PG&E Signs 800 MW in Solar PV Deals with OptiSolar & SunPower

I can't help but wonder how well PG&E conducted their due diligence for this project. They're investing in a 550 MW system to be built of modules that the public has no access to information on. What kind of product longevity is expected from the OptiSolar modules? What will their thermal performance be like on the Carrisa Plain?

Crystalline silicon PV has been around long enough to have a proven track record, but there's still the question of the appropriateness of using PV for an 800 MW system instead of solar thermal electric.

Hopefully this project will go well for all involved and the rest of us will still get to see the price of modules come down as expected over the next few years.

PG&E probably cares more about the bottom line, how much they pay per KWH. Under the contract, if the modules fail, that become's Topaz Solar Farm's problem, not PG&E's. I don't think PG&E has invested any money in the project at all.

Thin-film performs much better in higher heat than crystalline silicon. This is just a standard PPA for PG&E, probably sourced through an RPS RFO. The performance risk is borne by the developer. Also, it's partly the cost of panels that will come down but more importantly it should be the cost of installation that drops as a more robust and experienced installation workforce is built.

While they're not buying the equipment and owning the system themselves, they have invested considerable time and resources, not to mention the opportunity cost of not selecting other technologies. Perhaps a matter of semantics, but thin film never really performs better than crystalline PV. Standard efficiency crystalline PV always produces more watts per square foot than thin film. It also requires less glass, aluminum, steel, concrete, copper, and man hours per watt to install.

Opportunity costs of not selecting other technologies? I can't see that this has caused PG&E to not select any other technology through their RPS program. They have after all selected at the same time the solar tracking crystalline PV from SunPower as mentioned in this very article. They have also selected

PV
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=50977

Solar Thermal
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=52040
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=50482

Solar Thermal/biofuel hybrid
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=52778

Geothermal
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=51599

Wind
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=52951
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=50420

Wave
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=50913

Hydroelectric
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=47814

manure->methane->electricity
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=47442

and more. As someone who would like to see renewable energy production grow, I'm glad that PG&E is not rejecting technologies, and as a customer of PG&E, I'm glad they are negotiating for good prices, and that if the power producer fails, we rate-payers don't have to pay for their failure.

Jerry, while you are right that crystaline silicon P.V produces more watts in a given area, it does not necessarily use less glass, metal, concrete etc. Why? Some thin film technologies are produced on lightweight flexible substrate e.g Nanosolar. This allows lighter support structures assuming low wind loads.

As regards what "performs better" that needs defining!

What is better, 14% light to electricity conversion at $2 per installed watt, or 19% at $5?

Crystaline will perform better in terms of light to electricity efficiency, but the economic performance is most likely a different story, especially at utility scale.

We are at Dominican Republic and we are very interested in companies willing to bring here Thin film technology PPA, we have a large number of customers ranging from 1mw to 300mw interested in proposals.
fernando@cercadominicana.com