Our Commercial Customers

Scientists from U.C. Berkeley have found that solar power could supply a third of the electricity needs in the Western United States if the grid parity goals of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) are met by 2050. The report, released the Berkeley Energy and Resources Group and the Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory, argues that the DOE’s current goals of bringing solar power to a comparable cost with conventional energy sources would lead to a displacement of other fuels such as natural gas and nuclear.

The study found that if public policies such as carbon caps and pricing are put in place, and if investment in solar technology continues, it could become a much more crucial part of the region’s energy portfolio. This would help the country reduce its carbon emissions and mitigate the effects of climate change.

“Given strategic long-term planning and research and policy support, the increase in electricity costs can be contained as we reduce emissions,” Dan Kammen, study leader and Distinguished Professor of Energy, said in a news release. “Saving the planet may be possible at only a modest cost.”

The DOE has a program called the SunShot Initiative, the goal of which is to bring the cost of solar power down to the equivalent per-kilowatt-hour rate of non-renewable sources by 2020. Doing so would lead to a major shift in the energy infrastructure toward cleaner technologies, but at the moment this is being done through the use of government subsidies that incentivize homeowners and businesses to make use of California solar energy. Taxing carbon emissions and capping output could make the price of fossil fuels reflect the true environmental and economic costs of these sources, thereby making solar power more attractive.

Although the financial and environmental advantages of solar energy are clear, this technology still only provides less than one percent of the total electrical generation in the entire country. As such, it is important for the solar community and public officials to continue communicating to residents everywhere how they can benefit from having solar panels installed on more rooftops and vacant land.*

It’s clear that this encouragement won’t come from utilities, who are concerned that if more people switch to solar power, it will cut into their profits.

A recent New York Times piece discusses this issue and how electrical companies are trying to slow the growth of solar energy, despite the fact that there is so much to be gained for ratepayers.

The main claim being made by utilities is that Net Energy Metering (NEM) policies, which allow payers to sell solar-generated electricity back to the grid and lower their electricity bills, will cause charges for other customers to rise as more homes switch to solar power. As a result, they’ve been campaigning for public officials to eliminate Net Metered systems so that fewer residents can enjoy the advantages of solar energy.

There are many reasons that Net Metering benefits all utility customers as a whole. It is recognized in a general sense that less electricity produced by fossil fuels will improve the health of anybody who breathes air. However, the reason that the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) instituted the NEM class for solar owners in the first place was to create distributed energy throughout the grid. They believe that solar panels help generate electricity during the hottest days of the year, when marginal or ‘peaker’ power plants fueled by conventional means are ramped up to meet higher than normal demand. This not only stabilizes power production when it is most likely to fail, but lowers the cost of building infrastructure and new power plants because the owners of the distributed solar power plants assumed the burden of building the generator, not the state or the ratepayers.

In fact, it has been estimated that the costs of NEM solar has been exceeded by its benefits to the tune of $92.2 million a year in California alone (Crossborder Energy Study, January 2013). This study proves that all ratepayers benefit from solar and that it does not adversely affect non-solar owners.

*AMECO Solar is doing our part to spread the “solar gospel” to Los Angeles residents and officials by working with Environment California, a state-based nonprofit, on their “Go Solar California” campaign. By highlighting the stories of solar system owners in the area, the report will continue to build support for the goal of 20% rooftop solar power by 2020 in the county. Our hope is that by proving how beneficial solar is for all residents, we can bring more clean energy to Los Angeles.

Proposition 39, which was approved by California voters in November 2012, contained two important policy provisions. The first one closed a corporate tax loophole that will cause the state to lose billions in extra revenue. The second provision mandates that money raised by the closing of the loopholes would be invested in other public projects, specifically energy efficiency improvements in educational institutions. The goal was to promote clean technology job creation while also helping local education agencies (LEA) upgrade buildings.

Half of the money raised by the bill was earmarked for the Clean Energy Job Creation Fund, which would be used to pay for upgrades to electrical systems and insulation for aging education facilities. The original legislative language also allowed for agencies to spend grant money on clean energy installations, including Los Angeles and Orange County solar projects. Although some have called into question whether the California Energy Commission (CEC) will still fund solar installations due to ambiguity in the language of later versions of the law, the CEC has never officially ruled out solar energy projects for monetary awards.

The deadline to apply for grants is August 1, so institutions that are hoping to improve energy efficiency at their facilities or invest in solar technology should submit applications as soon as possible.

AMECO Solar can help you plan, budget and install a solar energy system that will help your organization or educational agency save money on utility bills and reduce your carbon footprint. For more information, contact AMECO by calling (888) 595-9570 or emailing gosolar@th2.e81.myftpupload.com.

After many months of negotiations, the European Union (EU) has finally brokered a settlement with China’s Chamber of Commerce regarding the price at which it exports solar panels to European countries. The agreement could have consequences for the U.S. solar panel market, where a similar controversy has erupted over recent years about Chinese “dumping” of photovoltaic (PV) panels.

The New York Times reports that under the terms of the new deal, Chinese solar panel manufacturers cannot sell their products to EU members for less than 56 euros ($0.74 cents) per watt. Those companies that refuse to comply will be subject to a 47.6 percent “anti-dumping” tariff.

The deal was thought by some to be less favorable to the EU than had originally been hoped. The European Commission had launched an investigation into the Chinese practice of dumping in September 2012, hoping that it could pressure China into raising the prices of its panels, making European-manufactured solar cells more competitive.

The practice of dumping, in which China floods a market with low-cost panels, thereby forcing competitors to lower their pricing, has been controversial in the U.S. as well. The Department of Commerce levied a 31 percent tariff in May 2012.

It’s important to note that the cost of going solar will likely continue to fall even with the tariffs in place. GreenTech Media Research, a solar industry research publication, predicts that the cost per watt of solar panels will fall from 50 cents at the end of 2012 to 36 cents by 2017.

The key to wider integration into the electrical grid of solar panels for homes is how the costs of these PV systems compare to natural gas and coal power. A drop in the price of panels will have a positive impact on the availability of solar to residents and businesses in Los Angeles and Orange Counties.