GetSolar.com Solar Homes & Solar Installers Directory Blog

New: Progress Energy Commercial Solar Incentive

2009-07-09T21:00:33Z

As I outlined about a month ago, Progress Energy has recently expanded its solar rebate and incentive programs. Beyond a new residential solar rebate worth up to $2.00/watt, the North Carolina-based utility has launched a commercial solar program called SunSense Commercial Solar PV. Details on the incentive structure have recently been made available. Here.

In short, commercial, industrial and government customers of Progress Energy Carolinas are eligible to sign up for a production-based incentive. Here’s the rundown:

Owners may receive a production-based renewable energy credit (REC) payment of 18 cents per kWh generated by the solar PV system
To be eligible, systems must be rooftop-mounted and be between 10 kW and 250 kW (DC) in size
The overall program limit is 5 mWs of installed PV capacity each year
The application (PDF) is available for download here.

This is great news for South Carolina and North Carolina businesses that are looking to get solar. Well-structured REC payments provide consistent cash flow over time, ensuring that system owners are compensated for their initial cash outlay. Don’t forget that businesses may also take (1) a 30-percent federal solar tax credit, or (2) for commercial systems installed in 2009 and 2010, a 30-percent renewable energy grant from the Treasury. Read here for details.

Finally, it’s well worth mentioning that Progress Energy also sponsors a solar water heating program for businesses and other non-residential customers. (Residential customers, see my previous post.) Check out this additional info from Cape Fear Business News:

SunSense Commercial Solar Water Heating – Non-residential customers can receive incentives through this program for installing rooftop-mounted solar water heating systems ranging in size from 1,200 to 4,000 square feet of collector area (roughly 30 to 100 solar thermal panels). Customers must apply to participate in the program and, if approved, agree to sell all RECs from the system to Progress Energy for 10 years.

Participating customers will be required to install a thermal meter to record and report system output. The measured output will then be converted to a REC equivalent. Progress Energy will pay customers $20 per REC for all metered thermal energy.

Commercial solar water heating systems vary in cost based on system type and size. Customers should contact a solar installation professional to determine appropriate sizing, costs and potential benefits.

NOTE: A 25-percent tax credit is available in South Carolina for the installation of a solar water heating system, while North Carolina offers a 35-percent tax credit for that installation of solar water heat and solar PV. See our U.S. solar incentive map for details.

UPDATE: Progress Energy Carolinas is teaming up with Southern Energy and NxGen Power to build and operate a solar energy plant. The 1.3 megawatt solar array will be sited on Raleigh, NC-owned property at the Neuse River Wastewater Treatment Plant.

New: Progress Energy Commercial Solar Incentive

New Jersey Solar Key in Race for Governor

2009-07-08T16:36:08Z

In New Jersey’s gubernatorial race, solar power development has become a hot topic. Incumbent Democratic Governor Jon Corzine has been at the wheel over the last few years as the state moved from one of the country’s strongest cash-based solar incentives to an innovative, and slightly risky, solar renewable energy certificate (SREC) trading program. SREC sales have been part of the state’s approach to incentivizing solar for years, but until recently, they were the support–not the foundation.

The surprising part about the solar debate being pushed by Republican Christopher Christie is that the contender feels Corzine has not done enough for solar development in the state. Christie is putting energy development at the forefront of his campaign, and it seems to be working: he’s leading (though narrowly) in the polls.

"Energy as Industry": The welcome screen on Christie's campaign website

Corzine ushered in a stringent RPS that dictates New Jersey’s energy portfolio must be 20% renewable by 2020, with 2% from solar energy sources. (If you want to split hairs, it’s actually 22.5% by 2021, with 2.12% from solar…) That equates 1500 MW of total solar capacity in the state. With an installed capacity of less than 70 MW at the end of 2008, that’s quite a hike. The current “integrated incentive” plan combining cash rebates with SREC sales is one prong of Corzine’s approach. He also presided over some recent controversial solar development bills that mandate solar minimums for some types of new housing and commercial spaces.

Corzine has not, however, presided over an explosion of solar installations. In 2001, five years before Corzine’s governorship, a lonely 9 kilowatts of solar panel installations were installed courtesy of New Jersey’s CORE rebate program. But by the time Corzine took office in 2006, CORE had found its footing. That year, the program funded over 17 MW of solar power. In subsequent years the program slackened a bit, until it choked on empty cash reserves in 2008 and then rebooted this year with more moderate rebate levels. Installations have not fallen off drastically since 2006, but they also haven’t skyrocketed. Admittedly, the shift to SRECs is a long-term investment whose true impact on solar in the state will only be seen as the market develops over the next few years.

Christie has a few suggestions for amping up the state’s solar capacity. He’s eyeing the state’s landfills (all of them) and protected farmland (20% of it) as the future sites of solar farms, as his campaign website lays out. He also wants to offer enormous tax incentives to renewable energy manufacturers to entice them to build within the state. While that might be a practice well within his party line, much of what Christie has to say about the importance of solar power and other renewable energy is hard to distinguish from the rhetoric of his Democratic opponent. It will make for an odd gubernatorial race, but is, perhaps, a testament to the truly non-partisan nature of our clean energy future.

New Jersey Solar Key in Race for Governor

Federal Energy R&D in Pictures

2009-07-07T21:08:19Z

Kate Mackenzie over at FT’s Energy Source relays an interesting overview of U.S. R&D spending on energy, courtesy of Alexis Madrigral who, in turn, draws from a Pacific Northwest National Lab report by James Dooley.

The main takeaways? (1) Relative to other expenditures, like health and national defense, America has over the years spent paltry sums on energy research and development. (2) Of the R&D funds allocated for energy, most of it has gone to fossil fuels and nuclear technologies (though the share going to renewable energy and energy efficiency is growing). (3) As Mackenzie notes, compared to other industrialized countries (save Japan) the U.S. is not alone in its spending habits. Take a look at the accompanying charts:

: U.S. Federal Energy R&D, 1961-2006

: Total U.S. Federal R&D Breakdown, 1961-2006

Looking at that pale blue-bulge during the 60s and 70s (labeled “Space” in the second chart), I can see why Al Gore has chosen to at times describe the drive for renewable energy as our generation’s “space race.” There have also been recent alternative references to a “new Manhattan project.” Metaphors aside, it’s clear the Obama Administration is set on boosting R&D for renewables and energy efficiency. Don’t believe me? Just check out this post from Cleanbeta (Just what you wanted, another chart…).

: U.S. Funding for Energy R&D

Federal Energy R&D in Pictures

California Solar Subsidies Victim Of Their Own Success, Crucial Bill Awaits Judgment

2009-07-07T18:54:01Z

Ever since the inception of its highly successful $3.3 billion solar subsidy program, California has been continually touted by solar power enthusiasts—ourselves included—as the model state for renewable energy adoption in the United States. As the LA Times reports this week, however, not everything is coming up roses in solar country. Due to the overwhelming success of the program, the state utilities are toeing the legal limit for the amount of electricity they can buy back from customers. Parts of northern and central California served by Pacific Gas & Electric Co. may hit the limit by the end of this year, whereas the areas served by Southern California Edison Co. and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. are in less danger of doing so. What’s a supporter of clean energy to do?

Enter Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), whose bill AB 560, which proposes to raise the net metering cap from 2.5% to a whopping 10%, passed the California State Assembly in May and awaits a crucial Senate utilities committee vote this week. Present California law restricts utilities from buying back from customers more than 2.5% of a utility’s maximum generating capacity, a cap which some would prefer to see gone altogether. Not surprisingly, PG&E, Edison and SDG&E all oppose the bill—although perhaps not as violently as one might expect, given what they might lose.

All three companies oppose Skinner’s bill. They do not want lawmakers to raise the limit until next year at the earliest, after the California Public Utilities Commission tallies up the program’s costs and benefits.

Utilities say they strongly support solar power but want more information about whether it’s fair to further increase financial incentives for solar-panel ownership.

Such incentives, they point out, would come at the expense of most of the utilities’ other customers, who don’t want or can’t afford to invest in the costly panels.

Other complaints extended beyond the net-metering to the solar subsidy program overall, which a report from the Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee lodged against California’s solar incentives program. It noted that solar power users receive a state subsidy of roughly 20% of the purchase and installation cost, as well as a federal income tax credit of 30%, and suggested that adding more incentives could be going “too far,” citing the disparity between the benefits solar power users receive and regular ratepayers receive. Some supporters of the program, however, chose to focus more on solar energy’s potential as a consumption-mitigation tool.

Caps are an impediment to fully developing solar power’s potential and its ability to provide clean energy that can be tapped in urban areas, where it is most needed, during peak demand on hot summer afternoons, [Adam Browning, executive director of the Vote Solar initiative,] said. Eighteen states allow net metering without any caps, he noted.

Ultimately, though, it’s often the hard numbers that speak the loudest. The LA Times article opens with the anecdote of a woman who, after installing 20 solar panels on her roof, found herself with an electric bill of $1.26 this past June. You can’t even buy an In-N-Out hamburger for $1.26. Furthermore:

Legislation, approved in 2007 and known as the Million Solar Roofs program, has spurred the production of solar-generated electricity to rise 78%. That’s equivalent to the power generated by a modern power plant, the Public Utilities Commission reported last week.

I doubt that the overwhelming popularity of California’s solar subsidy, and the roadblocks that have arisen from it, will sound the death knell of the state’s solar industry. It has far more longevity than that. Former solar poster children—Spain, Germany—have survived, retooled their programs and carried on promoting the adoption of solar energy. But what’s at stake aren’t just some extra dollars we could be saving on an electric bill—it’s a model of solar power adoption in America. Do the utility companies’ arguments seem valid? What possible solutions are there, and have they been tried before elsewhere? We welcome any thoughts, comments, questions—let’s make this an ongoing discussion as the events unfold.

California Solar Subsidies Victim Of Their Own Success, Crucial Bill Awaits Judgment

Connecticut Solar Rebate Returns

2009-07-06T13:55:31Z

This past December, we reported that funding for Connecticut’s solar rebate program had run dry. Six months later, the program is back by popular demand. The Connecticut Clean Energy Fund recently announced the re-opening of the Small Solar Rebate Program, effective July 1, 2009:

The Connecticut Clean Energy Fund (CCEF) today announced that it has reopened its Small Solar PV Rebate Program (SSPRP). Since November 2008, this program has been unable to accept new applications for rebates because budgeted funding for the program was fully committed. However, with the CCEF board’s recent approval of a new, $3.1 million funding allocation
for the program, the SSPRP can now support several new rebates for residential solar installations.

“We are delighted to be able to offer this program once again to Connecticut homeowners,” said Lise
Dondy, president of CCEF. “It has been a highly popular program, enabling the purchase and
installation of more than 1,000 small solar PV systems statewide since the program was first introduced
in late 2004.” Dondy added, “We have a long list of homeowners who wish to go green with solar and
will benefit from the new funding. We look forward to assisting them in stabilizing their energy costs
and protecting the environment.”

Of the $3.1 million in new funds, $1.5 million will come from federal stimulus money allocated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. (For more recent news on solar rebates and federal stimulus money, read here.) The remaining $1.6 million will be raised through small surcharges levied on all electricity utility bills, statewide — a funding approach CCEF has applied in the past.

As for the rebates themselves, residential customers who install a solar photoelectric (PV) system can expect to have their purchase subsidized as follows:

$1.75/watt, for the first 5 kilowatts (kW) of installed PV capacity (PTC rating)
$1.25/watt for the next 5 kW of PV capacity (for a maximum system size capped at 10 kW)

So, to take a rough example, a 7.1-kW residential solar panel system could qualify for a rebate of $11,375 ($1.75 x 5,000 watts + $1.25 x 2100 watts = $8,750 + $2,625 = $11,375). The CCEF estimates that this latest round of funding will provide rebates for 325 residential solar systems over the course of the next 11 months. Also, don’t forget that CCEF also sponsors a unique solar lease program.

To get started on your CT residential solar energy system, tell us about your home energy use. We’re here to provide free information and guidance for all your solar-related questions.

Connecticut Solar Rebate Returns

Twitter Weekly Updates for 2009-07-03

2009-07-04T02:59:00Z

CA Public Utilities Commission sees CA solar sector staying strong http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/energy/Solar/apa09.htm #
MA on the hunt for #solar bids for public buildings http://bit.ly/4ZAbY #
1st ship to direct #solar power into its main grid http://bit.ly/124ZJv #
Napa Wineries' #solar panels fall prey to thieves. 40 at a time? Yikes. http://bit.ly/f39xM #
SunPower & Wells Fargo doubleteam to fund up to $100 mil in solar projects http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2009/06/29/ap6600289.html #
Nokia leads pack in Greener Electronics Guide: http://bit.ly/1rQDbi #
RT @agrfc10 Ice bear energy system – thermal energy storage for commercial A/C units. pretty cool stuff http://bit.ly/13BAPM #
RT @AlternativeNRG Feds Hope To Have 13 New Solar Power Plants On Public Lands By 2010: Reid announce plans .. http://bit.ly/2D593b #
RT@EcoTechDaily via @LighterFootstep: Gorgeous Solar Power panels that mimic terra cotta tiles @ecogeek http://bit.ly/qk6tN #
Checking out Solar Fred's new shop @REWorld: http://tinyurl.com/nkbnyc #

Twitter Weekly Updates for 2009-07-03

Solar and Energy Independence: Some Thoughts for Independence Day

2009-07-02T20:13:22Z

The Fourth of July: fireworks, steak tips, beer and American flags. I’m writing from Boston, where the historical connection is particularly strong, and the fireworks celebration especially excellent. We love our Independence Day. But how many of us try to relate the meaning of the Fourth to the state of the world today? We’ve been an autonomous country, for good or for ill, since 1776. Two hundred and thirty-three years. We’re good buddies with our former sovereigns, and while taxes remain contentious, they’re not sparking any secessionist wars (at least not yet, eh, New Hampshire?).

The Boston Tea Party was staged to demonstrate resistance to the idea that we were subsidizing other countries’ profits at the expense of our own. The colonies were being told to pay more tax on tea so that, in essence, the British could woo the East India Trading Company with lower import tariffs while not losing any money themselves. Nice deal for the mother country, but the colonists weren’t standing for it. The Tea Party was three years before the signing of the Declaration of Independence, but it was this sense of desire for fiscal independence that precipitated that world-shaking event.

Okay, you are probably saying, why am I reading a history lesson about tea on GetSolar? Because independence–fiscal and otherwise–is still something near and dear to American hearts, and energy independence is one of the most vital issues facing our country today. In 2008 we imported nearly half of our petroleum: we may be ranked #3 in oil production, but we have the singular honor of being ranked #1 in consumption (Energy Information Administration). Our needs, habits, and trade systems mean we are eminently vulnerable to fluctuations in the cost of fuel. While world trade demands we be interdependent rather than independent, it’s still nerve-wracking to contemplate the degree to which we rely upon foreign products to maintain our way of life.

Solar power plants, wind farms, hydropower, biomass: renewable energies present an escape route. We don’t have to be trapped by rising import costs if we’re importing less. And yes, solar energy and other renewable technologies are very expensive. Yet I like to think of it as buying a house instead of renting. All that money we throw at other oil-producing countries to feed our insatiable appetite for energy, and what do we get out of it? Sure, we get energy, and a functioning (sort of) world economy. But putting money into domestic renewables is the investment that keeps on giving.

Cost does need to come down. Grid parity, the point at which the cost per kilowatt-hour of renewable-generated energy works out to be the same as the energy from traditional sources, is the holy grail of the solar industry. We’re on our way, though. President Obama has stood behind promises he made on the campaign trail and thrown heavy funding behind renewables development. Perhaps not quite as he envisioned–the stimulus funds were an emergency transfusion. All the same, we’ve been seeing positive signs in this country of renewable energy adoption. The EIA sees a sharp growth in the percentage of our energy that will come from renewables over the next 15 years or so:

This forecast puts solar power and other renewable energies as a 14.2 percent slice of the energy pie by 2030. Not bad, right? At the end of 2008, the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) tallied 9,183 MW of installed solar power capacity in the US, with another 6,000 in the pipeline–and that number has undoubtedly risen since the end of the March, when the report was last updated (full report here/PDF). An attainable goal in the near future of 20,000 MW of solar capacity equates power for about four million homes. You can see that the burden of energy production in this country is not going to rest squarely on the shoulders of the solar industry, but at the same time, solar can sure do some heavy lifting.

We love our freedom in the United States of America. To pursue freedom from the bonds of imported energy is a mission in keeping with our nation’s history as well as with our sense of national identity. We need imports, but we also need options. Solar power can and should be part of the greater energy solution.

To end on a lighter note, you’ve got to check out the Census Bureau’s “Fun Facts” about the Fourth of July. Did you know that Georgia leads the nation in watermelon production, for instance? Happy Independence Day, everyone!

Solar and Energy Independence: Some Thoughts for Independence Day

Maine Solar Rebate is Back

2009-07-02T13:32:52Z

Good news for homeowners and businesses in Maine looking to get solar: the state has re-opened its solar energy rebate program. Here’s a quick rundown of the solar rebate levels:

Solar thermal systems are eligible for a rebate worth up to 25 percent of installed costs, capped at $1,000.
Solar photovoltaic (PV) panel systems receive a rebate of $2.00/watt, up to $2,000

Capped at $2,000, the PV rebate is admittedly modest. But every little bit helps. In combination with the 30-percent federal tax credit — or, for businesses that install solar in 2009 or 2010, a 30-percent federal renewable energy grant — the Maine solar rebate will undoubtedly help reduce installed costs. If the past is any indication, Mainers will be clambering to apply: previous application cycles have been oversubscribed due to strong consumer interest and limited funding. By no means is Maine’s rebate program alone in this regard.

Interesting side note: it appears some of that federal stimulus money is finally starting to hit the pavement, so to speak. On Tuesday, the Maine Public Utilities Commission (PUC) announced that the current round of rebate funding has been made possible by combining existing state resources with new federal funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

To be eligible, the system must be installed by a professional certified by the PUC. The Maine Solar Rebate Program will begin accepting applications (again) on Monday, July 6. Go here for details.

[UPDATE: For an interesting look at where the federal recovery dollars are going, check out this cool interactive U.S. map, from Recovery.org.]

Maine Solar Rebate is Back

Solar Bids Solicited in Massachusetts

2009-07-07T18:55:03Z

In a state that has long provided thought leadership on the government’s role in deploying solar power, bids are now being solicited for solar projects on public buildings. Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick has set aside $20 million in stimulus funds–about 40 percent of the total stimulus funds for energy initiatives–to bankroll 16 new megawatts of solar capacity in the state. Earlier this year, the state created a buzz when it announced it was going to try for 30 new MW of solar power on public facilities.

Governor Patrick has been a staunch supporter of renewable energy in the state for some time–there have been hiccups, but by and large, he’s been firmly behind incentivizing the installation of solar power, wind power, biomass and more. For some background, let’s get it from the horse’s mouth (er, the Governor’s June 30th press release):

The Commonwealth had approximately 4 MW of installed solar power when Governor Patrick took office and setting the goal of 250 MW of solar power by 2017. Today, the state has over 11 MW of installed solar, plus 6.5 MW in the pipeline but not yet installed through the Commonwealth Solar rebate program. The Massachusetts Solar Stimulus could add up to 21 MW more – 16 MW funded through ARRA [American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009] State Energy Plan monies, plus roughly 5 MW more paid for with State Revolving Fund revenue for green infrastructure projects at drinking and wastewater treatment facilities, also financed by ARRA.

In the coming weeks, the DOER plans to issue several additional RFPs for solar projects at state-owned properties around the state. DOER selected projects through an Energy Task Force convened by the Governor’s office in preparation for receipt of ARRA funding. The Task Force identified over 13 MW of potential roof- and ground-mounted PV solar installations at a variety of state facilities, and an additional 5 MW at water and wastewater facilities. A Municipal Task Force pinpointed a number of additional projects. Future solicitations are expected to seek bids for solar installations at more colleges and housing projects, transportation facilities, and public buildings such as the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center.

The state aims to have contracts for this round awarded by the midle of September, with work commencing a few months later. Here are the sites in question for the first round:

Massachusetts Water Resources Authority

Deer Island Administration Lab Building — 160 kilowatts (kW)
• Deer Island North Main Pump Station — 60 kW
• Carroll Water Treatment Plant Operations Building — 450 kW
• Carroll Water Treatment Plant Post-treatment Building — 50 kW
• Carroll Water Treatment Plant Generator Building — 40 kW
• Carroll Water Treatment Plant – Ground mount — 500 kW
• Biosolids Processing Facility — 400 kW
• Clinton Treatment Plant East PV Location — 90 kW
• Clinton Treatment Plant West PV Location —140 kW

Department of Housing and Community Development
• Somerville Housing Authority, 2 Mystic River — 300 kW
• Somerville Housing Authority, 1 Clarendon Hill — 250 kW

Massachusetts Port Authority (Logan Airport)
• Terminal A — 750 kW
• Terminal B — 500 kW
• Terminal C — 750 kW
• Terminal E — 750 kW

Westfield State College
• New Residence Hall —150 kW

Solar Bids Solicited in Massachusetts

Italians See Solar Microgeneration Projects As Sound Investment

2009-06-30T14:35:59Z

As Margaret has pointed out here, the benefits of harnessing solar power for an urban environment are many. This WSJ article provides an example of the advantages of solar microgeneration from the other side of the world—in Italy, a rapidly expanding solar market with plenty of sun to spare. In order to lessen the pain of high energy costs, Italian households and small companies have begun adopting renewable energy microgeneration projects, the most popular of which are rooftop solar panels and wind turbines. These efforts at small-scale, in-house electricity production also have the potential to lift a heavy burden from Italy’s energy infrastructure, which is “severely hampered” by the country’s notorious bureaucracy.

Furthermore, Italy—whose electricity demand is forecast to grow an annual average of 0.6 percent between 2009 and 2013—aims to generate 17 percent of its energy from renewable energy by 2020, a goal whose feasibility some have cast doubts upon. In a country known for its bureaucratic red tape, which greatly hinders the completion of large power plants, some have suggested that small-scale utilities may be the way to go. Further adding appeal to microgeneration is its potential for increased energy security, no small deal for a country that imports over 80 percent of its energy supplies.

“I’d say about 20% of Italian buildings could be used for microgeneration,” said Giovanni Battista Zorzoli of ISES Italia, a technical-scientific nonprofit association, which organizes courses on renewable energy. “The incentives are such that families, thanks also to bank loans, can easily make such investments.”

And what exactly would incite banks to provide loans so readily?

According to energy research body Institute Osservatorio sull’Industria delle Rinnovabili, “building-integrated” photovoltaic investments in Italian buildings could potentially amount to about EUR42 billion in the 2009-2020 period. ISES Italia’s Zorzoli estimates photovoltaic power could generate about 6% of Italy’s electricity needs in 2020.

The article uses the case of a suburbanite mother with two kids to further illustrate its point.

In 2007, Miriam Di Palma, a married, working mother of two teenage girls who lives on the outskirts of Rome, installed 5 kilowatts of panels for about EUR37,000, which included some roof work.

She sells the power generated, in excess of her needs, to the grid for a heavily subsidized price, while buying power back when she needs it by paying the lower usual market rate to her local utility, pocketing the profit. Di Palma receives EUR0.42 per kilowatt-hour while the average price of electricity her utility charges is about EUR0.20/kWh.

…

Such investments have what amounts to a state guarantee of a fixed return for a fixed period, a degree of security against which banks are very willing to make loans, experts said.

Granted, Italy is by no means a perfect solar correlation to the United States. Different cities in the U.S. can have wildly different variations of insolation, and not all tax rebates are created equal. Add to that worries over Italy’s solar sector overheating, and the situation is not perfect. But it is an example of how solar can make sense for city-dwellers and suburbanites alike—especially when the financial incentives are good.

Italians See Solar Microgeneration Projects As Sound Investment