follow-on question to 'green fountain' scenario

[Anne Hendry <ahendry@pacbell.net>]

After today's discussion I wanted to try to get a bit more clarity on 
the 'green content source' discussion, so thought I'd throw out a 
hopefully simple example.

In my area we have quite a bit of local solar.  Up until recently net 
metering was the predominant method for handling any excess, although 
that is moving towards a direct monetary compensation model and 
eventually one where all generation is put back to the grid first.  Now, 
the generator (local home, business) gets certs for that green energy 
put back.  Once that energy goes back to the pool, though, I don't 
believe there is any tracking of how that energy was generated (other 
than the remaining certs).   Are we envisioning a future where that will 
change and all sources will be tracked through additional mechanisms?

[It may be the case that even if power does come from a green source, 
there is no certificate or tracking because it has not been 'certified', 
perhaps because there has been no mainstream market established for it, 
or the certification process is too onerous.]

Even if there is tracking, the certs for the above example go off into 
the financial carbon trading world where their validity and value are 
manged by a financial mechanism that is a world unto its own, and the 
energy takes a different route, back to the grid and then on to someone 
else's home or business.

So the financial value of the 'greenness' of this energy has already 
been used up (by giving certs to the producer).   I would therefore 
assume the cost of that energy to the consumer would be lower [than if 
it included the certs] because it has no certs included/embedded -- that 
value has already been realized by someone else.   If the certs had not 
already been utilized, and came with the energy, then the price of this 
energy would be higher because it would include valuable carbon certs.  
So, then, going back to the 'green fountain' example, is that consumer 
looking for utilized or unutilized 'green value', or does it care?   Is 
it driven primarily by economic reasons or altruistic reasons?

Another way to pose this, relative to what we're modeling, might be: if 
the certs have already been utilized, is there still value (and data) to 
be tracked due to the green source -- other than what went with the 
value of the certs (this would be, basically, altruistic value)?  This 
assumes the price is adjusted at the time the certs are removed.

I felt at the end of the discussion that we may be talking about two 
entirely different types of scenarios/markets.

Any comments/corrections welcome.

-Anne