Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower

More Solar Energy Coming to California, Some Contingent on ITC

July 18, 2008 | 7 Comments

Do you like this news?

Bookmark

Feed

Arizona and California, United States [RenewableEnergyWorld.com] Southern California Edison (SCE) this week began installing solar panels engineered and supplied by First Solar at the first of approximately 150 Southern California commercial rooftops that eventually will make up SCE's two-square mile solar generation project.

This first project is a 2-megawatt (MW) installation, comprising of 33,000 solar panels that are being installed on a 600,000-square-foot commercial roof in Fontana, CA, leased from ProLogis.

In related news, last week the CPUC approved project terms of a 20-year power purchase agreement (PPA) between First Solar and SCE for the sale of electricity generated by a new PV power plant to be built in Blythe, CA. The new plant will minimum generation capacity of 7.5 MW of electricity, with an option by First Solar to increase the size to 21 MW. When completed, SCE says that it will be the largest ground-based PV power plant in California.

First Solar will serve as the engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contractor for the PV power plant, and maintain the PV power plant over its lifetime. Subject to the satisfaction of remaining contingencies, including the extension of the federal solar investment tax credit (ITC), First Solar expects to begin construction of the PV power plant in 2009.

"By harnessing the clean, renewable energy of the sun that is abundant in California, these innovative solar projects are helping to meet our long-term energy and climate change goals," Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said. The Governor has set a goal of increasing California's renewable energy sources to 20 percent by 2010, and he supports reaching 33 percent by 2020.

Solar Energy

7 Reader Comments

Comment
1 of 7

joshua-miller-152010

July 18, 2008

It is very concerning to me that even here among progressive people who are following the renewable energy sector, that there are so many misconceptions about the ITC. This is a major piece of legislation that will have drastic negative affects on the growth of the entire renewable energy industry if it is not passed. Our company has projects all around the United States, including non-traditional solar areas such as St. Louis, that are 100% dependent on the extension of the ITC. If this does not pass, these projects will no longer be economically viable for anyone. With slowed growth in the industry, funds to develop lower cost technologies that will not be dependent on the ITC will slow down also. We are at a critical time when the technologies are just taking off on a grand scale and I would rather have my tax dollars supporting solar, even in sombody else's state, than having them go to many of the other things that are currently being used for.

Comment
2 of 7

mike-barz-76110

July 18, 2008

Ed You're right the point is that we need too get off of oil, and it will take subsidies. I remember when they begain building the first wind farms in Palm Springs. They looked like a cross between a 55 chevy and a wind mill from the 1800s. Boy have they come a long way. Renewable energy has always been right in front of us and now is the time to invest in it.

Comment
3 of 7

ed-arnold-152001

July 18, 2008

You miss the whole point. Solar is not cost effective without the subsidies. The oil and gas industries still receive them, as do farmers, etc. As far as California goes, the state ranks 46 out of 50 in per capita energy usage. http://blogs.business2.com/greenwombat/2006/12/tale_of_two_sta.html I would rather subsidies clean energy then export our dollars overseas.

Comment
4 of 7

mike-barz-76110

July 18, 2008

RT. I hope ITC is extended too. Even though we like paying forein countries two billion a day> I would hate too give those Califorians the millions they need. But Some times it takes money to get started. Mike form California.

Comment
5 of 7

r-t-55471

July 18, 2008

I certainly hope the ITC is extended. I know those poor people in CA need our help in paying for all that electricity they use.

Time after time other states need help in paying for their dreams. No wonder the nation is in such debt.

Comment
6 of 7

mortimer-shnerdlyfrump-47009

July 21, 2008

GE just finished a large study. They found that for every dollar that the feds give in energy subsidies to the wind industry, $1.10 comes back to the government through taxes from new jobs and all that comes with that. If the feds want to decrease their debt, they should significantly extend ITC.

It better be done soon. The $700,000,000,000 a year that is being shipping out of this country to purchase energy is being used to buy this countries infrastructure (both financial and physical). If we don't take care of this problem quickly, they'll also buy up all our renewable companies and then we're screwed.

People that argue against the tax credits for renewables don't know what they are talking about. We pay $8-10 a gallon for gas in this country, but most of it is hidden in tax subsidies to the oil companies. Renewable tax credits wouldn't be needed if it was a fair playing field.

Comment
7 of 7

paulyboy733

July 23, 2008

If Arnold hadn't given back the $30 billion that GOP energy/snake oil swindlers took from California we might have the money to do it ourselves and not borrow it from the teachers union. He also watered down the new solar law so that I can only meet % 90 of my energy needs with solar.
My rooftop would allow me to power 10 other houses but it is against Arnold's law. So much for the green gov..

Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!