A couple of months ago, I discussed the possibility of San Francisco entering into a solar power purchase agreement with a private solar power firm.  (Click here)

On May 15, Mayor Gavin Newsom signed an ordinance that would enable Recurrent Energy, a San Francisco distributed power firm, to install roughly 25,000 solar panels on top of the Sunset Resevoir.  The project was approved by the Board of Supervisors with a vote of 7-to-4 on May 12.

This plan will more than triple city’s solar energy output by adding about 5 MW of solar PV power.

Once completed, it will be among the largest municipal solar projects in the United States.

The 25-year contract between the city and Recurrent Energy allows the city to purchase the energy at a set rate, with the option to purchase the solar PV system when the contract expires.

Proponents of the partnership between the city and solar company state that a public-private partnership is the only way to complete such a project.  Opponents contend that the non-negotiable contract may be detrimental to the city should the cost of solar equipment and installation go down in the future.

(Click here for more information)

Here’s a great article on solar panel ratings. Published first on the Calfinder Solar Blog, and then on Solar Feeds (publishers of the Green Tool Bar for web browsers) the article provides some basic pointers on shopping for solar panels.  The article is a nice short read, and it’s a great place to start for someone who has never shopped for solar panels before.  

The article suggests one look at the following criteria:  

  1. Minimum Warranted Power
  2. STC v. PTC Ratings
  3. Efficiency Ratings
  4. An Underwriters Laboratories Listing (UL Listing)
  5. SRCC Rating

Those are the main points.  To get the full article and some quick tips on solar materials, visit the Calfinder Solar Blog or Solar Feeds.

Solar power is cool, but still expensive for most of us, even with the various incentives.  Fortunately, there are companies that will install with little or no money down.  Instead of buying the solar panels and paying for the installation, the buyer now simply leases the equipment which is installed and maintained by the company.  The buyer instead pays a set price for the solar energy produced.

On Wednesday, March 18, the San Francisco Budget & Finance Committee voted to table discussions in regards to entering into a recurrent solar power purchase agreement with a private entity until April 22.  Much of the debate seems to stem from the costs associated with the proposed agreement.  On one hand, by purchasing the solar power from a private entity, the city would avoid the upfront (and expensive) costs of purchasing, installing, and maintaining the solar array.  Instead, the city would lease the property to the private entity and the city would then purchase the power at a set price.  On the other hand, should the city decide to purchase the solar arraydown the line, it would end up paying a premium over the initial startup costs (much like the premium paid for a lease-to-own vehicle).

A solar power purchase agreement, similar to a conventional power purchase agreement, is a contract whereby a buyer (i.e. utility company) purchases power from an energy source (i.e. power producer). 

In addition to municipal uses, solar power purchase agreements have commercial and residential applications as well.  Small companies and individuals, who find the startup costs for solar panels too steep even with the federal and state incentives, can opt to lease a portion of their property to a private entity that builds and maintains the solar panels.  In exchange, the consumer pays a set price for power.  The price is determined by various factors such as power generated and tax credits/incentives.  For example, a commercial warehouse occupying a lot of space but using little power can generate a large amount of surplus power.  Of course, the tax incentives are limited to the energy needed to run the warehouse since the incentives are given to offset the consumer’s own (not surplus) energy use.  See Public Resources Code 25782.

This week, Roland Nikles helped us out with an interesting and thought provoking post.  A friend of Roland’s has some very interesting points to add.  He wants us to remember part of the reason California has doubled its economic output in the past 20 years without a commensurable increase in energy demand is because of increased efficiency and conservation.

Large buildings in California used to use 5 watts per square foot to light space, now they only use one. The commentor notes the reductions come from technology and consciousness.  Everything from motion detectors to the human hand turn off light switches, and improvements in interior insulation, windows, and HVAC systems all add up.  He predicts buildings will be twice as efficient in 30 years, but I don’t think it’s too optimistic to think efficiencies will be even greater.  Just remember what the world looked like in 1978 if you can think back that far…

Building codes are getting green, and even WalMart has aggressive green initiatives.  Take a look at a huge portion of their website devoted to sustainability issues.  With trends such as this, ubiquitous adoption of green technology may be closer than we think, and may just beat that 30 year prediction.  Even if we end up with buildings that are twice as efficient as today, that’s a pretty good deal.

A partner, Roland Nikles,  at our firm, Bell, Rosenberg & Hughes sent the email below.  Thanks, Roland, great stuff!

“Peak electricity demand in California is approximately 60,000 megawatts. In excess of 20% of this is imported, mostly from the Southeastern U.S. and the Pacific Northwest.  Roughly half of this demand is fulfilled by natural gas, a little less than a fifth by nuclear plants, and a similar amount by hydroelectric power plants.  Peak usage (which happens seldom) and peak capacity are about equal, which is why we flirt with black-out conditions on hot summer days.

 

For 20 plus years environmental lobbying on the one hand, and rate capping on the other hand, inhibited the construction of new power plants.  We stood idly by as demand rose ‘til, Enron and the partly real, partly manufactured energy crisis of 2001 jolted us sufficiently to acknowledge that new capacity must be added.  In the meantime, high crude oil prices, stimulus dollars, and global warming are making alternative energy sources more viable and attractive than ever.  Advances in technology since we last subsidized renewable energy (wind power at Altamont Pass, Tehachepi, and San Gorgonio, early generation solar heat in the Mojave, and solar panels for swimming pools) promise that this time round, renewable energy will be economically sustainable on a large scale.  California utilities are mandated to achieve 20 percent renewable energy by 2017, and this appears eminently achievable.

 

BrightSource Energy of Oakland, a client [editor’s note: client of the firm at which the authors work], is one company at the forefront of this renewable energy renewal. They have contracts to develop 2,000 megawatts of solar power (heat generation technology) for California’s two major utilities:  Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison.  These contracts all by themselves represent a 4 percent increase in the state’s electrical power capacity. 

 

My brother-in-law, David, an early adopter of everything cool, has a 7kw solar panel installation on his roof.  If 3 million California households (26% of total households) had similar installations, that would add up to an additional 21,000 megawatts of renewable power.  Assuming an installation cost of $21,000 each, that would represent a cost of $3,000/kw, which I believe would be very competitive with building new nuclear power plants ($3,500 – $4,000 per kw).  

 

So let’s hear it for, clients, renewable energy, and brothers-in-law!  As Arnold would say, Go Kalifornia!”

Every now and then, I do random web searches to see what emerges.  That’s how I found the California Center for Sustainable Energy located in San Diego, California (www.sdenergy.org).  Talk about resources, geez!  This organization is all things energy for San Diego, but a lot of their information can be applied anywhere.  

The center has articles, research, forums, and events.  They have reports on legislation, too.  They even present the San Diego Excellence in Energy (SANDEE) award.  

According to their website, the SANDEE is awarded to “outstanding projects and activities that have achieved significant energy savings and/or contributions toward the goals of the San Diego Regional Energy Strategy 2030 through the implementation of energy efficiency, energy conservation, renewable energy measures and CO2 reduction in San Diego County.”

There are many different categories for individuals as well as small and large businesses, and yes even an award for municipalities.  Nominations for a SANDEE award are due February 2, 2009, so if you know someone who might be eligible, you better hurry.  For more information, “Click Here.

As this is my first post, let me take a moment to introduce myself.  My name is Kevin Jeong and I am a new associate at a construction firm located in Oakland, California.  As of Friday, December 5, 2008 I am fully licensed to practice law, albeit very “green.”  Nonetheless, being a young attorney, I am very passionate about sustainable development and hope to contribute in a meaningful way to this blog.

According to the Associated Press, Burbank’s Bob Hope Airport debuted what is believed to be the first solar-powered airport hangar (Hangar 25) on Tuesday, December 9, 2008.  Rooftop photovoltaic panels will provide electricity for the 60,000-square-foot hangar, including enough electricity to power a Boeing 757 while on the ground for maintenance. 

The article fails to mention exactly how much electricty the solar panels will generate, but does list the cost of construction at $17 million dollars.  The project is a joint venture between Shangri-La Construction- a newly-formed business unit of Shangri-La Industries, the aviation services firm Avjet Corporation, and the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority.

The hangar has been issued a LEED Platinum certification, the highest “green” rating issued by the U.S. Green Building Council.

« Previous Page

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 26 other followers