Solar Powering Your Community Workshop
Actionable Steps for Adopting Solar in Your Community

Wednesday, September 26, 2012
8:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m.

Hosted by

Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments

About the SunShot Solar Outreach Partnership
SolarOPs is a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) program designed to increase the use and integration of solar energy in communities across the United States. The International City/County Management Association (ICMA) and ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability and their partners were competitively selected by DOE to conduct outreach to local governments across the United States, enabling them to replicate successful solar practices and quickly expand local adoption of solar energy. The U.S. Department of Energy SunShot Initiative is a collaborative national effort to make solar energy systems cost-competitive with other forms of energy before 2020. To drive down the cost of solar electricity, the U.S. Department of Energy is supporting efforts by private companies, academia, and national laboratories.

1 of 42

Regional Solar Workshop: Greater Cincinnati

Agenda
8:30 8:40 8:50 9:20 10:05 10:15
Welcome (5-10 Min) Edwin Humphrey, OKI President SunShot Intro (5 Min) & Agenda Overview (5 Min) Philip Haddix, Project Manager, The Solar Foundation Solar 101 Module (30 Min) Philip Haddix, Project Manager, The Solar Foundation Innovative Financing (45 minutes) Justin Barnes, Senior Policy Analyst, North Carolina Solar Center Break (10 minutes)

Expert Panel (60 minutes) Steve Melink, Melink Corporation (20 minutes) Local project successes and perspective on local challenges Siobhan (Shauvaun) Pritchard, Dovetail Solar &Wind (20 minutes) Solar Successes in our Community Larry Falkin, City of Cincinnati (20 minutes) Cincinnati’s solar utilization, solar power purchase agreement and LEED incentive Panel/Audience Discussion (30 minutes) Moderated by Julie Jones, Green Umbrella ReNew Action Team Chair What are the opportunities and benefits of solar for our communities and region? Wrap Up & Closing Remarks (15 minutes) Travis Miller, OKI Regional Planning Manager Boxed Lunch, Networking and Opening of Mini Expo

11:15

11:45 12:00

2 of 42

Justin Barnes co-coordinates the N.C. Solar Center's activities under
the SunShot Solar Outreach Partnership, a project funded by the U.S. Department of Energy. In addition, Justin leads DSIRE's policy research in Maryland, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania, and contributes heavily to DSIRE's federal policy research. Justin also manages DSIRE's quantitative RPS research and has spearheaded research on state-level public benefits funds that support renewables. His research interests include innovative financing mechanisms, solar renewable energy certificate (SREC) markets, and net metering in states with retail electric choice. He joined the N.C. Solar Center in 2007. Justin received an M.S. in environmental policy from Michigan Technological

Larry Falkin

is Director of the City of Cincinnati’s Office of Environmental Quality (OEQ). OEQ’s mission is to lead Cincinnati city government and the broader community toward sustainability and the practice of good environmental stewardship. OEQ has actively promoted energy efficiency and renewable energy use by Cincinnati City Government and the broader community. The City has completed energy efficiency retrofits on 70 City buildings, reducing energy costs by more than $1 million/year, and has completed solar panel installations on 20 City buildings, with another one currently under construction. Prior to his current role, Mr. Falkin held positions with: the City of Kansas City, MO; the U.S. EPA; and the Environmental Compliance Oversight Corporation (ECOCorp). Mr. Falkin has a B.A. from SUNY-Binghamton and a J.D. from Pace University.

Philip Haddix manages a number of The Solar Foundation’s projects and performs research in support of new and existing initiatives. Philip is active in executing the foundation’s duties under the SunShot Solar Outreach Partnership program and is assisting in the planning and implementation of the organization’s proposed SolarSmart Schools initiative. Philip’s prior professional experiences in the energy and environmental arena include stints with the Sierra Club/Blue Green Alliance and the Solar Energy Industries Association. He holds a Masters of Public Affairs from the School of Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana University with concentrations in Energy and Environmental Policy and a bachelor’s degree in Anthropology from the University of West Georgia. Philip has also been accredited as a LEED Green Associate by the U.S. Green Building Council. University and a B.S. in geography from the University of Oklahoma.

Philip Haddix, Project Manager:

3 of 42

Julie Jones, Chief Marketing Officer for Solar Earth and Chair of the
renewable energy action team under the Green Umbrella, has a back ground in high efficiency and green energy projects for fortune 500 companies, major industrial customers, and municipality from her time with Cinergy Solutions (the on-site power division of Cinergy Corp. now Duke). With experience in both traditional and social media marketing, Ms. Jones, is uniquely qualified to put the spot light on solar power and raise awareness of the growing potential and innovation in the solar industry. A self described solar enthusiast, Ms. Jones has been watching the solar field for years and is posed to position Solar Earth as an industry leader.

Steve Melink is the founder, owner, and president of Melink Corporation, a
provider of building commissioning services, energy-saving kitchen ventilation controls, and solar PV systems for the commercial and institutional building industry since 1987. Customers include national restaurant, retail, supermarket, and hotel chains, as well as schools, hospitals, and federal, state, and local governments. Steve is a licensed Professional Engineer in Ohio and holds a BSME degree from Vanderbilt University and MBA from Duke University. He is a board member of the USGBC Cincinnati Chapter, Cincinnati Green Umbrella, Green Energy Ohio, and Advance Energy Economy. He is also a member of American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers and Association of Energy Engineers. Melink Corporation’s headquarters in Cincinnati is the first LEED-Gold NC and LEED-Platinum EB certified office building in the State of Ohio. It is also Energy Star certified with a rating of 99 out of 100. In 2010 the Association of Energy Engineers awarded their building the Renewable Energy Project of the Year. And their building is one of the first in the U.S. and world to become net-zero energy. Steve’s goal is to help mainstream the sustainability movement through positive leadership. In addition to walking the talk at his home and business, he has actively promoted energy efficiency and renewable energy at the local, state and national level. He believes that energy is at the core of some of our most pressing challenges in the U.S, including economic growth, national security, environmental health.
4 of 42

is Dovetail Solar and Wind’s Regional Development Manager for Southwestern Ohio, Indiana and Kentucky. Mrs. Pritchard oversees the coordination of project development, integrating the design and project management teams to yield cohesive project implementation. She joined Dovetail Solar and Wind in July, 2009 after 16 years in technical medical sales with both Pfizer, Inc. and Care Rehab. Mrs. Pritchard was awarded Green Energy Ohio’s Southwest Ohio Volunteer of the Year in 2010 for her leadership role in GEO’s fundraising campaign and is in the NABCEP certification process. She serves as a board member for the Kentucky Solar Energy Society. Mrs. Pritchard holds a B.A. in Economics and Business Administration from Transylvania University and a MBA from Vanderbilt University. Some of the projects she has developed include: The Turkey Foot Middle School in Edgewood, KY, The Well Field Solar Project for the Village of St. Paris, OH, The PPA projects for The City of Cincinnati, the Waste Water Treatment Plants for the City of Xenia, OH, commercial projects at The Brazee Street Studios in Cincinnati, OH, BuyCastings Foundry and Offices in Miamisburg, OH, and the Bowman and Landes Turkey Farm in New Carlisle, OH.

Siobhan C. Pritchard

5 of 42

Solar Powering Your Community Addressing Soft Costs and Barriers

Agenda
08:30 – 08:50 08:50 – 09:20 09:20 – 10:05 10:05 – 10:15 10:15 – 11:15 11:15 – 11:45 11:45 – 12:00 12:00 Introductions & Overview Solar 101: The Local Solar Policy Environment Understanding Solar Financing Options Break Panel of Local Experts Panelist and Audience Discussion Wrap Up and Closing Remarks Boxed Lunch, Networking, Mini-Expo

Agenda
08:30 – 08:50 08:50 – 09:20 09:20 – 10:05 10:05 – 10:15 10:15 – 11:15 11:15 – 11:45 11:45 – 12:00 12:00 Introductions & Overview Solar 101: The Local Solar Policy Environment Understanding Solar Financing Options Break Panel of Local Experts Panelist and Audience Discussion Wrap Up and Closing Remarks Boxed Lunch, Networking, Mini-Expo

Justin B J ti Barnes
NC Solar Center / DSIRE justin_barnes@ncsu.edu (919) 515 - 5693

Philip H ddi Phili Haddix
The Solar Foundation phaddix@solarfound.org (202) 469-3743

About the SunShot Solar Outreach Partnership

About the SunShot Solar Outreach Partnership

 Increase installed capacity of solar electricity in U.S. communities  Streamline and standardize permitting and interconnection processes  Improve planning and zoning codes/regulations for solar electric technologies  Increase access to solar financing options

The SunShot Solar Outreach Partnership (SolarOPs) is a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) program designed to increase the use and integration of solar energy in communities across the US.

6 of 42

About the SunShot Solar Outreach Partnership
Resource Solar Powering Your Community Guide

About the SunShot Solar Outreach Partnership
Resource Sunshot Resource Center  Case Studies  Fact Sheets  How-To Guides How To  Model Ordinances  Technical Reports

A comprehensive resource to assist local governments and stakeholders in building local g solar markets.
www.energy.gov

 Sample Government Docs www4.eere.energy.gov/solar/sunshot/resource_center

About the SunShot Solar Outreach Partnership
Technical Support ‘Ask an Expert’ Live Web Forums ‘Ask an Expert’ Web Portal Peer Exchange Facilitation Peer In-Depth Consultations Customized Trainings www4.eere.energy.gov/solar/sunshot/resource_center For more information email: solar-usa@iclei.org

Poll Who’s in the room?

Poll What is your experience with y p solar?

Workshop Goal
Enable local governments to replicate successful solar practices and expand f l l ti d d local adoption of solar energy

7 of 42

Activity: Identifying Benefits

Explore benefits
and

What is the greatest benefit solar can bring to your community? [Blue Card]

Ri h Now Right N

During S i D i Session

Aft B After Break k

Overcome barriers
Write answer on card Compile results Group discussion

Activity: Addressing Barriers
What is the greatest barrier to solar adoption in your community? [Green Card]

Installed Capacity

Ri h N Right Now

D i S i During Session

Aft B After Break k

Germany y 35.6%

Write answer on card

Compile results

Group discussion

http://www.map.ren21.net/GSR/GSR2012.pdf

Installed Capacity
Total installed solar capacity in the US Capacity installed in Germany in Dec 2011

The Cost of Solar in the US

4 GW 4 GW
Source: NREL (http://ases.conference-services.net/resources/252/2859/pdf/SOLAR2012_0599_full%20paper.pdf) (http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/53347.pdf) (http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/54689.pdf)

http://www.map.ren21.net/GSR/GSR2012.pdf

8 of 42

The Cost of Solar in the US

The Cost of Solar in the US

Profits,Taxes, & Overhead

Source: NREL (http://ases.conference-services.net/resources/252/2859/pdf/SOLAR2012_0599_full%20paper.pdf) (http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/53347.pdf) (http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/54689.pdf)

Source: NREL (http://ases.conference-services.net/resources/252/2859/pdf/SOLAR2012_0599_full%20paper.pdf) (http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/53347.pdf) (http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/54689.pdf)

The Cost of Solar in the US
Solar Soft Costs

Agenda
08:30 – 08:50 08:50 – 09:20 09:20 – 10:05 10:05 – 10:15 10:15 – 11:15 11:15 – 11:45 11:45 – 12:00 12:00 Introductions & Overview Solar 101: The Local Solar Policy Environment Understanding Solar Financing Options Break Panel of Local Experts Panelist and Audience Discussion Wrap Up and Closing Remarks Boxed Lunch, Networking, Mini-Expo

Source: NREL (http://ases.conference-services.net/resources/252/2859/pdf/SOLAR2012_0599_full%20paper.pdf) (http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/53347.pdf) (http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/54689.pdf)

Solar Technologies

Solar Technologies

Solar Photovoltaic (PV)

Solar Hot Water

Concentrated Solar Power

Solar Photovoltaic (PV)

Solar Hot Water

Concentrated Solar Power

23

24

9 of 42

Some Basic Terminology
Cell

Some Basic Terminology

Panel / Module

Array

Some Basic Terminology

Some Basic Terminology
Residence 5 kW Factory 1 MW+

Production Kilowatt-hour (kWh)

e- e- eCapacity / Power kilowatt (kW)

Office 50 – 500 kW

Utility 2 MW+

Benefits of Solar Energy
 Local economy growth  Local jobs  Energy independence  Stabilizes price volatility  Valuable to utilities  Smart investment

Fact: Solar works across the US

4.62 KWh/m2/day

29

Source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory

30

10 of 42

Regional Solar Market
20

Comparison: Regional PV Financial Incentives
Ohio Kentucky
‐ ‐ Revolving Loans for State g Agencies ‐ TVA Programs ‐ ‐ OAQDA  Incentives;  Commercial/ Utility  Exemptions $3.00/W; Max. $1,000 $3.00/W; Max. $500 ‐

Megawatts In nstalled Capacity

Indiana
IP&L Rebate: $2.00/W up to 19.9kW ‐ ‐ ‐ IP&L Rate REP NIPSCO Feed‐in Tariff ‐ ‐ Assessed value of PV  system is exempt from  Res/Com/Ind Prop. Tax

15

Rebates State Grants

AEP Ohio: $1.50/W up to  50% of cost or $12k/$75k ‐ ECO‐Link;  ; Energy Loan Fund Local Option SRECs

10

State Loans PACE Financing

5

Prod. Incentives Corp. Tax Credits

0 2008 2009 2010 2011 Pers. Tax Credits Prop. Tax  Incentives

Ohio

Indiana

Kentucky

Source: IREC

Ohio State Loan Programs
Energy Conservation for Ohioans (ECO-Link):
Offers homeowners reduced interest rates on loans for renewable energy or energy efficiency upgrades offered by participating banks; maximum incentive = 3% rate reduction for up to $50,000 and 7 years of the bank loan

AEP Ohio: Solar Rebates
 Multi-Sector, esp. Residential, Commercial, Public, Nonprofit  $1.50/W  Max incentive: 50% of system costs up to $12,000 t t $12 000 (Residential) or $75,000 (Non-residential)  Net metering and Interconnection to AEP grid  Surrender RECs (15 yrs.)

Energy Loan Fund:
Offers public entities, manufacturers, and small businesses loans for RE and EE upgrades Public and nonprofit entities: 90% of project costs or $1 million

Renewable Portfolio Standard

Renewable Portfolio Standard

Renewable Energy

$e
Fossil Fuel

Two revenue streams

Utility

Any electricity source

eRenewable Energy

REC $ $

11 of 42

Renewable Portfolio Standard
Solar carve-out

Solar Renewable Energy Credits (SRECs)

Three Requirements: RPS solar carve out Unbundled, tradeable credits Penalty for non-compliance
– solar alternative compliance payment (SACP)

Renewable Energy

Any electricity source

Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard
 12.5% from renewables by 2024 for IOUs and retail suppliers  At least half of this renewable energy must be generated at facilities in Ohio  12.5% from advanced energy resources by 2024  Solar carve-out of 0.5% of total electricity supply by 2024

SRECs in Ohio
SACP: $350/MWh (2012 and 2013); declines by $50 biannually Two Markets: In-State (50%) Out-of-State (50%) PA, IN, KY, WV, MI

Renewable Portfolio Standard
www.dsireusa.org / August 2012.

Performance Incentives: IN
Indianapolis Power & Light Rate Renewable Energy Production (REP)
15 year contract; $0.24/kWh (20 kW – 100 kW); $0.20/kWh (100 kW – 10 MW)

NIPSCO Feed-in Tariff:
Washington DC and 2 territories,have Renewable Portfolio Standards

29 states,+

15 year max. contract term; $0.30/kWh (10 kW or less); $0.26/kWh (10kW – 2 MW); 500 kW allocated for small scale solar (≤ 10 kW)

(8 states and 2 territories have renewable portfolio goals).

12 of 42

Performance Incentives: KY
TVA Generation Partners:
Up to 50 kW; $1,000 + $0.12/kWh above retail; 10-yr. contract;

Net Metering

TVA Mid-Size Program Standard Offer:
50 kW – 20 MW; variable seasonal/TOD rates from $0.035/kWh - $0.16/kWh; Avg. $0.055/kWh (3% escalation); 10 to 20-yr. contract

Net metering allows customers to export p power to the grid during times of excess g g generation, and receive credits that can be applied to later electricity usage

Net Metering: Overview
Morning

Net Metering: Overview
Afternoon

Excess Credits

Customer

Utility

Customer

Utility

Net Metering: Overview
Night

Net Metering: State Policies
www.dsireusa.org / August 2012.

DC

Customer

Utility

Solar covers 100% of the customer’s load, even at night!

+ Washington DC & 4 territories,have adopted a net metering policy.
Note: Numbers indicate individual system capacity limit in kilowatts. Some limits vary by customer type, technology and/or application. Other limits might also apply.  This map generally does not address statutory changes  until administrative rules have  been adopted to implement such changes. 

43 states,

13 of 42

Net Metering: Market Share

Net Metering: Resources
Resource Freeing the Grid

More than 93%

of distributed PV Installations are net-metered

Provides a “report card” for state policy on net metering and interconnection

http://freeingthegrid.org/

Source: IREC (http://www.irecusa.org/wp-content/uploads/IRECSolarMarketTrends-2012-web.pdf)

Net Metering: Ohio

Net Metering: Ohio

Source: Freeing the Grid

Source: Freeing the Grid

Net Metering: Ohio

Net Metering: Resources
Resource Interstate Renewable Energy Council

Recommendations:
 Credit Net Excess Generation at the retail rate and provide the option of indefinite rollover  Adopt safe harbor language to protect customer-sited generators from extra and/or unanticipated fees  Specify that customer RECs belong to the

IREC developed its model rules in an effort to capture best practices in state net metering policies.
www.irecusa.org

Source: Freeing the Grid

14 of 42

Interconnection

Interconnection: Best Practices
1. Use standard forms and agreements

5,000+ utilities
with unique interconnection procedures

2. Implement expedited process 3. Implement simplified procedure for small solar arrays

Source: NREL (http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/54689.pdf

Interconnection: Ohio

Interconnection: Resources
Resource Interstate Renewable Energy Council

Recommendations:
 Remove requirements for redundant external disconnect switch  Expand interconnection procedures to all utilities (i.e., munis and co-ops)

IREC developed model interconnection procedures in an effort to capture emerging best practices in this vital area.
www.irecusa.org

PV and Property Taxes
Ohio Air Quality Development Authority Air-Quality Improvement Tax Incentives
Qualifying projects (including PV) financed through OAQDA bonds or notes can receive a 100% exemption from p personal and real property taxes p p y

Solar Access
Solar Access Laws:
1. Increase the likelihood that properties will receive sunlight 2. 2 Protect the rights of property owners to install solar 3. Reduce the risk that systems will be shaded after installation

Qualified Energy Property Tax Exemptions:
Systems ≤ 250 kW exempt from utility real and property taxes Systems > 250 kW also exempt, but requires payment in lieu of taxes of $7,000/MW Applies to facilities that generate electricity for sale to 3rd parties

15 of 42

Solar Access

Solar Easements: Ohio
Ohio law allows property owners to create binding solar easements for the purpose of protecting and maintaining proper access to sunlight. Easements must be executed in writing and are subject to the same conveyance and recording requirements as other easements.
U.S. Virgin Islands

DC

Solar Easements Provision Solar Rights Provision Solar Easements and Solar Rights Provisions

Local option to create solar rights provision

Source: DSIRE

Solar Access
Resource Solar ABCs A comprehensive review of solar access law in the US – Suggested standards for a model ordinance

Q &A

www.solarabcs.org

Agenda
08:30 – 08:50 08:50 – 09:20 09:20 – 10:05 10:05 – 10:15 10:15 – 11:15 11:15 – 11:45 11:45 – 12:00 12:00 Introductions & Overview Solar 101: The Local Solar Policy Environment Understanding Solar Financing Options Break Panel of Local Experts Panelist and Audience Discussion Wrap Up and Closing Remarks Boxed Lunch, Networking, Mini-Expo

Understanding Solar Financing
PACE Private PPA/Lease Sponsored  Loan QECBs Public PPA/Lease Non‐QECB  Debt New  Model?

Financing

Morris  Model

16 of 42

Third Party Ownership

Third Party Ownership
Pros Cons
 Market electricity price risk  Opportunities may be limited in some locations  Don’t keep RECs  No upfront cost  No O&M costs  Low risk Developer  Predictable payments

Power Purchase  Agreement

e$ Customer
REC

3rd-Party Solar PV Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs)
www.dsireusa.org / August 2012

Qualified Energy Conservation Bonds

 What?
– Tax credit or direct payment subsidy

 Why?
RI: may be limited to  certain sectors UT: limited to  certain sectors

– Subsidy lowers the effective cost of capital

VA: see notes

R l Relevance f S l ? for Solar?
– Financing public facilities (numerous) – “Green Community” programs (a few)

AZ: limited to  certain sectors

At least 22 states + PR authorize or allow 3rd-party solar PV PPAs

 How?
– State allocation or automatic allocation

Authorized by state or otherwise currently in use, at least in certain jurisdictions within in the state Apparently disallowed by state or otherwise restricted by legal barriers Status unclear or unknown

Puerto Rico

Note: This map is intended to serve as an unofficial guide; it does not constitute legal advice. Seek qualified legal expertise before making binding financial decisions related to a 3rd-party PPA. See following slides for additional important information and authority references.

Qualified Energy Conservation Bonds

Property Assessed Clean Energy

City creates type of land-secured financing district or similar legal mechanism (a special assessment district)

Property owners voluntarily signup for financing and make energy improvements

Proceeds from revenue bond or other financing provided to property owner to pay for energy project

Property owner pays assessment through property tax bill (up to 20 years)

Local Examples??? • Kentucky: Allocation mostly gone ($3M left) • Ohio: 11 issuances to date ($95M left) • Indiana: 2 issuances to date ($8.4M in state allocation remaining)
Source: National Association of State Energy State Energy Officials: State Financing Energy Resources.

17 of 42

Property Assessed Clean Energy
www.dsireusa.org / August 2012.

Innovative: Morris Model
Public Debt PPA

MORRIS MODEL

28 states,
+ Washington DC, authorize PACE (27 states have passed legislation and HI permits it based on existing law). .
Source: NREL . 2011. Financing Solar PV at Government Sites with PPAs and Public Debt

PACE financing authorized by the state*
*The Federal Housing Financing Agency (FHFA) issued a statement in July 2010 concerning the senior lien status associated with most PACE programs. In response to the FHFA statement, most local PACE programs have been suspended until further clarification is provided.

Replication of Morris Model
 Legality of PPA Model

Innovative: PACE + PPA
PACE PPA

Untested

 Laws Governing Public Contracts  Laws Governing Bonding  Laws Government Procurement

Source: NREL . 2011. Financing Solar PV at Government Sites with PPAs and Public Debt

Source.Vote Solar. 2012. Commercial Scale Solar Financing – PACE and Third-Party Ownership

Mitigate Soft Costs

Customer Acquisition

$0.56
per Watt

Solarize Group Purchasing

Source: NREL (http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/54689.pdf)

18 of 42

Solarize: Advantages
Barriers
High upfront cost Complexity Customer inertia

Solarize: Advantages
Benefits to Local Government: Low implementation cost: $10,000 - $20,000 Quick turn-around: 9 Months Long-term impact: Sustainable ecosystem

Solutions
Group purchase Community outreach Limited-time offer

Solarize: Process

Solarize: Case Study

Select Installer

Marketing & Workshops

Enrollment

Site Assessment

Decision & Installation

Harvard, Massachusetts Population: 6,520
Source:Wikipedia

Solarize: Case Study
Solarize Mass Harvard
Select Installer
April 2011

Group Purchasing
Average PV Cost July 2011: $5.75 / watt

Marketing & Workshops

Enrollment

Site Assessment

Decision & Installation
Dec 2011

April 2011

19 of 42

Solarize: Case Study
Solarize Mass Harvard
Select Installer Marketing & Workshops
May – July 2011

Solarize: Case Study
Marketing Strategy:
 Electronic survey of 1,100 households

Enrollment

Site Assessment

Decision & Installation
Dec 2011

 Email newsletters and direct mailings  Float in July 4 parade  Articles and advertisements in local newspaper  Facebook page and online discussion board
Source:Vote Solar

April 2011

Solarize: Case Study
Solarize Mass Harvard
Select Installer Marketing & Workshops
429 households  signed up

Solarize: Case Study
Solarize Mass Harvard
Decision & Installation
Dec 2011 151 feasible  households

Enrollment
June – Oct 2011

Site Assessment

Select Installer

Marketing & Workshops

Enrollment

Site Assessment
Oct 2011

Decision & Installation
Dec 2011

April 2011

April 2011

Solarize: Case Study
Solarize Mass Harvard
Select Installer Marketing & Workshops Site Assessment
75 Contracts

Group Purchasing

403 kW capacity  contracted

Enrollment

Decision & Installation
Oct –Dec 2011

April 2011

Dec 2011

20 of 42

Solarize: Case Study

Solarize: Lasting Impact

75 new installations totaling 403 kW 30% reduction in installation costs d ti 575% increase in residential installations
Source: NREL

Lasting  Impact

Solarize: Resources
Resource The Solarize Guidebook A roadmap for project planners and solar advocates who want to create their own successful S l i campaigns. f l Solarize i

Q &A

www.nrel.gov

Agenda
08:30 – 08:50 08:50 – 09:20 09:20 – 10:05 10:05 – 10:15 10:15 – 11:15 11:15 – 11:45 11:45 – 12:00 12:00 Introductions & Overview Solar 101: The Local Solar Policy Environment Understanding Solar Financing Options Break Panel of Local Experts Panelist and Audience Discussion Wrap Up and Closing Remarks Boxed Lunch, Networking, Mini-Expo

Agenda
08:30 – 08:50 08:50 – 09:20 09:20 – 10:05 10:05 – 10:15 10:15 – 11:15 11:15 – 11:45 11:45 – 12:00 12:00 Introductions & Overview Solar 101: The Local Solar Policy Environment Understanding Solar Financing Options Break Panel of Local Experts Panelist and Audience Discussion Wrap Up and Closing Remarks Boxed Lunch, Networking, Mini-Expo

21 of 42

INSERT LOCAL EXPERT DECK

Agenda
08:30 – 08:50 08:50 – 09:20 09:20 – 10:05 10:05 – 10:15 10:15 – 11:15 11:15 – 11:45 11:45 – 12:00 Introductions & Overview Solar 101: The Local Solar Policy Environment Understanding Solar Financing Options Break Panel of Local Experts Panelist and Audience Discussion Wrap Up and Closing Remarks Boxed Lunch, Networking, Mini-Expo

Page 29

Page 33

12:00

Agenda
08:30 – 08:50 08:50 – 09:20 09:20 – 10:05 10:05 – 10:15 10:15 – 11:15 11:15 – 11:45 11:45 – 12:00 12:00 Introductions & Overview Solar 101: The Local Solar Policy Environment Understanding Solar Financing Options Break Panel of Local Experts Panelist and Audience Discussion Wrap Up and Closing Remarks Boxed Lunch, Networking, Mini-Expo

Agenda
08:30 – 08:50 08:50 – 09:20 09:20 – 10:05 10:05 – 10:15 10:15 – 11:15 11:15 – 11:45 11:45 – 12:00 12:00 Introductions & Overview Solar 101: The Local Solar Policy Environment Understanding Solar Financing Options Break Panel of Local Experts Panelist and Audience Discussion Wrap Up and Closing Remarks Boxed Lunch, Networking, Mini-Expo

Activity: Identifying Benefits
What is the greatest benefit solar can bring to your community? [Blue Card]

Justin B J ti Barnes
NC Solar Center / DSIRE justin_barnes@ncsu.edu (919) 515 - 5693

Philip H ddi Phili Haddix
The Solar Foundation phaddix@solarfound.org

Right N Ri h Now

During S i D i Session

Aft B After Break k

Write answer on card

Compile results

Group discussion

22 of 42

Activity: Addressing Barriers
What is the greatest barrier to solar adoption in your community? [Green Card]

[ [Results from Survey] y]

Ri h Now Right N

During S i D i Session

Aft B After Break k

Write answer on card

Compile results

Group discussion

Activity: Next Steps

[ [Results from Survey] y]

What do you pledge to do when you leave today’s workshop? [Orange Card]

Net Metering: Virtual
School

Net Metering: Meter Aggregation

Landfill Town Hall

DC

Aggregation of some from authorized by state

But…It’s complicated B I’ li d
Police Station

No direct connection necessary

• Ownership requirements • Contiguous vs. non‐contiguous  properties • Multiple customers • Multiple generators • Modified system/aggregate system  size limits

• • • •

Rollover rates Distance limitations Number of accounts How to address accounts on  different tariffs

23 of 42

Process

Ownership Structure Decision
 Are you a taxpaying entity? Option 1: Direct Ownership  Do you have access to financing or available cash?  How does this compare to other opportunities?

Decide on  Ownership  Structure

 C you enter into long-term contracts? Can i l ?  Do you want to own the system? Option 2: Third Party Ownership  Do you have a municipal utility?  Do you need the RECs for compliance?

Process
Direct Ownership
Location  Selection Site  Assessment Finance  Project Installer  Procurement Construction

Process
Direct Ownership
Location  Selection Site  Assessment Finance  Project Installer  Procurement Construction

Decide on  ecide on Ownership  Structure

Third Party Ownership

Decide on  ecide on Ownership  Structure

Third Party Ownership

Option 2: Third Party Ownership

Option 2: Third Party Ownership

Step 1: Location Selection
 Who is using the energy?  Where is the energy being used?  What is the user’s energy load?

Step 1: Location Selection

Rooftop

Ground

 What is the user’s energy cost?

24 of 42

Process
Direct Ownership
Location  Selection Site  Assessment Finance  Project Installer  Procurement Construction

Step 2: Site Assessment
 Solar Access Rights  Interconnection  Wind loading
Third Party Ownership

Decide on  Ownership  Structure

 Roof age, type, & warranty  Electrical configuration  Slope, Shading and orientation

Option 2: Third Party Ownership

Step 2: Site Assessment
 Usable acreage  Slope  Distance to transmission lines  Distance to graded roads  Conservation areas

Process
Direct Ownership
Location  Selection Site  Assessment Finance  Project Installer  Procurement Construction

Decide on  ecide on Ownership  Structure

Third Party Ownership

Option 2: Third Party Ownership

Step 3: Finance Project
 Direct purchase  Grant financed  ESCO/performance contracting  Loans  Bonds

Process
Direct Ownership
Location  Selection Site  Assessment Finance  Project Installer  Procurement Construction

Decide on  ecide on Ownership  Structure

Third Party Ownership

Option 2: Third Party Ownership

25 of 42

Step 4: Installer Procurement
EPC = Engineer, Procure, Construct
 Designs the project  Completes necessary permitting requirements  Works with the utility to file for interconnection  Assists in procuring components  Applies for incentives  Manages project construction

Process
Direct Ownership
Location  Selection Site  Assessment Finance  Project Installer  Procurement Construction

Decide on  Ownership  Structure

Third Party Ownership

Option 2: Third Party Ownership

Direct Ownership
Pros
 Low – cost electricity  REC revenue  Maximize underutilized spaces

Process
Direct Ownership

Cons
 Large upfront cost  Long term management  Can’t take all incentives  Development risk  Performance risk
Decide on  ecide on Ownership  Structure

Third Party Ownership

Location  Selection

Developer  Procurement

PPA & Lease  Negotiation

Construction

Process
Direct Ownership

Process
Direct Ownership

Decide on  ecide on Ownership  Structure

Third Party Ownership

Decide on  ecide on Ownership  Structure
PPA & Lease  Negotiation Construction

Third Party Ownership

Location  Selection

Developer  Procurement

Location  Selection

Developer  Procurement

PPA & Lease  Negotiation

Construction

RFP vs RFQ

26 of 42

Step 2: Developer Procurement
Avoid Five Common Pitfalls:
 RFP/RFQ specifications are too restrictive or too unstructured  Competing measures of system efficiency  Finding sufficient number of qualified bidders  Lack of effective O&M program  Lack of strong monitoring program
Source: NREL Webinar “Procuring and Implementing Solar Projects on Public Buildings: How to Avoid Common Pitfalls” December 8, 2010

Step 2: Developer Procurement
In Santa Clara County, CA, nine municipalities collaboratively bid out 47 sites. Benefits include:

50% savings in administrative costs 10-15% reduction in energy cost
Source: NREL Webinar “Procuring and Implementing Solar Projects on Public Buildings: How to Avoid Common Pitfalls” December 8, 2010

Process
Direct Ownership

Step 3: Contract Negotiation
Negotiation points:
 Fixed or floating electricity price  Price escalator

Decide on  ecide on Ownership  Structure

 Contract term length
Third Party Ownership

 Property taxes
PPA & Lease  Negotiation Construction

Location  Selection

Developer  Procurement

 Liability  Performance guarantee  Regulatory risk

Process
Direct Ownership

Third Party Ownership
Pros
 No upfront cost  No O&M costs

Cons
 Market electricity price risk  Limited oppo tu ty in te opportunity PA  Don’t keep RECs

Decide on  ecide on Ownership  Structure

 Low risk
Third Party Ownership

Location  Selection

Developer  Procurement

PPA & Lease  Negotiation

 Predictable payments
Construction

27 of 42

Factors PPA Providers Look For
 States that allow PPA providers to operate without being regulated as utility  State financial incentives – tax credit or rebate  REC market  Good net metering and interconnection  PPA providers allowed to net meter

Case Study: Kansas City

The City will lease 40 – 80 rooftop grid connected 25 kW solar PV installations
Source: Solar Ready KC

Case Study: Kansas City
Direct Ownership

Decide on  ecide on Ownership  Structure

Third Party Ownership

Location  Selection

Developer  Procurement

PPA & Lease  Negotiation

Construction

Proposals due  July 2012

28 of 42

OKI Solar Workshop
Cincinnati Zoo Solar Canopy Case Study
September 26, 2012
Presenter Name Title Phone Email

Project Goals

• Solidify Cincinnati Zoo as Nation’s Greenest • Demonstrate and Educate the Region On Solar PV • More Predictable Power Cost For The Zoo • Spur Economic Development in the Uptown Area 

29 of 42

Project Challenges
• Cost Of Electric Power Relatively Low • Additional Cost Of Elevated Structure • Additional Cost Of Reconfiguring Active Parking Lot • Additional Cost To Upgrade Electrical Infrastructure  • Major Incentive – 1603 Grant ‐ Was Time Sensitive 

Electric Rate Inflation 
$0.11 $0.10 $0.09
Price e Per kWh

5.2% CAGR

12.4% Gap

$0.08 4.1% CAGR $0.07 $0 07 $0.06 $0.05 5.3% CAGR $0.04 2003 US Commercial 2004 2005 2006 Ohio Commercial 2007 2008 6.0% CAGR 10.4% Gap

US Industrial

Ohio Industrial

Utility Rate Shocks Are Possible
• Aging Coal Fleet Will Require New Generation • Utilities Must Meet Ohio Renewable Portfolio Standards – Renewable Energy – Advanced Energy: Clean Coal, Nuclear, Energy Efficiency • Federal Energy Policy and/or Clean Air Regulation

• Smart Grid

30 of 42

Global PV Industry Is Growing Rapidly
Growth 1978 – 2008 From 1‐MWp to >5‐GWp
6000.0 5500.0 5000.0 4500.0 4000.0 3500.0 3000.0 2500.0 2000.0 1500.0 1000.0 500.0 0.0 252.0 1.0 5.3 17.5 24.9 54.1 114.1 1049.8 1984.6 3073.0 5491.8

2003-2008 CAGR: 61.5%

Cincinnati Zoo Savings – Years 8‐25
$800,000 $700,000

$600,000
Annu Savings ual

$500,000 5% Inflation 5% Inflation $400,000 7% Inflation 9% Inflation $300,000

$200,000

$100,000

$0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Year

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

Power Purchase Agreement

Variable
Period Energy Cost Energy Cost Inflation

Amount
25 Years $0.08 5.5%

Driver
No Upfront Cost Current Rate Future Expectations

31 of 42

Financing Factors
• Type of Installation  • Solar Radiation • • • • • • Current Electric Rates Federal Incentives State Incentives – SRECs NMTCs Debt Interest Rate Equity Investor ROR

Q Questions?

32 of 42

Solar Makes Sense in Our Communities and Businesses

The City of Powell St. P i St Paris Washington Court House The City of Xenia City of Athens The City of Cincinnati
Siobhan C. Pritchard Regional Development Manager

The Reasons Are Clear Why Solar Makes Sense
 Cost savings over the long term (longer now with

SREC declines)
 Locks in a long term stable cost of electricity  Moves a portion of operational expense to depreciable

capital expense (if using a PPA, depreciation is monetized and passed to end user)  Reductions in greenhouse gas emissions  Enables you/your community or business to be viewed as an environmental steward

The Requirements/Attributes of Funded PPA’s

1. Investment Grade Host; What

is Your Bond Rating? 2. Favorable Site Conditions 3. Quality Component Selection 4. Realistic Production Modeling

Copyright 2009 Dovetail Solar and Wind

33 of 42

City of Powell Live Cameras

Powell Building and System Monitoring

Copyright 2009 Dovetail Solar and Wind

34 of 42

TURKEY FOOT MIDDLE SCHOOL

384.5kW Roof PV System

58kW Solar Bus Canopy

Village of St. Paris Ohio

66kW Well Field

Washington Court House

250kW Service Center

Copyright 2009 Dovetail Solar and Wind

35 of 42

City of Xenia, Ford Road Waste Water

City of Xenia, Glady Run Waste Water

Glady Run Waste Water Treatment Plant, 158kW

Glady Run Waste Water Treatment Plant

Copyright 2009 Dovetail Solar and Wind

36 of 42

Athens Community Center
225 KW Solar Canopies

City of Cincinnati, College Hill Recreation Center 158.76kW

City of Cincinnati, College Hill Recreation Ctr. 158kW

Copyright 2009 Dovetail Solar and Wind

37 of 42

City of Cincinnati, Beekman Garage, 209kW

Beekman Garage, 209.49kW

How Did These Municipalities Make Solar Work?
 Powell:  Federal Energy Efficiency Grant of which solar was a component  St. Paris:  State of Ohio Department of Development 50% Grant, Monetized Depreciation, SRECs, 30% Federal ITC  Washington Court House:  State of Ohio Department of Development 50% Grant, Monetized Depreciation, SRECs, 30% Federal ITC  City of Xenia:  PPA, SRECs, Monetized Depreciation, 30% Federal ITC  City of Cincinnati:  PPA, SRECs, Monetized Depreciation, 30% FITC

Copyright 2009 Dovetail Solar and Wind

38 of 42

The Take Away Points
 Be Ready When Opportunity Knocks!  Work with Reputable, Experienced EPC

Contractors
 Start reviewing possible sites:  Flat, unobstructed land, or  Unobstructed rooftops with newer roofs  Close to load centers  Considerable loads, 200kW and above  Power costs of 8-9 cents per kwatt hour and above

Meadow Springs Farm

Bowman & LandesTurkey Farm

Twenty First Century Energy Corp.

Beightler Armory

Turkey Foot Middle School

The City of Washington Courthouse, Ohio

Cincinnati Zoo Schott Education Center

Dovetail Solar and Wind
 Founded in 1995 - one of Ohio’s

oldest & largest renewable energy design and installation firms  Implement Solar Electric, Wind, & Solar Thermal systems throughout Ohio and surrounding states  Offices in Athens, Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Toledo and Southern Michigan  Over 240 systems installed (more than 4.5 MegaWatts)

Copyright 2009 Dovetail Solar and Wind

39 of 42

Discussion and Q&A
Siobhan C. Pritchard Dovetail Solar & Wind
(513) 535-7445
spritchard@dovetailsolar.com

www.dovetailsolar.com

Commercial Solar, Pitched Metal Roof
 Payback of under 10 years on roof or ground mounts  Bowman and Landes Turkey Farms, New Carlisle, OH,

51kW

Commercial Flat Roof
 Fortin Ironworks, Columbus, OH 69kW

Copyright 2009 Dovetail Solar and Wind

40 of 42

Commercial Metal Roof
 Downing Enterprises, near Akron, OH, 44.8kW

Dual Purpose Raised Solar Structures

Challenges
 Costs  Financing Z i Zoning  Permitting  FAA-- https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/portal.jsp

Copyright 2009 Dovetail Solar and Wind

41 of 42

FAA Criteria
 Within 10,000 feet of an airport,  Within 5,000 feet of a public use heliport,  Any highway, railroad or other traverse way whose

p prescribed adjusted height would exceed standards, j g ,
 When requested by the FAA,  Any construction or alteration located on a public

use airport or heliport regardless of height or location,  Within an “undetermined” distance of a navigational beacon

Discussion and Q&A

Dovetail Solar & Wind Siobhan Pritchard SouthwesternOhio (513) 535-7445 spritchard@dovetailsolar.com www.dovetailsolar.com

Copyright 2009 Dovetail Solar and Wind

42 of 42