Joseph Wiedeman IREC Community Solar

Report
Community Solar:
Removing Barriers to Market Expansion
Joseph F. Wiedman
Keyes & Fox, LLP
[email protected]
1
Overview of Today’s Presentation
• Basics of Current Policy
• Why Community Solar?
• What does Community Solar look like?
• CS Resources & Contact Information
• Appendix - Overview of State Programs
2
Net Metering
3
Meter Aggregation
Customer’s energy
load
Customer’s best sites for
PV
4
Why Community Solar?
≠
Why Community Solar?
~ 145000 HH in DC
~60% of the housing in DC is mult-tenant
~ 60% of the HH are renters
If 5% subscribe to 3kW of community solar
per year:
~22 MW of community solar per year!!
Simplified Model of Community Solar
Community Solar Programs
kWh blocks of NEM credits:
• SMUD – Solar Shares – CA
• Tucson Electric Power – Bright Tucson Community Power – AZ
Net Metering Credits based on Production:
• United Power – Sol Partners Cooperative Solar Farm – CO
• City of Ellensburg – Ellensburg Comm. Renewable Park – WA
• FKEC – Simple Solar – FL
• St. George – SunSmart - UT
• City of Ashland – Solar Pioneers II – OR
• Holy Cross Energy – Gleenwood Springs, CO
• Seattle City Light – WA
• Colorado – Xcel and Black Hills service territories
• Delaware – statewide
8
Holy Cross Community Solar
Program
System SIZE: 120% of the participant’s 12-mo historical usage
OWNERSHIP: Participants own; Clean Energy Collective
manages the system
PARTICIPATION: Customers in Holy Cross’s service territory
Total Program Size: 3.5 MW
BENEFITS:
•
•
•
CEC is paid for the value of generated electricity to Holy Cross
under a PPA
Participants are paid for the power on their utility bills
Residential – about 30% higher than current retail rates
9
TEP “Bright Tucson” Community
Solar Program
System SIZE: 100% of participant aggregate average
consumption
OWNERSHIP: 1.6 MW utility-owned array at UATechPark
PARTICIPATION: TEP’s customers
BENEFITS:
•
•
Participants purchase 150 kWh/month “blocks”
Price of kWh is fixed for term of participation
10
Decision Points
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Ownership and competition
Valuation of VNEM credits – retail rate? Gen only?
Mix?
Distribution of benefits – NEM credit/check?
Aggregate Net Metering
Interconnection
Participation by low-income/ag customers
Program segmentation
Metering
Securities issues – state and federal
Transfer of subscriptions
Billing issues
Community Solar Resources
IREC Model Program Rules: http://www.irecusa.org
A Guide to Community Solar: http://bit.ly/SACCSGuide
VoteSolar: http://votesolar.org/communitysolar/
State policies and maps at http://www.dsireusa.org/
Assistance to commissions and other stakeholders in
developing community renewables programs – please
contact [email protected]
Thank You!
Policy
Approach
States
Overall System
Size
Valuation of kWh
Number of
Participants
Group
Billing
VT
Up to 250kW
Retail rate (minus program
charges)
unlimited
Virtual
Net Metering
CA, MA, ME,
RI, CO, DE
Same as NEM
program
• CA – same as NEM
• MA(n), DE* – retail rate
minus distribution charges
• MA(g) - same as NEM
• ME – same as NEM
• RI – same as NEM
• CO – aggregate retail rate
CA, CO, DE – unlimited
MA(n) – up to 10
MA(g), DE – unlimited
ME – up to 10
RI – up to 10; cities, towns,
schools, farms and the
Narragansett Bay
Commission
• ME – Systems receive
either (i) 150% REC credit,
or (ii) long-term power sale
contract with utility
• WA – retail rate plus
production credit
ME – unlimited
WA – unlimited
CO – 2 MW
Community
Ownership
ME, WA
ME – up to 10 MW
WA – up to 75 kW
MA(n) – neighborhood NEM
MA(g) – general NEM
* - participants on same distribution circuit as facility receive full retail rate credit
13
States
Required Ownership
Interest
Geographic Scope
Admin
VT
Same as NEM
Service territory of an electric
utility
Customer rep allocates
benefits
CA, MA,
ME, RI, CO,
DE
• CA – Same as NEM
• MA – Same as NEM
• ME – Same as NEM
• RI – Same as NEM
• CO* – Same as NEM
• DE – Same as NEM
• CA – on low-income,
multitenant property
• ME, MA, RI, CO, DE –
service territory of an electric
utility
Same as NEM (utility
allocates credits on to
participants’ electric bills)
ME, WA
•ME – requires minimum
51% ownership by in-state
interests
• ME/WA – service territory
of an electric utility
Investors admin. payment
and incentives
•WA –incentive program for
locally jointly-owned systems
providing retail power
* CO also has a community-based system rule that requires local ownership but it is not well defined in statute.
14

similar documents