Boulder, Colorado has been on my solar radar for a number of years. It’s one of the cities that I covered in 2009 when part of my job was tracking solar rebates. They were generous then—around $3/watt… less so now. But those generous rebates and other factors have created a beautiful and inspiring solar community, although it’s not a perfect solar world.

The last time I was in Boulder was about 20 years ago. Since then, it has grown from a progressive University and renewable energy research town (NREL is there) to an upscale, progressive, outdoorsy Denver suburb and bedroom community of about 100,000 people. For those in the San Francisco Bay area, think Burlingame with snow and lots of visible solar roofs.

Beyond the solar visibility, the town is just flat-out eco-friendly. There are bike lanes everywhere here. Some are in the roads and other paths are hidden behind homes in a tree-lined bike alley system. Although I arrived just after a December snowstorm, I continued to see Boulderites using those bike lanes, and as the snow melted, their numbers increased. (I’m told that the warmer months are especially filled with local bike commuters.)

Boulder’s commitment to the bicycle lifestyle despite potentially harsh weather is reflective of its commitment to solar and renewable energy. Yes, there’s snow, but that hasn’t dampened residential solar too much, though I do have one solar friend who wishes someone would create a device that could cost effectively remove snow-covered panels more automatically.

Beyond its residents, the City of Boulder has committed to 1.7 megawatts of solar, and their installs are very public. They can be seen on recreation centers and even on a huge municipal building on Boulder’s main shopping district, Pearl St. Here’s a shot of the public recreation center with rows and rows of solar thermal collectors.

The city’s installs are a great symbol of green energy commitment, but that wasn’t enough for Boulder residents. Though you have to credit Xcel’s initially generous rebates for part of Boulder’s solar boom, some residents thought the investor owned utility became half-hearted once they approached Colorado’s mandated RPS quotas. Many saw Xcel starting to get in the way of distributed solar (and growing solar jobs and businesses) through abruptly slashing rebates, attempting to limit net metering, or impose new solar interconnection fees.

Rather than constantly battle Xcel through the Public Utility Commission, petitions, and protests, Boulder residents recently voted to unplug Xcel and create their own municipal utility. Although residents were warned that their utility costs could rise as a result, Boulder citizens nevertheless decided to become energy independent with an emphasis on green power, though it wasn’t a unanimous decision. The new Boulder utility’s goal is to create an energy mix of 84 megawatts of natural gas with a mix of 40 megawatts or more of rooftop solar power, and about 55 megawatts of wind, thereby reducing the city’s coal power needs to zero.

I can’t tell you how common it was for me to see solar panels on so many homes. Many homes I saw had solar hot water panels as well as solar PV, despite solar thermal incentives being less. So, how did Boulder become such a robust solar town?

In some ways, Boulder’s rapid solar growth is a reflection of today’s solar PV consolidation. Initially generous incentives from Xcel, combined with a state RPS, and the introduction of the residential 30% Federal ITC inspired this already green-minded community to demand lots of solar.

New installation companies were born to meet the demand, and that competition drove prices down — way down. In 2009 — before modules prices hit their lows of today — it was not uncommon to see installed residential prices at around $5/watt, or even in the $4’s. Today, my solar friends tell me it’s still in that range.

That kind of lowest-priced competition was great for consumers, but not sustainable for new under capitalized solar businesses, and I’m told that several installers have closed their shops. Nevertheless, their installs remain.

From a marketing perspective, my solar friends tell me that neighbors greatly influenced each other. That is, once one house on the block went solar, neighbors became curious and got a quote for themselves, and then eventually installed their own, often with the same company.

It’s unclear whether Boulder’s success can be repeated in larger cities. This is by no means a formula, but in summary, here are the points that seem to have contributed to Boulder’s solar growth:

A green-minded community. Boulder’s citizens were already progressive and open to green energy. That’s not to say that less progressive communities aren’t also open to solar, but far more customer and community education is needed than for Boulder.
A green-minded state. States with a renewable portfolio standard (RPS) compel utilities to act. Clearly, Xcel responded to the letter of the law, providing generous rebates at first. However, their perceived reluctance to go beyond the law’s requirements made the majority of their citizens vote for their own utility. That’s very difficult for any community, especially larger cities. Nevertheless, Boulder made it possible. We’ll have to see how their green aspirations compare to the reality of owning and operating their very own green municipal utility.
Generous rebates and incentives. Studies have shown that solar has to make financial sense to be adopted. Cities may not need $3/watt rebates with the recent fall in solar module prices, but every incentive helps, and Boulder has a lot of them. For now, these subsidies are still needed for rapid solar growth and states, cities, and utilities need to support them as they did in Boulder.
A committed local government. Though libertarians may disagree, it’s a lot easier to change our energy habits when local governments lead by example. Not only does the city incentivize solar for its citizens, but Boulder has also installed solar for its own energy needs. In many ways, visible solar panels are advertisements by themselves. They make viewers curious and ask themselves if they can go solar too. Typically, the answer is yes, but these people might never asked that question without seeing the city’s example.
Competition that lowered prices. There’s no doubt that competition dramatically lowered prices compared to other states; however it wasn’t sustainable when rebates were abruptly reduced. The recent consolidation of installers has allowed the strongest companies to survive, and now it remains to be seen if these survivors can thrive in Boulder. There are still plenty of empty roofs, but prices must stay competitive, especially without the generous incentives.
Federal Incentives. Until 2016, even if Boulder’s local rebates diminish or disappear, Boulder and the rest of the U.S. will still have a 30% Federal Investment Tax Credit to offset the initial cost, as well as provide solar leasing companies a way to provide residents with a low up front cost option. Right now this is a must to keep solar growing in Colorado and elsewhere, especially now that 1603 Treasury Grant Program has expired. If PACE programs could get back on track, that couldn’t hurt either.
It really was inspiring to travel through Boulder and see so many solar roofs in such a concentrated area. There may be more solar installed here in Los Angeles, but the city is so spread out, it requires a sharp eye to catch a solar roof.

I’m sure there’s much more to learn about Boulder’s success and mistakes, so feel free to take a trip and see it for yourself. You’ll not only see a great solar community, but the food is first class and the complete strangers that I met were extremely friendly and helpful to a visiting and some times lost L.A. visitor.

Know of any other hot solar communities like Boulder? (Recently, RenewableEnergyWorld.com blogger John Farreil cited Gainsville, Florida for its FiT program.) Please share in the comments section below and let us know what was behind the growth. I’m looking forward to seeing how other cities are UnThinking Solar.

Tor Valenza a.k.a. “Solar Fred” advises solar companies on marketing, communications, and public relations. Contact him through UnThink Solar or follow him on Twitter @SolarFred.

Solar Energy

The information and views expressed in this blog post are solely those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyWorld.com or the companies that advertise on this Web site and other publications. This blog was posted directly by the author and was not reviewed for accuracy, spelling or grammar.

The Colorado Public Utilities Commission today denied Xcel Energy’s request for an interim rate increase of $100 million.

Xcel had estimated that it would suffer at least a $50 million revenue gap if an interim electricity-rate increase was not approved by the commission.

The commission said Xcel failed to demonstrate that it would be adversely impacted by maintaining current rates during the six-month period while its request for a $141.9 million rate increase is fully reviewed.

“I view this in a simplistic fashion,” said chairman Joshua Epel. “There is one key term, ‘adverse.’ There has to be a true adverse impact. I don’t feel there is a demonstration of adverse impact.”

Karen Hyde, Xcel’s vice president of rates and regulatory affairs, said the interim hike was necessary.

“Obviously, we are very disappointed. We outlined what the negative impact would be as of Jan. 1, and we are sorry the commission didn’t recognize the adverse impact of the delay in rate relief,” said Hyde.

The commission is expected to issue its written ruling by Jan. 20, but the ruling is likely to come out sooner, said Terry Bote, spokesman for the commission.

A 2010 law passed by the legislature allows the PUC to consider interim rates if the utility shows it will be adversely affected by the revenue deficiency during the time period required to hold hearings on the suspended rates. Xcel Energy had asked that the interim rates be implemented by Jan. 21.

Consumer advocates, some of Colorado’s biggest companies, senior citizens and utility regulators opposed Xcel’s bid for the no-hearing, interim hike.

During Wednesday’s regular commissioner’s meeting, no one spoke on behalf of the interim increase or against it.

Commission staff briefly outlined Xcel’s position and the position of opponents. The consensus among those who opposed the interim hike was that Xcel failed to show how it would be hurt financially by waiting for a full rate-case hearing.

The PUC staff also opposed the interim rate request and challenged the $100 million figure, saying that no more than $52 million should be considered in the interim increase.

Mark Jaffe: 303-954-1912 or mjaffe@denverpost.com

ALAMOSA — Alamosa’s recreation center will soon be partially powered by the sun.

Custom Solar completed a 101-killowatt solar project this week that will provide a portion of the power needs for the rec center. Custom Solar Owner Willie Mein, PE, said the system would be turned on in about a week, on January 6.

The approximately $360,000 project employed many local individuals and companies while under construction in the last month, and Mein said he was impressed by the quality of workmanship afforded locally.

“People were motivated to work. It was great to see,” he said.

“We hired over a dozen local folks to help us with the installation.”

He said the competence of the local work force was outstanding.

Mein called Jessie Lopez with Lopez Electric the project’s “most valuable player,” and said he hoped Custom Solar can work with Lopez Electric on additional projects in the San Luis Valley in the future. Custom Solar is currently bidding on another local solar project and hopes to return.

Mein also praised Justin Clark who performed many tasks on the project including running heavy machinery.

“He was our guy on the job in the field.”

Custom Solar rented a great deal of equipment from J&J Rentals locally and appreciated doing business with American Electric, Monte Vista Cooperative, Southwest Ready Mix, Alamosa Lumber, Big R and others.

Mein also praised a crew out of Crestone run by Jason Anderson.

Mein was also impressed by the professionalism and accessibility of the city staff.

“The city manager and building inspector have all been outstanding,” Mein said. “It’s our experience as contractors and solar installers the permitting process can be very difficult and we found it to be really accommodating here. It’s been a breath of fresh air to work with the local city government. They have been fantastic, accessible, service oriented, reasonable, nice and available. It couldn’t have gone better.”

The project itself provided some challenges with cold weather during construction in the last four weeks, and a trench had to be dug 1,000 feet from the solar installation site behind the ball fields to the rec center, but the local work force and construction community more than made up for any difficulties, Mein said.

The 442 photovoltaic panels encompassing 17 arrays are set up on a 100×325-foot area. Total capacity of the system is 101.66 KW which can produce 172,374 kilowatt hours per year at a retail value of $20,685, by Mein’s conservative estimate.

Environmentally, this project takes the place of 15,250 pounds of coal on a monthly basis and prevents a great deal of carbon dioxide and harmful chemicals from entering the atmosphere and 10,675 gallons of water from being consumed.

“I am a believer in solar,” Mein said. “It’s why we do it.”

Custom Solar, headquartered in Boulder, has been in business about four years and installs both residential and commercial systems. The project for the Alamosa recreation center is the first the company has constructed in Alamosa “and hopefully not our last,” Mein said. “We are looking at some other projects.”

Although this system will not provide all of the rec center’s power needs, it will help, Mein explained.

The City of Alamosa had initially considered a solar parking structure like a carport in a portion of the recreation center parking lot. It would have provided some of the rec center’s power needs as well as a covered area for outdoor events. Mein said that was a novel idea and he would still be interested in pursuing a project like that. As financial arrangements progressed, the project evolved from a parking structure to a separate solar array. Custom Solar remained as the solar installer.

Mein commended Mayor Kathy Rogers and the rest of city council for not scrapping the project but moving forward with an alternative.

Custom Solar owns the solar facility but the city has contracted to purchase the power generated from it.

Posted: Wednesday, Dec 28th, 2011
BY: Ruth Heide, Courier editor

Corrections and clarifications: The original version of this story misreported the number of minutes of outages that have been avoided thanks to the installation of the smart grid. The actual number is 28,000 minutes per feeder, and one feeder serves about 2,500 customers. The original version of this story also attributed a statement to former city councilman Steve Pomerance that was incorrect because the reporter gave Pomerance the wrong figure for customer minutes out. Finally, this story said that MetaVu, the company that evaluated the smart grid for Xcel, characterized some of the lessons learned in Boulder as mistakes. MetaVu never used the word “mistake” in its report to refer to the lessons Xcel learned through the smart grid project.

Xcel Energy officials say the company has finished its SmartGridCity project in Boulder, and now they are asking the Public Utilities Commission for permission to recoup the project’s full cost by charging Colorado ratepayers another $16.5 million.

“SmartGridCity has not only provided us with a wealth of useful information that we are currently using in the development of our grid modernization approach, it is set up so that it will continue to provide us with valuable information as we test new technologies and cost-savings concepts,” said Michael Lamb, Xcel’s managing director for business, in testimony filed with the PUC.

When Xcel Energy began its project to build a demonstration smart grid in Boulder in 2008, the utility estimated that its contribution to the cost of the grid would be $15 million and that investors would fund the rest of the project.

But over the next couple of years, Xcel’s portion of the costs ballooned to about $45 million. At the end of 2009, Xcel asked the PUC for permission to increase customer rates across Colorado to recoup those costs.

Earlier this year, the commissioners ruled that Xcel could recover $27.9 million of its costs, but they said Xcel could not recoup an additional $16.5 million until Xcel “demonstrates to our satisfaction that it has completed the unfinished aspects of the (SmartGridCity) project.” Xcel also agreed to cap the total amount that the company could charge customers for the SmartGridCity project to $44.5 million.

Explaining their decision, the commissioners wrote, “We are concerned whether (SmartGridCity) is today slated to achieve enough of its potential to justify its higher-than-anticipated costs. … We believe that, in a very real sense, the project is still in the development stage and that (Xcel) has not yet fully evaluated the capabilities of (SmartGridCity) nor has the company assured us that those capabilities will likely be realized.”

In mid-December, Xcel Energy filed hundreds of pages of documents that seek to show that the utility has both finished the project and evaluated its capabilities.

As part of the project, Xcel installed monitoring devices on 4,600 transformers and four substations that serve Boulder. The utility also upgraded 24,000 meters — or about half of all meters in Boulder — and installed 200 miles of fiber-optic cable to allow the components of the grid to communicate with one another.

Xcel notes that, while the smart grid has improved the utility’s ability to serve Boulder, the improvements may not be immediately obvious to customers, who tend to associate smart grids with “customer-facing” devices, such as gadgets that can deliver real-time energy-use data or allow customers to program when certain devices in their homes turn on.

Lamb said the customer perspective was “completely understandable,” but he said that Xcel has found the market for in-home devices that would take advantage of the smart grid to be immature.

From the utility’s perspective, the smart grid has allowed the company to improve service. For example, the smart grid has allowed Xcel to reduce the number of “customer minutes out” by 28,000 annually per feeder — each of which serves about 2,500 customers — and reduce outage durations by 382,000 minutes across the smart grid service area. Before the smart grid, Xcel had to pinpoint outages based on phone calls from customers, but now the utility can remotely “ping” monitoring devices in Boulder to tell where the outages are. The “smart” monitoring devices also allow the utility to proactively reroute power around trouble spots.

Smart grid customers who are served by Xcel feeders that were upgraded to automatically reduce the voltage between the substation and the customer’s home or business also saved an average of $18 a year on their bills. And the smart grid has essentially eliminated voltage fluctuations in Boulder, reducing complaints about such situations from between 30 and 50 a year to zero.

Former Boulder city councilman Steve Pomerance, who has followed the issues surrounding Boulder’s smart grid, said Friday that he agrees there is some value to SmartGridCity.

“Yes, there’s value — the question is, ‘How much?’” Pomerance said.

Pomerance argues that the smart grid costs more than it’s worth, regardless of small increases in reliability or service.

“Would you pay 50 million bucks to do that?” he said. “There is nobody in the universe who would even pay a tenth of that to accomplish that.”

Pomerance also questions the wisdom of installing an expensive fiber-optic cable for communication purposes rather than relying on radio transmissions or the Internet. And in general, Pomerance said Xcel would have done better to launch a smaller and less expensive smart grid demonstration project.

Xcel Energy admits that the lessons learned from the smart grid include what worked as well as what didn’t work. For example, Xcel officials said that in the future, the company would try to take full advantage of existing communications channels — from cell networks to radio transmissions — before installing more cable.

And Xcel learned that it may not make business sense to upgrade all customers’ meters to “smart meters,” since the existing meters already allow for automatic meter-reading that doesn’t require a human meter reader. Xcel also learned that, in most cases, it makes sense to replace components of its distribution system with “smarter” components only when the components have reached the end of their lives.

MetaVu, a company hired by Xcel to evaluate the smart grid’s value, said in a report that lessons learned in Boulder represent a value to all of Xcel’s 1.36 million Colorado customers.

“The project informed both capabilities (Xcel) should consider, but just as importantly, those that it may want to disregard, at least presently,” the report reads. “In doing so (Xcel) may have avoided hundreds of millions of dollars in investments, and associated rate increases, that would have created insufficient value for customers relative to costs.”

Xcel also mentions in its filings that the November election in Boulder — when voters approved two measures that give the city permission to break from Xcel and start a municipal utility — should not affect the company’s ability to recoup its costs.

“We and our customers have obtained significant value from the project through what we have learned from it,” the document reads. “The Boulder vote does not negate that. If Boulder goes forward with its municipalization efforts, it is likely to be a three- to five-year process, giving us time not only to complete ongoing pilot (projects) but also to undertake new ones.”

City of Boulder staffers are aware of the filings, but the city has not decided whether to file its own responses to the document.

“The city is aware that Xcel has made this filing with the PUC and is reviewing the documents submitted,” said city spokesman Patrick von Keyserling. “No decision regarding whether to intervene will occur until our review is completed.”

Contact Camera Staff Writer Laura Snider at 303-473-1327 or sniderl@dailycamera.com.

Xcel Energy wants to raise an extra $142 million next year, with the money coming from another $4 a month on the average family bill and $5 on small businesses.

So that’s where the money would come from; the question is, where would it go?

That rate increase will cover costs such costs as $3.1 million for new equipment on power plants to curb mercury pollution, $400,000 for an employee-recognition fund and salary increases of 2.5 percent to 4 percent for workers.

There are dozens of costs and charges in the 10,000 pages of testimony and charts Xcel has filed with the Colorado Public Utilities Commission in support of the rate request.

All together, they would allow Xcel up to a 10.75 percent return on its investment. Currently, Xcel gets 10.5 percent, although it has said in the past that it rarely achieves that high a return.

“I don’t know if anyone in this economy can expect a 10.75 percent return,” said Bill Levis, executive director of the state Office of Consumer Counsel, which represents consumers in rate cases.

“There are a lot of elements in this rate request,” Levis said. “It would be the third increase in three years, so we are looking at everything carefully.”

Xcel’s rates have increased by $391 million since 2007, raising bills by about 20 percent.

Xcel filed the rate request with the PUC in November and it will be subject to a lengthy review and public hearings.

If approved, the rate hike would give Xcel total revenues in the state of $1.6 billion next year.

But Xcel is also seeking an immediate $100 million interim rate request that would go on bills in January.

That request could — under a clause in the 2010 Clean Air-Clean Jobs Act — be granted by the PUC without a hearing or public comment.

“The clause says the PUC may grant an interim increase, it doesn’t say it shall,” Levis said.

If the PUC was to grant such an interim rate hike, it would be a first in Colorado. If the final increase is less than $100 million, Xcel said it would give customers a credit.

“We have made $760 million in investments and we have costs to recover,” said Karen Hyde, a vice president with Xcel subsidiary Public Service Company of Colorado.

While the last rate case was in 2009, and went into effect in 2010, it was based on 2008 costs, Hyde said. “So we are catching up on four years,” she said.

Some of the key elements in the rate request include:

• $52.6 million to pay for absorbing 300 megawatts of generation that Xcel had been selling to Black Hill Energy. Xcel planned as early as 2004 to let the wholesale power contract lapse and use the power for its customers. But it’s taking on the costs of paying for that power generation at a time when it already has excess capacity.

• $13 million for the initial expenses of retiring coal-fired power plants around Denver to cut air pollution under the Clean Air-Clean Jobs Act.

• $23 million for additional property taxes for the new power plants and facilities the utility has built.

• $9.7 million for a program to cut down trees killed by the pine bark beetle infestation that threaten some of the company’s 18,100 miles of transmission lines. The dying trees are an ongoing problem, according to the company.

• $16 million in pension obligations to Xcel employees.

Among the other items in the request are a number of environmental, renewable-energy and energy-efficiency initiatives. There is a $3.2 million increase in the cost of chemicals to control other pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide.

Xcel is also seeking $2.3 million for an experiment that combined solar energy and coal at its Cameo plant near Rifle.

The $4.5 million project, done with Abengoa Solar, the U.S. subsidiary of Spanish company Abengoa SA, used a solar heating system to cut coal consumption by preheating the water with concentrating solar mirrors spread over 6.4 acres.

After the experiment, the aging Cameo coal plant was closed.

The rate request also includes $284,000 for a research project to develop energy storage — in essence a battery — which could store renewable energy.

In an e-mail protesting the rate request, one customer, Elouise Ohlson, said she was frustrated because Xcel keeps promoting energy and cost savings but still keeps raising rates.

“There is nothing to be gained here if they keep asking for and getting rate increases,” Ohlson said.

“My suggestion is to take into account middle-class incomes that do not increase or may be so low they do not keep up with the cost-of-living increase,” Ohlson wrote. “Another suggestion is to advise Xcel Energy to reduce incomes of the high- end executives.”

Mark Jaffe: 303-954-1912 or mjaffe@denverpost.com

Xcel’s proposed $142 million rate hike *

$52.6 million

To cover the expiration of a wholesale power contract with Black Hills Energy

$31 million

Depreciation charges on new facilities and for retiring old facilities

$23.2 million

Additional property taxes on new facilities

$23.1 million

for operating and maintenance costs on Xcel’s power distribution system

$16.4 million

in pension expenses

$13 million

to retire old coal-fired power plants to cut pollution under the Clean Air-Clean Jobs Act

$9.7 million

to cut down trees killed by pine bark beetles that threaten power lines

$24 million

in various charges and projects

* These cost increases are partly offset by $51 million in additional revenues, tax credits and lower borrowing costs

A Colorado Solar Energy Industries Association team today received a $491,000 federal grant to develop a system that will cut red tape and cost for solar panel installations.

“Every municipality has been going about trying to set standards in a piecemeal fashion and that has added to cost,” said Neal Lurie, executive director of the Colorado solar association.

Non-hardware costs, such as permitting, installation, design and maintenance account for up to 40 percent of the total cost of installed rooftop system, according to the US Department of Energy, which awarded the grant.

In a report released earlier this year, San Francisco-based SunRun, a company that leases solar panels, estimated local permitting and inspection added $2,500 to the average residential installation nation-wide.

The average residential solar installation is now between $12,000 and $18,000 and half the costs are now for permitting, regulatory, interconnection, customer acquisition, installation, and other similar charges, Lurie said.

The COSEIA team will work with municipalities to develop consistent lists of best practices, on-line tools and other standards, with the goal of cutting application costs by 25 percent, Lurie said.

“The Energy Department is investing in this Colorado project to unleash the community’s solar potential by making it faster, easier, and cheaper to finance and deploy solar power,” Energy Secretary Steven Chu said in a statement.

The Colorado Solar Energy Industries Association team also includes: the Rocky Mountain Institute, Denver, Boulder County, Fort Collins, Golden, and the American Solar Energy Society.

Mark Jaffe: 303-954-1912 or MJaffe@denverpost.com

WASHINGTON, Dec. 1, 2011 /PRNewswire/ — The Coalition for Affordable Solar Energy (CASE) announced today that dozens more new companies have joined the coalition in the last week, ahead of a vote at the International Trade Commission, to urge policymakers to quickly find an equitable resolution to the SolarWorld anti-trade complaint. In its first week since its founding on November 8, CASE grew from 25 companies to 52 companies. In its second week, CASE doubled again to about 100 companies. Now, in just three weeks, CASE represents 132 companies and 13,134 direct solar employees at those solar firms, or 13% of the U.S. solar industry workforce.

“We demand a resolution to this trade dispute before irreparable damage is done to the great progress that has been made in the domestic solar industry towards making affordable solar energy a reality,” said George Hershman, Vice President of Swinerton Builders Renewable Energy and a new CASE member from one of the nation’s longest established and most reputable construction companies. “We have over 1,100 employees working across the country who would be negatively impacted by higher solar panel prices. Let’s not move backwards when together we can and should be making huge strides forward.”
CASE member companies employ solar professionals across every major region and in more than two dozen states, including Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Maryland, North Carolina, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Virginia, among others.
“The rapid price reduction of solar panels in the last year has opened up new markets in the U.S. where solar was not previously cost competitive with grid power,” says Joe Bono, CEO of Solar Universe, a new CASE member representing 200 jobs. “This is an opportunity for more jobs and lower utility bills, a trend America needs.”
“The solar industry is uniting in its opposition to SolarWorld’s actions, which threaten to stall decades of solar industry growth and development.” said Jigar Shah, co-founder of CASE and founder of SunEdison. We cannot prioritize 3% of American solar industry jobs over the remaining 97%. We cannot prioritize the fate of one company over the success of one of America’s fastest growing industries, particularly given its strategic importance to our nation’s future.”
To learn more about the Coalition for Affordable Solar Energy (CASE), please visit our website: www.coalition4affordablesolar.org .

ALAMOSA, Colo.–The San Luis Valley in southern Colorado is an ideal location for capturing solar energy. But like so many communities, people of this mountain basin will only embrace a future of renewable energy if it fits comfortable with its past.

One of six counties in this high-desert valley surrounded by majestic mountains, Alamosa officials are eager to develop solar for much-needed revenue and to diversify the economy. The county welcomed a group of journalists earlier this month as part of a fellowship organized by the Institutes for Journalism & Natural Resources.

Even with a fabulous solar resource with an average of 340 days a year of sunshine, the county is finding that adopting solar technology is complicated in a place steeped in generations of farming and ranching. It’s a story that’s playing out in many communities drawn by the potential of renewable energy but unsure on how best to move forward.

Water is high on the list of concerns in Alamosa. Agriculture is the economic and social backbone of the valley, which produces high-value products such as barley for Coors beer, hay for cattle, and vegetables. Any solar technology that competes with agriculture products for water is certain to see opposition.
“It is our economy,” said Steve Vandiver, the general manager of the Rio Grade Water Conservation District, adding that the area sees six inches of precipitation a year. “If all that goes away, we have nothing left.”
So far, three solar farms have been developed and a fourth using novel concentrating photovoltaic technology, financed in part by a Department of Energy loan guarantee, is now in construction. Each project is using solar photovoltaics, an approach that requires very little water compared with steam-producing concentrating solar thermal technology.

Community activists, meanwhile, are wary of any development that transforms the valley into an industrial zone. At least one project, which would have placed 6,000 large solar dishes on a wetland, was blocked by local activists concerned about the size and noise of a proposed plant.
“People would like there to be good solar development here, but we really want it to be good. And we know once a bad plant is built, the bar will be so low that we’ll have a lot of bad plants,” said rancher Julie Sullivan, who fought a project that would have placed on an adjacent property. “That’s why people are trying to stay on top of it.”
Industrial scale
Compared with its neighbors, Colorado is relatively far along in renewable energy. The state has a mandate to produce 30 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2020. Although it has excellent resources, New Mexico has about one-third (PDF) the renewable energy production as Colorado.

But as is often the case, transmission lines are the current bottleneck to any further solar development in the San Luis basin, according to Alamosa County Commissioner Darius Allen. The county would like to export energy outside the valley, but its current infrastructure means it’s tapped out for the foreseeable future. A transmission line proposal from utility Xcel Energy, reportedly opposed by a wealthy landowner, was recently stopped.
To some extent, people in the San Luis Valley are being forced into changing their way of life. A shortage of water over the past several years led area officials to devise a plan to remove an estimated 40,000 acres from agricultural use in Alamosa County and as much as 15 percent of farm land from the whole valley this decade.

Each time that a farmer retires a plot of land normally used to grow potatoes, it’s the equivalent of removing about $6 million from the local economy, said Allen. Even though finished solar plants don’t employ many people and the path toward more development isn’t totally clear, solar at least offers the prospect local economic development, he said.

“If we start losing that much land, how are we going to back-fill some of that?” Allen said. “With the solar development, I think it’s able to come in here and back-fill some of our needs in the future.”

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo., Nov. 28, 2011 — /PRNewswire/ — Governor John Hickenlooper will be in Colorado Springs Tuesday, November 29, for the official Groundbreaking of Colorado Springs’ first Community Solar Garden. The event will take place at Venetucci Farm, located at 5210 S. U.S. Highway 85 at 10:30 a.m. Use Venetucci website or call for directions.

At 10:15 a.m., the Governor and other state and local elected officials will be placing the first solar panels on racking- Media welcome to join.

Local dignitaries will be on hand for the groundbreaking, including Mayor Steve Bach, City Council President, Scott Hente, President Pro Tem Jan Martin, Colorado Springs Utilities CEO Jerry Forte, State Representative Pete Lee, Pikes Peak Community Foundation Executive Director Michael Hannigan, and SunShare founder David Amster-Olszewski. SunShare is the start-up company that has contracted with Colorado Springs Utilities and Pikes Peak Community Foundation, who owns Venetucci Farm, to develop the Colorado Springs Community Solar Garden, the first public-private partnership of its kind in the nation.

The 575kW groundmounted solar array at the Venetucci Farm was designed, engineered and installed by RGS Energy, the commercial division of Real Goods Solar. The 2,500 solar panels that make up the system are available for lease to all customers of Colorado Springs Utilities. “The community solar garden allows citizens to participate in solar, without the average $25,000 upfront cost of a set of panels on their own roof,” SunShare founder David Amster-Olszewski said. “Leasing two panels can reduce the average electric bill by ten percent.”

Colorado Springs Utilities will provide a monetary incentive, up to 30 percent of the panel cost, for customers that subscribe to the community solar garden. Utilities’ 2011 budget for incentives is limited, available on a first-come first served basis, and expires in early December.

SunShare is headquartered in Colorado Springs. The company plans to build community solar gardens in several cities along the Front Range. Amster-Olszewski is a Colorado College graduate and recently moved back to Colorado Springs to start SunShare.

The Colorado Springs Community Solar Garden Groundbreaking Event will run from 10:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. RSVPs can be sent to sarah.wood@mysunshare.com.

Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/11/28/4084517/governor-hickenlooper-to-help.html#ixzz1f3DtuOx0