NREL Study: Cost Gap For Western U.S. Renewables Could Narrow By 2025

By 2025, wind and solar power electricity generation in the western U.S. could become cost-competitive without federal subsidies if new renewable energy development occurs in the most productive locations, according to a new report from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). The report, "Beyond Renewable Portfolio Standards: An Assessment of Regional Supply and Demand Conditions Affecting the Future of Renewable Energy in the West," compares the cost of renewables (without federal subsidy) from the West’s most productive renewable energy resource areas with the cost of energy from a new natural-gas-fired generator built near the customers it serves. A recent report from the Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory at the University of California, Berkeley, says that solar power could become a mainstream source of electricity in the Western U.S. by 2020 if the DOE's per-watt cost targets targets were met. "The electric generation portfolio of the future could be both cost-effective and diverse," says NREL Senior Analyst David Hurlbut, the report’s lead author. "If renewables and natural gas cost about the same per kilowatt-hour delivered, then value to customers becomes a matter of finding the right mix. "Renewable energy development, to date, has mostly been in response to state mandates," Hurlbut adds. "What this study does is look at where the most cost-effective yet untapped resources are likely to be when the last of these mandates culminates in 2025, and what it might cost to connect them to the best-matched population centers." According to NREL, the study’s key findings include the following: Wyoming and New Mexico could be areas of robust competition among wind projects aiming to serve California and the Southwest. NREL says both states are likely to have large amounts of untapped, developable, prime-quality wind potential after 2025. Wyoming’s surplus will probably have the advantage of somewhat higher productivity per dollar of capital invested in generation capacity; New Mexico’s will have the advantage of being somewhat closer to the California and Arizona markets. Montana and Wyoming could emerge as attractive areas for wind developers competing to meet demand in the Pacific Northwest. The challenge for Montana wind power appears to be the cost of transmission through the rugged forests that dominate the western part of the state. Wyoming wind power could also be a low-cost option for customers in Utah, which also has its own diverse portfolio of in-state resources. Colorado is a major demand center in the Rockies and will likely have a surplus of wind potential in 2025. However, the study suggests that Colorado is likely to be isolated from future renewable energy trading in the West due to transmission costs between the state and its Rocky Mountain neighbors. California, Arizona and Nevada are likely to have surpluses of solar resources. None is likely to have a strong comparative advantage over the others within the three-state market, unless environmental or other siting challenges limit in-state development. Consequently, development of utility-scale solar will probably continue to meet local needs rather than expand exports. New geothermal development could trend toward Idaho by 2025 since much of Nevada’s resources have already been developed. Geothermal power from Idaho could be competitive in California as well as in the Pacific Northwest, but NREL says the quantity is relatively small. Reaching California, Oregon and Washington may depend on access to unused capacity on existing transmission lines or on being part of a multi-resource portfolio carried across new lines. The study notes future electricity demand will be affected by several factors, including trends in the supply and price of natural gas; consumer preferences; technological breakthroughs; further improvements in energy efficiency; and future public policies and regulations. While most of these demand factors are difficult to predict, NREL says the study’s supply forecasts rely on empirical trends and the most recent assessments of resource quality. To read the full NREL report, click here.

Mesa County District 51 Schools Increase Solar Energy Use

The school board also adopted a resolution tonight that will add alternate energy to four District 51 Schools this year. Seven District 51 schools to date have solar energy and now four more schools will be added to the list. Grand Junction High School, Fruita Monument High School, Grand Junction High School and Nisley Elementary will have roof mounted solar units. District 51 Energy Officials say over a 20 year term, it's estimated that 2.1 million dollars will be saved in energy utility. And the project will be added at no cost to the schools and will begin immediately and be up and running before the end of the year. After its completion, District 51 will have 18% clean, renewable solar power.

Bureau of Land Management boosts solar development in Colorado

The federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has announced its first-ever competitive lease sale inside two designated solar energy zones in southern Colorado covering approximately 3,700 acres in the San Luis Valley. Once fully developed with solar projects, the two zones have the potential to produce 412 megawatts of electricity, enough to power more than 140,000 homes. The move by BLM marks the agency’s first foray into actively developing any of the seventeen “solar energy zones” that stretch across the Southwest. BLM designated the zones last fall as well-suited for utility-scale solar energy development and has pledged to prioritize them for solar energy production, transmission and infrastructure development. BLM Colorado State Director Helen Hankins noted that the competitive lease sale would “facilitate the Department’s priority approach to making appropriate public lands available for renewable energy development in the Solar Energy Zones and ensure a fair return to taxpayers for the commercial use of these lands.” BLM will publish formal notice of the lease sale in the August 16, 2013 edition of Federal Register, kicking off a 60-day window ending October 15 for companies to submit sealed bids, which must be accompanied by a $48,169 administrative fee on each parcel. An oral auction will be held October 24, 2013, opening with the minimum bonus bid or the highest sealed bid over the minimum bonus bid, whichever is higher. Winning bidders will have 180 days to file right-of-way applications and plans of development with BLM. The competitive lease sale is the latest example of the Obama administration’s efforts to promote development of renewable energy projects – particularly on federal lands. As of today, 47 solar, wind and geothermal power plants have been approved on nearly 300,000 acres of federal land. If all are built, the projects will have the capacity to produce more than 13,300 MW of electricity, or enough to power 4.6 million homes.

BLM to auction Colorado land for solar development

The United States Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management announced today that it will auction off leases for 3,705 acres of public lands in Colorado for solar development this fall. This will be the BLM’s first competitive auction for of leases for Solar Energy Zone land. The land is divided between two sites, the De Tilla Gulch and Los Mogotes East Solar Energy Zones in the San Luis Valley. The Interior Department designated the areas Solar Energy Zones because of their proximity to transmission lines or planned transmission lines in a famously sunny region of the sate. President Barack Obama’s administration has been proactively seeking out optimal solar energy regions and designating them Solar Energy Zones in a push to develop more utility-scale solar energy generation on public lands. “As we double down on the unprecedented progress that the Obama administration has made on advancing clean energy, the Interior Department has an opportunity not only to cut carbon pollution, but also to advance important conservation goals," Interior Secretary Sally Jewell said last week at the National Clean Energy Summit in Las Vegas. The Department announced last week that it was designating another nearly 11,000-acre parcel of land near the Marine Corps’ Chocolate Mountain Gunnery Range in Southern California’s Imperial Valley as its 19th Solar Energy Zone. While the department has been working to identify areas for solar development since the creation of the program in October of 2012, no actual development has started on the designated lands in Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico or Utah. Scheduled for Oct. 24, the parcels in Conejos and Saguache counties will be the first to be auctioned for lease. Bidding for the De Tilla parcel will start at $3,352. The Los Magotes section has been divided into two separate parts with bidding for the north parcel starting at $4,035 and the south starting at $4,284. Utility-scale solar developers, particularly those that specialize in early-stage construction investment, will be the likely bidders for the projects. Once the leases are finalized developers will have to go through all of the usual approval processes before they can begin developing solar projects on the land. Since this is the first auction of Solar Energy Zone lands, it will be an important one for the BLM. “This process will facilitate the Department’s priority approach to making appropriate public lands available for renewable energy development in the Solar Energy Zones and ensure a fair return to taxpayers for the commercial use of these lands,” BLM Colorado State Director Helen Hankins said in a statement.

Colorado Solar Advocates Fight Xcel’s Proposal to Gut Solar Net Metering

It’s one of those mixed bags. Colorado’s largest utility, Xcel Energy, which does business in the state as Public Service Company of Colorado has filed with the Colorado Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to extend its Solar*Rewards program, which is good. But at the same time it would gut its support of rooftop solar by reducing the amount it pays for net-metered PV systems to next to nothing, significantly reducing the incentive it provides for people to go solar in the state. Xcel made the filing in late July becoming the latest utility to attempt to significantly reduce its net-metering program. Under an internal study by the company it claimed that it should be able to recoup 6 cents per kilowatt hour from residential net-metered customers—who currently get about 10.4 cents per kilowatt hour for power they put back on the grid, for all the power they produce—not just the power they put back on the grid, according to The Vote Solar Initiative. As such, the the filing the utility would reduce the amount it pays for net-metered solar arrays. “Xcel is essentially claiming the value of residential solar is about 4 cents per kWh. For commercial customers the ‘subsidy’ is much lower at 1.5 cents per kWh,” the organization said. In response to Xcel's efforts to gut its net-metering program, Colorado’s renewable energy advocacy organizations have already developed an online petition, which can be signed here (Stop Xcel’s Power Grab in Colorado) and the Colorado Renewable Energy Society (CRES) has started a letter-writing campaign to CPUC to reject the proposal. “Xcel is using shady math and backroom tactics to try to rollback the state’s successful net metering policy, which allows solar customers to get credit on their energy bills for power they deliver to the grid,” said CRES Executive Director Lorrie McAllister. “If our regulators at the Public Utility Commission approve this anti-solar proposal, it could be rolled out statewide—so even if Xcel isn’t your utility, this proposal could affect solar rooftops in your community,” she said. Meanwhile solar advocate Robert Carmichael created a CREDO campaign that he plans to deliver to the CPUC in opposition of the proposal. In the campaign, Carmichael contended, “Xcel is going to great lengths to convince you that rooftop solar is a bad deal for Coloradoans, but this couldn't be further from the truth.” He said, “Distributed, local rooftop solar delivers innumerable grid benefits, which Xcel is unfairly discounting. In addition to those ratepayer savings, Colorado’s growing rooftop solar market delivers tremendous public benefits including jobs, improved air quality, and the decreased use of precious water resources in our energy production. This valuable resource should be supported and encouraged in Colorado, one of leading solar markets.” It’s not the first time that Xcel has landed a bombshell to the solar community in Colorado. In 2011 Xcel tried to gut its rebate program by reducing its solar rebates from $2 per watt to 25 cents per watt. That proposal, as has this one, met strong resistance from the solar community and ultimately the utility worked out a deal with the solar industry that left no one completely happy, but worked for everyone. In the more recent case, already 22 organizations in favor of renewable energy have sent the CPUC a letter asking the commission to reject the proposal.

Colorado Solar Garden Program Expands as Prices Drop

New data revealed Colorado is home to some of the nations lowest solar photovoltaic system installation costs as one town looks to expand its pilot solar gardens program and improve its energy efficiency. The Gazette reported that the City Council of Colorado Springs has reached a compromise to expand its solar garden program after its original expansion program was halted due to the election of six new council members. Originally, the council approved a 10-megawatt expansion, due to the popularity of the pilot program. Since it's been scrapped, the compromise reached by new council members calls for a 2-MW expansion to take place over a single year. The compromise stems from concerns that the cost of the solar garden expansion would unfairly fall on the customers of the Colorado Springs Utility company, an effect that must be balanced with a need to fulfill state mandates that call for increased renewable energy portfolios. Originally going to cost $22 million, the solar garden expansion will now only cost $4.9 million over 20 years, offering a maximum incentive of 13 cents per kilowatt hour for customers who purchase portions of the garden. No matter how uneasy councilmen felt about the cost to utility customers, six out of nine members voted for the expansion. Utility customers will be charged 50 cents extra per year as a result. "Colorado Springs Utilities does not have to purchase one grain of coal to supply my electricity," said Bob Kinsey, a resident of Colorado Springs and owner of 20 solar panels. "And I am feeding electricity back into the system." The Price of Solar in Colorado Despite the local incentives towns and municipalities have to expand or undertake solar installations, the state of Colorado is one of the best states to install a solar system, at least when it comes to cost. In 1998, the average price to install a solar system hovered around $12 per watt. In 2012, the national average installed PV price was $5.30 per watt. However, for solar systems that range in size between 10kWs and 100kWs, Colorado boasts the lowest installed price in 2012, with it costing residents and businesses $3.70 per watt. "It is exciting to see tangible evidence that the Colorado solar industry is aggressively driving down solar installation costs," said Annie Lappé, solar policy director for Vote Solar. "Colorado installers are offering some of the most aggressive pricing options in the country."

Clean Energy in Yampa Valley

A new power purchase agreement between community-owned solar developer Clean Energy Collective and the Yampa Valley Electric Association was announced this week.– The agreement brings the community solar model to northern Colorado and supports the Yampa Valley Electric Association's quest to meet Colorado’s newly adopted renewable portfolio standard for rural electric cooperatives. The agreement allows Yampa Valley Electric Association , a customer-owned rural electric cooperative serving more than 26,000 members in northwestern Colorado, to buy 500 kilowatts of renewable energy from Clean Energy Collective'’s newest array to be built in Craig, Colo. Individual Yampa Valley Electric Association customers can then purchase solar panels in the shared array and receive credit for the energy produced directly on their monthly utility bill. The credit rate being offered by Yampa Valley Electric Association on participating member bills is significantly higher than the retail electric rate that members pay, making the program very advantageous for it members to embrace solar, according to its promoters. Clean Energy Collective expects the 500 kilowatt, approximately 2,100-panel array to serve upwards of 200 residential and commercial customers. Yampa Valley Electric Association ratepayers can buy in with as few as one panel, at an anticipated cost of $646.25 per panel, or purchase as many as needed to fully offset the electricity needs of their home or business. Yampa Valley Electric Association's 7,000-square-mile service territory includes the communities of Craig, Hayden, Steamboat Springs, and Yampa, as well as Baggs and Savery, Wyo. Yampa Valley Electric Association joins five other Colorado utilities in providing renewable energy through community-owned solar. Although a final site hanse'’t been identified to date, it is common for Clean Energy Collective to work with local communities to utilize land that is otherwise unproductive, or work with private land owners or local government entities eager to participate who want to leave a legacy of environmental stewardship. In 2010, Clean Energy Collective established the first community-owned solar array in the country near El Jebel, Colo. Today, Clean Energy Collective operates nine community solar facilities in Colorado, New Mexico, and Minnesota, generating 3.8 megawatts of clean power, spanning more than half of all utility customers in Colorado. Clean Energy Collective also has an additional 15 facilities under construction or approved for development, representing more than 6 megawatts of distributed renewable energy

Colorado Has Lowest Cost of Solar Installation in US

Colorado has just about the lowest costs in the country for installing photovoltaic solar systems, according to a study by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The annual study tracks the price for photovoltaic installations in the U.S. and has charted a steady downward path from $12 a watt in 1998 for a smaller residential system to $5.30 a watt in 2012. While that's the national average, the state-by-state breakdowns are far more dramatic. In Wisconsin, the installed cost for a system of less than 10 kilowatts was $5.90 a watt in 2012. The installed price for west Texas was $3.90 a watt, and in Colorado it was $4.10. For systems between 10 kilowatts and 100 kilowatts, Colorado had the lowest installed price in 2012 — $3.70 a watt. Wisconsin again had the highest cost, at $5.90. When it came to large, primarily utility-scale systems, Colorado again posted the lowest cost, at $3.20 a watt. Arizona had the highest installation figure, at $6.10 a watt, and California was the second-highest, $5 per watt. Driving down the cost has been a sharp decline in the price of solar panels, which dropped by $2.60 a watt between 2008 and 2012. That accounts for 80 percent of the overall price decline. A peskier part of the cost equation has been everything else — including additional equipment and workers' salaries. "The other costs have been less amenable to any overall policy, and they are lots of little things," said Galen Barbose, a researcher at Lawrence Berkeley and the report's principal author. "Still, collectively, those little things have become the largest aggregate cost." These so-called soft costs have been a prime target for the U.S. Department of Energy in reducing overall solar-energy costs. The Colorado Solar Energy Industries Association in 2012 launched the "Solar Friendly Community" campaign to encourage municipalities to streamline their permitting and inspection process for solar installations. "It is exciting to see tangible evidence that the Colorado solar industry is aggressively driving down solar installation costs," said Annie Lappé, solar policy director for Vote Solar, an advocacy group. "Colorado installers are offering some of the most aggressive pricing options in the country."

Colorado GE Solar Plant Cancelled

Just two years after picking Aurora, Colo., over the Capital Region for a mega solar panel fabrication plant, General Electric Co. has dumped the business. The decision was announced Tuesday by GE and Tempe, Ariz.-based First Solar, one of the country's largest solar manufacturers. Under the deal, which has already been completed, GE sold its thin-film solar panel technology to First Solar in exchange for 1.75 million shares of First Solar stock — about two percent of the company. GE cannot sell the shares for three years. The shares had a value of $83.8 million as of Monday. By the close of the Nasdaq stock market Wednesday, GE's share of the company had dropped to just below $71 million In April 2011, GE announced that its new $600 million solar panel plant — and 400 jobs — would be going to Colorado instead of the Albany area, which had fought fiercely for the plant. The competition by New York made sense because GE's renewable energy headquarters is based in Schenectady, and GE's research and development laboratory — where it works on solar technologies — is based in Niskayuna. The consolation prize for this area was 100 jobs in Schenectady and Niskayuna that would support the new Colorado plant, which was expected to be up and running this year. All of that was put temporarily on hold in July 2012 when GE announced the Aurora project would be suspended for at least 18 months after the collapse of domestic solar panel prices. At the time, GE said it needed to make its panels more efficient and cheaper and that the business and the Colorado plant had to be redesigned to reach those goals. Many analysts said that Chinese dumping of solar panels at cut-rate prices in the U.S. had led to a glut and to the crash of domestic solar panel prices. As part of this week's announcement, GE said it no longer plans to build the Aurora facility. First Solar spokesman Steve Crum said Wednesday his company was not planning to build the facility either. The 100 jobs expected for the Capital Region never materialized. Instead, the two companies will work together on complementary solar technologies. For instance, GE makes solar electric inverters, which First Solar will use in its systems sold to customers. Inverters convert direct-current electricity from solar panels into alternating-current electricity used in homes and commercial buildings where solar electric systems are often sited. GE will also sell First Solar solar panels to its customers. The two companies will also collaborate on future R&D projects related to the thin-film technology that GE is selling to First Solar, which is based on materials made from cadmium telluride. The efforts will take place in Niskayuna and at First Solar's research labs in Ohio and California.

Xcel Energy's Colorado Renewable Energy Plan Based on Flawed Study

This week, the Solar Energy Industries Association joined other renewable energy advocates, businesses, and environmental groups to urge the Colorado Public Utilities Commission to reject a new proposal from Xcel Energy that would discourage net-metered solar energy growth in its territory. Issued last week as part of Xcel’s 2014 Renewable Energy Standard (RES) compliance plan, the proposal takes aim at net metering using a contested, in-house Xcel study that has not undergone public or commission review to make its case against the successful solar policy. The Xcel study and this subsequent proposal do not fairly value the many benefits that net-metered solar delivers to Colorado. When determining the value of net-metered solar, both costs and benefits must be considered. Solar is helping Colorado families, schools, and businesses take charge of their power supply and their electricity bills like never before. Distributed, local rooftop solar also delivers innumerable benefits to the electrical grid, which Xcel unfairly discounts in its study. Private investments in local clean energy deliver economic, environmental and public health benefits to Xcel’s solar and non-solar customers alike: New energy leadership: Colorado ranks 5th in the country with enough solar installed to power 50,500 homes. Grid benefits: Local solar energy systems can reduce the need for expensive centralized power plants and transmission infrastructure, which benefits Colorado’s non-solar customers. Job & economic benefits: There are currently 275 solar companies employing 3,600 Coloradoans throughout the state. In 2012, $187 million was invested in Colorado to install solar on homes and businesses. In order to ensure a mutually-agreeable resolution for both Xcel and the Colorado solar industry, the study and RES compliance plan must be adjusted in order to adequately account for all of these benefits. Until then, SEIA encourages the Colorado Public Utility Commission to take a stand for the state’s growing solar industry by rejecting Xcel’s near-sighted proposal.

FREE Energy Efficiency Seminar in Grand Junction, CO

Energy Efficiency Seminar Save the Date for a great seminar presented by HBA member, Energywise Consultants, titled "Energy Efficiency Techniques for New Homes Seminar"! This educational seminar will include topics such as : Values of Air Sealing, Install of insulation, HVAC Certification, & Energy Star New Homes Program, presented by accredited speaker Paul Kriescher! When: August 15, 2013 Where: Atlasta Solar (1111 South 7th Street) Time: 3:30-5:30 PM with refreshments beginning at 3:00. FREE to attend! RSVP to Vernon at 970-242-9473.

Xcel Colorado Responds to the Solar Industry on Net Metering

Solar industry representatives are attacking Xcel Energy Colorado’s just-announced proposal to change net energy metering. They've called it a threat to hundreds of solar businesses, thousands of solar jobs and tens of millions of dollars in solar investments. “It was done with only the appearance of [having solicited] our advice and counsel,” explained SolarCity Policy Director Meghan Nutting, speaking for The Alliance for Solar Choice. “Throwing out a proposal like this is essentially declaring war on the solar industry.” The Xcel proposal on net metering to the Colorado Public Utility Commission (CPUC) came out of its in-house study on the costs and benefits of distributed solar generation. The study “significantly undervalues solar’s capacity benefits and the avoided transmission costs, and there is no valuation of solar’s ancillary services benefits,” said VoteSolar’s Annie Lappé. “And they proposed a hard and fast fixed net metering charge from that faulty analysis.” “It’s an overreaction,” Xcel Energy VP Karen Hyde said of the solar industry’s response. “We want to have an open debate in the best forum we know of, the CPUC, about the net metering incentive -- whether it’s the right amount, who should pay for it, those sorts of things.” Despite the proposed reduction of the customer benefits of net metering, Hyde noted, Xcel proposed no cutbacks in solar installed capacity for 2014. Hyde expects the filing to start a dialogue about the costs and benefits of rooftop solar. "There is a contribution of solar rooftop generation to our peak," she said, "but our system load peaks substantially later than the midday solar peak, when people start coming home from work but businesses are still operating." That was the largest part of solar’s value, according to Xcel’s study. “We gave solar credit for that, though It isn’t going to avoid the need for a power plant,” Hyde said. “We determined that rooftop solar does not avoid investments in transmission and distribution, in part because we still have to serve part of the load and in part because the peaks are different. We did determine that solar avoids line losses on the distribution system, because it is closer to load, and we credited solar for that.” Hyde said she wasn’t sure what ancillary services solar could provide. “It would be great if they give us some specifics.” Hyde speculated that even with significantly more solar on the Xcel system, the benefits attributed to it by the study would not significantly change. “Over time, as you add solar, it will avoid building other generation, but we have quantified that in our assumptions.” When residential solar owners get the $0.104 per kilowatt-hour retail rate for the electricity their systems send to the grid, Hyde said, that benefit is approximately $0.059 per kilowatt hour more than the benefit solar adds, and it is paid for by non-solar owning customers. “There are just and reasonable rates where one group of customers pick up the costs for another,” Hyde noted. “Rural and urban customers are charged at the same rate.” Xcel’s intention, she insisted, is transparency about who is picking up the costs. “We don’t agree that net metering is an incentive," Nutting said. “It is a fair credit for generation. Maybe the retail rate is rough justice, but solar customers who generate electricity for the grid should get credit for it.” “It is time to start recognizing the net metering incentive as an incremental cost of customer-sited solar,” Hyde testified to the CPUC, “and to include that cost in the RESA.” The Renewable Energy Standard Adjustment (RESA) fund is one of two places spending for renewable incentives can be entered, Hyde explained. Shifting the costs of net metering to the RESA fund is one of the proposed changes. “It is neutral to customers the way we proposed it,” Hyde said, “and it doesn’t change the amount of money available of other renewables.” Xcel is allowed to collect no more than 2 percent of the customer bill to pay for incentives, but the law allows customers to owe it, in the RESA fund, for incentive expenditures. “Even with the net metering incentive for new installations,” Hyde said, “the addition to the RESA fund for 2014 is only $2.6 million for all incentives.” The RESA fund rules are complicated, Hyde acknowledged, “but it shouldn’t impact the amount of money we are able to spend for wind or utility-scale solar. They are becoming quite cost-effective for us.” But it will make more transparent the money spent on “our most expensive renewable resource, which is rooftop solar,” she added. “We want to have a debate about what the most cost-effective ways are to use our customers’ money and about what our goals are,” Hyde said. “I’m perplexed why they are opposing the debate. They should be welcoming it.”