Top Ten Utility Green Pricing Programs

April 2000

Rank	State	Utility	Program	# of Participants
Customer Participants (as of April 2000)
1	CA	Los Angeles Department of Water and Power	Green Power for a Green L.A.	31,000
2	CO	Public Service Company of Colorado	Windsource	14,500
3	WI	Wisconsin Electric	Energy for Tomorrow	12,000
3	CO	Public Service Company of Colorado	Renewable Energy Trust	12,000
5	CA	Sacramento Municipal Utility District	Greenergy	6,100
6	WI	Madison Gas and Electric	Wind Power	5,200
7	WI	Wisconsin Public Service	Solar Wise for Schools	4,000
8	OR	Eugene Water and Electric Board	EWEB Windpower	2,700
9	HI	Hawaiian Electric	Sun Power for School	2,600
10	OR	Portland General Electric	Salmon-Friendly Power	2,500
Source: NREL

Rank	State	Utility	Program	Participation Rate
Customer Participation Rates (as of April 2000)
1	WI	Madison Gas and Electric	Wind Power	4.7%
2	CO	Holy Cross Energy	Wind Power	4.1%
3	WA	Orcas Power & Light	Green Power	3.8%
3	IA	Cedar Falls Utilities	Wind Energy	3.8%
5	OR	Eugene Water and Electric Board	EWEB Windpower	3.7%
6	MN	Moorhead Public Service	Capture the Wind	3.4%
7	OR	Central Electric Cooperative	Green Power	2.9%
8	OH	City of Bowling Green	Green Power	2.5%
9	CA	Los Angeles Department of Water and Power	Green Power for a Green L.A.	2.2%
10	CO	Fort Collins Utilities	Wind Power Program	2.1%
Source: NREL

Rank	State	Utility	Resources Installed	New Capacity
New Renewable Resources Developed through Green Pricing (as of April 2000)
1	CO	Public Service Company of Colorado	Wind	15.7 MW¹
2	CA	Sacramento Municipal Utility District - Greenergy	Landfill gas	8.3 MW
3	WI	Madison Gas and Electric	Wind	8.2 MW²
4	WI	Wisconsin Electric	Wind/hydro/landfill gas	7.2 MW³
5	TX	TXU	Wind	6.6 MW
6	OR	Eugene Water and Electric Board	Wind	6.5 MW
7	CO	Holy Cross Energy	Wind	3.0 MW⁴
8	CO	Fort Collins Utilities	Wind	2.9 MW⁵
9	CA	Sacramento Municipal Utility District - PV Pioneers	PV	1.5 MW
9	KS	Western Resources	Wind	1.5 MW
Source: NREL Notes: ¹ PSCO sells 4 MW from its 20-MW wind project to Holy Cross Energy and Colorado Springs Utilities. ² Madison Gas & Electric uses 3 MW of its 11.2-MW wind project to satisfy a state renewable energy mandate. The remainder of the project is supported through green pricing. ³ Wisconsin Electric purchases another 2.6 MW of existing landfill gas resources for its green pricing program. ⁴ Holy Cross Energy purchases its wind power from PSCO. ⁵ Fort Collins obtains its wind power from Platte River Power Authority's 4.6 MW Wyoming wind project.

Rank	State	Utility	Resources	Premium
Premium Charged for New, Customer-Driven Renewable Power¹ (as of April 2000)
1	TX	Austin Energy	Landfill gas/wind	0.4¢/kWh
2	CA	Sacramento Municipal Utility District	Landfill gas	1.0¢/kWh
3	MN	Dakota Electric Association	Wind	1.22¢/kWh
4	MN	Great River Energy²	Wind	1.5¢/kWh
4	MN	Moorhead Public Service³	Wind	1.5¢/kWh
5	MI	Traverse City Light & Power	Wind	1.6¢/kWh
6	WI	Wisconsin Electric⁴	Landfill gas/small hydro/wind	2.0¢/kWh
7	CO	Public Service Company of Colorado	Wind	2.5¢/kWh
7	CO	Holy Cross Energy	Wind	2.5¢/kWh
7	CO	Tri-State G&T	Wind	2.5¢/kWh
7	CO	Platte River Power Authority (Estes, Loveland, Fort Collins, Longmont)	Wind	2.5¢/kWh
Source: NREL Note: The premium charged in a green pricing program can be a function of any number of variables, including but not limited to the renewable energy technology utilized, the quality of the renewable energy resource, the size of the project(s), the project and company financials, the availability of subsidies or incentives, inclusion of administrative and marketing costs, the utility's avoided cost of energy, the amount of renewables already in the utility mix, and whether participating customers shoulder the full cost of the program. ¹ Includes only programs that have installed or announced firm plans to install new renewable resources. ² Suggested retail price for member distribution cooperatives. ³ Adjusted to reflect the cost of 100% new wind power. ⁴ Three-fourths of the power comes from new renewable resources.