Octopussies and Dildos

What do you get when you cross an Octopus with a Dildo Factory?

Run!  Run!!!

La la la... Wine is good... num num num... 

If at FERC you don't succeed try try again

Dear Fellow Rooftop Solar Challenge Grantees,

Please join the Clean Coalition on June 20 from 9:30-10:30 am PDT, to learn about its initiative to standardize and improve the interconnection process for small-scale solar PV installation.  Today, while there are standard regulations for interconnection, installers of these systems are not given a clear guide for on-the-ground processes conducted by each utility company.  To address this, the Business Practice Manual (BPM) Initiative works to have each grid operator publish a standard interconnection guide and work towards adopting best practices from around the country.  The Clean Coalition’s Associate Executive Director, Ted Ko, will lead the discussion.  Collaboration with other Rooftop Solar Challenge teams will be critical to the success of the BPM, as it is a tool that will be useful to everyone.  Also, please share this with other team members.

The Clean Coalition is a key partner of the Efficient Solar Market Partners of Northern California (ESMP) team, which is led by SolarTech as part of the Department of Energy’s Rooftop Solar Challenge.  Along with the Clean Coalition, SolarTech is supported by the City and County of San Francisco, East Bay Green Corridor, and Solar Sonoma County in the delivery of this grant.  These partners will also present their work in future webinars.

Click here to register. 

Reply to SolarWriter

You can use my spreadsheet linked at the bottom. If you don't trust my spreadsheet you can track down Dr. Alfred Körblein's model (in German) and use that. I haven't looked at his model in over a year so I don't know how he's treating self-consumption these days or even if he's kept it updated. I recently saw a comment of his on PV Magazine and he thinks the new FiT rates in Germany are fine. That tells me our models are kicking out similar results.

To use the model go to the Input Parameters page and enter in the current system prices, O&M, kWh/kWp, interest rates, discount rate, etc in the gray fields. The input data needs to be in per KWp increments. You have to be careful but it's hopefully intuitive - if not I'll write up some more in depth instructions. The default values are all referenced and are specifically set to model the current situation in Germany. The results pop up in the Orange box on the right hand side. 

The most under-appreciated parameter is the self-consumption rate. You can vary that from 30% to 50% and see what I mean.

We often hear that FiTs are set to deliver an 8% return on investment. You can play with the model yourself to see how system prices and FiT rates conspire to deliver X% rate of return or Y net present value based on the inputs.

When I play with the model it's clear to me the FiT rates for the sub-10 kW tranche can come down significantly. The FiT rate is actually a secondary concern - you could set it at 10 cent/kWh and still clear the economic hurdle tests. The FiT used to be about making money - now it's about saving money. A counter argument here is that retail rates may come down in the future and this would impact the profitability of your system. That's absolutely true but there's a hedged risk here. If electricity prices go up you save money with PV. If they go down you lose money on the PV investment but you save money on utility bills. The showstopper would be if electricity rates dropped sharply over a short time period but that seems unlikely to me.

I'm guesstimating that prices for small and medium sized systems come down to 1500 Euro/kWp in the near term and stabilize around there. If system prices get down to this level your production costs (the LCOE) are at 10 ct/kWh. This gives you a lot of room to chop the FiT rates. As mentioned previously, things very much depend on your self-consumption profile. 

An additional thought here is that the FiT shouldn't necessarily be based on installed kWs. Another way to go about it would be to base the rate on total backfeed. This structure would encourage a balance between economies of scale and overall system integration (generation matched to load) at the same time. I like that. We shouldn't unnecessarily punish a roof that's good for 12 kW when a 10 kW system may actually back feed more. Make the top FiT tranche apply to the first 10 MWh of backfeed per year. The next tranche would apply to the next 90 MWh and so on.

It's my belief that the BSW, DECC, GEA etc should be putting out a standardized model like this themselves - a better cleaner model of course. Things need to be transparent. The Government should be using the exact same model to set FiT rates so we're all on the same page and everybody is held accountable. People will still complain but at least we'll be clearer on what's being debated.

Disclaimer: I think my model works but some bugs and brain farts may have slipped in/out.

http://www.4shared.com/file/o29g_XBj/Economics_of_Photoelectricity_.html

Dear FERC

Dear FERC,

I'm relatively familiar with the FERC Open Access orders that got the ball rolling on deregulation. I was wondering if it is within FERC's power/jurisdiction to move forward with a Feed-in Tariff order for small/medium scale solar power installations. I'm thinking specifically of residential and commercial solar PV installations that feed excess power into the grid. I realize this isn't a wholesale power situation directly but was hoping there may be a way for FERC to assert authority here. The idea of the Order wouldn't be to force the US utilities to accept Feed from PV at X price - it would be to force the utilities to transparently lay out their tariff rules on back feeding. Basically an Open Access rule for Solar. The US has plenty of net-metering type programs but the coverage isn't universal. I know a fellow in Georgia that had to twist many arms to get his system connected. I'm sure FERC is busy but it's about time we started moving forward on improving the transparency of feed-in rules with an across the board procedure. I've studied the situation for many years and I believe there's a critical need for standards in this area. This seems to be something that may be right up FERC's alley. If you're already working on it please let me know. If this is not in FERC's jurisdiction then I apologize for the misplaced suggestion. Either way, as a concerned private citizen I'd appreciate some feedback. 

Respectfully

Photomofo

Thank you for your informed email and suggestion. This agency can always initiate a rulemaking in any proceeding within its jurisdiction. You are right, however, that feed-in-tariffs sit on the outer limits of our jurisdiction. This agency did review a feed-in-tariff related filing in California: http://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/comm-meet/2010/102110/E-2.pdf, but a rulemaking is not something I have heard under consideration, most likely because of jurisdictional issues. Thank you again for your suggestion.


Hello,

Thank you for the feedback. I can see how this is difficult for FERC to move on but at the same time FERC seems to be the right entity to take responsibility here and set a precedent. Solar power at scale is a new thing after all. Is this something that has to be done one PUC at a time?

Respectfully

Photomofo

 

 

Tough question to answer. Like I said it is on the line between State and Federal jurisdiction. I can't really say for sure what the Chairman or Commission would wish to do or not do and I wouldn't want to tie their hands. I can only say, I am not aware of any effort to address feed-in-tariffs on a nationwide scale. Now of course, Congress can pass a law on this issue and that can change the dynamic greatly

Dear Google News

I don't want stories about child molestation or rape. I don't want stories about murders or suicides. I don't want stories about car bombers. I don't want stories about ENTER NAME HERE. Call me crazy... I want some news but I don't want to wake up to downer crap. 

What's the deal Google? I'm sure thousands of folks have posted about this so you know we want this. I've never read a good Google response as to why you aren't adding this. Jeez... Imagine if you didn't allow the minus sign on searches. That would be silly. Imagine if Facebook didn't allow you to delete a stalker from your friend list. All I've ever heard is that you're looking into it. Lame, out of touch and unimaginative. You could be building the news page into a Facebook type page if you put some resources into it. Have you thought about that? Who's in charge there? I send you all sort of good ideas but you goofs got ears like grandpas. 

Now You C-PV, Now You Don't

Unusual solar panels gone from Berger structures in Palm Desert

Not too far down the road there's a matching Now You C-SP, Now You Don't sign... Turn left there... You'll be on LaLa Lane. A little past the Johnson place there's a roadside marker... CIGS was here... Make a right there and you'll be on ShouldaWouldaCoulda Boulevard... You just keep on going down ShouldaWoulda. You have to goes a ways... Once you go by the abandoned CdTe works you can see the highway. Head south on the highway and you'll hit the Crystal City in about an hour. Say hey to the Wizard for me. 

Project Prices... Shames and WOWs

California...Here's a 200 MW Imperial Valley project for 360 million - $1.8/Watt


Spain...Here's a 60 MW Spanish project for 60 million Euro - $1.3/Watt


These may not be all in costs. Perhaps Solar Magazine has taken to tantalizing their audience with BS statistics. If so, SHAME on them. If not, WOW.


Germany...Here's an update on the German solar market.


United Kingdom...Here's a 3.93 kWp Tesco promotional package for the U.K. market priced at £6,799 - $2.7/Watt. This price is down from £14,499 last November. The extraodinary drop in prices ($5.75/Watt to $2.7/Watt) over a few months shows how much installers in the U.K. were over-charging previously. We've seen the same sort of price corrections following FiT adjustments in Germany, Italy and Australia. We'll see the same sort of price response when the U.S. removes the odd hodge-podge of perversely ineffective incentives they currently have.


California... Speaking of perverse ... The CSI lists the average installed cost of PV systems in California at $7.83/Watt. If you look more specifically at installs over the last month (rather than the last year) the average cost is tracking around $5.5/Watt. Please note this is about where the U.K. was 5 months ago.


Factory..."Module prices are being forecasted at the €0.51–0.55/watt range for Q4..."

Fresco of the Week

Triumphant Achilles dragging Hector's body around Troy, from a panoramic fresco of the Achilleion...