The pv magazine weekly news digest: On a war footing

Back in the U.S., amid the news bombs dropping all around them, the solar industry’s great and good got on with the matter at hand: Intersolar North America. Day one was particularly interesting, setting an embattled tone that persisted throughout the show’s duration. Speaker after speaker addressed not only the rapid growth of the solar industry, but the forces that are pushing against that growth, including a public advocate who is suing to stop fossil fuel projects, and the CEO of perhaps the most combative distributed solar company in the industry.

"We are inherent disruptor of the status quo, and that has caused some to push against us," noted California Solar Energy Industries Association (CalSEIA) Executive Director Bernadette del Chiaro. 

Del Chiaro is a veteran of these conflicts, which are neither abstract nor distant. And while this last year’s regulatory battle over net metering was largely a victory for the solar industry in California, the same cannot be said of other states, most notably Nevada, where net metering was dismantled.

Source: http://www.pv-magazine.com/news/details/beitrag/the-pv-magazine-weekly-news-digest_100025425/#ixzz4EUxZpUve

The Imperial Irrigation District has a new rooftop solar plan, and solar installers say it's terrible

By Sammy Roth, The Desert Sun

The Imperial Irrigation District could end the months-long uncertainty over its solar policy next week. But critics say the district's new plan — if approved by the utility's board of directors Tuesday — would kill the rooftop solar industry in the Imperial and eastern Coachella valleys, leading to mass layoffs and making it impossible for all but the wealthiest families to go solar.

The agency brought rooftop solar installations to a halt in February, when it abruptly eliminated net metering, the program utilities have long used to compensate solar-powered homes and businesses for the excess electricity they generate. District staff now want to replace net metering with a new arrangement called net billing, which would dramatically reduce the value of solar. Installers say they'll stop doing business in Imperial Irrigation District territory if the board approves the plan, since they won't be able to offer deals that make financial sense for most families.

Nearly 100 people packed the district's La Quinta boardroom for a public hearing on Wednesday, including solar workers who said they could find themselves unemployed if the new proposal passes. Among them was La Quinta resident Laura Fonseca, who said some of her colleagues at SolarCity have already been laid off this year because of uncertainty over the district's solar policy.

"It's not because they don't know how to do their job. It's just that there’s no business," Fonseca said. "And if this continues and it doesn't change, I probably will lose my job as well."

Under net metering, solar customers who sent more electricity onto the grid than they consumed were able to zero out their energy bills. If they consumed more from the grid than they contributed, they only had to pay for the difference, at the retail electricity rate. So a customer who consumed 1,200 kilowatt-hours from the grid but sent back 1,000 kilowatt-hours only had to pay for 200.

Under net billing, solar customers would be charged the retail rate for all the electricity they take from the grid, then credited at a far lower rate for the energy they send back. So that same customer would be charged the retail rate, 11.69 cents per kWh, for all 1,200 kilowatt-hours they consume, then credited at just 6.8 cents per kWh for the 1,000 kilowatt-hours they contribute. The 6.8-cent credit rate would probably drop over time, making rooftop solar progressively less valuable.

The result: Solar customers would pay much higher bills. They would rarely zero out, if ever.

In a letter to the district's general manager, Kevin Kelley, earlier this week, the California Solar Energy Industries Association gave an example of what the changes would mean for a hypothetical solar customer, assuming the initial credit rate of 6.8 cents. A customer who would have gotten a $22 credit on her monthly bill under net metering, the group estimated, would instead pay $28.40 that month under net billing. A customer with a similar solar system but higher energy use, who would have paid $22 in a particular month under net metering, would instead pay $64 under net billing.

The net billing system "will effectively end the installation of rooftop solar on individual customer homes," Joe Deisenroth, who runs Revco Solar's Coachella Valley office, told the district's board of directors on Wednesday. Revco started focusing on the east valley last year, but it's already had to fire five of the six employees it hired to serve that market, Deisenroth said in a follow-up interview.

"I absolutely never will market in (the Imperial Irrigation District) again if they move forward with the current proposal," he said.

District officials have criticized net metering as an unfair subsidy, saying rooftop solar customers aren't paying their fair share to maintain the electric grid. They say the agency is losing $10 million per year in revenue due to rooftop solar, and that non-solar customers — who tend to have lower incomes than their solar-powered neighbors — will ultimately pay the difference through higher rates.

That argument has highlighted divisions between the Imperial Valley — where the district is based — and the higher-income communities of the eastern Coachella Valley, where most of its energy customers live. Due to some historical quirks, the Coachella Valley doesn't have representation on the utility's board of directors. Board members say their top responsibility is to keep electricity rates low for residents of the Imperial Valley, which is home to some of the lowest incomes and highest unemployment rates in the state.

"Solar around here in this town isn’t like it is in La Quinta, where everybody has it and has the money to pay for it," Brawley resident Gerald Gauna, a member of the utility's energy advisory committee, said at a committee meeting in El Centro on Monday. "Down here it’s a whole different story. I don’t see why we who don’t have solar should pay for the people that do get the benefit."

READ MORE: Imperial Irrigation District slams brakes on solar

Many solar advocates reject the idea that net metering is a subsidy. They've pointed to studies showing that rooftop solar actually benefits the grid by reducing strain on transmission lines and limiting the need for new power plants, and they've criticized the Imperial Irrigation District for refusing to take those benefits into account. Many environmentalists note that rooftop solar reduces air pollution and climate change by limiting the need to burn fossil fuels, providing public health benefits that don't show up in a utility's bottom line.

District officials, though, are unlikely to change their minds. They insisted Wednesday they're not trying to kill rooftop solar, although critics say that's exactly what the net billing proposal would do.

Under the new rate plan, solar customers would initially be credited at 6.8 cents per kilowatt-hour for the energy they contribute to the grid. District staff chose 6.8 cents because that's their cheapest contract to buy electricity from a large solar power plant. Utility officials say they shouldn't have to pay more for solar power from someone's roof than they pay for solar power from a big solar farm.

The 6.8-cent credit rate might not last long, though. The staff proposal would tie that rate to the lowest-cost solar contract signed by the district, meaning net billing customers would see the value of their solar drop if the utility signs new, cheaper contracts. That will almost certainly happen, since solar is getting cheaper all the time and state law will require the district to buy more clean energy.

Other utilities have signed solar contracts at under 4 cents per kilowatt-hour over the last year. So an Imperial or Coachella valley resident who signs up for net billing at 6.8 cents next year could find herself getting credited at a rate as low as 3 or 4 cents per kilowatt-hour in the not-so-distant future.

"They know they're proposing something that's going to kill the market for rooftop, but they seem to have no remorse for it," said Bernadette Del Chiaro, executive director of the California Solar Energy Industries Association, a trade group.

Indio City Council member Lupe Ramos Watson criticized the proposal to use the lowest solar contract rate, calling it "ridiculous." Ramos Watson, who represents Indio on the district's energy advisory committee, suggested using the average contract cost instead.

"These people are doing something that's better for all of us. Whether we can afford solar or not, going green is better for this universe, for the world, for the United States of America, for everyone," Ramos Watson said at Monday's committee meeting. "So let's give them a little bit of credit for that. We don't have to lowball them."

Homes and businesses that signed up for net metering before the district closed the program won't be affected by any of the changes, which only apply to new solar customers. But the changes will impact the hundreds of people who hurried to apply after the district closed the program, many of whom had already signed contracts with solar installers under the expectation of net metering.

It's unclear how many of those customers will sign up for the net billing program, if it's approved, and how many will choose not to go solar because they can no longer afford it.

Southern California Edison, which provides electricity in the western Coachella Valley, continues to offer net metering at retail rates. Edison also tried to gut the program last year, but its proposal was rejected by the California Public Utilities Commission, which regulates investor-owned but not publicly owned utilities, like the Imperial Irrigation District.

Source: http://www.desertsun.com/story/tech/science/energy/2016/07/14/imperial-irrigation-district-has-new-rooftop-solar-plan-and-solar-installers-say-s-terrible/87063726/

Location Matters: California Regulators Investigate More Granular Solar Benefits

By Brad Heavner, for Solar Industry Magazine

In a transmission plan approved in March, the California Independent System Operator cancelled 13 sub-transmission projects that previously had been approved in Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) territory. PG&E supported the project cancellations, which will save customers $192 million. The utility pointed out that rooftop solar and energy efficiency have reduced their load forecast and stated, “The need for those is just not there anymore.”

This is a clear example of distributed solar’s reducing utility infrastructure costs, but it does not answer the question of how to quantify future spending reductions that result from increasing amounts of solar.

Optimal Locations For Solar
A primary conclusion of the recent net-metering debate in California was that more time is needed to accurately measure the benefits of distributed solar. That effort is now in full swing, with multiple working groups and proceedings.

The question is complicated by the fact that solar is more valuable to the grid in some places than others. Utilities have traditionally spread costs and benefits evenly across their service territories, but the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) may decide to give distributed solar different value depending on where it is connected. Nobody is quite sure where these regulatory discussions will end up, but they are certainly heading in an interesting direction.

A.B.327, passed in 2013, is known as the legislation that led to flattening the residential rate tiers and forcing the creation of NEM 2.0. A lesser noticed portion of the bill directs utilities to “identify optimal locations for the deployment of distributed resources.” Under the direction of the CPUC, utilities filed plans last July with proposals for how to determine location-specific costs and benefits.

One of the first steps is to improve the mapping of existing capacity on the grid. Many solar developers in California are familiar with the “RAM maps” that were created for the renewable auction mechanism. These maps show distribution circuits throughout a utility territory that are color-coded based on how much capacity there is to host new solar installations. Developers have been able to use the maps to identify good locations for site development. The idea is good, but the data has been crude and unreliable.

As part of the new planning process, these maps are now being improved. The ultimate goal is a plug-and-play grid, where circuits are essentially pre-engineered to determine how much solar can go in each location at any time.

Currently, the maps show hosting capacity based on distributed resources that are already connected, but there is no way to know if there are other projects already in the queue that will use up available capacity. If developers are going to rely on the maps, and the interconnection process is going to use them, the maps need to include projects under development. To update their maps in real time as projects move through the development process is no small feat for the utilities.

Another initial step that is moving in parallel with the mapping exercise is to develop a methodology for determining location-specific values for the benefits of solar and storage. Stakeholders have identified the categories of benefits that need to be quantified. Once that list is finalized, the hard work begins to decide on the math.

Competitive Solicitations
One practical outcome in the near term is to look at the list of distribution system projects that are already planned and figure out which ones can be deferred by distributed alternatives.

Southern California Edison has held competitive solicitations to address local needs stemming from the loss of the San Onofre nuclear power plant. These have been generally successful, and the experience can be applied to ongoing system growth and maintenance. In addition, the CPUC has proposed a pilot project that would direct utilities to announce at least two requests for offers (RFOs) per year for alternatives to traditional investments.

The proposal includes a sweetener for the utilities: guaranteeing them equal profit for distributed and centralized solutions. Utilities have traditionally resisted giving solar credit for its value to the grid because utility profits are pegged to capital expenses on infrastructure. Their fiduciary responsibility to shareholders pushes them to favor substation upgrades over customer-sited solutions.

CPUC Commissioner Michel Florio has responded to this problem with a proposal to give utilities an incentive to propose alternatives to substation upgrades. The proposal seeks to give utilities the same return on distributed solutions to grid challenges as centralized infrastructure solutions. Utilities put out an RFO for distributed energy resources in a specific area, companies bid project portfolios, utilities sign a power purchase agreement, developers build systems, utilities get a return and everybody’s happy.

It is not clear, however, that regulated profit on utility procurement of distributed solutions would truly motivate utilities to propose alternatives to the traditional way of doing things. Their official response was that consideration of incentives and profit motive is premature.

Data And Tariffs
An alternative to encouraging utilities to propose distributed solutions is to make enough data available for third parties to be able to see system needs and propose alternatives. Solar and storage companies have recommended a long list of data types to become publicly available. Utilities are concerned that companies competing in RFOs would not price their bids low enough if they have too much visibility into utility cost-savings.

Yet another approach would be to create tariffs based on locational benefits and let the competitive market deliver results. Getting the utilities to change their procurement strategies to address system needs is one thing; trusting markets is another.

Nobody wants tariffs that change every time you turn the corner, but markets can move faster than top-down procurement. The CPUC is looking for the right balance between consistency and precise price signals.

One potential tariff structure is simply the inclusion of a locational benefits adder that could be layered on top of existing rate schedules for projects located within specified zones. Other ideas may emerge. The CPUC has signaled it will develop tariffs incorporating locational benefits but intends to work on competitive solicitations first.

Aliso Canyon
From last October through February of this year, a failed wellhead at a natural gas storage facility at Aliso Canyon, located near Los Angeles, leaked an estimated 5.4 billion cubic feet of natural gas. The greenhouse-gas emissions from this leak equate to half a million cars driving in circles for a year.

Aliso Canyon is the largest natural gas storage facility in the West. It has been key to assuring electric system reliability in the transmission-constrained LA Basin. During hot summer months, when demand can increase quickly when people turn on air conditioners, gas-fired power plants ramp up production in a hurry.

On some days, gas pipelines and electric transmission lines are tapped out, and it is only local power plants fueled by gas stored in Aliso Canyon that can meet demand. This summer, that’s not an option, and regulators have warned of potential blackouts.

The state has been scrambling to clear the way for more solar PV, solar water heating and energy storage in the LA Basin to help alleviate this problem. In this case, nobody is even questioning whether local energy solutions can avoid the need for new transmission. It is painfully obvious.

As solar penetration grows, solar customers will probably be required to pay more in fees or accept less in compensation for exported power. Location-specific values may become available to offset those changes for customers that are in the right places, and improved interconnection tools can reduce soft costs. If the solar sales process keeps pace with more sophisticated opportunities, market growth can remain strong.

Author’s note: Brad Heavner is policy director at the California Solar Energy Industries Association.

Source: http://solarindustrymag.com/location-matters-california-regulators-investigate-more-granular-solar-benefits

Opening ceremony of Intersolar North America dominated by politics

Bernadette del Chiaro, Executive Director of California Solar Energy Industries Association (CALSEIA) was one of the speakers of the opening ceremony of Intersolar 2016 North America yesterday evening in San Francisco.

Bernadette del Chiaro, Executive Director of California Solar Energy Industries Association (CALSEIA) was one of the speakers of the opening ceremony of Intersolar 2016 North America yesterday evening in San Francisco.

By Hans-Christoph Neidlein, Sun & Wind Energy Magazine

Despite a predicted record growth of 16 GW photovoltaics in the U.S. in 2016 the opening ceremony of Intersolar North America(link is external) yesterday evening in San Francisco was pretty much shaped by politics. The focus was the democratization of the energy transition, job creation through decarbonization and a policy design for smart markets.

“Solar is for everybody”, Bernadette del Chiaro, Executive Director of California Solar Energy Industries Association (CALSEIA(link is external)) said. Already now over 50 percent of new residential solar capacity in California would be installed in middle class and lower income homes, she stressed. Utilities should cooperate and not block the further expansion of residential solar del Chiaro underlined, referring to problems with the disruption of several net-metering programs. This would also undermine further job creation of the solar sector.

“Climate protection, cleantech and solar secure our economy”, Kevin de León, president pro tempore of the California Senate and winner of the 2016 Intersolar Champion of Change AWARD, underlined. Already now jobs in the cleantech sector in California would grow six times faster than other industries. It would be historic step to further implement decarbonization and the decoupling of economic growth and energy consumption of fossil fuels. As the number six of GDP globally California could lead the way for the U.S. and other countries, León stressed. This would also enhance quality of life and health care of the middle class and lower income groups. “We have to provide as many people as possible access to clean renewable energies”, the democratic senator said.

Next step would be the coupling with electric mobility and clean transportation. As “a big step forward”, he described the engagement of Southern California Edison(link is external). The utility announced to install 30,000 electric charging stations within the next years. Presently in Los Angeles around 1,200 charging stations for electric vehicles are installed. “But there are still battles to be fought and we need more lobby work for solar and decarbonization”, León stressed. Although he is optimistic, that the 50-percent goal for the renewable power mix in California will be reached already before the year 2030.

“We need a better coordination of energy policies in the U.S. and a market design, that prevents the parallel creation of overcapacities in the conventional energy sector”, Gregory M. Wilson, Director of the National Center for Photovoltaics at the National Renewable Laboratory (NREL)(link is external) told S&WE. Similar comments were made by Lynn Jurich, CEO of Sunrun(link is external) at her opening speech.