Back to top Jump to featured resources

Viewing the Electricity tag archive Page 9 of 31

Term for Energy

6185967963_d1b5b3a97e_b
Article filed under Energy | Written by John Farrell | 4 Comments | Updated on Nov 2, 2011

Citizens give “going Boulder” a new meaning: local energy self-reliance

The content that follows was originally published on the Institute for Local Self-Reliance website at http://www.ilsr.org/citizens-give-going-boulder-new-meaning-local-energy-self-reliance/

By a razor-thin margin, Boulder citizens gave the city a victory for energy self-reliance on Tuesday, approving two ballot measures to let the city form a municipal utility.  If the city moves ahead, it would capture nearly $100 million currently spent on electricity imports and instead create up to $350 million in local economic development by dramatically increasing local clean energy production.   

The stage was set over several years, as the city’s multiple pleas for more clean energy were given short shrift by the incumbent electric utility, Xcel Energy.  Instead of meeting local demands for more wind and solar power, Xcel instead financed a new coal power plant and told Boulder that it could have more wind power only if it paid extra, and paid when the wind didn’t blow.  In response, the city authorized two measures for the Nov. 1 ballot to allow the city to pursue municipal clean energy production.

The campaign was enormously lopsided.  Xcel dumped nearly $1 million into a vote ‘no’ campaign,  outspending local clean energy supporters by a 10-to-1 margin and spending nearly $77 for each no vote.  On the flip side, nearly every local business or newspaper endorsement (and nearly 1000 individual citizen endorsements) supported a ‘yes’ vote.  Despite the financial disadvantage, the local grassroots groups won, though their margin of victory was less than 3%.

The victory margin was small, but the clean energy and economic opportunity is enormous.  According to a citizen-led and peer reviewed study, the city could increase renewable energy production by 40 percent from multiple, local sources without increasing rates.  In contrast to the $100 million in revenue sent to Xcel under the current arrangement, the economic value of local energy production and ownership could multiply within the city’s economy to as much as $350 million a year, according to research by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.   

If the city uses its new authority to become a utility, future generations may look back at 11/1/11 as the shot heard round the world – a shot fired for clean, local energy – and ask why more Americans didn’t “go Boulder” sooner. 

Continue reading

clean_v_SREC_report_cover2
Article, ILSR Press Room filed under Energy | Written by John Farrell | No Comments | Updated on Oct 18, 2011

More Cost-Effective Solar from CLEAN Contracts than Solar REC Markets

The content that follows was originally published on the Institute for Local Self-Reliance website at http://www.ilsr.org/more-cost-effective-solar-clean-contracts-solar-rec-markets/

The low risk and transparency of CLEAN Contract Programs can provide states with more solar at a lower cost than solar renewable energy certificate (SREC) programs, says a new report released last week.  Produced by the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), CLEAN v. SREC: Finding the More Cost-Effective Solar Policy finds that an otherwise identical… Continue reading

Article filed under Energy | Written by John Farrell | 2 Comments | Updated on Oct 17, 2011

The Challenge of Reconciling a Centralized v. Decentralized Electricity System

The content that follows was originally published on the Institute for Local Self-Reliance website at http://www.ilsr.org/challenge-reconciling-centralized-v-decentralized-electricity-system/

As Americans transition their electricity system to the 21st century, they should ask this question.  Does it make sense to pursue strategies such as accelerating the development of new high-voltage power lines that reinforce an outdated paradigm of electricity delivery, or should scarce energy dollars be spent to add new clean, local energy to the… Continue reading

Article filed under Energy | Written by John Farrell | No Comments | Updated on Oct 3, 2011

State Wind Energy Potential

The content that follows was originally published on the Institute for Local Self-Reliance website at http://www.ilsr.org/state-wind-energy-potential/

At least 32 states can get 25% or more of their electricity from wind power within their own borders.  This map is updated from our 2010 report and namesake, Energy Self-Reliant States.  Click here for a larger version.

The only updated figure is Maryland, due to a new report on its offshore wind potential.

Continue reading

Article filed under Energy | Written by John Farrell | No Comments | Updated on Sep 26, 2011

The Value and Power of Distributed Solar in Arizona

The content that follows was originally published on the Institute for Local Self-Reliance website at http://www.ilsr.org/value-and-power-distributed-solar-arizona/

A presentation I gave last Friday to the Arizona Corporation Commission.

Continue reading

Article filed under Energy | Written by John Farrell | No Comments | Updated on Sep 23, 2011

California Governor to Western Grid: No Imports of Renewable Energy Needed

The content that follows was originally published on the Institute for Local Self-Reliance website at http://www.ilsr.org/california-governor-western-grid-no-imports-renewable-energy-needed/

Western grid operators have been making plans for large-scale renewable energy imports into the California electricity market, prompting the governor’s Senior Advisor for Renewable Energy Facilities to write a “self-reliance” response.

Here are a few highlights of his letter to the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC):

California has plenty of in-state development: “The California Independent System Operator indicates that renewable projects totaling 70,000 MW of installed capacity [nearly enough to meet all of the state's peak summer demand] are seeking to connect to the CAISO-managed grid.”

Transmission costs are up, waaay up.  In particular, “the developer of at least one significant line, TransWest Express, expects the project to cost about 70 percent more than WECC’s original assumptions…we thus appreciate the ongoing efforts of WECC staff to review these and other assumptions and to revise capital cost assumptions upward.”

Transmission line risks: “transmission lines proposed to stretch hundreds of miles over private and public lands face significant permitting and development risk – perhaps most so in the case of DC lines, which offer few electrical benefits to the states they cross.”

In summary, California has a robust in-state market for renewable energy and sufficient in-state renewable resources to serve its entire electricity needs, so Western states would do well to temper their export optimism.

Continue reading

Article filed under Energy | Written by John Farrell | No Comments | Updated on Aug 16, 2011

Updating Maryland’s Renewable Energy Potential

The content that follows was originally published on the Institute for Local Self-Reliance website at http://www.ilsr.org/updating-marylands-renewable-energy-potential/

In our 2009 report Energy Self-Reliant States, we published the following map detailing the percent of a state’s electricity that could come from in-state renewable energy resources. 

Click the image for a larger version.

Tom Carlson of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network recently contacted me to let me know that a newer report substantially increases the estimated offshore wind potential for Maryland (in fact, we had found no studies at the time of publication showing any offshore potential). 

A 2010 study by the University of Delaware’s Center for Carbon-free Power Integration, College of Earth, Ocean and Environment found that Maryland could in fact get two-thirds of its electricity from shallow-water offshore wind (depths of 35 meters or less). 

With that update, our Energy Self-Reliant States map would show that Maryland could in fact get 107% of its electricity from in-state sources, rather than just 40%. 

Continue reading

solar save MN schools millions
Article, Resource filed under Energy | Written by John Farrell | No Comments | Updated on Jul 26, 2011

Solar in Minnesota: Great Promise

The content that follows was originally published on the Institute for Local Self-Reliance website at http://www.ilsr.org/solar-minnesota-great-promise/

Back in April 2011, ILSR Senior Researcher John Farrell gave this presentation on the potential for solar power in Minnesota to a group of solar businesses and advocates. Solar in Minnesota: Great Potential View more presentations from John Farrell. Continue reading

Article filed under Energy | Written by John Farrell | No Comments | Updated on Jul 25, 2011

Lost in Transmission

The content that follows was originally published on the Institute for Local Self-Reliance website at http://www.ilsr.org/lost-transmission/

Update 7/26: One commenter asserts that the loss figures offered by the original author may be relevant in India, but do not reflect the U.S. grid, where losses total around 7%.  EIA data seems to reflect this [xls].

Can transmission losses completely offset economies of scale for solar power plants?  An article in Renewable Energy World argues against the building of multi-megawatt (MW) solar PV instead of on-site or local PV systems.  In particular, the author writes:

The biggest problem with the multi-MW solar PV plant is that it loses 12-15 percent of expensive power as it passes through a series of power transformers. PV solar inverters generate power at 400 [Volts] three-phase. In large plants, this power is first boosted to 66 [kilovolts] or more with several power transformers and then stepped down to 400V with another string of transformers to suit consumer requirements. In addition, there is a further transmission loss of 5-7 percent in the power grid. Why suffer an avoidable 20 percent loss of expensive solar power?

…There is thus no ‘scale advantage’ in large PV solar plants. In reality, all multi-MW plants are basically clusters of several 500-kW plants since solar inverter capacities are limited to about 500 kW and no more. Why not have one hundred 500 kW plants instead of one giant 50 MW plant?

With 20% of the power from a large-scale solar plant lost in transformers and power lines, it could seriously alter our previous analysis of solar economies of scale.  Here are the original charts, with the first chart shows our original analysis of solar economies of scale, with strong savings for scale for new projects (as reported by the Clean Coalition):

The next chart shows the economies of scale in the German rooftop PV market, as reflected in their feed-in tariff rates.  The percentages show the price in each size tranche relative to the price for the smallest rooftop PV systems.  Once again, there are significant savings for scale, especially when going from a project 100-1000 kW to one that is 1 megawatt or larger (15 percent).

But if there is a 20% power loss for the voltage stepping and transmission for larger solar projects, then when it comes to delivered power, small projects may perform better.  Let’s assume that projects 1 MW and larger require the voltage step and transmission (and incur the losses), whereas smaller plants do not.  The following two charts illustrate the difference.

The first chart takes the Clean Coalition (green line) data from the Solar PV Economies of Scale chart and calculates the levelized cost of the power from each size power plant based on the sunshine in southern California.  For the largest size solar power plants, the cost is adjusted for the losses due to transmission and transformer stepping.

As we can see in the first chart, the losses from transmission wipe out most economies of scale for large-scale solar, making 1 MW and larger solar PV plants equivalent to on-site solar power from a 25 kW solar PV array.

We can similarly examine the effect in the German case.  Here the government sets the price paid for solar by size class, and since it’s based on output at the power plant, large-scale plants that have transmission losses get paid for their entire power output, regardless of how much usable power reaches customers.  The following chart shows what German customers effectively pay for solar, assuming that 1 MW and larger facilities all experience the 20% transmission losses explained earlier.

 

As we can see in the chart, the cost of transmission can wipe out the economies of scale in installed costs, making large-scale solar comparable to solar PV of 30-100 kW, but without the same transformer and transmission losses. 

It may be true that the installed costs of solar PV continue to fall as projects get larger, but it’s clear that relying on the price of solar at the power plant does not accurately reflect the cost to the grid or ratepayers. For some size of larger power plants (1 MW? 5 MW?), the lost power from stepping up and down voltage through transformers and from transmission may largely offset the economies of scale from building a larger power plant.

Rather, mid-sized solar (or specifically, projects that can connect directly into the distribution system without changing the voltage) may deliver the best cost per kilowatt-hour.

Continue reading

Article filed under Energy | Written by John Farrell | No Comments | Updated on Jul 19, 2011

Breaking Grid Barriers Could Unleash Local Power and Clean Energy Jobs

The content that follows was originally published on the Institute for Local Self-Reliance website at http://www.ilsr.org/breaking-grid-barriers-could-unleash-local-power-and-clean-energy-jobs/

A recently released solar map of New York City found enough room for solar panels on building rooftops to power half the city during hours of peak electricity use.  And the city is not alone.  Almost 60 million Americans live in areas where solar prices are competitive with retail electricity costs, and this kind of… Continue reading