“Solar is a key strategic investment that can help combat energy poverty to create economic growth and help fight climate change,” said Matt Petersen, President and CEO of Global Green USA. “We need governments to shift subsidies for oil, gas and coal toward solar and renewable technologies to create jobs, improve the lives of those in need, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The report card enables us to see which countries are doing exactly that and which countries still need to strengthen their solar programs.”
“Global Green’s 2009 Global Solar Report Card, the 2nd annual release, provides world leaders gathered in Copenhagen with an accurate and essential perspective on the progress – or lack thereof – toward developing solar energy as a key piece of how we solve the climate crisis and address energy poverty,” said Edward Norton, Global Green board member. “Sadly, the report card points out that most nations still have a long way to go toward harvesting the full potential of solar as a clean, renewable energy source.”
HIGHLIGHTS OF THE SOLAR REPORT CARD
- Only one A – Germany (A-) again got the highest grade.
- Who doesn’t love California and Italy? – California and Italy both received B-, with Italy experiencing almost 400% annual growth in installed capacity.
- Who got an F? – Poland and Russia, with governments focused marginally on other renewable energy sources and no PV-specific incentives in place, once again received failing (F) grades.
- Who’s Going up – Six (6) countries received higher grades relative to 2008: Italy, Japan, Greece, China, the United Kingdom and Switzerland, though for the last two countries the higher grade was the result of a new grading scheme and not new or better incentives.
- Who fell behind? – Australia and India both fell from C to C-. Incentives are plentiful in both countries, but often lack cohesion or long-term predictability.
- 3 countries not making the grade – China (despite new programs), the United Kingdom and Canada all scored a D, suffering from a lack of incentives that are sufficient in size or scope to encourage meaningful growth.
- Small nations, small programs – Switzerland and Israel, the smallest nations evaluated, both scored a D-. Switzerland’s program suffers from a lack of funding, and Israel’s program is too limited.
– from globalgreen.org