Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

EU's Von Der Leyen Says Private Sector Deals Could Unlock 4 Billion Euros for Western Balkans

News Feed
Monday, October 13, 2025

TIRANA (Reuters) -European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on Monday private sector deals signed or in the pipeline could unlock about 4 billion euros ($4.63 billion) in new investment as part of an EU growth plan for the Western Balkans region.During a summit in the Albanian capital Tirana between the EU and the Western Balkans countries, Von der Leyen invited investors to take part in the growth plan that aims to double the size of the region's economies in the next decade.She said that 10 important business deals will be signed in Tirana on Monday, and 24 other potential investments will be discussed on Tuesday."Together they could bring more than 4 billion euros in new investments in the region," Von der Leyen said at the summit. "The time to invest in the Western Balkans is now."The EU has pledged 6 billion euros to help the six Western Balkans nations form a regional common market and join the European common market in areas such as free movement of goods and services, transport and energy.But in order for payments to be made, Albania, Bosnia, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia must implement reforms and resolve outstanding issues with their neighbours.Von der Leyen identified artificial intelligence, clean energy and industrial value chains as three strategic sectors that would integrate local industries into EU supply chains.She cautioned that regulatory integration and industrial alliances are key to this effort.The six countries were promised EU membership years ago but the accession process has slowed to a crawl.The delay is partly due to reluctance among the EU's 27 members and a lack of reforms required to meet EU standards - including those concerning the economy, judiciary, legal systems, environmental protection and media freedoms.Serbia and Montenegro were the first in the region to launch EU membership talks, and Albania and North Macedonia began talks with Brussels in 2022. Bosnia and Kosovo lag far behind.(Reporting by Daria Sito-SucicEditing by Ros Russell)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

TIRANA (Reuters) -European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on Monday private sector deals signed or in the pipeline could unlock...

TIRANA (Reuters) -European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on Monday private sector deals signed or in the pipeline could unlock about 4 billion euros ($4.63 billion) in new investment as part of an EU growth plan for the Western Balkans region.

During a summit in the Albanian capital Tirana between the EU and the Western Balkans countries, Von der Leyen invited investors to take part in the growth plan that aims to double the size of the region's economies in the next decade.

She said that 10 important business deals will be signed in Tirana on Monday, and 24 other potential investments will be discussed on Tuesday.

"Together they could bring more than 4 billion euros in new investments in the region," Von der Leyen said at the summit. 

"The time to invest in the Western Balkans is now."

The EU has pledged 6 billion euros to help the six Western Balkans nations form a regional common market and join the European common market in areas such as free movement of goods and services, transport and energy.

But in order for payments to be made, Albania, Bosnia, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia must implement reforms and resolve outstanding issues with their neighbours.

Von der Leyen identified artificial intelligence, clean energy and industrial value chains as three strategic sectors that would integrate local industries into EU supply chains.

She cautioned that regulatory integration and industrial alliances are key to this effort.

The six countries were promised EU membership years ago but the accession process has slowed to a crawl.

The delay is partly due to reluctance among the EU's 27 members and a lack of reforms required to meet EU standards - including those concerning the economy, judiciary, legal systems, environmental protection and media freedoms.

Serbia and Montenegro were the first in the region to launch EU membership talks, and Albania and North Macedonia began talks with Brussels in 2022. Bosnia and Kosovo lag far behind.

(Reporting by Daria Sito-SucicEditing by Ros Russell)

Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Offshore oil plan was 'primed for cash flow,' but then it hit California regulators

A Texas company wants to drill for oil off Santa Barbara County's coast. Experts say its path to oil sales is looking more and more challenging.

When a Texas oil company first announced controversial plans to reactivate three drilling rigs off the coast of Santa Barbara County, investor presentations boasted that the venture had “massive resource potential” and was “primed for cash flow generation.” But now, less than two years later, mounting legal setbacks and regulatory issues are casting increasing doubt on the project’s future.Most recently, the California attorney general filed suit against Houston-based Sable Offshore Corp., accusing it of repeatedly putting “profits over environmental protections.” The lawsuit, filed last week in Santa Barbara County Superor Court, accuses Sable of continually failing to follow state laws and regulations intended to protect water resources. Sable, the lawsuit claims, “was at best misinformed, incompetent and incorrect” when it came to understanding and adhering to the California Water Code. “At worst, Sable was simply bamboozling the Regional Water Board to meet a critical deadline,” according to the lawsuit.The action comes less than a month after the Santa Barbara County district attorney’s office filed criminal charges against the company, accusing it of knowingly violating state environmental laws while working on repairs to oil pipelines that have sat idle since a major spill in 2015. The company also faces legal challenges from the California Coastal Commission, environmental groups and even its own investors. These developments now threaten the company’s ability to push forward on what has become an increasingly expensive and complicated project, according to some experts.Clark Williams-Derry, an analyst for the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, said there are still ways Sable could get off the ground and begin oil sales, but the repeated setbacks have become what he called “cumulative risk” for investors, who are key to funding the restart. “Sable is at risk of burning through its cash, and lenders are going to have to make a decision about whether or not this is a good investment,” Williams-Derry said. Ongoing pushback from the public, the state and in lawsuits makes that increasingly a hard argument to make, he said. Sable, however, said it remains steadfast in its goal of reactivating the Santa Ynez Unit — a complex of three offshore platforms, onshore processing facilities and connecting pipelines. The unit was shuttered by a different company a decade ago after a corroded section of pipeline ruptured near Refugio State Beach, creating one of the state’s worst oil spills. The company denies that it has broken any laws and insists that it has followed all necessary regulations. Recently, however, company officials have promoted a new restart plan that could avoid California oversight. Company officials say the new plan would keep the project entirely within federal waters — pivoting away from using the contentious pipelines and from what company officials called California’s “crumbling energy complex.”Jim Flores, the company’s chief executive, said Sable is working with the Trump administration’s National Energy Dominance Council on the plan to use an offshore storage and treatment vessel to transport crude from its offshore wells instead of the pipeline system. Although the company reports that pipeline repairs are complete, the lines have not yet been approved for restart by state regulators. “California has to make a decision soon on the pipeline before Sable signs an agreement for the [offshore vessel] and goes all in on the offshore federal-only option,” Flores said in a statement. The company acknowledges that transporting oil by ship instead of pipeline would dramatically extend the company’s timeline and increase its costs. In a June Securities and Exchange Commission report, Sable said there was “substantial doubt ... about the company’s ability to continue,” given ongoing negative cash flow and stalled regulatory approvals. However, the company says it continues to seek approvals to restart the pipelines from the California Office of the State Fire Marshal. The state fire marshal has said the plans remain under review, but the office has made clear that the pipelines will be approved for operation only “once all compliance and safety requirements, including ... approvals from other state, federal and local agencies, are met.”Deborah Sivas, a professor of environmental law at Stanford’s Law School, said it’s getting harder to see a successful path forward for Sable.“It’s pretty rare that an entity would have all these agencies lined up concerned about their impacts,” Sivas said of state regulators. “These agencies don’t very lightly go to litigation or enforcement actions. ... and the public is strongly against offshore drilling. So those are a whole bunch of reasons that I think are going to be hard obstacles for that company.”But even if Sable can pivot to federal-only oversight under a friendly Trump administration, Williams-Derry said there’s no clear-cut path. “This is an environment where some of the best, most profitable oil companies in the U.S. have cut drilling this year because profits are too low,” Williams-Derry said. Sable has enough money in the bank right now to have a “little bit of running room,” he said, “...but you can imagine that [investors] are going to start running out of patience.”The new lawsuit filed by the California attorney general lays out a year’s worth of instances in which Sable either ignored or defied the California Water Code during the firm’s pipeline repair work. The attorney general’s office called Sable’s evasion of regulatory oversight “egregious,” warranting “substantial penalties.” It’s not immediately clear how much will be demanded, but violations of the California Water Code are subject to a civil liability of up to $5,000 for each day a violation occurs. Despite repeated reminders and warnings from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Coast region, Sable did not comply with the water code, preventing the board “from assuring best management practices ... to avoid, minimize and mitigate impacts to water quality,” the lawsuit said. “No corporation should gain a business advantage by ignoring the law and harming the environment,” Jane Gray, chair of the Central Coast Water Board, said in a statement. “Entities that discharge waste are required to obtain permits from the state to protect water quality. Sable Offshore Corp. is no different.”The case comes months after the California Coastal Commission similarly found that Sable failed to adhere to the state’s Coastal Act despite repeated warnings and fined the company $18 million.

Business
Energy
Waste

Work Advice: How to avoid ‘workslop’ and other AI pitfalls

AI at work has drawbacks such as ‘workslop,’ which can hinder productivity. Strategic AI use and transparency are top solutions.

Following my response to a reader who’s resisting a push to adopt artificial intelligence tools at work, readers shared their thoughts and experiences — pro, con and resigned — on using AI.The consensus was that some interaction with AI is unavoidable for anyone who works with technology, and that refusing to engage with it — even for principled reasons, such as the environmental harm it causes — could be career-limiting.But there’s reason to believe that generative AI in the office may not be living up to its fundamental value proposition of making us more productive.A September article in Harvard Business Review (free registration required) warns that indiscriminate AI use can result in what the article dubs “workslop”: “AI-generated work content that masquerades as good work but lacks the substance to meaningfully advance a given task.”Examples of workslop include AI-generated reports, code and emails that take more time to correct and decipher than if they had been created from scratch by a human. They’re destructive and wasteful — not only of water or electricity, but of people’s time, productivity and goodwill.“The insidious effect of workslop is that it shifts the burden of the work downstream,” the HBR researchers said.Of course, workslop existed before AI. We’ve all had our time wasted and productivity bogged down by people who dominate meetings talking about nothing, send rambling emails without reviewing them for clarity or pass half-hearted work down the line for someone else to fix. AI just allows them to do more of it, faster. And just like disinformation, once workslop enters the system, it risks polluting the pool of knowledge everyone draws from.In addition to the literal environment, AI workslop can also damage the workplace environment. The HBR researchers found that receiving workslop caused approximately half of recipients to view the sender as “less creative, capable and reliable” — even less trustworthy or intelligent.But, as mentioned above, it’s probably not wise — or feasible — to avoid using AI. “AI is embedded in your everyday tasks, from your email client, grammar checkers, type-ahead, social media clients suggesting the next emoji,” said Dean Grant from Port Angeles, Washington, whose technology career has spanned 50 years. The proper question, he said, is not how to avoid using it, but what it can do for you and how it can give you a competitive advantage.But even readers who said they use AI appropriately acknowledged its flaws and limitations, including that its implementation sometimes takes more effort than simply performing the task themselves.“[H]ow much time should I spend trying to get the AI to work? If I can do the task [without AI] in an hour, should I spend 30 minutes fumbling with the artificial stupid?” asked Matt Deter of Rocklin, California. “At what point should I cut my losses?”So it seems an unwinnable struggle. If you can’t avoid or opt out of AI altogether, how do you make sure you’re not just adding to the workslop, generating resentment and killing productivity?Don’t make AI a solution in search of a problem. This one’s for the leaders. Noting that “indiscriminate imperatives yield indiscriminate usage,” the HBR article urges leaders encouraging AI use to provide guidelines for using it “in ways that best align to the organization’s strategy, values, and vision.” As with return-to-office mandates, if leaders can articulate a purpose, and workers have autonomy to push back when the mandate doesn’t meet that purpose, the result is more likely to add value.Don’t let AI have the last word. Generating a raw summary of a meeting for your own reference is one thing; if you’re sharing it with someone else, take the time to trim the irrelevant portions, highlight the important items, and add context where needed. If you use AI to generate ideas, take time to identify the best ones and shape them to your needs.Be transparent about using AI. If you’re worried about being judged for using AI, just know that the judgment will be even harsher if you try to pass it off as your own work, or if you knowingly pass along unvetted information with no warning.Weigh convenience against conservation. If we can get in the habit of separating recyclables and programming thermostats, we can be equally mindful about our AI usage. An AI-generated 100-word email uses the equivalent of a single-use bottle of water to cool and power the data centers processing that query. Knowing that, do you need a transcript of every meeting you attend, or are you requesting one out of habit? Do you need ChatGPT to draft an email, or can you get results just as quickly over the phone? (Note to platform and software developers: Providing a giant, easy-to-find AI “off” switch wouldn’t hurt.)Step out of the loop once in a while. Try an AI detox every so often where you do your job without it, just to keep your brain limber.“I can’t deny how useful [AI has] been for research, brainstorming, and managing workloads,” said Danial Qureshi, who runs a virtual marketing and social media management agency in Islamabad, Pakistan. “But lately, I’ve also started to feel like we’re losing something important — our own creativity. Because we rely on AI so much now, I’ve noticed we don’t spend as much time thinking or exploring original ideas from scratch.”Artificial intelligence may be a fact of modern life, but there’s still nothing like the real thing.Pro Tip: Having trouble getting started with AI? Check out Post Tech at Work reporter Danielle Abril’s brilliant articles on developing AI literacy.

Business
Conservation
Technology

Richard Tice has 15-year record of supporting ‘net stupid zero’ initiatives

Firms led by deputy Reform UK leader since 2011 have shown commitment to saving energy and cutting CO2 emissionsUK politics live – latest updatesHe never seems to tire of deriding “net stupid zero”, but Reform UK’s deputy leader, Richard Tice, has a 15-year business record of support for sustainability and green energy initiatives.The Reform party has made opposition to green energy and net zero part of its policy platform. Its founder, Nigel Farage, has called net zero policies a “lunacy”; the party has called to lift the ban on fracking for fossil gas; and one of the first Reform-led councils, Kent, rescinded last month its declaration of a climate emergency. Continue reading...

He never seems to tire of deriding “net stupid zero”, but Reform UK’s deputy leader, Richard Tice, has a 15-year business record of support for sustainability and green energy initiatives.The Reform party has made opposition to green energy and net zero part of its policy platform. Its founder, Nigel Farage, has called net zero policies a “lunacy”; the party has called to lift the ban on fracking for fossil gas; and one of the first Reform-led councils, Kent, rescinded last month its declaration of a climate emergency.However, companies led by Tice since 2011 boasted of their commitments to saving energy, cutting CO2 emissions and environmental responsibility. One told investors it had introduced a “green charter” to “mitigate our impact on climate change” and later hired a “full-time sustainability manager” as part of “its focus on energy efficiency and sustainability”.Another said it was “keen to play its part in reducing emissions for cleaner air” and said it had saved “hundreds of tonnes of CO²” by installing solar cells on the rooftops of its properties.A glance at Tice’s account on X reveals contempt for warnings of climate breakdown and efforts to mitigate it. Last year he said: “We are not in climate emergency; nor is there a climate crisis.” In May he stated: “Solar farms are wrong at every level” and insisted they would “destroy food security, destroy jobs [and] destroy property values”.He recently adopted the slogan “net stupid zero”, describing efforts to neutralise the UK’s fossil fuel emissions as “the most costly self-inflicted wound in modern British history”.But Steff Wright, a sustainability entrepreneur and former commercial tenant of Tice, found that statements in the annual reports from CLS Holdings and Quidnet Reit, property companies led by Tice, contradicted his public position.Wright said: “These reports reveal that Tice can clearly see the financial, social and environmental benefits of investing time, money and energy into sustainability focused initiatives.“He is a businessperson, and if he has chosen to be a chief executive of at least two companies who have taken steps to reduce carbon emissions and implement energy-efficient innovations, it’s because there is a business case to do so.”In 2010, the year Tice joined CLS Holdings as deputy chief executive, the company said it was committed to “a responsible and forward-looking approach to environmental issues” by encouraging, among other things, “the use of alternative energy supplies”. The following year, when Tice was promoted to chief executive, the company implemented the green charter and hired a sustainability manager. In 2012, CLS celebrated completing its “zero net emissions” building, adding: “The board acknowledges the group’s impact on society and the environment and … seeks to either both minimise and mitigate them, or to harness them in order to affect positive change.”In the company’s 2013 report, climate change was identified as a “sustainability risk”, requiring “board responsibility”, “dedicated specialist personnel” and “increased due diligence”. The company’s efforts were rewarded in 2014, when it was able to tell shareholders it had exceeded its CO2 emissions reduction targets.Tice launched Quidnet Reit, a property investment company, the following year. When it published its first full accounts, covering 2021, Tice was also chair of Reform UK, and already setting out his stall against “net stupid”. But for his company, fossil fuel emissions remained a priority.The 2021 report stated: “The company is keen to play its part in reducing emissions for cleaner air,” and detailed investments in solar power which “importantly … will reduce CO² emissions by some 70 tonnes per annum”.Quidnet’s emissions reduction efforts continued into 2022 and 2023, with the company stating both years that its solar investments were “saving hundreds of tonnes of CO²” a year. However, after a Guardian report last year covered some of Quidnet’s environmental commitments, no mention was made of them in last year’s report.skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionWright said: “Solar initiatives and other energy efficiency schemes have benefited Tice’s property companies whilst he was in charge, but now … there is a political advantage to gain Tice is all too happy to label these schemes as ‘perilous’ for investors.”Tice said critics were “in danger of confusing apples with pears”, insisting the comparisons revealed no contradiction. “I have never said don’t reduce emissions, be they CO2 or other, and where sensible use technology to do so efficiently,” he said.“Solar panels on roofs, selling electricity to tenant[s] underneath are [an] excellent double use of [a] roof and involve no subsidies. Solar farms on farmland is insane, involves large public subsidies and often include dangerous [battery energy storage] systems.”Tice said that when he ran CLS, net zero was not a legal requirement. “My issue has always been the multibillion subsidies, fact that renewables have driven electricity prices higher, made British industries uncompetitive and destroyed hundreds thousand jobs,.“Also in annual reports, because of [the] madness of ESG, so banks and shareholder became obsessed with emissions so companies felt pressured to report on all this. ESG is also mad, stands for Extremely Stupid Garbage, and is now rapidly sensibly being abandoned by many companies and banks.“So my position has been clear and logical and never involved subsidies. Big difference.”

Business
Climate
Energy

We Must Fight for Our National Parks

The national park system includes crucial spaces that hold our shared history and biodiversity and the promise of a livable future.

In this American moment, there are many concerns and crises. The country’s national park system might not be at the top of everyone’s list, but these parks impact our lives in ways we often don’t realize. We go to national parks to learn new perspectives, find peace and solitude in nature and history, and make cherished memories with our loved ones. By securing these spaces for us, national parks protect the water we drink, the air we breathe, and the food we grow. These public lands hold our history, preserving our culture and the stories that make up our identities and values as Americans. They also provide livelihoods, not only to the rangers who work in them but also to the small communities and businesses that surround them, contributing almost $56 billion annually to the nation’s economy. People are seeking them out now more than ever: A record number visited National Park Service (NPS) sites in 2024. Plus, the NPS is viewed most favorably of all major federal agencies, with the least amount of partisan division in public opinion of the sixteen agencies included in a Pew Research Center report last year. Following the events of November 2024, I naïvely thought (or held on to hope) that due to all of these factors and more, the Trump Administration would ignore Project 2025 and avoid damaging cuts to the agency. How could they come after an agency that is so beloved by such a vast majority of Americans? But if we’ve learned anything over the past nine months, it’s that we must not underestimate the carnage this administration will enthusiastically inflict on people and institutions. The NPS is currently navigating a 24 percent cut to its permanent staff and has lost more than $260 million in funding, in addition to a federal hiring freeze and additional cuts by the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Many permanent positions simply can’t be filled during the busiest seasons, and seasonal hiring delays also heavily impact operations. The Trump Administration is also directing NPS units to rewrite history by Executive Order, soliciting visitors to report via QR code “negative” signage and exhibits that in fact explain the complex and nuanced history of our nation’s integral moments of progress. Our national parks are under attack in more ways than this, but what’s happening on the ground? I spent the past two years traveling to twenty-three different NPS sites for graduate research and formerly worked for the service in Glacier National Park in Montana. My research team studies ranger-led public programs in national parks, such as guided hikes, tours, and campground programs. We systematically observe these programs and survey the audience about the experience afterward. I’ve spent a lot of time with frontline interpretive rangers and audiences, and the questions and comments expressing support for these brave public servants have been abundant since January. In March, I observed several visitors to California and Nevada’s Death Valley asking rangers leading programs about the challenges the park is facing, and expressing their dismay at what DOGE was doing to the National Park Service. One question on our survey that audience members fill out asks them to write out what this program inspired them to do. While entering the data, we noticed that many participants wrote comments such as, “Vote against Trump and anyone who doesn’t support the national parks,” and, “Write Congress to stop the terminations of the employees.” Visitors are also flooding the QR code system for reporting signage and exhibits with messages of support for the NPS and irrelevant comments to slow down the review process. Fighting the attacks against the NPS is certainly at the top of park visitors’ minds, and the battle is being brought to the streets as well. Grassroots organizations like the Resistance Rangers and The Wilderness Society have been organizing resistance and resilience, getting the word out through podcasts and social media channels, and rallying protests across the country. Alt National Park Service is another grassroots group of NPS supporters who use social media to motivate action. With more than 4.4 million followers on Facebook, the group uses its platform to spread information and call out outrageous attacks by the Trump Administration. NPS employees are also unionizing through the National Federation of Federal Employees, the National Treasury Employees Union, and others to protect against additional threats, including at Yosemite National Park and Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks. They join other NPS units that have unionized in the past. Despite illegal firings, understaffing, burnout, and other daily challenges, brave public servants continue to show up with passion and joy for the stewardship of what environmentalist Wallace Stegner called America’s “best idea.” With a smile, they demonstrate resilience to hundreds of visitors at an information desk, grit their teeth against the pouring rain while conducting plant surveys, and paddle dozens of miles to set nets that remove invasive fish species. They haven’t given up, and neither should we. “I’m incredibly heartened by people stepping up to advocate for national parks,” one NPS worker told me. “Through this work, they’re recognizing the power they have to make a difference when they get organized. It makes me hopeful to see these people finding their voices and learning how to make change, both in parks and in their own communities.” The massive outcry and collective action from those who love public lands have worked in some regards. In June, the Senate removed a provision from Trump’s budget bill that would have sold off millions of acres of public lands, a major win. While the fight is ongoing, there is no shortage of passionate people who believe in the agency’s mission to preserve “unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the National Park System for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations.” The U.S. National Park System represents more than historic buildings, forests, mountains, and rivers. It includes crucial spaces that hold our shared history, biodiversity, and the promise of a livable future. These spaces belong to each and every one of us, not corporations or politicians. Now, more than ever, we need bold voices, fierce protectors, and unwavering advocates to stand up against exploitation and greed. Whether you’re hiking a trail, sharing science, organizing your community, or calling out injustice, you are part of a powerful movement. And you can take action right now. (Personally, I love the 5 Calls app, which helps to streamline daily advocacy by helping constituents contact their representatives about issues that matter to them.) Every action matters. Every voice counts. Together, we can defend the wild and historic places that heal us, ground us, and remind us of what’s worth fighting for.  Mary Grace Larson is an environmental advocate. After working for the National Park Service at Glacier National Park in Montana, she is currently pursuing a master’s degree in forest resources and environmental conservation at Virginia Tech. Read more by Mary Grace Larson October 8, 2025 1:54 PM

Business
Conservation
Culture

Regulators know PG&E, Edison are slow to hook up solar. Why are there no penalties?

PG&E and Southern California Edison routinely blow their deadlines to hook up new solar panels, an advocacy group says. But after years of complaints they have not been punished.

In summary PG&E and Southern California Edison routinely blow their deadlines to hook up new solar panels, an advocacy group says. But after years of complaints they have not been punished. The state’s two largest utilities routinely drag their feet connecting solar panels to the electric grid, missing state-mandated deadlines as much as 73% of the time, according to a complaint filed to regulators by solar advocates. The complaint filed by a solar energy advocacy group urges the California Public Utilities Commission to hold utilities accountable when they fail to meet such deadlines. The commission is formally reviewing it.  The advocates have complained for years that such delays hinder California’s transition to renewables. State utility regulators are separately revisiting the process for connecting rooftop solar to the grid, including examining whether and how the utility commission should require utilities to comply with the timelines it established years ago. But the commission has yet to reprimand utilities for regularly missing these deadlines. “The rule is there, but the commission hasn’t chosen to enforce [it],” said Kevin Luo, policy and market development manager for the California Solar & Storage Association, a group advocating for the adoption of solar energy that filed the complaint. “The rule is there, but the commission hasn’t chosen to enforce [it].”Kevin Luo, California Solar & Storage Association When Californians add solar panels to their rooftops, they begin a complex “interconnection” process led by the utilities to ensure the array is correctly installed and able to provide power for both the customer and the grid, which receives power the customer does not use. For each interconnection step, the utility is allotted a certain amount of time, ranging from five business days to 90 calendar days. The timelines for several of the more extensive steps – including design, construction and installation – were clarified in a 2020 decision after solar panel owners complained that California’s major investor-owned utilities were blowing their deadlines.  The delays can have significant financial consequences for panel owners, widening the period after they have laid out money for solar cells but before they see a reduction in their power consumption or payments from selling excess solar power back to utilities. Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison, and San Diego Gas & Electric all report their compliance with these timelines on a quarterly basis. The reporting is for projects over 30 kilowatts, which are often for businesses, not residential homes, and account for the majority of solar projects. These data show that PG&E and Edison routinely exceed the allotted windows.  In the complaint, filed in late August, the California Solar & Storage Association noted the utilities take longer than permitted to connect customers between 19% and 73% of the time, depending on which stage of the process is examined.  For example, the utilities are given 10 business days to acknowledge someone’s request for interconnection – PG&E’s median time for this step was 20 days, with its longest being 245 days. One of the most crucial steps is a system impact study, which looks at how the addition of a customer’s solar array will affect the grid and identifies any potential issues with hookup. PG&E kept to its timeline 49% of the time, while Edison met its deadline 43% of the time, according to the complaint.  San Diego Gas & Electric typically meets its deadlines and wasn’t included in the solar association’s complaint about timeliness. PG&E spokesperson Mike Gazda responded to the complaint by stating that “PG&E is a strong advocate for solar energy and has interconnected nearly 900,000 solar customers—more than any other U.S. utility—to support customers who have made the choice to go solar, strengthen California’s energy grid and reduce our state’s carbon footprint. We look forward to addressing the latest claims made by the solar gorup through the appropriate regulatory channels.”  Edison spokesperson Jeff Monford said the company takes “complaints seriously and [is] working with the California Public Utilities Commission to thoroughly address any issues related to our interconnection processes.” Utilities have previously said that delays can be caused by permitting issues, unfamiliar new technologies, or other agencies needing to be involved.  So what happens when they break the rules?  The utilities commission declined to lay out specific penalties when it clarified the timelines in 2020. It rejected a recommendation from a working group including industry representatives and consumer advocates to “clearly indicate that financial penalties” could happen if a utility fails to meet the timelines on 95% of projects. “The commission must first determine whether timeline certainty is improving,” the decision said. Regulators could set out penalties in the future “if it determines such a construct would support timely interconnection.”  The commission declined to comment because the case is an “ongoing adjudicatory proceeding,” Adam Cranfill, spokesperson, said.   Without some kind of punishment, advocates argue, there’s not only no incentive for utilities to follow the rules, there’s a disincentive because of how the money flows. “From their perspective, solar and storage is competition for them,” Luo said. “Having people with their own solar and storage reduces the need to continually expand the grid and build out transmission lines.”  California’s rooftop solar industry has been mired in controversy in recent years because of the state’s “net energy metering” program, which governs how much utilities are required to pay solar customers for extra energy their panels generate. The program is meant to incentivize adopting renewable energy sources and offset the significant cost of rooftop solar, but utilities argued it creates an unfair cost burden for those without solar who pay more for costs such as grid maintenance. As a result, the current iteration of the program pays out significantly less than prior versions. Three environmental groups sued over the change, and the California Supreme Court ruled last month that the lower courts should reexamine the case’s details instead of deferring to utility regulators. 

Business
Energy

Suggested Viewing

Green Waste

What if every person could actually make an impact on the world? “Green Waste” takes an in-depth look at the process of recycling and waste management in the community of Flagstaff. From recycling plastic bags, to re-using glass bottles, from recycling hazardous waste to the efforts of local businesses, the film shows how every contribution, no matter how small, can collectively make the difference for a better tomorrow. Filmed and Produced under the Emerging Filmmakers Program for youth filmmakers.

Waste
Business
Solutions

Wake Up People!

Environmental activists have been camping in Sodros for more than four months with the purpose of stopping the trees from being cut down. In the past few days Chinese company CRBC workers have been showing up at the site accompanied by the police and gendarmerie forces. The activists have been requesting to see the permits and the documentation for the work they are planning to conduct from the CRBC workers. The CRBC workers haven’t shown any of the permits. Also, the work has begun without a construction board being clearly visible, which is mandatory by law.

Sustainable
Social Justice
Nature

Last Chair

We pollute the environment upon which we depend. An exploration of the paradox of sustainable skiing and how we can protect the places we love.

Sustainable
Business
Conservation

Voice of Vanilla

In the rainforests of Madagascar, vanilla offers hope to farmers hindered by the relentless tide of poverty and cyclones. How will the women responsible for vanilla cultivation weather the storms that threaten their livelihoods? Join us on this journey to uncover the truth behind one of the world’s most beloved spices and to support the women farmers at the heart of the vanilla industry.

Social Justice
Food
Business

The Fellowship of the Springs

Florida’s artesian springs are a natural wonder of the world. As unique as the geysers of Yellowstone and as mesmerizing as Vernal Falls in Yosemite, these blue jewels surrounding the north Florida landscape are considered a treasure by many who see them. The state contains the largest and highest concentration of fresh water springs on earth. But today, the future of Florida’s springs is uncertain. With flow levels declining and nitrate pollution on the rise, the springs today bear the scars of a profound struggle. Florida's own government continues to approve permits for large companies that want to pump water from the springs and their springsheds, for nominal permit fees that often cost less than a day pass to Disney World. The Fellowship of the Springs takes viewers behind the scenes of the fight to save Florida's springs, from the halls of the state capitol in Tallahassee to deep caves of Ichetucknee spring.

Water
Government
Business

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.