Too Little, Too Late? NV Energy Renews Solar NEM Grandfathering Request
(It's a few days old)
http://solarindustrymag.com/too-little-too-late-nv-energy-renews-solar-nem-grandfathering-request
by Joseph Bebon on July 28, 2016
As the debate over infamous net energy metering (NEM) changes continues in Nevada, utility NV Energy is again asking state regulators to grandfather in rooftop solar customers under the previous NEM rules. However, some solar installers have deemed the utility’s renewed request “too little, too late.”
In December 2015, a Public Utilities Commission of Nevada (PUCN) decision slashed NEM rates and established new fees related to rooftop solar, and some solar companies closed up shop in Nevada as a result. In addition to calling for the PUCN to completely reverse its decision, both the local and national solar industries argued that existing solar customers should be able to receive the NEM rates they initially signed up for in Nevada. After facing immense pressure, NV Energy – which, like many other utilities around the U.S., claimed NEM is a subsidy that unfairly burdens non-solar customers – made a last-minute grandfathering proposal in February. At the time, solar stakeholders called the utility plan a “bait and switch.”

Ultimately, the PUCN denied a NEM grandfathering clause, meaning existing customers have also been subject to the newer NEM rules.

Now, NV Energy has filed a new proposal with the PUCN that rooftop solar customers who either added their installations or had active NEM applications before Dec. 31, 2015, be allowed to cash in on the previous NEM rates for 20 years. The proposal resembles a recent recommendation from Nevada’s New Energy Industry Task Force.

“After a number of recent failed attempts to negotiate a resolution of this grandfathering issue with out-of-state private solar suppliers, it became clear that NV Energy needed to step up and act alone,” comments Paul Caudill, president and CEO of NV Energy, in a press release. “I have spoken with many of these net-metering customers personally and understand and empathize with their concern. We simply did not want to wait any longer to offer a solution on their behalf and believe our filing today represents the most efficient and timely way to do that.”

The utility has asked the PUCN to take action on its proposal within the next three months. In its press release, NV Energy also seems to place some blame on solar companies, claiming nationwide installers might have misled Nevada customers.

“Unfortunately, it appears that these out-of-state solar suppliers are more concerned with increasing the subsidies needed to run their businesses than taking care of their approximately 32,000 contracted customers [in Nevada], who are our customers, too,” says Kevin Geraghty, NV Energy’s senior vice president of energy supply.

“It seems that they created uncertainty for customers who purchased or leased a rooftop system by not clearly communicating that their rates were subject to change in future regulatory proceedings,” continues Geraghty. “Many of these net-metering customers entered into 20-year leases believing that they would be locked into a rate and that they would save money because NV Energy rates would increase every year. Neither of these sales pitches are true.”

The installers say that although they thank the utility for “joining us in speaking out on the urgent need to grandfather” in existing solar customers, “It’s disappointing that NV Energy, while speaking to the press about their support for grandfathering, waited 161 days to respond to the commission.”

The installers also suggest NV Energy’s timing is fishy, pointing out that the utility’s proposal and related press release came shortly before the Nevada Supreme Court is slated to consider allowing Bring Back Solar’s referendum to fully undo the PUCN’s NEM changes on the November election ballot.

“Nevada must right the wrong that has been done to the state’s existing solar customers, but also allow Nevadans the choice to go solar in the future without being punished with discriminatory charges.”

They continue, “It’s time for real action, to restore consumer choice, jobs, and Nevada’s solar potential. And if our leadership won’t take action, it should be up to the voters to decide.”

Solar, wind, storage and big data: Why energy may soon be free
By Giles Parkinson on 1 August 2016
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/solar-wind-storage-big-data-energy-may-soon-free-27165

Global investment bank Citi is predicting that the combination of near zero-variable cost energy sources such as solar and wind, along with smart analytics and “big data”, may deliver what the nuclear industry promised nearly half a century ago – free energy.

“The notion of free energy came to prominence in the 1960s, as nuclear fusion was touted as a way to provide free energy,” Citi writes in the latest of its “Disrutive Innovations” series in a section focusing on Big Data and the energy industry.

When those claims were made about nuclear fusion, the technology was in the embryonic stage, and it turned out nuclear energy wasn’t free at all, but incredibly expensive, and getting more so by the year.

But wind and solar, along with demand and storage optimisation, may finally deliver on that promise, Citi says.

“Big Data and advanced analytics are developing rapidly to improve forecasting, automation, customization, and the democratisation of energy,” it says in its reports.

“The end result is that we are producing more energy with fewer resources ….. the goal of dramatically lowering energy costs for all, with the possibility of free energy in some corners, may finally come to fruition.”

Citi is not the only research institution making such forecasts, but is is sharp contrast to the general public discussion in Australia, which is dominated by those who insist that the old centralised energy system – slow, inefficient and expensive – will not and cannot be replaced by new technologies.
South Australia is now the focus of that debate, and the push-back against wind and solar by conservatives and, of course, vested interests, seeking to protect their sunk assets is striking.

But Australia is already well done the path to this transformation given its high level of rooftop solar and the fact that it is considered to be the world-leading market for household battery storage, and smart software.

Already, it has more than 1.5 million households and businesses with rooftop solar, totalling more than 5GW, and many will soon add battery storage. Smart software will allow households and businesses to pool their resources, and trade with each other – if regulators allow.

Citi says this “democratisation” of energy could see renewables and distributed energy resources (DERs) proliferate at the local level, and that will mean fewer new power plants.

Consumers could eventually “trade” energy with others, in the form of “transactive energy” – a concept that is already being trialled by utilities and community energy groups in Australia.

This, of course, has profound implications for business models. Instead of investing in large fixed assets, as they have done for the best part of a century, Citi suggests the utilities of the future will become distribution service platform providers.

The state of New York is already going down this path through its remarkable REV (Reforming the Energy Vision) program, and some analysts want it adopted in Australia.

Citi says REV is one of the most ambitious regulations put forth by a regulatory agency in changing the business models of utilities. The focus is entirely on distribution energy, creating the right regulations and rules for the appropriate platform and operations, as well as system integration and operation.

In the distributed, decentralised world, particularly in the electricity space where the supply and demand of electricity has to match instantly, ensuring a smooth and optimal operation of the grid necessarily requires advanced analytics to process the vast amount of data generated.

“Technology companies could provide energy network optimizing software or even operate platforms and energy companies that transition to providing services could become asset-light, as they could control how energy is routed and optimised,” Citi suggests.

“Third-parties or homeowners would become energy providers through Distributed Energy Rs and auto companies would become service and energy providers (e.g. through their battery technology).”

Citi says the fundamental technologies of solar panels, wind turbines, converters, and energy storage have been around for years, but having nearly half or more of total electricity supplied by wind or solar was previously thought to be impossible due to grid integration issues.

But Big Data and advanced analytics are helping the electric grid to function more seamlessly, enabling wind and solar utilization and penetration rates to rise more sharply, and integrating more distributed generation.

A lot of this comes down to predictive software. “Having more precise estimates of renewable generation allows the grid to schedule in the appropriate amount of backup generation and deploy other measures, such as demand-side management.”

One example is the creation of “virtual power plants”, which pool the output and resources of numerous solar and storage arrays that could be located in households, businesses, or CBD buildings or factories.

The software can bring these devices together and operate them as if they were a single power plant. Citi says these are critical because they negate the traditional response to rising demand in an area by building a new centralised power plant or adding new infrastructure.

Recently, the New York regulator denied Con Edison’s request for a $US1 billion upgrade in resolving equipment overloading. Instead, ConEd created the BQDM (Brooklyn Queens Demand Management) program that relied on both traditional utility and non-traditional customer/utility improvements at a total estimated cost of only $US200 million.

Those sorts of cheaper alternatives are being considered in Australia, but the regulators have been slow to catch on, and when large spending cuts are recommended the regulator is taken to court by the utilities,

Citi says this requires a whole new way of thinking. It would require pricing energy and ancillary services at the neighborhood or an even more micro level

“What does the future of energy look like?” the Citi report asks.

“Producers could tap previously stranded assets and do it quickly; utilities could be winners but only if they transform with the times; renewables, despite intermittencies, could operate as smoothly as traditional fossil energy; emissions should be limited as energy demand is optimized and renewables proliferate. Trillions of dollars are at stake.

“This is a story of how software will transform a hardware-dominated sector; it is the kind of creative destruction that demands fundamental changes in an entire sector.”

sunworks
This El Dorado Hills, CA homeowner is now estimated to save an average of $1,622 per month in energy costs!
(System Size- 16.kW)
-----------
Now listen to what the stupid sheep are believing....
http://dailysignal.com/2016/07/29/these-climate-change-regulations-will-increase-your-electric-bill/
These Climate Change Regulations Will Increase Your Electric Bill
July 29, 2016 /

Commentary By

Elayne Allen

Elayne Allen is a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation.
Portrait of Nicolas Loris

Nicolas Loris
@NiconomistLoris

Nicolas Loris, an economist, focuses on energy, environmental and regulatory issues as the Herbert and Joyce Morgan fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Read his research.

Amid the summer heat, American households are thankful for affordable, reliable air conditioning. But the Obama administration’s war on coal is going to drive up energy prices for families who want to keep cool in the summer and stay warm in the winter.

A recent study by Heritage Foundation economists estimates that the administration’s regulations to counter global warming, or climate change, will increase household spending on electricity between 13 and 20 percent over the next 20 years.

Americans have plenty of reasons to be concerned with the administration’s regulations on new power plants, and states have good reasons to challenge these regulations in court. Here are three:

1. Regulations drive up energy costs.

Higher energy costs hurt the poor the most. If the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulations on new power plants stand, they will take a reliable power source off the market.

For instance, Maryland coal production fell 62 percent between 2005 and 2013, according to the Maryland Department of the Environment. Though this decline is partially a result of cheap natural gas prices, many also point to EPA regulations for the industry’s decline.

The decline in coal production is problematic because coal and carbon-based conventional fuels made up 87 percent of America’s primary energy between 2003 and 2013.

In fact, electricity prices are 15 percent lower in those states that rely most on coal. Unnecessarily driving out coal production will cause electricity prices to increase, disproportionately hurting low-income Americans who spend a greater portion of their budget on energy bills.

2. Mining towns suffer from overregulation.

The EPA’s regulations of future power plants will have detrimental impacts on coal mining towns.

Alabama coal worker Renea Aldridge said: “Think about the families you’re affecting. Think about all the jobs you’re closing down. I keep thinking the coal industry will never be the same again.”

What’s more, because a small coal mining town’s livelihood often is tied to the power plant, regulation of coal power plants also harms investments, hurts small businesses, and decreases the town’s overall economic activity.

The EPA’s latest regulations of newly built coal power plants will seriously harm these coal towns. And because of the stringent requirements for new plants, many towns that might otherwise have had a coal plant built will be deprived of the economic benefits.

3. The regulations barely make a dent in climate change.

A few hot days does not mean the planet is experiencing more heat waves because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions. Even if it did, however, the administration’s climate change policy would make no noticeable impact.

According to Cato Institute’s “carbon tax temperature-savings” calculator, developed by climatologists, the U.S. could shut down its entire economy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions to zero and it would mitigate global temperatures only a few tenths of a degree Celsius over the next 85 years.

In fact, if all industrialized nations cut 100 percent of carbon dioxide emissions, temperatures would be only 0.352 degree cooler than if the emission levels remained the same.

States are fighting back, but Congress should assert its authority.

Last year, much of the Environmental Protection Agency’s onslaught of overregulation came under the pretense of addressing man-made global warming, or climate change. The regulations threaten the livelihood of miners and coal towns, and the availability of coal as a dependable energy source.

The Supreme Court temporarily halted regulations on existing power plants (the administration’s “Clean Power Plan”) after states and industries challenged them.

But another important legal front is the states’ challenge to global warming regulations on new electricity generating units. After the EPA issued a regulation under Section 111(b) of the Clean Air Act to control how much carbon dioxide may be emitted by new power plants, 23 states filed a lawsuit challenging the proposal.

The regulation restricts carbon dioxide emissions of coal-fired power plants to 1,100 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt hour and the emissions of natural gas power plants to 1,000 pounds per megawatt hour.

According to the federal government’s Energy Information Administration, the average emission for a coal-fired power plant in 2014 was between 2,070 and 2,170 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt hour, depending on the type of coal used.

States certainly are justified in taking legal action, but it’s also time for Congress to rein in unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats at the EPA. Congress should pass legislation that prevents all agencies from regulating carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions.

Geeze, I pay less than $900 per year... Geeze!

That was what I was saying 2 years ago. Most of them have just left, but too late. That is what makes us bigger than the #1 coal miner.
BUT we have 1 candidate standing behind coal.
We have the Wyoming Governor working with Japan on clean coal.
Clean or dirty, COAL IS DEAD.
Some are just too slow to realize it.

Yes, and we have to watch how well run each company is... Did SUNE learn anything...

Back to the discussion about what our fossil fuel competition can do to us.
Yesterday Coal miner Alpha Natural Resources went private, with the shares going WORTHLESS.
With the possibility of Arch Coal and Walter Energy going that way...
Now it looks the same with our friends Sandridge Energy......
Now for the big boys. Shell Oil profits dropped 79% on low oil prices...
Total did ok, but they have solar exposure.....
Meanwhile we will show great profits...

Before market is a good sign!

When a utility offers a deal, don't trust it..

When Solar & Wind Prices Are “Too Low” And Solar & Wind Power “Too Dominant”
July 27th, 2016 by Zachary Shahan
http://cleantechnica.com/2016/07/27/solar-wind-prices-low/
Update: I think I buried the takeaway points a bit too far down below the industry background and definitions, so I’m bumping this summary up to the top (so you can understand the problem before reading more details on what leads to the problem and potential solutions):

1. Wholesale electricity is sold to the grid on spot markets in many places. Under such a system, power plant operators have the option to sell electricity from their power plants to the grid on a day-ahead, hourly, or other short-term basis. As long as the power plant operators sell electricity for more than the marginal cost of producing electricity (which almost $0 for solar and wind without subsidies, and below $0 with some subsidies), they make some money.

2. In a system where all power plants are solar or wind, however, that means everyone is bidding each other down to almost $0 (without subsidies). But selling electricity for just barely more than $0 for years is going to result in never earning back the money invested into the power plants to set them up (or company overhead) — non-marginal costs.

3. So, if we project out to a 100% renewables future, or even a future in which renewables are dominating but not capable of providing 100% of electricity, we need to figure out a way to compensate power plant owners for non-marginal as well as marginal costs — something different from the simple spot markets that many grids run today. How best to compensate for non-marginal costs in a competitive way is what is quite unclear at the moment.

[This is quite an “inside baseball” topic for CleanTechnica, but I think it’s a fascinating one and one that is ripe for discussing in this community and more broadly.]

For several years now, there’s been a bit of concern about how the energy industry will proceed as solar and wind take more and more of the market — and I’m not talking about integration or flexibility, but about the insanely low marginal (operational and “fuel”) costs of solar and wind farms (close to nilch).

To understand the issue, you have to have somewhat of an industry insider’s view of how electricity markets work (but not too much, so don’t run away as I explain a few key industry terms and processes).

In certain electricity markets, to get your power plant’s electricity onto the grid, you have to outbid other electricity providers on the wholesale spot market (under what is referred to as a “merit order” system). Given that your power plant is already built, what you have to look at in order to determine how low of a bid you can offer is what it costs your power plant to actually produce the electricity at a certain point in time. If you can produce another kWh of electricity for 3 cents, and you can sell it for 5 cents, you’re good to go. However, if you can produce another kWh of electricity for no fewer than 4 cents, and you can’t sell it for more than 3 cents, you lose out and you can’t sell the kWh of electricity.

Since wind and solar power have nearly no marginal electricity production costs (sunshine and wind are free, and no one has to operate the power plants as the sun shines down or the wind blows), they can outbid practically everything else. Thus, the more that solar and wind electricity becomes available for bidding, the more higher-marginal-cost electricity options get pushed off the table. At some point, of course, if a coal, nuclear, or natural gas power plant can’t sell enough electricity to cover its overhead (and marginal) costs, it is not financially viable to keep the power plant open.

However, at some point, the ~$0 marginal cost of solar and wind could result in these renewable technologies pricing so much electricity generation capacity (power plants) off of the grid (including other solar and wind farms) that there isn’t an adequate amount of generation capacity for high-demand times.

Furthermore, if it were just or primarily solar and wind competing with each other, and they go down to, say, a bid of 0.5¢/kWh (or whatever would cover marginal costs + a slight profit) on a regular basis, that would end up driving the power plant owners into bankruptcy. Over the life of a plant, after all, the initial investment costs need to be recouped from selling electricity to the grid/consumers.

By the way, for some deeper background pieces on the above topics, check out some of our previous articles on the merit-order effect:

Cheap Wind Power Disrupting Brazilian Energy Market

Wind & Solar Pushing Down Price of Electricity in Australia

German Utilities Fight Solar’s Cost-Cutting Merit Order Effect

Solar PV Reducing Price of Electricity in Germany

How German Solar Has Made All German Electricity Cheaper

Wind Power is Making Electricity Cheaper (Exxon: Wind to be Cheapest Source of Electricity) — That article was from 2011. In many places, wind is certainly now the cheapest source of electricity.

Lots of Solar Power May Reduce, Not Increase, Electricity Prices

Renewable Energy Cuts Wholesale Cost Of Energy

Renewable Energy Big Pic: Part 2 (Including 19 Charts & Graphs)

Solar and wind offer cheap electricity, but they still need to earn enough money to recoup initial investment, overhead, and operational costs.
Capacity markets: To some degree or another, in some way or another, a capacity market compensates power plants for offering latent electricity generation capacity that can be dispatched as needed, and especially that can be dispatched quickly. (Click on this link, this link, this link, or this link to read more about capacity markets — or the link a little further up, which explains the idea much more simply and clearly.)

Modified spot markets: This is a bit similar to the above, but pricing in the extra security of reliable generation capacity for all times of the year is not done through direct payments for that capacity. Rather, the idea is that either 1) power plants can “economically withhold capacity” while bidding on the spot market, in order to raise prices, or 2) higher scarcity prices, or spot-market-clearing prices, could be determined to preserve economic viability for enough power plants. (This is a new concept to me, and I may be misinterpreting the arguments made for this approach, so please have a look at page 25 of this document as well and check my interpretation/logic.)
Long-term power purchase agreements (PPAs): To guard against power plants having to shut down and inadequate electricity supply, utilities can also contract electricity under certain prices from individual power plants (over the course of, say, 20 or 30 years). Even enough is contracted in this way, from an adequate variety of sources, in order to guarantee electricity security, the problem is essentially solved. However, getting the calculation precisely right for the lowest potential cost using such long-term contracts is practically impossible. Thus, while PPAs can be a useful part of electricity security while providing viable compensation for power plants, these alone would not offer the most cost-competitive solution. However, this would offer the simplest solution, which cuts costs in other ways. And if the costs get low enough, how much is it actually worth to have a complicated capacity market or modified spot market system and bureaucracy?*

Better demand management: Note that, if the electricity grid could cut back demand 100% when needed, there would be no need for backup generation capacity at all. That’s an absurd example, but the point it is trying to demonstrate is that, as electricity demand management gets better, the grid is more capable of working around periods of relatively high electricity demand and low electricity supply. This isn’t a solution for the concern described above, but it’s a helpful tool to limit the breadth of power plants needed, the capacity/backup needed, and thus the challenge of compensating power plants for not actually producing electricity but simply being capable of it. So, it’s not surprising that the UK’s Capacity Market and other capacity markets and proposals have been “designed to support the development of more active demand management in the electricity market.”

As part of better demand management, better real-time electricity pricing (or nearly real-time electricity pricing) for retail electricity consumers could help a great deal to cut demand at times of limited supply. More accurately pricing electricity would result in less “waste” in the electricity capacity market. Furthermore, better transmission and storage capacity can help electricity generated to “go farther” (i.e., not be wasted or undervalued).

I haven’t done a PhD in this topic, so I’m sure I’m missing some key arguments and ideas. I know we have plenty of industry professionals reading CleanTechnica, so I encourage you to chime in below in order to improve this story and the broader discussion of what to do about the growth of low-cost solar and wind power.

*Note: I think this was essentially James Wimberley’s point underneath the “Do We Really Need Solar That’s Too Cheap to Meter?” article, and I think it’s a very compelling one.

Charts by 1) Richard Caperton for Think Progress, and 2) Lazard, modified by me to highlight today’s low solar power costs, which are now lower than all other electricity generation sources other than wind.

The Switch by Chris Goodall – solar power is finally taking over
The transition to solar is happening faster than predicted, and now power can be stored when the sun isn’t shining. This book is a guide to the latest exciting developments
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/jul/28/the-switch-chris-goodall-review-solar-power-taking-over

A solar electricity generating in the Mojave desert, California. Photograph: Sipa Press / Rex Features
A sense of drift and apathy has pervaded the global warming and renewable energy debate for too long. The fossil fuel companies continue to dig coal and pump oil and gas; herbivorous idealists, scientists and ecowarriors emit their ritual opposition. The carbon load forced into the atmosphere continues to rise, and the general public seems resigned.

But 2016 is the year this will really begin to change. Chris Goodall’s book is wonderfully up to date but, thanks to the pace of change, even he couldn’t keep up with the avalanche of news and initiatives conspiring to justify his subtitle. In May, Shell announced a major move into renewables; on 15 May Germany received almost all its electricity from renewables; for four days from 7 to 10 May Portugal did the same. Goodall, who is an economist rather than a technologist or ecowarrior, explains why the change is happening now: the cost of solar electricity is falling much faster than anyone predicted. Solar power is approaching parity with fossil fuels and can only become cheaper as time goes by.
Sunny Portugal might run fossil-free for four days but what happens when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind refuses to blow? The recent Ren21 global status report, while reporting that clean energy investment in 2015 ($286bn, or £217bn) was more than double that for fossil fuels ($130bn, or £99bn), added the rider: “But the fast-maturing renewables sector still has to overcome storage limitations and the world’s dependence on infrastructure systems geared towards fossil fuels.” In the latter part of the book Goodall addresses this, explaining the missing factor – the final piece of the puzzle.

Goodall writes that the sun supplies enough power in 90 minutes to meet the world’s total energy needs for a year. When solar and wind installations reach a certain critical level, there will be periods when they produce far more energy than can be used. Electricity cannot itself be stored but that surplus electricity and indeed sunlight itself can be used to create liquid hydrocarbons for fuel, plastics and other chemicals and methane to drive gas-fired power stations at times when renewable output dips. This is not a pipe dream. An exciting project, launched as the Global Apollo programme in 2015 and taken up, thanks to Bill Gates’ ministrations, by 20 major governments at the Paris climate conference in December 2015, is to produce liquid fuels and methane directly from carbon dioxide using sunlight – in effect, mimicking the photosynthesis that every plant accomplishes so easily.
Advertisement

David Attenborough, one of the founders of the Global Apollo programme, has said: “If we could put a man on the moon in 10 years you mean to say we can’t solve the problem of getting one 500th part of the energy from the sun? It’s really a tiny technological problem.” It isn’t quite such a tiny problem, but lab scientists such as Peidong Yang at Berkeley and commercial companies such as LanzaTech in the US and Carbon Recycling International in Iceland are already showing the way.

The surplus solar energy of summer will be squirrelled away into liquid fuel and gas for winter, rather as the sun’s past bounty produced the surplus we now consume as fossil fuels. And this project has the backing of scientists, technologists, economists, governments, great foundations, major investors and even giant energy companies from the fossil era (because the liquid fuels and gas will use the existing infrastructure: a huge economic boon).

The “switch” is coming. It will probably take 20 years to make a major impact, but we should see the first fruits very soon. This book is the essential guide to this great benign change, although I could have done with some sense of the grandeur of what we are on the verge of achieving. For 4.5bn years, light has been pouring down on the earth, creating and sustaining the cornucopia of life. For two and a half centuries we have been living off hundreds of millions of years of stored sunlight. And for over half a century, scientists have been working to unlock the secrets of plant photosynthesis. This is now known down to the last atom, and this achievement should rank with Watson and Crick’s elucidation of the DNA structure. It’s time to put that knowledge to work for us.

SO Many energy experts out there......
We (and our solar) are not helping him.
Billionaire T. Boone Pickens Predicts Oil Prices Will Hit $70 Before 2016
Despite the relentless pullback in energy prices, billionaire T. Boone Pickens is holding firm on his $70.00 price target for crude oil. Prices are currently hovering between $52.00 and $54.00, reflecting a 44% decrease over the last 12 months. (Source: CNBC, July 10, 2015.)

Pickens’ comments come in a week where U.S. oil production dropped by 50,000 barrels. The lower price has forced 1,012 oil rigs out of business in the last year. However, many analysts are estimating that a deal between Iran and the United States will draw one million barrels of Iranian oil into an already crowded market.

Are we becoming a WORLD POWER?

We have to couple the charts with the NEWS. We SHOULD be smashing the charts eventually...

Being mentioned with the big guys can't hurt!
Remember we are now bigger than the #1 coal miner. Peabody Energy (BTU)

There! She broke $3....

I found the 2.77....
+2.77%

Is $2.77 in the rear view mirror?

A HALF BILLION$$$$$$ in a few years!

Never any guarantees in life, BUT knowing that the home is set up for free power in the future, you should get a premium price when you sell...

Some are learning...
India's fossil fuel giants begin to back Modi solar goal

Read more: http://www.pv-magazine.com/news/details/beitrag/indias-fossil-fuel-giants-begin-to-back-modi-solar-goal_100025529/#ixzz4FAEBqYc8
India's fossil fuel giants begin to back Modi solar goal
22. July 2016 | Markets & Trends, Investor news, Global PV markets, Industry & Suppliers | By: Ian Clover

Leading big oil, coal, and gas giants of India are beginning to see the benefits of solar power.
IBC Solar

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s unabashed ambition to transform the country’s energy sector into a world-leader for renewables looks to have won over a series of the industry’s typically more curmudgeonly opponents – big oil and the fossil fuel industry.



Indian Oil Corp. is to collaborate with Oil India Ltd to build a 1 GW solar plant in the state of Madhya Pradesh, state regulators have revealed, joining big power producers such as Tata Power Co. and NTPC Ltd in the pursuit of PV progress.

Oil & Natural Gas Corp, the biggest oil exploration firm in the country, is also seeking out solar opportunities, according to Bloomberg. “We already have some wind capacities, and now we want to position ourselves big in solar,” said the firm’s chairman, Dinesh Kumar Sarraf. “Investments in renewable energy are not for mere demonstration, but also because of business reasons. We are working towards giving renewables a reasonable share in our overall business mix.”

Solar’s plunging costs are making large-scale PV developments a more attractive proposition for big energy, particularly in light of the troubles state power retailers are having in terms of paying their own bills. Bloomberg states that these retailers are in the red for around $37 billion.

Hence, believes BNEF’s head of Asia and Pacific Justin Wu, more renewables than coal power will be built in Asia over the next 25 years. “And most of it will be built by these big conventional power companies."

The trend apparent in India mimics that seen already in Europe and China, where big utilities such as Enel SpA of Italy, Spain’s Iberdrola, Finland’s Fortum OYJ and China’s Longyuan Power Group have all transitioned to become leading renewable developers. France’s EDF and Total, along with Germany’s E.ON, are also making moves into clean energy and storage technologies.

NTPC has made noises about its intention to become India’s largest green power producer, while Tata Power recently purchased 1.1 GW of clean energy projects from Welspun Renewables for an amount of $1.45 billion.

This change in attitude has been partly fueled by Modi’s pro-solar policies, which target the installation of 100 GW of solar PV capacity by 2022, and a total of 175 GW of clean energy by that date. Recent auctions for solar have triggered some concerns that the ‘strike price’ is too low to be viable, and if no improvement in the financials of such projects is forthcoming then experts warn that some large-scale plants could become non-performing assets.

Metal roofs offer many benefits, including: Longevity. Metal roofs can last 40 to 70 years, depending on the material. Traditional asphalt roofing materials have an estimated life expectancy of roughly 12 to 20 years.

The big point is that there IS a payback period, after which power is free!

But once the solar IS PAID FOR, the energy is FREE! You should get many years with free electric power!

Solar companies know that they have to keep on innovating to keep up with the competition.... Compete or die. Nobody wants to be the next Kodak...

We will just keep on lowering prices. We are in the tech world... The tech world is great for lowering prices.... I used to spend over $5 for 36 pictures on my camera. Now it's less than 6¢....
Prices for electrical power will become too low to even meter.

or

President B - subsidizes solar, wind. Taxes Americans to pay for the subsidies - what happens to solar? climate?

where's the democracy?
Fossil fuel subsidies are HUGE!

But it is Ted Cruz and Fracking nat gas is the #1 killer of coal!

Only so long. Their time is up soon, if it is not up now.
How long can you lose a billion$ per quarter?
Patriot Coal went bankrupt, paid all it's bills then went bankrupt a second time....

This is 2016! A TOTALLY different game now....
Did you READ that article that I posted?
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/07/18/3797907/solar-energy-miracle-charts/
http://www.triplepundit.com/2016/07/oil-weakening-headed-coals-path
They are having trouble now. What happens when we reduce our costs another 50%???
Here is an interesting part of an article...

You’ll Never Believe How Cheap New Solar Power Is
by Joe Romm Jul 18, 2016 9:29 am
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/07/18/3797907/solar-energy-miracle-charts/

Solar energy has grown 100-fold in this country in the past decade. Globally, solar has doubled seven times since 2000, and Dubai received a bid recently for 800 megawatts of solar at a stunning “US 2.99 cents per kilowatt hour” — unsubsidized! For context, the average residential price for electricity in the United States is 12 cents per kilowatt-hour.

Solar energy has been advancing considerably faster than anyone expected just a few years ago thanks to aggressive market-based deployment efforts around the globe. Since it’s hard to keep up with the speed-of-light changes, and this is the fuel that will power more and more of the global economy in the near future, here are all the latest charts and facts to understand it.

If you are looking for one chart to sum up the whole solar energy miracle, Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) Chairman Michael Liebreich has one from his keynote address at BNEF’s annual conference in April titled “In Search of the Miraculous”:



Solar’s exponentially declining costs and exponentially rising installations (the y-axis is a logarithmic scale)
Thanks to sustained long-term deployment programs, Liebreich explained, “We’ve seen the costs come down by a factor of 150 since 1975. We’ve seen volume up by 115,000.”

“How much more miracle-y do you need your miracles to be,” Liebreich added.

What that chart doesn’t reveal is that the price drop and the sales volume increase are directly linked. There is a learning curve: Over the past four decades, for every doubling in scale of the solar industry, the price of solar modules has dropped roughly 26 percent.

BNEF has the learning curve chart in its “annual long-term view of how the world’s power markets will evolve in the future,” their New Energy Outlook (NEO) from June. In a section headlined, “Solar and Wind Prices Plummet,” BNEF says “The chart below is arguably the most important chart in energy markets. It describes a pattern so consistent, and so powerful, that industries set their clocks by it”:

BNEF projects that by 2040, the world will invest an astonishing $3.4 trillion in solar. That’s more than the projected cumulative investment of $2.1 trillion for all fossil fuels — and $1.1 trillion in new nuclear — combined.

The result of these investments and the continued learning by solar (and wind) makes “these two technologies the cheapest ways of producing electricity in many countries during the 2020s and in most of the world in the 2030s.”

Here is an interesting — though already out-of-date — chart of the decline in the price per kilowatt-hour of utility-scale solar power (as opposed to the charts above of the price per kilo-watt of the solar cells). It is based on U.S. Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), which are contracts to sell electricity at a guaranteed price. It comes from a May 2015 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory study, “Is $50/MWh [5 cents/kwh] Solar for Real? Falling Project Prices and Rising Capacity Factors Drive Utility-Scale PV Toward Economic Competitiveness.”

CREDIT: LBNL, 2015[img][/img]

It illustrates the plummeting prices utilities have to pay for large-scale solar. But while the study is only a year old, it’s already out of date. For instance, Austin Energy has reported that last fall they they “signed on the dotted line for 288 MW of utility-scale solar power with First Solar Inc. and Hanwha Q CELLS USA Corp” with both offerings “coming in below 4 cents per kilowatt-hour” [below $40/MWh]!

This year we learned “City of Palo Alto considers solar power contract at under $37/MWh.” Bloomberg reported last week that “Berkshire Hathaway Inc.’s NV Energy agreed to pay 3.87 cents a kilowatt-hour for power from a 100-megawatt project that First Solar Inc. is developing.”

It is worth remembering that U.S. solar power bids include the 30 percent Investment Tax Credit. According to one analysis, NV Energy’s “$.0387/kWh would potentially turn into about $.07/kWh if we backed out the 30% Federal Tax Credit and 60% depreciation in Year One.”

The bids seen around the world this year without subsidies or incentives are even more stunning. Dubai Electricity and Water Authority (DEWA) received a bid this year for 800 megawatts at a jaw-dropping “US 2.99 cents per kilowatt hour.” Two other bids were below US 4 cents/kWh, and the last two bids were both below 4.5 cents/kWh — again all of these bids were without subsidies!

That 2.99 cents bid is way down from a 2015 deal Dubai signed for more than 1000 megawatts at 5.84 cents over 25 years. So Dubai has seen a 50 percent price drop in solar in just 18 months.

And these prices aren’t unique to the Middle East. As Bloomberg New Energy Finance reported in April, Enel Green power signed a contract for $.036/kWh in in Mexico — 3.6 cents.

With prices dropping so fast, sales of solar PV systems have been soaring, as you can imagine. Here is the recent growth in this country:

ANNUAL U.S. SOLAR PV INSTALLATIONS in Megawatts (2000-2015)
From 2005 through 2015, annual PV sales in this country went up 100-fold! And projections suggest that solar sales may double this year, driven by Congress’s five-year renewal (with phase-out) of the solar Investment Tax Credit (ITC).

And here is what the recent solar boom looks like world-wide — cumulative installed PV capacity and annual additions — from the recent “Renewables 2016 Global Status Report” by REN21, the Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century:

CREDIT: REN21

The solar miracle has been driven by major state, national, and international policies. BNEF Chair Liebreich calls this “The March of the Price Signal” — the rapid expansion of global deployment programs, especially market-based mechanisms such as renewable portfolio standards and reverse auctions.

Unfortunately, other countries have had bigger and more reliable deployment programs whereas our erratic policies generally diminish or disappear whenever and wherever conservatives assume control. In the past decade in particular, massive government-led deployment policies in China and Germany have been a major driver of the world’s stunning price drop.

The result is that while the United States invented the modern solar photovoltaic cell over a half-century ago, as of 2015, we are fourth in installed capacity worldwide:

CREDIT: REN21

The good news is that solar power in this country has a very bright future, thanks to the renewal of the ITC. By one recent projection, the U.S. could hit 100 gigawatts total installed capacity by 2021. That said, India also plans to hit 100 gigawatts by 2022.

China, however, plans to triple solar PV capacity to 150 gigawatts installed by 2020! So the race is definitely on.

No wonder the International Energy Agency concluded last fall: “Driven by continued policy support, renewables account for half of additional global generation, overtaking coal around 2030 to become the largest power source.”
The ‘Other’ Form Of Solar Energy, Which Can Run At Night

Earlier this month, I wrote about the “other” form of solar, concentrating solar thermal power, which uses sunlight to heat water and uses the steam to drive a turbine and generator. That heat can be stored over 20 times more cheaply than electricity — and much more efficiently — so CSP can provide power long after the sun has gone down.

For the sake of having all the solar charts in one place, here’s CSP capacity over the past decade:

CREDIT: REN21

Now that China appears to be placing a large bet on solar thermal electric, it seems likely CSP will also start coming down the learning curve, which will help it increase sales, which in turn will keep it coming down the learning curve — a virtuous circle that PV is already benefiting from.

The 2014 STE Technology Roadmap from the International Energy Agency (IEA) projected that while PV could generate 16 percent of the world’s electricity by 2050, as much as 11 percent could be generated by STE at the same time.

Given how fast solar PV has been coming down in price — and given the world’s commitment in Paris last December to keep ratcheting down carbon pollution in the coming decades to keep total global warming “well below 2°C” — it seems entirely possible if not likely that solar power will outperform the IEA’s scenario.

Indeed, it’s precisely because clean energy has been moving at the speed of light that “almost everything you know about climate change solutions is probably outdated,” as I’ve been detailing for months. Stay tuned to this channel for more surprises.

Obama announces plans to increase solar energy to low-income households
By Allen Cone | Updated July 20, 2016 at 12:57 AM

President Barack Obama announced plans Tuesday to increase solar energy in homes. File photo by Craig Russell/Shutterstock


WASHINGTON, July 19 (UPI) -- President Barack Obama announced plans to bring more solar energy to American homes, with a focus on a 10-times increase on the alternative energy for low- and moderate-income households.

The Clean Energy Savings For All initiative will expand the use of solar power with new programs to help reduce solar energy costs for consumers.

"Solar panels are no longer for wealthy folks who live where the sun shines every day," Obama said in a video with the announcement. "Today we're offering even more families and communities the chance to choose cleaner sources of energy that save you money and protect the planet for all of us."

Obama noted that solar usage has increased 30 fold since he took office and the number of jobs in the solar industry is increasing 12 times faster than in the rest of the economy.

But the 1 million U.S. homes with solar, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association, is about one-quarter of the 1-gigawatt goal than Obama wants installed by 2020 in low-income homes alone. That would amount to a 10-fold increase in the low- and moderate-income homes. Originally, Obama sought 100 megawatts of renewable energy for federally assisted families by 2020.

Housing authorities in 36 states have agreed to invest $287 million to help finance 280 megawatts of solar energy projects in low and moderate-income communities, Obama said. Including past commitments, this amounts to a total investment of $800 million.

The Clean Energy Savings For All initiative will expand the use of solar energy with new programs to help reduce solar energy costs for consumers.

Six federal agencies will participate in the initiative. They include the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Veterans Affairs to expand financing for rooftop systems and energy efficiency upgrades through lower property tax bills. The Energy Department will award $100,000 in cash prizes to communities developing solar farms for people who don't own their homes and to train solar workers in low-income neighborhoods. The Department of Agriculture, Environmental Protection Agency, DOE and HUD will help households and businesses that don't have adequate roof space to install solar systems -- especially in low- and moderate-income communities. Health and Human Services and DOE will provide technical assistance to low-income households for low-cost energy efficiency improvements, including renewable energy.

The government is also partnering with Google in expanding its solar mapping technology, Project Sunroof. "It leverages the 3D rooftop geometry data behind Google Earth to calculate the solar potential and financial benefits of solar power for 43 million American buildings across 42 states," the government release said.

New 3D solar cells capture sunlight from every angle
http://inhabitat.com/new-3-d-solar-cells-hitched-a-ride-to-space-for-testing/
Georgia Tech scientists developed three-dimensional solar cells which just hitched a ride to space this week on a SpaceX rocket. At the International Space Station, the solar cells will be tested to see how well they function and how they respond to space conditions. The solar cells have been designed to capture the sun’s rays from every angle, which could enable spacecraft to gain more power from a limited surface area.

The experimental module blasted into space includes four different types of solar cells. One type is a “traditional planar” solar cell, and a second is a planar cell based on a formulation of low-cost materials: copper-zinc-tin-sulfide (CZTS). These materials cost about “a thousand times less than the rare-earth elements” like selenium and indium used in some solar cells. There are also two types of 3-D solar cells: one “based on CZTS” and the other “based on conventional cadmium telluride.” There are 18 solar cells total, and they will be tested in space for six months.

Related: 2,500 orbiting solar “flying carpets” could power the planet

3-D solar cells could forever alter the way spacecrafts receive power. The Georgia Tech solar cells are described as miniature “towers” coated with a “photo-absorber.” Instead of requiring the sun to be right above them to work, the innovative 3-D solar cells can capture sunlight over longer periods of time. Georgia Tech Research Institute principal research engineer Jud Ready said in a press release, “We want to see both the light-trapping performance of our 3-D solar cells and how they are going to respond to the harshness of space.”

After six months, the solar cells will return to Earth so scientists can study how they held up in space. According to Ready, “If it can survive in space, which is the harshest of environments from the standpoint of wide temperature swings, radiation, and numerous other factors, then we can be confident it will work well down on Earth.”

Via Phys.org

Solar energy will be mainstream by 2020, says new report

Éanna Kelly, Science|Business

Analysis predicts the cost of solar cells is to fall dramatically over next five years but the loss of subsidies will be a setback for the technology in Europe
http://www.sciencebusiness.net/news/79878/Solar-energy-will-be-mainstream-by-2020-says-new-report


Solar power is reaching maturity as a global energy source, with solar power systems for both residential and utilities in line to reach grid parity by 2020, at which point the cost of electricity generated by the sun will be the same as that from other sources, according to new research from industry analysts Frost & Sullivan.

“Pro-solar incentives and the recently made pledges at the COP 21 summit will ensure that the market for solar [photovoltaic cells] continues to grow exponentially over the next five years,” said Frost & Sullivan energy and environment research analyst Pritil Gunjan.

Raw material suppliers, solar cell manufacturers, solar module manufacturers, and equipment suppliers and installers are all positioned to benefit, says the report.

The growth will happen mainly in China, India and Japan, which together will account for more than 80 per cent of all solar installations planned over the next five years.

It will be a less prosperous period for Europe’s solar industry which, “will suffer a setback due to withdrawal of subsidies and incentives,” the analysis says.

Huge overcapacity, coupled with a fall in the price of solar components, will see European suppliers struggling to turn a profit.

By contrast, solar panel manufactures will see strong growth in North America, largely thanks to the extension of investment tax credit eligibility for solar generators until 2019.

Solar panel revenues stood at $113.75 billion in 2015 and will grow to $179.13 billion in 2020.

They can only go so low in prices. They have to move that massive weight/volume. We have a wire. Do you really expect to see 75¢ gas again? Yes, there will be alternative ways.
Mechanical ways of energy will always be expensive. Solar is non mechanical, solar panels can last 50 years.

Fossil companies can afford low prices. The cost of production is above the price that they are getting paid.
That is why they are going bankrupt...
So if prices go up, we are more attractive...
If prices go down they lose money....
Fossil fuels are in a GLUT, due to Fracking.....
Any boost in production will only end up with more Bankruptcies...
Our prices will just keep on dropping. They just can't compete...
New tech will only lower our costs....

THAT'S IT!
We have competition!
http://www.bloosolar.com/

Interesting, Interesting Interesting
I'm watching The Spacex Dragon capture...
Commenter was mentionaing 3 dimensional solar Technolgy.
Able to capture sun at different angles.....
Compatible with existing solar technology.
Sound familiar?
Competing with us?
Hmmmmmmmm.....

We can sell "the cell" to China for a Billion!

As heatwave bakes CA, solar sets a big record
By David R. Baker July 14, 2016
http://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/As-heatwave-bakes-CA-solar-sets-a-big-record-8379331.php?t=ddeab6786b7d4f3860&cmpid=twitter-premium

Photo: Michael Macor, The Chronicle
A view of some of the 749,088 solar panels at the California Valley Solar Farm near Santa Margarita, Calif., in San Luis Obispo County, on Fri. August 28, 2015.
The same clear, sunny weather that broiled much of California in near triple-digit heat this week also helped the state’s solar power plants set a record, briefly generating enough electricity for more than 6 million homes.

A megawatt is a snapshot figure, roughly equal to the amount of electricity used by 750 typical homes at a single moment in time.

California law requires utilities to get 33 percent of the electricity they sell from the sun, the wind and other renewable sources by 2020. When electricity demand on Tuesday reached its absolute peak, at 5:54 p.m., almost 29 percent of the electricity coursing over the grid came from renewable sources, according to the California Independent System Operator.

“California continues to lead the nation in adding clean resources to the system and writing a playbook for operating a low-carbon grid,” said Steve Berberich, the system operator’s CEO.

For a brief time on May 16, renewables accounted for 56 percent of the grid’s electricity, according to the operator. To see the amount of renewable power flowing onto California’s grid in real time, click this link.
http://www.caiso.com/outlook/outlook.html

California has added so many solar plants so quickly that the grid doesn’t always have room for all of the electricity. On Tuesday, for example, grid operators had to curtail — or turn off — 292 megawatt-hours of solar electricity, equal to 292 megawatts over the course of an hour.
The Independent System Operator is exploring the possibility of launching a unified power market that would cover most Western states, so that California’s solar plants and wind farms could sell their excess power to customers outside the state.

David R. Baker is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: dbaker@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @DavidBakerSF

Big Data Center Company Sues Nevada Regulators, Utility Over Solar Deal
by Katie Fehrenbacher @katiefehren July 14, 2016, 8:33 PM EDT
https://twitter.com/katiefehren?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
http://fortune.com/2016/07/14/switch-sues-over-solar-deal/
It’s the latest dispute in Nevada over solar.

The owner of some of the world’s largest data centers has sued Nevada regulators and that state’s utility over a solar energy deal that it says led to it being overcharged.

Las Vegas-based data center operator Switch filed a lawsuit this week that alleges that its agreement to buy solar power, partly brokered by the Nevada Public Utilities Commission and utility NV Energy, was unfair, overpriced, and that employees of the state regulator acted inappropriately. The suit, which asks for $30 million in damages, claims fraud, negligence, and conspiracy.

The lawsuit is the latest dispute that has emerged involving solar energy in Nevada, a state with ample sunshine that was an early clean energy supporter.

As companies and residents in Nevada increasingly install solar panels, and sometimes unplug from the power grid, the state regulator and NV Energy are trying to figure out how to manage. The utility and the regulator have repeatedly clashed with both companies selling solar panels and customers buying solar panels.

NV Energy is owned by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway.
Switch, along with some of the world’s largest Internet companies like Google GOOG 0.55% and Apple AAPL 1.98% , have increasingly sought to buy solar and wind power to operate data centers as a way to manage energy costs and be more environmentally friendly.

Switch, which has two massive data centers in Nevada, says it started trying to buy solar power from NV Energy in 2011. Its data centers, which sell services to eBay, Zappos and Cisco, are power-hungry facilities that are filled with computers.

Switch says NV Energy ignored its requests to buy solar power, prompting it to file an application in 2014 to disconnect from the grid so that it could seek solar power from other sources like First Solar FLSR 0.00% .
In the summer of 2015, Switch says the Nevada Public Utilities Commission denied its application to leave the grid. The regulator found that because Switch was such a large power customer, leaving the grid would financially hurt NV Energy and force it to raise rates and thus harm other power customers.

Instead, regulators said that Switch could buy solar power for a higher price through a deal with First Solar, but with NV Energy as the middleman. Switch says it agreed to the deal because it felt like it had no other options, and because an important federal solar subsidy was set to expire by the end of the year that would have driven up solar prices even more (the federal subsidy ended up getting extended).

First Solar is now installing 180 megawatts of solar panels as part of a deal to sell the power to Switch. That’s enough energy to run close to 30,000 average American homes.

Following Switch’s solar deal, the regulator later allowed several large Las Vegas casinos to disconnect from the power grid, with the agreement that the casinos would have to pay hefty fees to NV Energy to leave.

Switch says the solar deal it agreed to was an unlawful attempt to “retain Switch as a customer of the monopoly NV Energy.” Switch also says that the NPUC’s attorney, Carolyn Tanner, acted inappropriately by discussing the case on social media using a pseudonym.

The NPUC said it has yet to receive service of the complaint and therefore has no comment at this time.

This isn’t the first time a company has accused the NPUC and NV Energy of colluding.

Late last year, regulators approved a plan to increase the fees and lower the rates that solar customers earn for generating electricity. The new rate structure makes roof-installed solar panels uneconomical in the state, according to solar companies, some of which stopped doing business in Nevada.

Following the solar roof rate change, solar companies like SolarCity SCTY 1.78% and SunRun RUN 0.20% accused the NPUC of being in the pocket of NV Energy. NPUC Chairman Paul Thomsen denied the accusation in an interview with Fortune.

Solar companies and solar customers are turning to other venues to fight the regulator’s decisions.





Lawsuits have been pointed at all parties over the solar roof rate change. In March a solar group filed a lawsuit against the NPUC seeking to overturn the new solar rates. Earlier this year solar customers filed a class action lawsuit against NV Energy, alleging the utility provided false information to the state’s regulator. And another solar customer sued SolarCity accusing it of failing to disclose information about the potential rate change.

It doesn't hurt that SUNW is not Elon Musk!

Maybe you will like this one, ESP for the Florida members....
League of Women Voters joins effort to expand solar energy — with price break, too
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article89698507.html#storylink=cpy

By Mary Ellen Klas

Herald/Times Tallahassee Bureau

TALLAHASSEE

Saying they face a “David and Goliath” fight against Florida’s utility giants in trying to bring rooftop solar energy collection to the Sunshine State, the League of Women Voters on Thursday announced the creation of a new organization that will form “solar co-ops” around the state to obtain bulk discounts for community-based solar installations.

Martin Cabrera and Joseph Molina of Cutler Bay Solar Solutions install solar panels at a home in South Miami-Dade,

The group, FL SUN, is a non-profit established to solicit competitive bids from local installers and provide individualized proposals for groups of homeowners that reflect the group discounts.

The first two projects are in St. Petersburg and Orlando, using a model begun a decade ago by Community Power Network, a national nonprofit that helps communities build and promote local renewable energy projects and policies, in Washington, D.C., Maryland and is now also active in West Virginia, Virginia and Ohio. FL SUN, which is financed by public and private grants, also has plans to quickly expand to Brevard, Volusia, Alachua and Sarasota counties and hopes to operate in more parts of the state.

“The League’s role is going to be one we’re very comfortable and familiar with — that’s education,” said Deirdre Macnab, chair of the League’s Natural Resources/Solar Action Group and a member of the 80-member Orlando co-op. “We are going to be helping citizens understand how they can save money and better conserve energy in their houses by putting on forums.”

Under the program, co-op members work together to obtain a competitive bid from a rooftop solar contractor and together they obtain a discount of up to 20 percent off.

Each participant signs his or her own contract with the installer, but everyone gets the bulk discount and the advantage of navigating the process together. The installer, who normally spends up to 30 percent of his costs on finding customers, pays the co-op a referral fee of $500 per customer and both sides save money, said Angela DeMonbreun, FL SUN’s state director.

There is no cost to join the co-op but members will be allowed to vote on the final vendor from among the bidders, she said.

The Orlando co-op, known as the Central Florida Solar Advocates, was the first to bring the concept to Florida, after having learned about the success of the Maryland-based program from a story on National Public Radio.

The group received bids from 45 companies and ultimately hired Tampa-based Solar Energy Management to offer the service. the group then launched a second cooperative with plans to create more.

Although Florida has the third largest number of residential electricity customers in the nation, expansion of rooftop solar has moved slowly as utility regulators have reduced energy efficiency programs and the Florida Legislature has ended solar rebates. Today, only about 11,626 of the 7.9 million utility customers in Florida have rooftop solar installed — less than 1 percent — according to the Florida Public Service Commission.

In an attempt to “expand the solar community” by promoting changes in state and local policies, FL SUN will to do more than just help people navigate the often-complicated process of installing solar, DeMonbreun said.

“Ballot initiatives could greatly impact the ability to go solar,” she said. To that end, the group will also be working to educate voters to vote “yes” on Amendment 4, the solar proposal on the Aug. 30 primary ballot that will give small businesses and commercial buildings a tax break on equipment if they install solar.

The group is also urging voters to vote “no” on the utility-backed Amendment 1 proposal on the November ballot, which would install into the state Constitution existing law and expand on the disputed claim that solar customers are subsidized by non-solar customers.

“What Amendment 1 attempts to do is it enshrines in the state Constitution the misinformation, and not factually valid information, that somebody who puts solar on their home is costing other customers money,” said Stephen A. Smith, executive director of Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, and a supporter of the new FL SUN project.

“It is a deceptive ballot that is set up to do nothing more than perpetuate the utility control over the solar marketplace and limit customer options.”

Smith said if Amendment 1 passes, electric companies will use it to justify increasing charges to solar customers or reductions in net metering — the process that allows customers to transfer their surplus power generated by their solar systems to the grid, allowing customers to offset the cost of power drawn from the utility.

McNab said that having two proposals on two different ballots is confusing so the group hopes to simplify it: “Yes in August. No in November,” she said.

Also Thursday, the Florida Realtors announced their support for Amendment 4 on the August ballot. The measure also has the support of Tea Party organizations, the Christian Coalition and environmental groups such as the Sierra Club.

“It will encourage Florida’s business community to invest in solar, which will expand the use of clean energy and help reduce our reliance on fossil fuels,” said Matey H. Veissi, broker and co-owner of Veissi & Associates in Miami who is the 2016 president of the Florida Realtors.

There are no announced opponents to Amendment 4. By contrast, Smith said, there are no known solar energy suppliers who support Amendment 1 on the November ballot.

Mary Ellen Klas is Tallahassee bureau chief. She can be reached at meklas@miamiherald.com and @MaryEllenKlas

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article89698507.html#storylink=cpy