Photo Credit: Duke Energy
article tools
Increase Text Size Increase Text Size Decreate Text Size Decrease Text Size
Share Email This Story Share Share This Story Reader comments Reader Comments (25) View image gallery Image Gallery (1) Add to favorites Add to Bookmarks Printer friendly version Printer Friendly Version
Article Tool Sponsor:

Advertise with us

More Jobs
7 ratings - Sign-in to rate this article
August 13, 2009

Utilities Hatch Ambitious Plans to Own and Operate Large-scale PV Projects

by Justin Moresco, Contributor
California, United States [RenewableEnergyWorld.com]

In years past, solar photovoltaic (PV) installations were largely done in a piecemeal fashion, planned and implemented one rooftop or ground-mounted system at a time. But as solar technology has improved and as state governments demand more renewable generation through portfolio standards, large-scale projects are becoming more common. A growing number of utilities, rather than depend on independent power producers to build these projects, have launched multi-million dollar initiatives to own and operate their own solar assets.

"We believe distributed generation will grow in prevalence as customers make these investments on their own."

-- Owen Smith, Managing Director of Renewable Energy Strategy, Duke Energy

Charlotte, N.C.,-based Duke Energy, one of the largest power companies in the United States and serving about 4 million customers, is one of them. In May, the utility received approval from the North Carolina Utilities Commission to proceed with a $50 million plan to install 10 megawatts worth of solar PV systems in the state, enough electricity to power 1,300 homes. The initial plan was double the size, but the North Carolina Utilities Commission Public Staff, which acts as a consumer advocate, asked for a reduction out of concern that the proposal was too aggressive and expensive.

Under the current plan, the solar systems, which will be owned and operated by the utility, will be installed starting later this year on the roofs and grounds of homes, schools, office buildings, warehouses, shopping malls and industrial plants. Between 100 and 400 separate arrays will be installed — the details are still being worked out — and they will range from about 2.5 kilowatts on residential rooftops to more than 1 megawatt (MW) on open land or on the rooftops of large commercial buildings. The power will be fed into the electrical grid and participants will be paid for use of their roofs or land, based on the size of the installation and amount of electricity generated at the site.

The main driver behind the project is North Carolina’s renewable portfolio standard, which requires the utility to satisfy 12.5 percent of its customers’ power needs with renewables or energy efficiency by 2021. The law requires that a growing portion of that renewable goal be met with solar energy, starting at 0.02 percent of the electricity sold by 2010 and rising to 0.2 percent by 2018.

But there are other reasons behind Duke’s decision to own and operate the facilities, according to Owen Smith, the utility’s managing director of renewable energy strategy. “We believe distributed generation will grow in prevalence as customers make these investments on their own,” Smith said. “We felt this was something we needed to get ahead of to understand the impact distributed generation would have on the grid.”

No single rooftop array on its own could disrupt Duke’s distribution network, but a large number concentrated in one area could lead to imbalances on a circuit, Smith said. By analyzing the data from the 10 MW project, the power company hopes to understand the limits of its electricity network and avoid potential problems. But distributed generation is also an opportunity for Duke, Smith said. With solar arrays strategically placed closer to the demand, the grid should become more robust, and the plan offers the power company a new way to interact with its customers, Smith said.

Duke isn’t the only utility to see opportunity in owning and operating its own solar assets. U.S. utilities have announced plans to build more than 800 MW of solar installations that they would own and operate, according to GTM analyst Daniel Englander. California utilities, in particular, have drafted ambitious plans. Southern California Edison has unveiled an $875 million proposal to build a network of 250 MW of PV power generation that would cover 65 million square feet of rooftops in southern California. And Pacific Gas & Electric has its own plan to build 250 MW of distributed PV installations, largely focused on ground-mounted systems.

“They are choosing to own and operate the projects because they view it as less risky than buying from a third party and because they believe they can build them at lower costs,” Englander said. Since utilities are regulated and have predictable revenue, they can raise financing at cheaper rates than most businesses. For multi-million dollar projects, cheap capital translates into significant cost savings.

Duke, which will finance its 10 MW project off its balance sheet, has set an average installation target price of $5 per watt. The company hasn’t yet announced module providers or installers, but Smith said the projects will involve silicon-based and thin-film technologies. The former will be used for residential projects and thin-film, which is cheaper but converts less sunlight to power per square foot, will go in the ground-mounted and larger commercial rooftop installations. All the systems will be fixed — no trackers will be used — and Duke has ruled out using concentrating technology like mirrors to focus a larger swath of sunlight onto a small area. But Smith said Duke is considering using several module providers so the company can evaluate the benefits of different technologies.

The more than 800 MW of solar power plants announced so far highlights the growing willingness of utilities to own and operate their own solar assets. But this amount is still a small fraction of the country’s planned power generation. U.S.-based plants totaling nearly 5 GW of electricity generating capacity were built or planned in the first four months of this year, according to the Energy Information Administration. Still, if Duke and others are successful with their plans, utilities now waiting on the sidelines should become more interested in launching their own, similar initiatives.

Justin Moresco has been writing about sustainability and green issues since 2005, first as a correspondent in West Africa for IRINnews. He now focuses mainly on emerging clean technology and is based in the San Francisco Bay Area. Before becoming a journalist, he was a licensed civil engineer.

Image Gallery (1)
 
Reader Comments (25)
 
No image available
August 13, 2009
I think this article misses the most important point. If consumers put in their own systems under net metering or feed in tariff programs, the utility is paying retail or better for the surplus power. If they own the installations, they pay wholesale and sell back to the consumer at retail; a much better deal for their shareholders and profitability.
Comment 1 of 25
No image available
August 13, 2009
This is exactly what it takes to get the ball rolling. Rollout of rooftop PV will be too slow if left to individual homeowners and business owners. Utility company owned and operated systems will be implemented faster with a focus on the entire grid.

However, I wonder about large land-based PV installations. Rooftops large and small, and PV covered parking in large parking lots makes good sense. But it seems to me that large dedicated land-based plants should be solar thermal, most likely parabolic trough.
Comment 2 of 25
No image available
August 14, 2009
$5 a watt! Not bad, considering that Solar buzz states it'll cost homeowners 8 to 12 (for complete system minus the incentives).

Soon, with all the trillions being printed, there will be no other option but inflation. Fossil fueled power will also increase due to further extraction costs caused by declining reserves, therefore, how could any short sited consumer advocate overlook this fundamental truth? (Oh, trillions weren't quite yet being printed in '08 then, but oil was high... go figure)!

Another thing that solar advocates need to do is attack the Cc&rs that restrict panels.

On a more challenging note, isn't CSP cheaper? (Concentrated solar power can also store heat for later...).

And on a questionable and negative note, I don't think thinfilm will last but ten years 'cause it's not as durable as silicon (kind'v like paint on glass)? I would think all the moving parts associated with CSP (whether silicon PV or thermal) would last much longer with a little maintenance. Good old fashioned stand alone silicon PV should become the target of deep pockets and mass production (no moving parts or "paint" to worry about)!

And finally, I do believe that the utilities can provide solar for cheaper than ever before due to volume. This is my hope of a green grid exponentialing (so I don't have to pay $8 a watt upfront myself!).
Comment 3 of 25
No image available
August 14, 2009
The middlemen that jacked module prices up from $2.6/w ex-factory to $4.5/w to consumers have only themselves to blame. So too the project developers that go about trying to flog solar farms at $5,500/kw to ignorant communities and local authorities will also see their end of days.

Jonothan spotted the issue for utilities.

Their lower cost of capital alone makes a huge difference to utilities' ability to do PV very well. Add their ability to do this in scale and you quickly get to $3,400/kw for large solar farms and $6,000/kw for rooftop.

Remember that a utility's business is selling power, they aren't all married to their generation technology. What somebody at the utility realized is that there are entrepreneurs out there who spotted this market opportunity:
* most homeowners are scared off by the techno-babble, think they can't do it
* most homeowners are scared by the upfront cost hurdle
* the 20 y cost of PV per kwh is 95% certain for a given project versus maybe 45% certain for grid-coal
* don't sell systems, rather own them on customer site and sell kwh to customer
* one can even initially sell at a loss to LCOE, but escalate the rate per kwh 10% a year and see what happens...
* plus, once your system is on their roof, you own their future additions and in effect their future power decisions.

BTW, thin film is not 'paint on glass', it is also glass fronted & then encapsulated, many actually are glass-glass laminates and are certified to 25 years. Quite the opposite, there are x-Si modules out there that only have 5 year warranties.

CSP can be cheaper, depending on the technology. But CSP doesn't scale efficiently to small 3 KW distributed.
Comment 4 of 25
No image available
August 14, 2009
Why is it that one week I read in renewableenergyworld that the costs for PV is down under $1/watt (with banner headlines) and the next I read it costs $5/watt to install. Where's the extra $4 going???
I've a South-facing house at 52º N that uses most energy in summer (we're a B&B and self-catering eco-holiday location) I'd love to buy 3 - 5kW via my utility company and pay it off over some years with the monthly bill. But I'd want to know where 80% of the PV costs are going. Lets be practicable.
Glenribbeen is eco-friendly - not dumb.
Comment 5 of 25
August 14, 2009
Hi All:

Personally, I want to own what is on my roof. I don't know how energy independent one can be with the utility company owning the generation capacity on ones roof along with its design, functionality, growth, etc...
Less of an issue at the commercial level...
I just wish they would cover parking lots with them for partial shading from that summer sun baking your car.... a double benefit...

.....Bill
Comment 6 of 25
No image available
August 14, 2009
I think the article really misses the true story. Its positively reports that utilities all of a sudden want to develop and own solar, but it is all fueled by the change in tax law with the ARRA. Moreover, for those that think the utilities are being "green," it is really their ability to make a profit using monopoly cash flows in addition to receiving cost recovery on SRECs through the state's renewable portfolio standards. Utilities do not do anything without cost recovery!

What dissappoints me is that the incentives in the industry, while promoting renewable resources and lowering upfront costs, were also intended to drive an industry including jobs, entreprenuership, and economic stimulus to homowners and small businesses. When you build large solar farms and feed it into the grid, put solar on utility poles or property, or net meter large facilities through a rigid utility rfp process set up for big developers with balance sheets, it does not fully satisfy the federal and state goals. I am miffed that the PSCs and PUCs in the states do not see this too. I am beginning to wonder if the utility commissions and consumer/small business advocate groups are really representing the rate payers' interest? Its pretty clear the legislators who set policy do not care since they have moved on to health care and will most likely fumble that too. I am not usually this negative, but I am living this stiff and it is frustrating.

Adam Stern
The Gemstone Group
Comment 7 of 25
No image available
August 14, 2009
Investor owned utilities such as Duke Energy, have a great incentive to install the highest priced generation and the most permitted by their state public service commissions. The reason being that they are allowed to earn a rate of return on plant investments. Thus, the more the investment, the more they earn. They are not installing the PV because of any high-minded ideals, they are doing so becasue the can earn more money for their stockholders. As to what their customers pay for electricity, that is of little consequence to investor owned utilities.
Comment 8 of 25
No image available
Anonymous
August 14, 2009
I would like to address the cost per watt installation price for Peter. The $1.00 per watt headlines from companies like First Solar aren't relevant on residential installs. This is thin film technology for large scale where watts per sq ft isn't a big issue and this is their cost. The average panel cost to a residential installer is now just coming under $3.00 per watt due to over supply, which is encouraging, through their distributor. Then you have the cost of the inverter, racking system, conduits, conductors, disconnects, labor, permits, etc. on top of the panel cost. The condition of the roof and the existing electrical distribution system are variables that also factor in. The good news is what cost $9.00 per watt in 2007 to install is down to just over $6.00 per watt in 2009 but this is with very small margins. Considering a well installed system in a good location is going to produce for 20+ and with any type of incentive on top of the ITC the ROI would be in the 5 year range and this is what has the Utilities worried.
The Duke Energy program makes no sense other than the fact it prevents the end user the benefits of net metering for 20 years. What they don't include in these costs are system upgrades such as separate transformers, meter sockets, etc. to get this power back to the grid which they will incur and pass on to rate payers since the existing service was sized for the building load and not this additional power. These upgrades are unnecessary if they allow the customer to use this power and pay them an incentive for the environmental attributes these systems generate. These PV systems are also generating at peak power periods when the grid is most stressed and could help significantly in reducing this peak load extending the life of the conductors. We need to allow the Utilities to make a profit from delivering the power and not selling the power then they will truly be on board.
Comment 9 of 25
No image available
August 14, 2009
$ 5.00 per watt, fat chance. Will probably go to $ 8.00 per watt by the end of the program with a 100 year pay back! Let's just get real and forget PV as a source until the middle man, hoarders and waistful suppliers get out of the business. CSP seems the way to go for South West USA for solar. Don't feed the fat waistful cats with tax payer subsidized programs. Forget these folks. The best solutions is energy conservation and Nucs!

Good comments up there, just check payback
Comment 10 of 25
No image available
August 14, 2009
This is precisely why our small company will not develop our renewable energy technology in the corrupt US. The independent power industry develops the technology and the utilities take it, whenever they want and to whatever extent they want. Utilities are allowed to monopolize US power markets, especially for larger projects. We are going to countries with feed-in tariffs.
Comment 11 of 25
August 14, 2009
Hi:

I didn't think there was anyone left on the planet that was still naive enough to think that ANY of the conventional energy companies have positive feelings towards renewables. They are in the "charge for fuel" business no matter what your flavor, oil, gas, coal, nuke, etc...
Renewables are free, and there is lies the "core" business distaste.
There is no recurring income if the fuel is free and that is the hallmark of business stability, that constant cash flow month by month going up with more "fuel" usage by the end customer.
If they could make all renewables go away without consequences, it would be a half century's dream come true....

.....Bill
Comment 12 of 25
No image available
August 14, 2009
Again, here is another article with not one word about conservation (a bad word here in 'murika) and energy efficiency upgrades. They myth of unlimited growth on a finite planet continues... caution, brick wall rapidly approaching!
Comment 13 of 25
No image available
August 14, 2009
ECOTOP (Earth can occupy trillions of people) !
Comment 14 of 25
No image available
August 14, 2009
If it wasn't for greed (and conservational based limitation)! Conservation through efficiency (and 3 dimensional cities with electric mobility to all of tens or hundreds of levels) is why humanity's VISION can out do old fashioned negative (and repeated) thought patterns!
Comment 15 of 25
No image available
Anonymous
August 14, 2009
Energy efficiency is crucial to what this country needs to do and makes renewable energy that much more effective. I come from New England with 60 amp services and knob & tube wiring that was sufficient just 30 to 40 years ago and think of how things have changed. Today's new kitchens with the best energy star appliances would burn down a house with this infrastructure not to mention the harmonic loads from computers and other electronics. We have been doing plenty in the way of efficiency now for many years and with LEED construction standards this will continue to do so and this is paid through utility rebates. We should continue these funding mechanisms for renewables like a FIT program at the end user. This would create an explosion in all technologies and would be paid on actual power production from these systems. This is not some pipe dream the technology is tried and true.
Comment 16 of 25
No image available
August 14, 2009
Tech is tried and true for many "unlimited energy" possibilities, it's just that it seems to be a pipe dream here in America...
Comment 17 of 25
No image available
August 15, 2009
If my math is right $50 million for 1,300 homes is $38,466.66 per household over 25 years = $1,538 per year = $128 per month to supply some of the power needed to helb run tthe average north american house.
One could alternatively build a passive house standard home put on $20,000 worth of PV provide all the power required for the home charge up the [coming soon] lithium sulpher batteries for the [coming soon] electric auto and sell the rest to the grid. A well built house could be self sustaining for more than 100 years with a periodic changing of the pannels.
Changing the world is financially within the grasp of the current home owner/ builder with a positive financial return on the PV investment.
Numbers are easy to understand. People are not
Comment 18 of 25
No image available
Anonymous
August 17, 2009
I wish to implement this Solar PV Systems in my country, INDIA. I wonder if someone can help me in this venture.
During my Engineering studies, I did a project on the "Feasibility Studies of Solar Power Generation in the Kashmir Valley". That fascinated me and I am sure, this concept would work out in the power suffocated states of India.
We have plenty of Sunlight in the desert state Rajasthan. SPV, CSP and even Solar Thermal power stations can be thought of in Rajasthan.
Can someone inform me on the proper contacts for materialising such a project, please ?
- Jitendra Singh
js123india@yahoo.com
Comment 19 of 25
August 17, 2009
I wish to implement this Solar PV Systems in my country, INDIA. I wonder if someone can help me in this venture.
During my Engineering studies, I did a project on the "Feasibility Studies of Solar Power Generation in the Kashmir Valley". That fascinated me and I am sure, this concept would work out in the power suffocated states of India.
We have plenty of Sunlight in the desert state Rajasthan. SPV, CSP and even Solar Thermal power stations can be thought of in Rajasthan.
Can someone inform me on the proper contacts for materialising such a project, please ?
- Jitendra Singh
js123india@yahoo.com
Comment 20 of 25
No image available
Anonymous
August 18, 2009
The concept is really good. Definitely involving the user for maintenance and to own the solar power generation is really good. How to feed the grid with small power generations of each of the roof tops is not a problem, it will definitely get popular. Ofcourse it has got its own acceptance problems and also the costs and its returns ( ROI ) for their investment part of it. If that is taken care it will be useful. India being a tropical country and with large population it will really help to promote renewable energy utility more acceptable. If smaller capacity CSP thermal generators of capacities are economical in the range of 10 kw to 25 kw it will be much more acceptable as it can extend the usage time with storage possibility in moten salt.
Comment 21 of 25
August 18, 2009
This is a good step. The utilities will not loose an electric customer. But the real question is how to also encourage energy efficiency improvements. Our Energy Credit Card will allow the utilities to compensate the customers while promoting energy efficiency.
Comment 22 of 25
No image available
August 19, 2009
It is all about PROPERTY VALUE. A property that owns its own energy producing ability is intrinsically more valuable than one that throws its money into a utility company's coffers. Utility companies want to keep that monopoly and customer base. We need to turn their eyes towards foreign oil, a national electric railroad grid and plug in hybrids and off property values. Commercial property can recover its lost value by installing its own PV and thermal based power. The monopoly that utility companies want to keep, costs property owners in property value, especially while the US Govt is ready to offer incentives to install. If you pass on installing your own renewable energy systems today, you will be at a disadvantage on your property values in 5 years.
Comment 23 of 25
No image available
August 19, 2009
ESCOE3's property value is a valid point. I wonder how many of the calculations of LCOE figure in the asset value of the rooftop system - that $6/w on the roof is not a sunk cost.
Comment 24 of 25
No image available
August 19, 2009
Electric utilities grow by adding assets to rate base (what they are allowed to charge consumers for). ARRA allows the utilities to use the tax incentives (for the first time) that come along with renewable investments. They can build new transmission lines, but now that they can't build coal plants and nuclear takes forever, what's left?
Comment 25 of 25
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!

Register Now   Sign-In
Featured Total Access Partners
Click company logos to learn more
SunWize Technologies Stoel Rives LLP GlobalData Virtual Energy Forum PVPowered Inc. altPOWER, Inc.
WORLD'S #1 RENEWABLE ENERGY NETWORK
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network Logo