriated funds altogether, although an agency may choose to finance a project with a mix of private and federal funds.  ESPCs often allow federal agencies to benefit from the availability of private sector financing.  In addition, federal agencies can take full advantage of the cost savings after the expiration of an ESPC's term, which is statutorily capped at twenty-five years.

However, the unique nature of ESPC contracting can present its challenges.  For instance, many key terms that allocate risk under ESPCs are subject to negotiation.  ESPCs may vary, for example, with respect to operation and maintenance requirements, as well as obligations relating to equipment repair and replacement.  ESPCs may also vary with respect to risks associated with future modifications to a facility, which may be of particular concern due to the length of most ESPCs.  And, as we discussed in a recent article in the BNA Federal Contracts Report, considerations such as these can become the source of dispute during contract performance.

In sum, the White House's recently announced goal of acquiring $2 billion in energy efficiency upgrades to federal buildings will likely lead to a number of new opportunities.  However, contractors should be aware of the unique nature of ESPCs, including the overall risk allocation, as they examine these new opportunities.

The Department of Energy ("DOE") issued a draft solicitation yesterday for a new Renewable Energy and Energy Efficient Projects Loan Guarantee Program.  Once finalized, the Program is expected to make as much as $4 billion in loan guarantees available to innovative clean energy technology projects that are not currently in commercial use.  Based on DOE's previous practices, we expect the final solicitation to be issued later this year.

Established in support of the Administration's "all-of-the-above" energy strategy, the Program represents yet another opportunity to obtain financial assistance for innovative clean energy technology projects, in addition to the previously announced Advanced Fossil Energy Project solicitation.  In announcing yesterday's draft solicitation, Secretary Ernest Moniz noted that DOE's existing renewable energy loan guarantees "helped launch the U.S.utility-scale solar industry and other clean energy technologies that are now contributing to our clean energy portfolio."  Secretary Moniz further explained that DOE wants "to replicate that success by focusing on technologies that are on the edge of commercial-scale deployment today."

In the draft solicitation, DOE identifies five areas of technology that it hopes will benefit from the Program, including advanced grid integration and storage, drop-in biofuels, waste-to-energy, enhancement of existing facilities, and efficiency improvements.  Specific examples of eligible projects include technology that:

• improves renewable energy distribution systems;
• provides bio-based substitutes for crude oil, gasoline, diesel fuel, and jet fuel;
• harnesses energy from landfill methane and segregated waste;
• enhances or extend the lifetime of an energy generating asset;
• reduces commercial or residential energy usage!or
• recovers dispatch or waste energy.

DOE will look favorably on projects that have a catalytic effect, replicating or extending new or significantly improved technologies once established in the commercial marketplace.

Upon issuance of the final solicitation, DOE plans to review applications in a two-step process.  After making an initial eligibility determination, DOE will subject applicants to a more complete process, including underwriting and further negotiation upon DOE's conditional commitment to provide a guarantee.  The draft solicitation indicates that projects must be market ready, and applicants for financial assistance must be prepared to provide an equity contribution.  In addition, the draft solicitation indicates that DOE plans to give preference to projects that cannot be fully financed by commercial means.

DOE is accepting comments on the draft solicitation for a thirty-day period.  Additional details and a schedule for public meetings being held to discuss the draft solicitation can be found here.

On March 28, His Serene Highness, Prince Albert II of Monaco bestowed innovation awards for excellence in the field of environmental technology to three emerging technology companies — Mango Materials, Frigesco, and One Earth Designs — out of a field of 22 companies from 11 countries that participated in the annual three-day CleanEquity Monaco conference in Monte Carlo.

The award winning companies featured vastly different technologies to earn awards in three different categories:

• Mango Materials, a San Francisco-area research stage company that produces biodegradable plastics from waste biogas (methane) that are economically competitive with conventional oil-based plastics, earned the award excellence in the field of environmental technology research;
• Frigesco, a UK-based development stage company focused on improving the energy efficiency of commercial refrigeration systems and in particular defrost technology, through innovative and patented engineering solutions, won the award for excellence in the field of environmental technology development!并
/oneearthdesigns.com/>OneEarthDisports 香港公司商业化Sol源码 Sol源码器可与热电生成器合并为小型电器或充电 。

On March 19, 2014, the California Energy Commission, the state's primary energy policy and planning agency, announced that it was initiating a regulatory process leading to the regulation of 15 categories of consumer appliances as to usage of electricity, natural gas, and water.  This comes in part in response to the three-year drought period in California, which has reduced hydroelectric production of electricity.

The Commission provided the following schedule with expected release dates of draft regulations for several categories of products:

The Commission noted that interested stakeholders will be provided with a public comment period to respond to the draft proposals.  In addition, a public workshop will be provided as a forum to discuss the proposals in person.

The Appliance Efficiency Regulations were last updated in 2012, and at that time included standards for 23 categories of federally regulated and non-federally regulated appliances.  The standards apply to appliances that are sold or offered for sale in California, except those sold wholesale in California for final retail sale outside the state and those designed and sold exclusively for use in recreational vehicles or other mobile equipment.

Tonight's State of the Union highlighted that energy and environmental issues will continue to play a central role in the Washington agenda over the next year.  From the President's early reference to workers building fuel efficient cars, to his extensive discussion of next steps on energy and the environment, it is clear that the President continues to tie economic progress to energy and environmental actions.

Our nation's revamped energy picture – where natural gas production is booming and where domestic oil production is exceeding imports for the first time in two decades – are critical factors in a U.S.-led manufacturing boom.  The President took credit for these results, touting his "All of the Above" energy policy.

Yet that focus on industrial progress and energy production expansion also comes with a continued pledge from the President to do everything within the Administration's power to address the challenge of climate change.  Indeed, the President laid down a marker on this issue, asserting that "the debate is over" and that, "Climate change is a fact."

With the White House dubbing its approach a "Year of Action," the President stressed that he will move forward on his energy and environmental agenda "whenever and wherever" he can, with or without Congressional support.  This has the potential to lead to significant controversy over several of the actions, through enhanced Congressional oversight and fractious public debate.

While some may say that, in reality, the President highlighted few entirely new actions, he made clear that vigorous efforts will continue in certain key areas:

• the Environmental Protection Agency will continue its signature effort to regulate greenhouse gas emissions – referred to by the President as carbon pollution – from power plants, which are the largest source of those emissions, as well as continue its efforts with the Department of Transportation to regulate fuel efficiency for heavy duty trucks;
• the President pledged to streamline permitting processes for key infrastructure projects, including roads and ports, as well as for new manufacturing facilities.  In doing so, he recognized the critical importance of infrastructure modernization to the Nation's economic progress;
• the President highlighted the recently launched negotiating effort to eliminate tariffs on environmental goods and services in the World Trade Organization;
• the President asked Congress to expand funding for regional innovation hubs, for basic research on innovation, and to support natural gas fueling infrastructure.  This recognition of the potential of natural gas for vehicles may represent a significant policy shift;
• the President also called on Congress to complete legislative reauthorization efforts for transportation and waterways, raising the expectation that the Administration will assist in shaping this legislation;
• he again called on Congress to eliminate four billion dollars in fossil fuel subsidies and, without providing much detail or explicitly referencing last year's proposal for an Energy Trust or innovative financing approaches such as Master Limited Partnerships, called instead for investing in renewables, such as through the nation's growing solar energy industry.

It is not surprising that the President's speech did not reiterate each element of his more detailed Climate Action Plan, announced in June.  One should expect, though, that efforts like the Department of Energy's push on appliance fuel efficiency standards and the Department of Interior's focus on siting renewable energy infrastructure on public lands will also continue.  Nor is it surprising that the President avoided mentioning highly controversial decisions, like the ongoing Keystone XL Pipeline permit evaluation.

As the details of the President's State of the Union message emerge, we should expect to see a continued focus on energy and environmental actions that begin to test the outer contours of Executive Branch authority in the absence of further Congressional action.  Whether this will lead to mounting Congressional attempts, particularly in the House of Representatives, to impede these actions or instead to the delineation of some limited areas of agreed-upon progress, should make for a dynamic and interesting year.