Purchasing Green Power for Client's Entire Operation

Alicia, you will need to demonstrate that the green power you purchased is equivalent to Green-e certified power, by showing that it is certified to an equivalent standard. (Taking the effort to do this is not common.) There is more guidance on this above, and in earlier conversations on this forum.

Equivalency includes the following sections of the Green-e Energy Standard - Section II, III (excluding G), Section IV (excluding A), and Section V.

The last one if often the most difficult. The power source cannot be part of a government mandate. It must create additionality in the voluntary market.

I'd be careful with the term "additionality." It has strong connotations that the green power would need to be installed BECAUSE of the money from the RECs, not as part of business as usual. In the US RECs do not require additionality, while carbon offsets do.

I think you're saying they can't be double counted: once for a government mandate and again for a voluntary purchase.

As I understand it that is the case. To count as Green-e RECs they do require additionality (see Section IIID) but maybe I am not using the term correctly. Again as I understand it RECs themselves may not require additionality (Green-e RECs do require it) and some of the low quality carbon offsets do not require it either. Additionality does not happen with a government mandated renewable (they would happen anyway); it does happen in the voluntary market and in some cases because of the value of the RECs.

I am saying that it can't be double counted and it can't be part of a mandate like an RPS or similar government requirement. As I understand it both are the case for LEED projects since both are required by Green-e.

Additionality: means that a project is beyond business as usual. http://www.green-e.org/learn_dictionary.shtml

Green-e RECs absolutely do not require proof of additionality. If I buy a REC all I am buying is proof that 1,000 kwh of renewable energy was generated and put onto the electric grid and the "environmental benefits" of that 1,000 kwh belong to me and no one else.

Additionality usually refers to reductions that would happen in *addition* to business as usual. When I buy a green-e REC I am not buying proof that additional capacity is being added or that my money is making a direct impact on the amount of renewable energy generated/GHGs reduced.

The vast majority of Green-e wind RECs are really coming from wind farms that would have been built even if there was no REC market (they were built because of the production tax credit). So in that sense the green-e RECs are not "additional."

I'd like RECs more if they required "addionality" but they don't. The only people who ask for "additional RECs" are college students :) it's not a term I hear very much.

We understand the term the same.

So help me understand what Section III D is saying if it is not about additionality? Again maybe I am getting the term and this "no mandate" requirement confused.

the majority of section III D clarifies what is/is not "double counting." I'd encourage you to call green-e and ask them if green-e RECs are "additional."

Some voluntary REC companies would come into a state with a 30% renewable portfolio standard (RPS) mandate, sell someone RECs for 70% of their usage and call it 100% renewable energy. Other companies would say that 100% of the usage had to be "offset" and no credit for the RPS could be taken. This section clarifies what's allowed.

In other instances Some utilities had renewable mandates forced on them, realized some of their customers were voluntarily buying RECs, and tried to take credit for it. That's not allowed per section III D (thank god).( Personally, I did purchase RECs to "make a difference" and I would have been mad if my utility got to take credit for my purchase.) I'm not sure about the sentence about specific mandated facilities because I am not aware of any.

Pro-additionality people may have said that wind farms/ solar farms receiving generous tax incentives should not be able to sell green-e RECs. Section IIID says those facilities can still generate green-e RECs. That does relate to "additionality" in that a non-"additional" facility can still generate green-e RECs.

...could get rough trying to exactly match green-e to the standards in another country, ya think? I know people on this form have succeeded with that though.

or call Bob Maddox, Sterling Planet you may have served on the TAG together

Yep maybe I will call Bob as we did serve on the EA TAG together.

I do appreciate the education. Perhaps my use of additionality was inappropriate so let's lay that aside. I think I understand the term but maybe not as thoroughly as you do.

My primary point was related to the green power source not being part of a mandate. Section III D clearly states "Green-e Energy certified products must be comprised of eligible renewable generation over and above anything required by state or federal RPS requirements, legislation, or settlement agreements". This section seems pretty clear. As I understand it to be Green-e or equivalent the green power source cannot be part of a mandate. I suppose this is a form of "double counting" but the next section deals with the double counting that I think of when I hear the term.

Section III E is labeled "Double Counting" and deals with claiming the same source more than once.

So my primary point was "not part of a mandate" which is difficult in many countries as most if not all renewables in some are mandated as I understand it. Sorry if I confused folks with an inaccurate use of the term additionality.