P.J. Popovic, CEO of Houston-based Rhythm, explains Renewable Energy Certificates work and their impact on Texas. Photo courtesy of Rhythm

We all know what renewable energy is — wind, solar, biomass, geothermal, hydropower — but how do you purchase it? It's invisible. Not to mention when energy from any source enters the electricity grid, there's no way to track all those electrons.

Renewable Energy Certificates have made it possible

Renewable Energy Certificates, or RECs, allow us to track your clean energy. Each individual REC represents one megawatt-hour of clean energy generated. And while a REC isn't technically electricity, it represents the clean energy going into the electricity grid—meaning homes and businesses claim their commitment to renewable energy if their electricity is supported by RECs.

It's also important to understand what a renewable energy certificate is not: an offset. An offset represents a metric ton of emissions avoided and a REC represents 1 MWh of clean energy generated. While each have similar goals, they are not quite the same thing.

Not all RECs are created equally

The market for RECs is fluid. Due to the growth of the renewable energy market, RECs have been oversupplied for years. This has created low prices and little-to-no financial advantage for the facilities that generate clean electricity (e.g., wind facilities, solar farms, hydro plants).

In Texas, the retail electricity market is inundated with renewable electricity claims said to be supported by RECs. The energy plan you sign up for might come from solar, wind, biomass, or even trash incineration, but the renewable energy facilities likely are coming from outside Texas, located in places like California, Canada, or elsewhere. While there's no wrong way to switch to renewable energy, supporting renewable energy sources inside Texas helps Texans move closer to being a more sustainable state.

Choosing Texas renewable energy plans and your actions do have a true, real-world impact more than ever before

Some critics have argued that REC-supported renewable energy plans don't meet the highest standard of sustainability arguing RECs are not foundational to the existence of renewable energy assets. In other words, they argue that RECs don't provide a material revenue source for renewable projects because they don't incentivize new developments of renewable facilities to be built.

When RECs were trading for less than a dollar, this was a valid argument. But that was then, and this is now.

In the last year alone, voluntary renewable energy certificate prices have skyrocketed and are now between $7 and $10 per MWh. This means RECs can now contribute up to 30 percent of a renewable facility's revenue. Naturally, this encourages more and more clean-energy facilities and clean-energy jobs to be created. A win-win.

What about Power Purchase Agreements?

A Power Purchase Agreement, or PPA, is a tad different than a REC. In a PPA, the developer of a renewable project (solar arrays at a solar farm, or turbines at a wind farm) can sell the actual energy it produces over a 10-to-20-year contract.

While the sale of this renewable energy still contributes to a larger portion of project revenues, the revenue mix has clearly shifted, and RECs cannot be considered an immaterial incentive anymore. Sure, PPAs are a stronger market signal for renewable project development, but only a couple of hundred organizations globally utilize PPAs. This makes them very challenging for businesses to access.

Through PPAs, various risks, credit needs, and long-term commitments create challenges for many organizations to meet their sustainability goals. So, while RECs do not provide as material of a market signal as PPAs, with the recent changes in market prices, RECs can now be considered a meaningful, profitable market signal for renewable projects.

Making the future of renewable energy in Texas even brighter.

------

P.J. Popovic is the CEO of Houston-based Rhythm.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Houston scores $120M in new cancer research and prevention grants

cancer funding

The Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas has granted more than $120 million to Houston organizations and companies as part of 73 new awards issued statewide.

The funds are part of nearly $154 million approved by the CPRIT's governing board earlier this month, bringing the organization's total investment in cancer prevention and research to more than $4 billion since its inception.

“Today marks an important milestone for CPRIT and for every Texan affected by cancer,” CEO Kristen Doyle said in a news release. “Texas has invested $4 billion in the fight against one of the world’s greatest public health challenges. Over 16 years, that support has helped Texas lead the search for breakthrough treatments, develop new cancer-fighting drugs and devices, and—most importantly—save tens of thousands of lives through early cancer detection and prevention. Every Texan should know this effort matters, and we’re not finished yet. Together, we will conquer cancer.”

A portion of the funding will go toward recruiting leading cancer researchers to Houston. CPRIT granted $5 million to bring John Quackenbush to Baylor College of Medicine. Quackenbush comes from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and is an expert in computational and systems biology. His research focuses on complex genomic data to understand cancer and develop targeted therapies.

The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center also received $3 million to recruit Irfan Asangani, an associate professor at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine. His research focuses on how chromatin structure and epigenetic regulation drive the development and progression of cancer, especially prostate cancer.

Other funds will go towards research on a rare, aggressive kidney cancer that impacts children and young adults; screening programs for breast and cervical cancer; and diagnostic technology.

In total, cancer grants were given to:

  • The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center: $29.02 million
  • Baylor College of Medicine: $15.04 million
  • The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston: $9.37 million
  • Texas A&M University System Health Science Center: $1.2 million
  • University of Houston: $900,000

Additional Houston-based companies landed grants, including:

  • Crossbridge Bio Inc.: $15.01 million
  • OncoMAGNETx Inc.: $13.97 million
  • Immunogenesis Inc.: $10.85 million
  • Diakonos Oncology Corporation: $7.16 million
  • Iterion Therapeutics Inc.: $7.13 million
  • NovaScan Inc.: $3.7 million
  • EMPIRI Inc.: $2.59 million
  • Air Surgical Inc.: $2.58 million
  • Light and Salt Association: $2.45 million

See the full list of awards here.

U.S. News names 5 Houston suburbs as the best places to retire in 2026

Retirement Report

Houston-area suburbs should be on the lookout for an influx of retirees in 2026. A new study by U.S. News and World Report has declared The Woodlands and Spring as the fourth and fifth best cities to retire in America, with three other local cities making the top 25.

The annual report, called "250 Best Places to Retire in the U.S. in 2026" initially compared 850 U.S. cities, and narrowed the list down to a final 250 cities (up from 150 previously). Each locale was analyzed across six indexes: quality of life for individuals reaching retirement age, value (housing affordability and cost of living), health care quality, tax-friendliness for retirees, senior population and migration rates, and the strength of each city's job market.

Midland, Michigan was crowned the No. 1 best place to retire in 2026. The remaining cities that round out the top five are Weirton, West Virginia (No. 2) and Homosassa Springs, Florida (No. 3).

According to U.S. News, about 15 percent of The Woodlands' population is over the age of 65. The median household income in this suburb is $139,696, far above the national average median household income of $79,466.

Though The Woodlands has a higher cost of living than many other places in the country, the report maintains that the city "offers a higher value of living compared to similarly sized cities."

"If you want to buy a house in The Woodlands, the median home value is $474,279," the city's profile on U.S. News says. "And if you're a renter, you can expect the median rent here to be $1,449." For comparison, the report says the national average home value is $370,489.

Spring ranked as the fifth best place to retire in 2026, boasting a population of more than 68,000 residents, 11 percent of whom are seniors. This suburb is located less than 10 miles south of The Woodlands, while still being far enough away from Houston (about 25 miles) for seniors to escape big city life for the comfort of a smaller community.

"Retirees are prioritizing quality of life over affordability for the first time since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic," said U.S. News contributing editor Tim Smart in a press release.

The median home value in Spring is lower than the national average, at $251,247, making it one of the more affordable places to buy a home in the Houston area. Renters can expect to pay a median $1,326 in monthly rent, the report added.

Elsewhere in Houston, Pearland ranked as the 17th best place to retire for 2026, followed by Conroe (No. 20) and League City (No. 25).

Other Texas cities that ranked among the top 50 best places to retire nationwide include Victoria (No. 12), San Angelo (No. 28), and Flower Mound (No. 37).

The top 10 best U.S. cities to retire in 2026 are:

  • No. 1 – Midland, Michigan
  • No. 2 – Weirton, West Virginia
  • No. 3 – Homosassa Springs, Florida
  • No. 4 – The Woodlands, Texas
  • No. 5 – Spring, Texas
  • No. 6 – Rancho Rio, New Mexico
  • No. 7 – Spring Hill, Florida
  • No. 8 – Altoona, Pennsylvania
  • No. 9 – Palm Coast, Florida
  • No. 10 – Lynchburg, Virginia
---

This article originally appeared on CultureMap.com.

Micro-nuclear reactor to launch at Texas A&M innovation campus in 2026

nuclear pilot

The Texas A&M University System and Last Energy plan to launch a micro-nuclear reactor pilot project next summer at the Texas A&M-RELLIS technology and innovation campus in Bryan.

Washington, D.C.-based Last Energy will build a 5-megawatt reactor that’s a scaled-down version of its 20-megawatt reactor. The micro-reactor initially will aim to demonstrate safety and stability, and test the ability to generate electricity for the grid.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) fast-tracked the project under its New Reactor Pilot Program. The project will mark Last Energy’s first installation of a nuclear reactor in the U.S.

Private funds are paying for the project, which Robert Albritton, chairman of the Texas A&M system’s board of regents, said is “an example of what’s possible when we try to meet the needs of the state and tap into the latest technologies.”

Glenn Hegar, chancellor of the Texas A&M system, said the 5-megawatt reactor is the kind of project the system had in mind when it built the 2,400-acre Texas A&M-RELLIS campus.

The project is “bold, it’s forward-looking, and it brings together private innovation and public research to solve today’s energy challenges,” Hegar said.

As it gears up to build the reactor, Last Energy has secured a land lease at Texas A&M-RELLIS, obtained uranium fuel, and signed an agreement with DOE. Founder and CEO Bret Kugelmass said the project will usher in “the next atomic era.”

In February, John Sharp, chancellor of Texas A&M’s flagship campus, said the university had offered land at Texas A&M-RELLIS to four companies to build small modular nuclear reactors. Power generated by reactors at Texas A&M-RELLIS may someday be supplied to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) grid.

Also in February, Last Energy announced plans to develop 30 micro-nuclear reactors at a 200-acre site about halfway between Lubbock and Fort Worth.

---

This article originally appeared on our sister site, EnergyCapitalHTX.com.