Comments on: California Utilities Balk as Home Solar Producers Near 5 Percent Limit

By: Susan Kraemer

Susan Kraemer — Mon, 07 May 2012 04:22:00 +0000

Cannot reply to the below comment, but in answer, yes, firefighter’s setbacks are where they prefer to walk on roofs.

By: Altair IV

Altair IV — Sun, 06 May 2012 10:21:00 +0000

“They also cannot reduce their fossil power plant capacity because you cannot rely on the sun shining every day. ”

They could if they started replacing them with energy storage systems. Capture the surplus solar and wind generation whenever it outstrips demand, and feed it back out when it’s needed.

By: Bob_Wallace

Bob_Wallace — Sun, 06 May 2012 00:30:00 +0000

Setbacks from edges and peaks.

I didn’t know that was an issue. Can you explain why firefighters would want setbacks? (I assume it has to do with being able to climb the roof, but that’s just a guess.)

Out here in the country we don’t pull no stinkin’ permits…. ;o)

By: Susan Kraemer

Susan Kraemer — Sun, 06 May 2012 00:07:00 +0000

Yeah, there are so many variables. I do know from personal experience that by far the biggest part of the cost has to be everything but the panels themselves and the few hours of labor they need to get them on the roof.

Rather than fretting about “efficiency gains” in the lab, we need to simplify the logistics more. I really think that the best way to get costs down now is the boring side: nationwide universal building department rules on solar.

One example of a fiddlier aspect of solar estimates is contacting each different town’s city hall to find out what their firefighters’ setbacks etc are. San Francisco might require 3 ft front and sides, San Mateo two ft in each side of ridgeline, 2 ft at edge, Daly City not yet decided…and each new customer is ALWAYS in a different city.

By: Susan Kraemer

Susan Kraemer — Sun, 06 May 2012 00:05:00 +0000

I will look into it more, talk to more of the stakeholders. I am not sure that they are really dragging their feet, in the way that I am sure – say, when utilities in Arizona, the Republicans in congress, the Koch brothers, the Chamber of Commerce and so on are full-on resisting the slightest clean energy victory.

It is kind of a murky area, since California utilities actually do earn more when California ratepayers use less energy. The CPUC set up a good incentive that thus encourages them to save (fossil) energy, back when it was only (pretty much) fossil sourced. Does that apply to solar (distributed) reducing the other energy that solar homeowners need? Be good to find out.

Re your regional peak/your output. Do not be afraid to contact a solar co. in your region to get a free quote. They are free, and local guys would have that local info, and did I mention it IS free. Solar estimators do about ten free quotes a day. It is no sweat for them to do yours, there is no obligation.

By: Susan Kraemer

Susan Kraemer — Sun, 06 May 2012 00:02:06 +0000

I will look into it more, talk to more of the stakeholders. I am not sure that they are really dragging their feet, in the way that I am sure - say, when utilities in Arizona, the Republicans in congress, the Koch brothers, the Chamber of Commerce and so on are full-on resisting the slightest clean energy victory. It is kind of a murky area, since California utilities actually do earn more when California ratepayers use less energy. The CPUC set up a good incentive that thus encourages them to save (fossil) energy, back when it was only (pretty much) fossil sourced. Does that apply to solar (distributed) reducing the other energy that solar homeowners need? Be good to find out. Re your regional peak/your output. Do not be afraid to contact a solar co. in your region to get a free quote. They are free, and local guys would have that local info, and did I mention it IS free. Solar estimators do about ten free quotes a day. It is no sweat for them to do yours, there is no obligation.

By: Susan Kraemer

Susan Kraemer — Sat, 05 May 2012 23:47:28 +0000

By: Bob_Wallace

Bob_Wallace — Sat, 05 May 2012 16:40:00 +0000

I might have screwed that up. $4.60 might have been for large commercial roofs and not residential roofs.

(Or it could have been a post-subsidy average price.)

Looking around on the web I’m seeing all sorts of “averages”, generally falling from quarter to quarter.

$6.42 for residential, $3.75 utility Q2 2011.

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/average-system-price-of-5.20-w/

$6.20 for residential, Q3 2011.

http://www.cleanenergyauthority.com/solar-energy-news/report-says-cost-of-solar-declining-091911/

By: RobS

RobS — Sat, 05 May 2012 05:25:00 +0000

http://www.wholesalesolar.com/gridtie.html
They have grid tie systems priced between $2.00 and $2.80 per watt. Not including delivery installation and roof mounting hardware, rule of thumb is those balance of system costs are about 50% of the total so $4.60 seems smack in the middle of their system prices.

http://www.mrsolar.com/page/MSOS/CTGY/CE
Similarly have systems not including installation for ~$2 per watt.

Both of these examples are before a 30% federal tax rebate. System prices fell ~40% last year so if today’s numbers were a few months old t the time of publishing then a fall from $6-7 to $4-5 is exactly what you would expect.

By: GaryReysa

GaryReysa — Sat, 05 May 2012 00:54:00 +0000

Hi Bob,
Can you tell me where you saw the $4.60 per watt. Solar Today ran a US wide survey a couple months ago and came up with $6.80 a peak watt for US average.
Gary

By: GaryReysa

GaryReysa — Sat, 05 May 2012 00:51:00 +0000

Thanks for the responses.
In trying to find out a bit more about this, I ran across this interesting report: http://d-bits.com/tou-rates-favor-pv/

Seems to indicate that solar in CA should indeed fetch a premium price, but also indicates that peak demand appears to be after solar PV peaks out and is declining.

Also wondering why the CA utilities are dragging their feet on the 5% limit if the solar PV generation is such a good thing for them?

Does anyone have links, books … that cover this whole area in more detail — I’d like to learn more about it.

I’m also wonder for us northerners (I’m in Montana), how the correspondence of peak demand and solar PV output match up (or don’t)?

Gary

By: Patrick

Patrick — Fri, 04 May 2012 19:29:00 +0000

There was a blog on linkedIn about a report from the EU that Solar had a downward effect on peaking power rates (wholesale). It contradicted my expectation that solar and peaking power would be a wash, financially. Maybe there is a reason that Futura has run into resistance.

By: Captivation

Captivation — Fri, 04 May 2012 00:16:00 +0000

Thanks Bob,

I would like to point out that many of these paradoxes disappear when people become aware of them. For example, there was a safety paradox a few years ago where people with abs brakes drove more recklessly because of the increased safety of the brakes. But once I became aware of this effect, I compensated by being extra careful. Thus the effect was nullified by my own awareness of it.
Same thing with Murphy’s Law. The moment you become aware of it, you take steps to prevent it.

By: Susan Kraemer

Susan Kraemer — Thu, 03 May 2012 23:30:00 +0000

California’s case might be different because only 1% (PG&E anyway) is coal – maybe a bit more for the 2 LA/San Diego
area utilities

By: RobS

RobS — Thu, 03 May 2012 23:23:00 +0000

We are nowhere near having more wind or solar on the grid than can be consumed and hydro is a despatchable power source so I’m not sure I see your point, even at times of lowest demand solar and wind output never go begging because demand is still higher then their output, and even if with hydro power it did overshoot demand hydro is the most despatchable power source able to ramped up and down within seconds to meet demand fluctuations so it’s not in even vaguely the same boat.
Peak demand hours do extend a few hours past solar peak, which is why storage will be a big player if solar is to increase its penetration beyond 10-20%.
My point was that there are several months of the year where frequently they are paying fossil fuel generators many times more then their retail rates for power at exactly the time when their customers solar arrays are producing at their peak output, as it stands at the moment at those times buying solar power at the retail rate is VERY cost effective for them.

By: Bob_Wallace

Bob_Wallace — Thu, 03 May 2012 22:10:00 +0000

It’s not quite so black and white.

There are times of the year when there’s lots of hydro and wind available and at the same time demand low. It’s not summer year ’round.

Peak demand hours extend past the hours in which PV produces.

By: RobS

RobS — Thu, 03 May 2012 22:05:00 +0000

You’ve missed a few important points, first when pv is available is exactly when demand is peaking, PV output is NEVER begging for a taker. Second is that in the afternoon at peak demand the wholesale price of electricity is regularly 50c to $1 per kwh and sometimes peaks far higher then that, the way electricity is priced all generators receive the peak market price for their power, ie on a hot afternoon coal power plants will be payed upwards of $1 per kwh if that’s where the market pricing goes, the only people who don’t get this advantage are customers with small scale distributed generation who just get paid the retail rate. So even though solar produces peak output on hot sunny summer afternoons when demand and cost to utilities is highest the utilities only have to buy it at the base retail rate, this means that utilities are quite often getting a bargain when they ONLY have to pay retail rate for that solar power instead of having to buy as much wholesale power at 5-10 times retail.

By: Susan Kraemer

Susan Kraemer — Thu, 03 May 2012 20:08:00 +0000

When you pay monthly on a PPA or a lease, they are usually still lower than the utility bill you were paying.

By: Susan Kraemer

Susan Kraemer — Thu, 03 May 2012 20:05:00 +0000

(I’m not a guy.) For us our total paid out or 3.15 KW was about $10,000.

We got ours through a SunRun contract, so technically we don’t “own” the solar panels, but rather got an 18 year contract in a PPA. (Then last year we sold our house, and the new owner has assumed the contract)

Through the contract SunRun owns, maintains, insures and guarantees the performance of the system. If they fail, SunRun must pay the difference to the new owner of our house.

Though we chose to pay the 18 yr contract in one lump sum, most people pay them monthly.

By: RV

RV — Thu, 03 May 2012 19:25:00 +0000

The thing is that it doesn’t work that way. You can already see it in Germany where the (solar) electricity generated during peak hours lowers the prices so much that electricity is cheaper during the day than it is at night. That means that utilities do have lots of coal etc. plants sitting “idle” not earning any money. They also cannot reduce their fossil power plant capacity because you cannot rely on the sun shining every day.