Interesting article from MSN.com
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/this-shiny-state-is-the-sleeping-giant-of-solar/ar-BBl3ZEQ?ocid=mailsignout
"Held up in committee.............."
Take it straight to the people and maybe then we can truly become the Sunshine State.
There is a way around this but it is steeped in difficulty.
I had a client (cant say who) here in Jacksonville who wanted to lower their overall energy costs. (JEA and Teco).
We talked to firm in California who was interested in a master power arrangement. Because Florida disallows PPA's we had to get creative.
To keep this posting short, we looked at taking the complete office development and have it be the sole customer of a joint venture utility. A utility registered like any other in the state of Florida, but only serving one client.
It meant the JV would have to register with FERC, all the grid management entities, etc. So that we would be fully legal.
The power sources in the plan were solar based and used not only building top but also parking lot "solar shades" to provide the needed kWh.
Dont curse JEA or Teco because it never reached that level.
It just didnt work out. Regulatory costs were a large concern.
Once upon a time, railroads used to own utilities. There is a 1934 law that made it illegal. But wouldnt it be nice if Fortress had a subsidiary that had nothing but solar on their ROW from Jacksonville to Miami?
If PPA's were legal, they could sell that power back to Flagler Properties. The incumbents would still make $ on the carriage fees.
By extension, the FEC could make themselves the first carbon free railroad. No more diesels.
So big government is in the way? I'm shocked. Just remember that next time you all are voting, there are consequences to interfering with the free market.
There is no free market. I really want to purge that and opt for a more honest term regulated market. I think the honesty will help us explore ideas without having to cling to dogma that is not really even in practice anywhere to any meaningful degree. Sorry for the tangent.
A major reason why solar power is not used in Florida is capacity. JEA's Paul McElroy gave an example at a breakfast meeting last year.
JEA has a vendor who sells solar power to the utility for $163 per megawatt hour (MWh) which is over the cost of about $135 per MWh that customers pay for power including all taxes and fees. There is a reason that the "free sunlight" costs so much.
The capacity of an electric facility is how much power is provide versus how much could be produced if facility was run at full power 24/7 all year/every year. According to EIA some capacities are nuclear 92%, natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) 85%, coal 70%. Solar will vary some based on the location.
McElroy explained that the solar would be operating at a full 15 megawatts (MW) and then suddenly one of these fluffy white clouds that make Northeast Florida's sky so beautiful will appear and then block the sun for a minute or two. The dial drops from 15 MW to zero for this time period. Overall JEA's vendor has a capacity of 28%. That means 72% that 15 MW has to come from another source and the little white clouds mean that the power will go off and on line sporadically.
If you build NGCC plant for $3500 per kilowatt (KW) of capacity or a nuclear plant for $7000 per KW and you can build a solar plant for $4000 per KW, you have factor in capacity. The nuclear plant will have a capital cost of $7200 per KW. The NGCC plant will have a capital cost of about $4200 per KW. The solar plant by comparison will have a capital cost of almost $14,000 per KW excluding energy storage facilities which cost $185 per KWh to build. From a regulatory standpoint coal will be all but gone from the power generation mix by 2050. JEA will likely close down its coal fired plants soon after the bond are paid off in the late 2020's.
When you factor in fuel, maintenance, waste disposal and decommissioning costs for all of these sources natural gas only comes out slightly cheaper than nuclear; but regulatory hurdles make NGCC easier to build.
This is the real reason that utilities have not embraced solar power in the sunshine state. As long as natural gas prices stay low enough to make it less expensive or in future if NGCC becomes more expensive than nuclear, then there will not be a financial incentive to build solar.
As long as you think of solar as a mass generation replacement for a single site NG or coal plant it will always fail.
What solar provides is reductions in distribution and getting power sources closer to the actual users. The suppliers are more concerned with "backfill"...the inability to control what a large home solar contingent brings back onto the grid. After years of balking, the Hawaii PUC finally made Hawaii Power accept panel installs.
No disputes, solar is still more expensive per kWh than mass generation. Using buffering (like what Tesla is pushing) easily deals with the cloud effect.
The land mass required in solar to replicate typical coal generation is massive and not economical. It would be like trying to take the entire US corn harvest to make ethanol and leave nothing to make food.
But the arguement that solar will adversely inpact the grid doesnt hold water. The technology to regulate and control and manage power flows have existed for years. Utilities have enjoyed years of macro management of their grid. Now that some basic micro management is needed they all go running.
I'm pretty much referring to house top installations. Designed to augment what you are paying JEA for. In a "real " Sunshine State, pretty much every home would have a 600 sq ft (or more) solar installation on their roof or carport that would generate enough electricity to cut your summer time peak bill by 50-70%.
As far as I know there has never been an actual large scale attempt to get this done. Unless I am mistaken solar power is susceptible to the same market forces as any other industry, so when enough people purchase the solar array then "economies of scale" kick in, driving the price down and encouraging use.
The coolest part is that if you leave on summer vacation, you can theoretically spin your meter backward as you have your AC turned to a much higher thermostat setting, and getting a credit on your bill as a result.
One final point, 90% of Florida's population lives on less than 10% of it's land. There actually is plenty of available acreage for large scale solar implementation.
TerraWise Homes is currently building zero net energy homes in Jacksonville. They feature heavy duty insulation (soy based) and large solar arrays on the roof.
Gainesville Florida was the first city utility in the US to adopt what is called "feed-in tariff". There are a lot of local utilities who have done so in the last couple of years. This law requires utilities to pay anyone who feeds power to their grid. In Germany, which has this law in place, every warehouse, barn and chicken coop is cover with solar panels. Every rooftop becomes a income source.
Right now with JEA, they will give you credit against your electric bill for everything you produce, but will not pay you if you are just feeding power to them. They were reluctant to even go that far, but did it.
My electric bill for my office last month was -6.26. The A/C goes off at night and there are no lights of course so generating $24.96 worth of power covered my electric use and the various fees and taxes. 2500 watts of solar panels will pay for themselves in about ten years at this rate and the prices for panels keep dropping.
If JEA would adopt feed-in-tariff, I've got about 20,000 sq. ft. of tenant occupied flat roofs that would get covered with solar panels in a heartbeat.
Quote from: coredumped on June 13, 2015, 03:21:19 AM
So big government is in the way? I'm shocked. Just remember that next time you all are voting, there are consequences to interfering with the free market.
it isn't government per se getting in the way...it is those same companies that say they want a free-market that are blocking this from happening....look no further than the big energy companies and their lobbyists
Quote from: MusicMan on June 13, 2015, 02:44:27 PM
I'm pretty much referring to house top installations. Designed to augment what you are paying JEA for. In a "real " Sunshine State, pretty much every home would have a 600 sq ft (or more) solar installation on their roof or carport that would generate enough electricity to cut your summer time peak bill by 50-70%.
As far as I know there has never been an actual large scale attempt to get this done. Unless I am mistaken solar power is susceptible to the same market forces as any other industry, so when enough people purchase the solar array then "economies of scale" kick in, driving the price down and encouraging use.
The coolest part is that if you leave on summer vacation, you can theoretically spin your meter backward as you have your AC turned to a much higher thermostat setting, and getting a credit on your bill as a result.
One final point, 90% of Florida's population lives on less than 10% of it's land. There actually is plenty of available acreage for large scale solar implementation.
TerraWise Homes is currently building zero net energy homes in Jacksonville. They feature heavy duty insulation (soy based) and large solar arrays on the roof.
Florida used to have a solar energy tax credit than was authorized through the legislature. When it came back up for re-authorization, (around 2010) it quietly didn't pass. Since then installers have had to rely on other schemes to help cover some of the capital expenses. When I last had an installer at my house he said they were mostly selling solar tax credits to large exchanges in California.
Now that "solar shingles" for homes have been perfected, there is just no good reason for a housing developer to take advantage of the sales angle of selling solar locally. With Tesla around the corner with home based Powerwall capacity, having the solar retention built in a house at conception is a no brainer. It's really up to the maketplace to drive it by demanding it.
Quote from: Dog Walker on June 13, 2015, 03:42:21 PM
Gainesville Florida was the first city utility in the US to adopt what is called "feed-in tariff". There are a lot of local utilities who have done so in the last couple of years. This law requires utilities to pay anyone who feeds power to their grid. In Germany, which has this law in place, every warehouse, barn and chicken coop is cover with solar panels. Every rooftop becomes a income source.
Right now with JEA, they will give you credit against your electric bill for everything you produce, but will not pay you if you are just feeding power to them. They were reluctant to even go that far, but did it.
My electric bill for my office last month was -6.26. The A/C goes off at night and there are no lights of course so generating $24.96 worth of power covered my electric use and the various fees and taxes. 2500 watts of solar panels will pay for themselves in about ten years at this rate and the prices for panels keep dropping.
If JEA would adopt feed-in-tariff, I've got about 20,000 sq. ft. of tenant occupied flat roofs that would get covered with solar panels in a heartbeat.
JEA does have a tariff document on their website. Its a 228 page PDF file last time I looked. Sorry, I dont the link handy but it does exist.
Last time I checked they would pay you a wholesale rate for any backfeed from a commercial meter. It used to be 3.25 cents per kWh a few years ago. The tariff form has the updated rates. People always are confused on how JEA charges a retail rate per kWh, but only pay you the wholesale rate. California forces a retail tariff on backfill and the power companies arent too happy about it.
So those of you looking to making some credits or want to add solar, do not look at your current bill and assume that is what the backfill credit rate will be.
If you talk with a reputable solar panel installer here in Jacksonville, they can put you in touch with customers who have made the change and show you how the bills changed.
Quote from: Dog Walker on June 13, 2015, 03:42:21 PM
Gainesville Florida was the first city utility in the US to adopt what is called "feed-in tariff".
GRU or Gainesville Regional Utilities has some of the highest rates in the state. Then there's the new biomass plant mess they are struggling with. Not sure they are the best example of a utility that's leading the way. GRU exists to line the pockets of special interests and their employees. The feed-in tariff mechanism they implemented was probably the result of not being able to produce enough electricity efficiently to meet demand or caving in to a popular cause to quiet the many critics. Ask anyone in Gainesville what they think of GRU. It's pretty much open hatred.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CHjN6m0XAAAUm4E.png:large)
If they can do it in Africa, surely we can do it here.
The falling cost of renewable energy may allow Africa to bypass the carbon-intensive sort
Jun 4th 2015, 8:33 | From the print edition
BRIGHTLY POLISHED mirrors flash light across the dusty khaki scrubland of South Africa's inhospitable Northern Cape province as they rotate slowly to follow the sun, producing electricity for 80,000 homes.
http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21653618-falling-cost-renewable-energy-may-allow-africa-bypass
The incredible drop in prices is why the State of Florida dropped the subsidy program six years ago.
Not only are the panels less than half price from ten years ago, but the new mini-inverters on each panel are much more efficient than the big "whole-system" inverters. My newer 2500 watt system with mini-inverters produces only 30% less power than my older 5000 watt system, not 50% less.
In response to the discussion of the economics of various forms of power generation, here is a link to one of many estimates of the levelized cost of coal, nuclear, natural gas, wind, solar, etc., this one from a relatively non-controversial source (US Energy Information Administration).
http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/electricity_generation.cfm (http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/electricity_generation.cfm)
Note that (utility-scale) solar doesn't cost appreciably more than the other options, given the uncertainties involved. Unlike some of those others, its cost is expected to continue to drop.
I suspect this is one of the reasons why utilities are beginning to invest more in these systems, particularly in states where the regulatory systems differ from Florida (but also in Florida).
On the distributed (i.e. non-utility scale side), costs are higher, but also changing fast. On that side of the coin, here's more on the group referenced in the article: http://www.flsolarchoice.org/ (http://www.flsolarchoice.org/). They are supporting a constitutional amendment that would allow PPAs along the lines described by an earlier poster.