{"id":292,"date":"2012-12-06T09:26:57","date_gmt":"2012-12-06T14:26:57","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/2012\/12\/financing-solar-energy-georgias-special-problem.html"},"modified":"2012-12-06T09:26:57","modified_gmt":"2012-12-06T14:26:57","slug":"financing-solar-energy-georgias-special-problem","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/2012\/12\/financing-solar-energy-georgias-special-problem.html","title":{"rendered":"Financing solar energy: Georgia&#8217;s special problem"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>\nIn most states, financing solar energy is largely a matter of learning<br \/>\nall the local ropes.<br \/>\nIn Georgia, there&#8217;s a bigger problem.\n<\/p>\n<p>\nMichael Mendelsohn<br \/>\nwrote for RMI 5 December 2012,<br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/blog.rmi.org\/blog_How_Do_We_Lower_Solar_Installation_Costs\"><br \/>\nHow Do We Lower Solar Installation Costs and Open the Market to Securitized Portfolios: Standardize and Harmonize<\/a>,\n<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>\nSoft costs can be pretty tough. The cost of solar installations can<br \/>\nbe generally separated into &#8220;hard&#8221; costs \u2014 representing<br \/>\nprimary components such as modules, racking, inverters \u2014 and<br \/>\nsoft costs including legal, permitting, and financing. While the<br \/>\nformer group \u2014 particularly modules \u2014 have dropped<br \/>\ndramatically over the last several years, the latter have not.<br \/>\nAccording to a recent NREL analysis, these costs represent roughly<br \/>\n30% of both residential and utility installations (slightly less for<br \/>\ncommercial-host systems). See Figure 1.\n<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/blog.rmi.org\/blog_How_Do_We_Lower_Solar_Installation_Costs\"><br \/>\n<img decoding=\"async\" style=\"border:none;\" class=\"at-xid-6a0120a58214e4970b017c345650d8970b\" src=\"\/blog\/images\/6a0120a58214e4970b017c345650d8970b-pi.png\"   \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>\nIn fact, soft costs are so critical to the overall success of solar<br \/>\nadoption, their reduction is a primary focus of the Department of<br \/>\nEnergy&#8217;s SunShot Initiative to make solar energy cost-competitive.<br \/>\nIn order to reduce the cost of financing, NREL recently completed<br \/>\nand continues to work on various efforts to tap public capital<br \/>\nmarkets and enable other vehicles that securitize project<br \/>\nportfolios.\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>\nWe&#8217;ll come back to tapping public capital markets and the like,<br \/>\nbecause that&#8217;s the key to what<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/blog\/2012\/12\/videos-solar-energy-forum-csc-2012-12-01.html\"><br \/>\nGeorgia Solar Utilities (GaSU) is trying to do.<\/a><br \/>\nBut there&#8217;s a special problem in Georgia, buried in the next paragraph:\n<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>\nDoing so requires standardized contracts, interconnection<br \/>\nagreements, and other relevant documentation so these projects can<br \/>\nbe easily aggregated with a consistent set of risk factors.<br \/>\nUnfortunately, a myriad of unique state renewable portfolio<br \/>\nstandards (RPS), interconnection protocols, and\/or permitting<br \/>\nprocesses prevent the possibility of solar projects becoming<br \/>\nroutine.\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>\nWe don&#8217;t have an RPS in Georgia.<br \/>\nWhy?<br \/>\nBecause<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/blog\/2012\/08\/alec-responds-to-sierra-club-report.html\"><br \/>\nALEC&#8217;s &#8220;our state legislators&#8221;<\/a><br \/>\nkeep propping up Georgia Power&#8217;s interpretation of<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/blog\/2012\/11\/tv-station-gets-it-territoriality-law-prevents-solar-in-georgia.html\"><br \/>\nthe 1973 Territorial Electric Service Act.<\/a><br \/>\n<a href=\"\/blog\/2012\/05\/salute-for-less-coal-how-about-third-party-solar-mark-woodall-so-2012-05-23.html\"><br \/>\n<img decoding=\"async\" style=\"float:right;border:none;\" class=\"at-xid-6a0120a58214e4970b0177429e9835970d\" src=\"\/blog\/images\/6a0120a58214e4970b0177429e9835970d-pi.jpg\"    \/><\/a><br \/>\nWhat do Georgia Power and its parent the Southern Company want to do instead?<br \/>\nSO CEO Thomas A. Fanning has spelled that out in several different formats:<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/blog\/2012\/07\/why-energy-matters-to-you-thomas-a-fanning.html\"><br \/>\nnuclear, &#8220;21st century coal&#8221;, natural gas, renewables, and efficiency.<\/a><br \/>\nWhen does he want renewables (solar and wind)?<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/blog\/2012\/05\/salute-for-less-coal-how-about-third-party-solar-mark-woodall-so-2012-05-23.html\"><br \/>\n&#8220;probably very late in this decade or beyond that, we still are gonna<br \/>\nget by far the lion&#8217;s share of electricity from central stations.&#8221;<\/a><br \/>\nYou can see him say that on video, along with what he called Georgia&#8217;s<br \/>\nfranchise law &#8220;that we need to protect.&#8221;<br \/>\nProtect so SO and Georgia Power can continue to wallow in their<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/blog\/2012\/10\/southern-companys-three-legged-nuclear-regulatory-capture-stool.html\"><br \/>\n<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" style=\"float:right;border:none;\" class=\"at-xid-6a0120a58214e4970b017d3c80c4e1970c\" src=\"\/blog\/images\/6a0120a58214e4970b017d3c80c4e1970c-pi.gif\"   width=\"59\" height=\"64\"  \/><\/a><br \/>\n<a href=\"\/blog\/2012\/10\/southern-companys-three-legged-nuclear-regulatory-capture-stool.html\"><br \/>\nthree-legged nuclear regulatory-capture stool<\/a><br \/>\nof a stealth tax on Georgia Power bills, PSC approval of cost overruns,<br \/>\nand an $8.33 billion federal loan guarantee.<br \/>\nYou know, you don&#8217;t need a federal loan guarantee to float bonds for solar<br \/>\nenergy, because soalr is not a <a href=\"\/blog\/2012\/05\/exit-strategy-for-when-this-big-nuclear-bet-goes-bad-john-s-quarterman-so-2012-05-23.html\">bet-the-farm risk<\/a> like nuclear!<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/blog\/2012\/10\/denmark-reaches-200-mw-solar-goal-8-years-ahead-of-schedule.html\"><br \/>\n<img decoding=\"async\" style=\"float:right;border:none;\" class=\"at-xid-6a0120a58214e4970b017d3cfabd67970c\" src=\"\/blog\/images\/6a0120a58214e4970b017d3cfabd67970c-pi.jpg\"    \/><\/a><br \/>\nSolar gets installed on budget and often <a href=\"\/blog\/2012\/10\/denmark-reaches-200-mw-solar-goal-8-years-ahead-of-schedule.html\">ahead of schedule, like in Denmark, way to the north of us!<\/a><br \/>\nSO&#8217;s backwards priorities are why the SO states of Georgia and Alabama<br \/>\nand Mississippi and northern Florida and some surrounding states<br \/>\ndon&#8217;t have Renewable Portfolio Standards.<br \/>\nSO and Georgia Power&#8217;s nuclear buggywhip priorities are why<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/blog\/2012\/10\/denmark-reaches-200-mw-solar-goal-8-years-ahead-of-schedule.html\"><br \/>\ntiny Denmark is way ahead of Southern Company,<\/a> not just in Georgia,<br \/>\nbut even including SO&#8217;s southwestern solar farms.<br \/>\nAnd to change that, we need to find a way around that Territorial Act<br \/>\nto get financing for solar energy.\n<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>\nAssuming 75% of the installed cost of residential solar project are<br \/>\nsold into the securitization pool and a 5-kW average system size, a<br \/>\n$100 million fund can source roughly 4,700 systems. To put that in<br \/>\nperspective, that&#8217;s roughly the entire number of &#8220;pipeline&#8221; projects<br \/>\nunder development in New Jersey [3], the second most active state in<br \/>\nthe country (which likely includes some projects of much larger<br \/>\nsize). In effect, residential-only projects from less active states<br \/>\ncould benefit from standard contracts, evaluation practices, and<br \/>\nother protocols to enable access to public capital markets. [4]\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>\n75% was the rebate Austin Energy started providing for rooftop<br \/>\n(home and business) solar installations after AE&#8217;s<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/blog\/2012\/04\/austin-energy-changed-from-anti-solar-to-pro-solar-in-one-year.html\"><br \/>\n<img decoding=\"async\" style=\"float:right;border:none;\" class=\"at-xid-6a0120a58214e4970b017c345650e6970b\" src=\"\/blog\/images\/6a0120a58214e4970b017c345650e6970b-pi.jpg\"    \/><\/a><br \/>\n<a href=\"\/blog\/2012\/04\/austin-energy-changed-from-anti-solar-to-pro-solar-in-one-year.html\"><br \/>\nsudden flip to solar in 2003.<\/a><br \/>\nThey ran the numbers and found they could get as much energy as a coal<br \/>\nplant that way, for the same investment.\n<\/p>\n<p>\nHm, what if GaSU (or somebody) tapped capital markets and provided<br \/>\nsolar installation rebates across Georgia?<br \/>\nThat way the jobs (planning, delivery, installation, studying) would<br \/>\nbe distributed across Georgia, as would the delivered energy and the<br \/>\ndirectly lowered bills.<br \/>\nIf GaSU wrapped that in along with their single-location<br \/>\nsolar plant,<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/blog\/2012\/11\/gasu-wins-at-ga-psc-but-will-gasu-help-all-of-us-win-in-the-legislature.html\"><br \/>\nGaSU could help all of us at the same time.<\/a><br \/>\nOr somebody else could.\n<\/p>\n<p>\n-jsq\n<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In most states, financing solar energy is largely a matter of learning all the local ropes. In Georgia, there&#8217;s a bigger problem. Michael Mendelsohn wrote for RMI 5 December 2012, How Do We Lower Solar Installation Costs and Open the Market to Securitized Portfolios: Standardize and Harmonize, Soft costs can be pretty tough. The cost [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[606,14,8,18,2,19,20,104,21,22,23,73,24,36],"tags":[1249,8794,772,8704,713,102,8701,8708,101,8699,8709,8702,8710,12,7,1251,8737,8711,8712,8713,1248,1252,1253,145,8731,1250,8714,108,221,6,8716],"class_list":["post-292","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-austinenergy","category-economy","category-georgia","category-georgia-power","category-government","category-history","category-law","category-nuclear","category-planning","category-politics","category-renewable-energy","category-safety","category-solar","category-wind","tag-austin-energy","tag-austinenergy","tag-denmark","tag-economy","tag-financing","tag-gasu","tag-georgia","tag-georgia-power","tag-georgia-solar-utilities","tag-government","tag-history","tag-lake","tag-law","tag-lowndes-area-knowledge-exchange","tag-lowndes-county","tag-nrel","tag-nuclear","tag-planning","tag-politics","tag-renewable-energy","tag-renewable-energy-portfolios","tag-rmi","tag-rocky-mountain-institute","tag-rps","tag-safety","tag-soft-costs","tag-solar","tag-southern-company","tag-thomas-a-fanning","tag-valdosta","tag-wind"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/292","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=292"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/292\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=292"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=292"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=292"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}