SEIA: “Solar is the Fastest-Growing Industry in the US”

The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) hosted a press teleconference today to discuss an emerging trend in the utility-scale solar market toward diversifying solar technologies in utility-scale power plants. But the call strayed from the diversification topic and addressed some of the major issues confronting the U.S. market in 2011.

 

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs

Rhone Resch, President of SEIA, said that the solar industry employs 100,000 Americans and that that number could double in the next two years. Within a few years, the U.S. will be the world's largest solar market, according to SEIA.

 

1603 Tax Grant Program and Solar

Resch said that the 1603 tax grant program has filled the void in the collapse of the tax equity market and that the grant program has doubled the efficiency of the Investment Tax Credit (ITC). He remarked that it is scheduled to expire despite the tax equity market not having fully recovered. (The 1603 program provides a 30 percent grant in lieu of the tax credit.)

Resch said, "We have found it to be absolutely critical in the last two years." Resch added that SEIA wants the1603 program extended through 2016 "so we have business certainty. We've found that the 1603 program is an extremely efficient policy for job creation." In the last two years, the solar industry has created 50,000 jobs, according to Resch, adding that the U.S. market will double from 1 gigawatt in 2010 to 2 gigawatts in 2011 and could possibly double again if the tax credit is extended.

This is the kind of policy that yields huge results, creates jobs and doesn't have an enormous impact on taxpayers, according to Resch.

Extension of 1603 is the number-one priority of SEIA and they are working with Republicans and Democrats on the issue. SEIA thinks it has a good chance of extending the program -- and instead of extending it for one year, the group would prefer to see "it ingrained in the tax code through 2016."  The 2012 Obama budget does have an extension of the TGP for one more year, according to Resch.

Resch added that 1603 is "simply the most important policy for continuing renewable energy growth in the U.S." The 1603 grant provision was actually passed during the Bush Administration.

It's not just large-scale solar that will feel the pain if 1603 expires. Tax equity and grants are what keeps solar residential financing companies like SolarCity, SunRun and Sungevity in business. 

According to law firm K&L Gates, "The 1603 Treasury Grant Program is dead after 2011. There won't be an extension." That information was reported by Ed Gunther while attending a GABA event.

 

Pushback From the Environmental Community on the Solar "Land-Grab"

Large-scale solar farms on public lands have pitted environmentalists against solar developers, with a bit of help from media amplification. And tortoises.

Resch notes that the oil and gas industry has received 74,000 permits for drilling on public lands over the last century, while the solar industry has received nine permits to build on public lands. "There is no land grab," said Resch, adding, "The EIR [environmental impact report] to study these areas has been comprehensive."

Resch also notes that 75 percent of the U.S. public support locating solar on public land instead of using it for grazing or other uses.

 

Technological Diversification, etc.

Arizona wants to be a leader in solar. (In 2010, Arizona was the fourth largest state market for solar with 55 megawatts of solar installed.) But that is certainly set to change.

Pat Dinkel, VP of Resource Planning, Arizona Public Service spoke of the Solana solar trough plant -- an Abengoa project with a U.S. DOE loan guarantee, the $500 million, 100 megawatt Arizona Sun project and the plan for Gila Bend to be the solar capital of the world.

In addition to those large projects, APS is working on a number of projects in the 15-megawatt to 20-megawatt range using c-Si panels on trackers or CdTe on fixed mounts. 

Tom Georgis, Senior VP of SolarReserve, spoke of the Crescent Dune project (which is backed with a loan guarantee) and the Rice project (which is currently going through the loan guarantee process). Georgis restated the need for clarity and certainty around policy in order to attract project and corporate capital.

Jim Stein, VP of Government Affairs, Schott North America, does qualify as a diverse supplier, as the company manufactures PV panels as well as CSP tubes. The firm has nine manufacturing sites in the U.S. and a flagship Albuquerque solar facility employing over 300 people and looking to expand to a workforce of 1,500 in the near future.

Article by Eric Wesoff, GreenTechMedia

United Kingdom Plans World's First State-Backed Green Investment Bank

The British government outlined plans for the world's first state-backed green investment bank on Monday – a key plank of its pledge to transition the country into a low-carbon economy.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said the bank will open for business next April and will likely focus initially on investing in areas such as offshore wind, waste and non-domestic energy efficiency.

The bank will be capitalized with an initial 3 billion pounds ($4.8 billion) from the Treasury coffers but will be given independence from the Treasury and will be able to borrow in the capital markets and from the private sector from April 2015.

Clegg said he expects the bank to have injected some 15 billion pounds into the green economy within four years.

"The bank is intended to bridge the gap between venture capital and the green economy, provide the finance for low-carbon infrastructure and lay the foundation for long-term, balanced growth," said Clegg, the leader of the junior Liberal Democrats party in the Conservative-led coalition government.

"The green investment bank will go from an idea to a flow of investment in under two years, and quickly grow into an independent investing, and then borrowing, institution," he added, noting it was an "an extraordinary political commitment" at a time the government is axing billions of dollars of spending to cut heavy national debt.

Clegg said the global market for low-carbon and environmental goods and services was worth 3.2 trillion pounds in 2008/09, and is forecast to continue to show strong growth.

Many countries around the world have a development bank, but Britain will be first to have a national bank dedicated to the green economy.

The plans announced by Clegg make some key concessions for critics who had feared the bank would be too tightly controlled by the Treasury, which had argued for the bank to be allowed only to borrow from the government.

Campaigners argued that if the bank was not allowed to borrow from the capital markets, it would be unable to deliver the necessary investment in low-carbon technology.

Clegg said the bank will have full operational independence "as soon as possible." And it will have borrowing powers from April 2015 as long as targets for reducing government debt have been met.

Greenpeace executive director John Sauven welcomed the government's commitment to the bank's independence, but said that it will be "hamstrung from the outset by keeping the restriction on borrowing powers until at least 2015."

John Cridland, the director general of the Confederation of British Industry, said the bank must deliver certainty for investors if it is to generate the scale and pace of investment needed to shift the UK to a low-carbon economy.

Cridland, who has forecast that 450 billion pounds of investment is needed by 2025 to bring green jobs and opportunities to Britain, warned the bank "won't work if it needs the Treasury's permission to blow its nose."

"The bank needs to be able to get into the markets itself and do what it's intended to do," he added.

Article by Jane Wardell, Huffington Post

How State Funding Spurs Recycling. New Jersey Leads The Race

There’s long been a push for the federal government to mandate nationwide recycling, but the power to encourage one of the basic tenets of environmental stewardship still rests with state governments.

Many states prefer to set up minimal recycling infrastructure and allow residents to participate on a strictly voluntary basis, but some states are taking an active role in pushing their populations to embrace recycling as a key component of everyday life.

One such state is New Jersey, which continues to excel at recycling nearly a quarter century after becoming the first state to initiate a statewide mandate.

Driven by its government’s commitment to improving and expanding state recycling programs, New Jersey has more than doubled the percentage of municipal solid waste (MSW) it recycles to 37.9 percent, which is well above the national average of 33.8 percent. When industrial and hazardous waste is factored in, New Jersey’s recycling rate rises to 59.1 percent, an increase from 57.3 percent in 2007.

Here’s how New Jersey transitioned from environmental deadbeat to national leader in recycling. 

The Jersey Uprising

This rapid ecological improvement is a departure from New Jersey’s past. A solid waste crisis gripped the state in the 1980s, which New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) spokesman Lawrence Hajna said led to the passage of mandatory recycling legislation.

“We’re a densely populated state; we have limited land availability,” he said. “We recognized early on the importance of conserving landfill space, and it grew from there.”

The mandatory recycling legislation of 1987 set a goal for New Jersey to recycle half of its MSW by 1995, but it missed that goal by about 5 percent. The recycling percentage dipped rapidly over the next decade, due to federal court rulings that struck down state solid waste-flow rules and the expiration of programs that funded recycling efforts.

The state bottomed out at 33 percent of MSW recycled in 2003, before new legislation was proposed to reemphasize New Jersey’s recycling program.

Among other things, 2008’s Recycling Enhancement Act established a $3-per-ton tax on waste deposited at New Jersey solid waste facilities. Money from that tax, estimated to bring in as much as $33 million per year, goes to fund efforts to expand recycling, including providing funding for recycling education programs and market development. 

Who Gets the Grants?

Most notably, 60 percent of the funding brought in by the tax on waste goes directly into the Municipal Recycling Tonnage Grant Program, which distributes grant money to counties and municipalities to help expand their recycling programs. In January, DEP announced $13 million in grant money that would be distributed to cities around New Jersey through the program.

“These grants are an investment in our future,” DEP Commissioner Bob Martin said in a press release. “Local governments will use this money to continue to build even stronger recycling programs as we all work to continue improving our recycling efforts.”

The grant money is assigned to the communities that have the highest recycling rates, creating an incentive-based system to drive increased recycling participation.

While that standard for distributing funds leaves low-recycling communities to fend for themselves, Hajna said using the money as an incentive is the most effective way to encourage communities to step up their recycling efforts.

“I think that, in general, people support recycling and want to do the right things,” he said. “It is our hope that everyone – all the counties, all municipalities – will take advantage of the opportunities that are available through the Recycling Tonnage Grant program, and work to achieve the goals that we all share.” 

Hiring ‘Cheerleaders’

Hajna said one of the best ways for a struggling community to quickly enhance its recycling program is to hire a recycling coordinator to spearhead new recycling efforts.

“If a town has a recycling coordinator, a lot can happen,” he said. “A lot of cases, all a town really needs to do is focus in on hiring that person that will really be… the cheerleader for recycling.”

Jersey City, located just west of New York City, will receive $267,674, making it the top recipient of funds in 2011. Vineland, Newark and Clifton will also receive more than $200,000 in grant money.

Cities use that money for a variety of recycling-related purposes, from new facilities and staff to enhanced marketing plans.

“New Jersey’s recycling rates continue to trend upward,” said Guy Watson, chief of the DEP’s Bureau of Recycling and Planning. “We are seeing steady and encouraging increases in rates for a number of reasons, including expanded public outreach efforts, expansion of the types of materials municipalities are collecting, and more convenient recycling options, such as single-stream programs that enable residents to put all of their recyclables out for collection in one container.”

Hajna said the $13 million devoted to municipal grants is a significant increase over the $4-5 million that was at the DEP’s disposal in the past, but that it still doesn’t cover everything the DEP wishes it could.

“We would certainly like to be able to have more money, but the reality is what it is,” Hajna said. “We think this a good way to get people to start thinking, and start funding some of the programs they need to get kick-started.”

Article by Ryan Huffman, Earth 911

Why We Are in Awe of China....It’s The Can-Do Optimism For One Thing

At a lunch in Chicago last week, Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) said he was “blown away” during a recent trip to China by how competitive their renewables industries had become, according to wind developer Michael Polsky, President and CEO of Invenergy. When Polsky asked the senator what he was going to do about it, Durbin shrugged helplessly.

“He didn’t know what to do about it,” Polsky said, because Congress cannot agree on stable, long-term incentives for U.S. renewables. “We’re debating something that should not be debated. It’s obvious. For the Chinese, it’s obvious. For the rest of the world, it’s obvious.” But, Polsky said, “We’re still debating.”

“I was listening to another panel,” Polsky went on, referring to a Milken Institute Global Conference panel like the one at which he was speaking. “They criticized the renewable subsidies all over the world. Like they are three people on the panel who are right and the whole world is wrong. It was just laughable.”

Venture capitalist Peter Labbat, a partner at Energy Capital Partners, remembered the 2007-2008 period when his firm made its big renewables commitments as a metaphorically “sunny day.” Demand was strong, and substantial support, including long-term tax credits, a federal Renewable Energy Standard (RES) and a price on emissions, appeared imminent.

With the changes that followed the Great Recession and the political swing back to the right, the day has turned “cloudy,” Labbat said. Incentives were lost to partisan bickering. Now, “there is a lot of supply chasing fewer and fewer opportunities to build projects, fewer and fewer PPAs, [and] fewer contracts on offer from utilities demanding renewables.”

Falling solar panel prices, low returns on PPAs for wind, competition from cheap natural gas and other factors, Labbat said, have drastically cut into the payoff an investor in renewables can expect. “Whereas you could get double-digit returns building a wind farm a couple of years ago, now you’re stuggling to get 8 percent or 9 percent. That makes it tough for private capital to take the risk.”

With the new spending austerity in the House of Representatives, even long-protected incentives like wind’s production tax credit (PTC) are, Labbat said, in jeopardy. 

“With the wind PTC expiring at the end of 2012,” he said, “if you’re building a wind farm today, you better be sure it’s going to get done by December 31, 2012, because you need those tax credits -- [and] if it’s going to miss that deadline, you probably aren’t going to take that risk.”

To avoid such loathed uncertainties, Labbat said, “We’re looking for projects with PPAs, we’re looking for projects where developers have capital, [... and] we’re looking for projects that can definitely get done on time.”

“China did make a decision back in July 2010,” said venture capitalist Patrick Eilers, Managing Director of Madison Dearborn Partners, “to spend $800 billion over the next decade to capture the entire manufacturing renewable chain,” while U.S. renewables investors continue to struggle for meager, fluctuating short-term tax credits worth perhaps $2 billion.

Adding insult to injury, Eilers said, the strongest competitors are “manufacturers from overseas [whose products are] delivered domestically, who have set up headquarters in Chicago, L.A. and New York.” The impotent congressional response, he said, might be domestic content rules that, if they even win passage, Eilers suggested, will not stop foreign manufacturers.

“Fifteen people in China’s ministry looked at the United States,” Eilers said, and realized it was a democracy and so “could not come to a decision to do anything for ten years” and so their $800 billion dollar investment was secure.

“What China does is not an accident,” Polsky agreed. “They’re gearing up for something really big.” Their plan, he said, is to “create their own markets -- to generate, to build plants, to really learn, to attain economies of scale. And then they will come to the world, while we are debating whether $2 billion is a good investment. And then we’re going to be blaming China for bad trade practices.”

But that is just the beginning, Polsky warned. “What I think Chinese manufacturers will do, they will bring not just technology but also money.” This, he said, “will dramatically change the landscape.”

A wind farm builder-owner-operator needs money to buy equipment, but, in this current climate of compromised incentives and disappearing venture investment, the builder needs project financing as well. With the cash the Chinese government has made available to its turbine manufacturers, they can entice purchases of their technology with promises of financing. “The rest of the manufacturers will not be able to compete,” Polsky said. “On the solar side, it’s the same,” he added.

“This is our problem,” Polsky said of U.S. policy. “If it’s not convenient, we pay no attention to the long term. For nuclear, we looked long-term. When it comes to renewables, we have to justify the investment today or it’s no good. If we start talking about the price of gas today, we have already lost the battle. If it is natural gas or oil, it doesn’t matter. It’s a finite commodity."

“It just makes sense that this country should have a policy to obtain a specific percentage of its energy from renewables,” Polsky finished. “A third, twenty percent, whatever. It just makes sense from any standpoint: economic, national security, diversity, the environment, jobs -- whatever reason you bring, it just makes sense.”

A Green Future : 11 Vertical Farms to Transform Our Cities

Check out these great futuristic ideas for clean, green metropolises that produce their own power by the wind and sun, and feed themselves from transparent skyscrapers that are planted up and down with hydroponic gardens.

 

 To see full article, click here

Article by Brian Clark Howard, The Daily Green

Water Solar Panels – Can Floating Solar Energy Farms Using CPV Succeed?

Solar Panels have grown exponentially in the last few years driven by declining costs and growing energy prices. The advent of the low cost manufacturers of silicon solar panels from China, falling raw material polysilicon costs, subsidies from governments fighting climate change have all contributed to the more than 150% increase in world solar demand in 2010.Solar Panels are not only being used on solar roofs and giant rooftop ground plants, but also are being integrated in buildings known as BIPV applications. 

Solar Panels are also available in flexible forms which can be used in backpacks and other innovative ways. Now there is another niche for solar panels that is growing. Note most of these companies are using the Concentrated Photovoltaic Technology (CPV).The traditional CPV suffers from heating problems as high concentration of sun power leads to high temperature. Building the CPV systems on water will help them solve their problems according to these companies.

Floating Solar Systems

Water Solar Panels are Solar Panels that float on water instead of being fixed on land. A number of companies are pioneering this concept of selling solar panels which can float on water bodies saving space on land.

Advantages of Floating Solar Systems

The advantages of solar panels on water are

1) They require less cooling and are more efficient

2) They save expensive real estate as they are built on industrial water bodies like waste water treatment plants, cooling facilities in factories and power plants etc.

3) The help in keeping the water safe from algae growth, evaporation by covering the surface of the water body

4) Helps in lowering the temperature of the water

5) CPV Systems can be easily be cooled. The structures according to Synergy will be lower cost as they can withstand high winds. Being built on hydro reservoirs, they can use existing grid systems as well.

Disadvantages of Solar Panels on Water

1) Increased Transmission costs as underwater cable has to be built to transmit the power to land

2) More Maintenance costs than usual

3) Specialized installation will lead to higher system costs and increased LCOE

Summary

Water Solar Panels are an interesting concept however their costs are currently much higher than normal solar panels on land. The benefits of floating solar panels do not overcome the disadvantages of higher initial systems costs and transmission cost of power. However the niche is an interesting one and the start ups have done well to pick a less crowded sector. Like Envision Solar which made solar carports a big growth story in solar panels, these companies can look to make floating solar panels a big growth area as well.

Article courtesy of GreenWorldInvestor