DOCSLIB.ORG

Re-Powering America's Land Initiative: Project Tracking Matrix October 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

RE-POWERING AMERICA’S LAND INITIATIVE: PROJECT TRACKING MATRIX OCTOBER 2020 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recognizes the overall environmental benefit of siting renewable energy projects on contaminated properties. EPA’s 417 RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS RE-Powering America’s Land Initiative, tracks renewable energy projects on WITH OVER 1.8 GIGAWATT INSTALLED CAPACITY formerly contaminated lands, landfills, and mine sites to educate stakeholders and encourage future site development.1 This publication includes information about geothermal, biomass, solar and wind installations. EPA has identified current trends 30% in renewable energy development on contaminated lands including: of Sites • 417 renewable energy installations identified to date 91% • 91% of the installations are solar PV in MA Solar • 59% of the installations are located on former landfills • Massachusetts continues to lead the nation in siting solar on landfills and PV other sites with roughly 30% of all installations in the U.S. 6% • New York continues to be a top three state with renewable energy on Wind contaminated lands, including two wind installations totaling over 35 MW 417 Renewable Energy Projects, Over 1.8 Gigawatt Installed Capacity • Wyoming has the second most installed capacity out of the states with 16% of the total installed capacity, all of the capacity is from 5 wind installations. To date, the RE-Powering Initiative has identified 417 renewable energy installations on 390 contaminated lands, landfills, and mine sites,2 with a cumulative installed capacity of 1,849.8 megawatts (MW). Approximately 69% of these installations are large-scale systems with a project capacity of 1 MW or more. The renewable energy is used to export energy onto the utility grid, offset onsite energy demands, or power cleanup of contaminated sites. Technologies This document provides summary statistics and analyses regarding the types Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Wind of projects (e.g., system sizes, renewable energy technologies, energy uses) Multiple that have been completed on contaminated properties to date. At the end of Geothermal Biopower this document, EPA includes a project tracking list with basic information that Capacity (MW) is publicly reported about each known, completed installation. In addition to < 2 the completed sites listed in this document, EPA is actively tracking more than 2 - 5 5 - 20 150 renewable energy projects that are in various stages of planning, approval, 20 -35 or construction on contaminated properties. Examination of the information in > 35 this document may assist in the future planning for development of renewable energy installations. Alaska Hawai'i Puerto Rico/Virgin Islands This map is for informational purposes only. The information was gathered from public announcements of renewable energy projects in the form of company press releases, news releases, and, in some cases, conversations with the parties involved. This map may not be a comprehensive representation of all completed renewable energy projects October 2020 on contaminated lands. To provide information on additional projects, please email [email protected]. 1 Using publicly available information, RE-Powering maintains a list of completed renewable energy installations on contaminated sites and landfills. 2 In this document, installation and project refer to a single renewable energy technology installation, while site and location refer to a single contaminated property. A site or location may have more than one installation or project. For example, the former Dave Johnston Mine (one site) has three separate wind installations. Multiple installation details can be seen in the tracking spreadsheet at the end of this document. Office of Communications, Partnerships, and Analysis Office of Land and Emergency Management 1 RE-POWERING AMERICA’S LAND INITIATIVE: PROJECT TRACKING MATRIX OCTOBER 2020 National Deployment Policy Matters RE-Powering has identified renewable energy installations on formerly contaminated The map below shows the impact of “RE-Powering” policies -- procurement lands, landfills, and mine sites in 45 U.S. states and territories. The location of requirements, financial incentives, and other state, local, or utility initiatives for these installations often reflects three factors: available renewable resources (e.g., renewable development of potentially contaminated lands.3 States with sunlight patterns, wind speeds); electricity prices; and incentives or other types of “RE-Powering” policies tend to have the largest numbers of installations. For example, policies. Policies can apply generally to renewable installations (e.g., Renewable Massachusetts has enhanced incentives for landfills and brownfields within its Solar Portfolio Standards) or can be specially designed to encourage renewable energy Renewable Energy Certificate and SMART programs and other well-established development on contaminated lands. policies to streamline redevelopment of these sites. In New Jersey, longstanding utility (PSE&G Solar 4 All) and state (subsection t) programs and policies have supported widespread development of solar on landfills and brownfields. Additional states such as Illinois have been implementing such policies more recently, with expectations of Number of RE-Powering Projects by State and Territory as of Octoberfuture increases 2020 in renewable installations on contaminated lands. 11 1 1 3 4 13 1 Massachusetts - 125 NUMBER OF RE-POWERING 1 35 4 Connecticut - 18 5 3 PROJECTS BY STATE Rhode Island - 10 2 10 2 1 AND TERRITORY 9 1 2 6 New Jersey - 60 22 9 AS OF OCTOBER 2020 1 4 Delaware - 3 1 2 3 Maryland - 10 5 5 2 2 1 1 3 States with RE-Powering Policy States with RE-Powering Projects 4 (# of Projects) States with No RE-Powering 3 Projects or Policy Virgin Islands - 4 Alaska Hawai'i 2 3 This includes policy related to procurement Puerto Rico requirements, financial incentives and state initiatives for development of contaminated lands Virgin Islands 2 Office of Communications, Partnerships, and Analysis Office of Land and Emergency Management RE-POWERING AMERICA’S LAND INITIATIVE: PROJECT TRACKING MATRIX OCTOBER 2020 Inside the Numbers NUMBER OF INSTALLATIONS INSTALLATIONS AND CAPACITY INSTALLATIONS AND CAPACITY 4 Based on current trends, 67% of the BY SITE TYPE BY RENEWABLE TECHNOLOGY BY ENERGY USE renewable energy systems identified Solar and wind projects on landfills/ 245 Installed Energy Installed in the tracking matrix sell power back landfill buffer Technology # Installations Capacity (MW) Production/Use # Installations Capacity (MW) to the grid as wholesale electricity, Renewable energy projects on 100 Solar Photovoltaic 381 1,150.5 Wholesale Electricity 279 1612.2 5 while another 22% provides energy via brownfield sites (PV) Onsite Use - General 46 120.7 community solar projects or for onsite Renewable energy projects on 71 Wind 24 634.2 Rooftop8 38 47.7 use. Systems range from utility-scale Superfund sites6 projects, such as 118.5 MW of wind on Biomass 5 65.1 Onsite Use - 26 12.5 a WY abandoned mine land, to smaller Renewable energy projects on 27 Green Remediation9 current/former federal facilities and Geothermal7 5 1 community-scale projects, such as the Community Owned/ 19 43.7 contaminated properties 0.2-MW community solar installation on Solar PV w/ Wind 1 <0.1 Subscription10 Renewable energy projects on RCRA 21 a Norwood, CO landfill. Unknown 8 12.5 corrective action sites Geothermal w/ 1 <0.1 RE-Powering capitalizes on the Solar PV Onsite Use – Training 1 0.5 opportunity to address contamination Renewable energy projects on 13 mine sites Total 417 1,849.8 Total 417 1,849.8 and support renewable energy implementation to achieve the associated economic and environmental benefits. Installations to date demonstrate the viability INSTALLATIONS AND CAPACITY 45 of projects across all EPA and state BY SITE OWNERSHIP TYPE remediation programs, from powering Ownership Installed States and industrial facilities at sites subject to Type # Installations Capacity (MW) RCRA corrective action to offsetting Municipal 205 443.0 Territories the energy demands at federal facilities Private 150 1,040.7 with ongoing cleanup activities to Unknown 22 102.5 repurposing brownfield and Superfund sites. Federal 21 169.3 4 Some installations can be considered multiple “site types.” For example, a Superfund site on a federal facility would be counted both as a Superfund site and as a federal facility for the purposes of this table; however, sites considered to be multiple site types are counted only Various 6 82.8 once when calculating the total number of sites (417 for October 2020). 5 Includes state brownfields. Non-Profit 5 7.5 6 Includes sites subject to the National Priorities List (NPL), non-NPL sites, and sites subject to removal action under Superfund. 7 One geothermal project, the Guthrie Green project in Tulsa, OK, uses a small solar array to power the geothermal heat pump. University 4 2.8 8 Rooftop installations cited in the Tracking Matrix represent projects on buildings that are sited on land identified as contaminated (primarily brownfields). State 2 0.9 9 Green remediation is the practice of considering all environmental effects of remedy implementation and incorporating options to minimize the environmental footprints of cleanup actions. One such practice is using renewable energy systems to power remediation activities Federal/ 1 0.2 or offset the energy needs associated with cleanup efforts. Projects identified as On-site Green Remediation
Recommended publications
  • Good Energy - 2015 Highlights 4 – 5

    Good Energy - 2015 Highlights 4 – 5

    Annual Report & Financial Statements 2015 Contents Annual Report & Financial Statements Year ended 31 December 2015 2015 Strategic Report Strategic Annual Report Good Energy - 2015 highlights 4 – 5 Strategic Report 6 – 17 Chairman’s Statement 7 – 8 Strategic Review 9 – 11 Chief Executive’s Review 12 – 15 Chief Financial Officer’s Review 16 – 17 Directors’ Report Directors’ The Good Energy Group PLC Board 18 – 19 Directors’ Report 21 – 34 Directors’ Remuneration Report 31 – 34 Independent Auditors’ Report to the members of Good Energy Group PLC 35 – 39 Financial Statements Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income 41 Consolidated Statement of Financial Position 42 Parent Company Statement of Financial Position 43 Financial Statements Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity 44 Parent Company Statement of Changes in Equity 45 Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows 46 Parent Company Statement of Cash Flows 47 Notes to the Financial Statements 48 – 90 Directors and Corporate Resources 91 3 Good Energy - 2015 highlights Revenue Gross profit EBITDA Compound annual growth Compound annual growth Compound annual growth over five years: 26% over five years: 27% over five years: 42% EBITDA is calculated using operating profit before exceptional costs. PBT Non current assets Compound annual growth Compound annual growth over five years: -29% over five years: 37% Financial summary Revenue increased 12% to £64.3m Cash balance £4.8m Gross profit increased by 13% to £21.3m Net debt £54.0m EBITDA increased by 28% to £7.3m Basic (loss) / earnings per share (1.4p) Profit before tax of £0.1m Total dividend for the year maintained at 3.3p 4 Strategic Report Strategic Customer growth Customers Good Energy continues to Electricity customer numbers grew 32% Directors’ Report Directors’ to 68,000 focus on building its customer base and delivering excellent Gas customer numbers rose 55% to 38,800 customer service.
  • Town of Amherst Request for Proposals

    Town of Amherst Request for Proposals

    TOWN OF AMHERST REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR OLD LANDFILL REUSE PROPOSAL Presented by: In partnership with: Letter of Transmittal............................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ 8 1. Evaluation Criteria ............................................................................................................ 10 1.1. Proposal protects the existing landfill caps. ...............................................................................10 1.2. Proposal protects operation of landfill gas systems...................................................................10 1.3. Experience of team proposing project........................................................................................10 1.4. Risk to human, health and the environment..............................................................................11 1.5. Effect on the environment..........................................................................................................11 1.6. Project compatibility with neighboring properties.....................................................................12 1.7. Noise levels from use of site.......................................................................................................12 1.7. Best compensation to Town of Amherst ....................................................................................13
  • BNEF Long Form

    BNEF Long Form

    THE EVOLVING LANDSCAPE FOR EPCS IN US RENEWABLES 14 OCTOBER 2014 SECTION 4. THE PLAYERS This section of the report analyzes players in EPC for solar and wind in the US. About this analysis This section is based mostly on data gathered from companies’ websites. Much of this analysis relies on linking firms to projects in our database, which contains nearly 3,000 wind and solar projects in the US at various stages of development. The information mapping projects to their EPCs is captured in our Industry Intelligence database, available to subscribers of our service. There are a number of assumptions, caveats, and methodological points that are important to note in the context of this analysis; an Appendix at the end of this report identifies these. 4.1. LEAGUE TABLES The charts below show the top EPC firms for solar and wind, ranked strictly in terms of historic activity – ie, this does not reflect any kind of qualitative assessment about firms’ competencies. • Top-ranked solar EPCs includes the three vertically-integrated giants – SunPower, First Solar, and SunEdison – and some EPC specialists, like Bechtel and Fluor, that have performed a small number of very large projects. • The league tables for wind are headlined by Mortenson, IEA, RES Americas, and Blattner (with Blattner under-represented, as explained in the Appendix). Figure 8: Top EPC firms for US utility-scale solar (GW of Figure 9: Top EPC firms for US wind (GW of ‘active’ ‘active’ projects) projects) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0 4 8 12 SunPower MA Mortenson Co First Solar Inc IEA / White Construction MA Mortenson Co RES Americas E Light Wind and Solar Michels Corp Abengoa Blattner Energy Inc Bechtel Power Corp Wanzek Construction SunEdison Fluor Rosendin Electric Inc AMEC Tetra Tech Construction Inc Strata Solar LLC Signal Energy LLC Blymyer Engineers Dashiell Swinerton Inc TVIG / American Helios Blattner Energy Inc Reed & Reed Inc Baker Electric S&C Electric Co Blue Oak Energy Inc Barton Malow Co ARB Jay Cashman, Inc.
  • NEW to Acquire First Australian Asset: Manildra Solar Power Plant 25 June 2018

    NEW to Acquire First Australian Asset: Manildra Solar Power Plant 25 June 2018

    RENEWABLE ENERGY. SUSTAINABLE INVESTING NEW to acquire first Australian asset: Manildra Solar Power Plant 25 June 2018 Questions to the New Energy Solar management team can be addressed to [email protected] 1 Manildra Solar Power Plant – May 2018 Disclaimer This document is prepared by New Energy Solar Manager Pty Limited (ACN 609 166 645) (Investment Manager), a corporate authorised representative (CAR No. 1237667) of Walsh & Company Asset Management Pty Limited (ACN 159 902 708, AFSL 450 257), and investment manager for New Energy Solar Fund (ARSN 609 154 298) (Trust), and New Energy Solar Limited (ACN 609 396 983) (Company). The Trust and the Company (together with their controlled entities) are referred to as the ‘Business’, ‘NEW’ or ‘New Energy Solar’. This document may contain general advice. Any general advice provided has been prepared without taking into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. Before acting on the advice, you should consider the appropriateness of the advice with regard to your objectives, financial situation and needs. This document may contain statements, opinions, projections, forecasts and other material (forward looking statements), based on various assumptions. Those assumptions may or may not prove to be correct. The Investment Manager and its advisers (including all of their respective directors, consultants and/or employees, related bodies corporate and the directors, shareholders, managers, employees or agents of any of them) (Parties) do not make any representation as to the accuracy or likelihood of fulfilment of the forward-looking statements or any of the assumptions upon which they are based. Actual results, performance or achievements may vary materially from any projections and forward looking statements and the assumptions on which those statements are based.
  • How Community Solar Supports American Farmers February 2020

    How Community Solar Supports American Farmers February 2020

    How Community Solar Supports American Farmers February 2020 How Community Solar Supports American Farmers February 2020 Dave Gahl - Senior Director of State Affairs, Northeast www.seia.org 1 How Community Solar Supports American Farmers February 2020 Introduction As family farms are increasingly squeezed to make Community solar lease payments can provide an ends meet, farmers all over the country have found a economic lifeline to farmers, allowing farm operations new revenue stream that helps support their bottom to stay within families. In addition to generating local line: community solar projects. revenue, these projects help states make progress toward meeting their clean energy and climate goals. This fast-growing segment of the solar industry is now authorized in 19 states and Washington D.C. This short paper explains the community solar Companies specializing in community solar are model, describes the typical arrangements farmers increasingly negotiating deals with farmers to lease enter into with companies that build these projects, portions of their land to build these projects. As more presents five case studies from different states and more states continue encouraging the growth of showing the ways in which agricultural operations community solar, farmers – and landowners more have benefited from community solar on their generally – should be aware of the benefits of this property, and offers resources to help landowners potential new revenue stream. and solar firms. SEIA intends to update this document periodically and add new case studies from across the country. What is Community Solar? Community solar allows residents, small businesses, organizations, municipalities and others to receive credit on their electricity bills for the power produced from their portion of a solar array, offsetting their electricity costs.
  • Kenneth P. Ksionek Community Solar Farm at the Stanton Energy Center

    Kenneth P. Ksionek Community Solar Farm at the Stanton Energy Center

    ANNOUNCING THE KENNETH P. KSIONEK COMMUNITY SOLAR FARM AT THE STANTON ENERGY CENTER The new solar farm, producing 13 megawatts (MW) of green power, has joined OUC’s family of innovative, sustainable solutions and is among the first to sit atop a closed byproduct landfill. Community Solar Farm Dedication_OBJ Insert_V2.indd 1 11/29/17 11:55 AM KENNETH P. KSIONEK COMMUNITY SOLAR FARM BY THE NUMBERS 37,544 SOLAR 2,100 PANELS HOMES 24 POWERED ACRES 539 OF LAND TONS OF STEEL 129 MPH WIND PROTECTION OUC’s Kenneth P. Ksionek Community Solar Farm is among the first in the nation to sit atop a byproduct landfill. Covering 24 acres at the Stanton Energy Center (SEC) in east Orlando, nearly 40,000 solar panels provide 13 megawatts (MW) of energy – enough to power 2,100 homes. The new farm doubles OUC’s solar capacity, allowing both commercial and residential customers who own or rent to reap the benefits of solar power without the upfront costs and hassle of installing their own rooftop array. TO SIGN UP, VISIT OUC.COM/COMMUNITYSOLAR. THE MAN BEHIND THE RELIABLE ONE KENNETH P. KSIONEK – A POWERFUL LEGACY After 32 years for 19 straight years compared to He was the driving force behind an of service and Florida investor-owned utilities, electric vehicle (EV) partnership with a plethora of according to data submitted to the the City of Orlando, leading to the accomplishments, Florida Public Service Commission. community being named one of the Ken Ksionek will Top 10 Most EV-Ready cities in the Under his tenure, SEC has retire as General United States.
  • Celebrating U.S. Solar Contractors

    Celebrating U.S. Solar Contractors

    July 2017 www.solarpowerworldonline.com Technology • Development • Installation CELEBRATING U.S. SOLAR CONTRACTORS Cover_July 2017_Vs3.indd 1 6/30/17 8:32 AM HONORING THE BEST OF THE INDUSTRY The 2017 class of Top Solar Contractors is dedicated to bringing solar to the United States. The following pages honor the hard-working efforts of 500 solar companies across the country. The Top 500 List Begins On The Next Page Lists By Market p.52 Lists By Top States p.87 Lists By Service p.68 Contractors Across America p.105 INTRO Top 500_Vs2kp.indd 1 6/30/17 9:16 AM = UTILITY CONTRACTOR = RESIDENTIAL CONTRACTOR = COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL CONTRACTOR = OFF-GRID CONTRACTOR = EPC = INSTALLATION SUBCONTRACTOR = ELECTRICAL SUBCONTRACTOR = DEVELOPER = ROOFTOP CONTRACTOR Pie pieces represent all services and markets in which a company works RANK & STATE/ PRIMARY TOTAL KILOWATTS ALL ALL PRIMARY COMPANY CITY TERRITORY FOUNDED EMPLOYEES MARKET INSTALLED INSTALLED SERVICES MARKETS SERVICE KILOWATTS IN 2016 OFFERED SERVED 21 CSI Electrical Contractors Santa Fe Springs CA 1990 1000 1,231,825 281,805 22 E Light Electric Services Englewood CO 1998 255 1,752,050 276,430 23 Moss Fort Lauderdale FL 2004 600 790,015 244,015 24 Vivint Solar Lehi UT 2011 5000 680,000 221,500 25 DKD Electric Albuquerque NM 1978 129 370,120 220,400 26 Bombard Renewable Energy Las Vegas NV 1982 800 420,033 219,494 27 SunEnergy1 Mooresville NC 2009 211 706,000 214,000 28 DEPCOM Power Scottsdale AZ 2013 84 390,000 205,000 29 Cantsink Lilburn GA 1988 50 416,000 197,387 30 CSW Contractors Scottsdale AZ 1982 350 1,669,000 195,000 31 HCS Renewable Energy Round Rock TX 2014 425 553,000 189,000 32 Primoris Renewable Energy Denver CO 2013 20 479,000 186,000 33 The Ryan Company Greenwood Village CO 1949 100 536,496 182,294 34 juwi Boulder CO 2008 60 420,000 182,089 35 ESA Renewables Sanford FL 2002 25 615,000 165,011 36 Hypower Fort Lauderdale FL 1991 450 425,000 165,000 37 J&B Solar Cocoa FL 2013 85 360,000 160,000 38 J.
  • Hawaii Clean Energy Initiative Hawaiian Electric Companies’ Energy Agreement One-Year Progress Update

    Hawaii Clean Energy Initiative Hawaiian Electric Companies’ Energy Agreement One-Year Progress Update

    Hawaii Clean Energy Initiative Hawaiian Electric Companies’ Energy Agreement One-Year Progress Update n October 2008, the Hawaiian Electric Companies joined the Governor of Hawaii; the Hawaii Department of Busi ness, Economic Development and Tourism; and Office of Consumer Advocacy in an energy agreement Ias part of the Hawaii Clean Energy Initiative. The agreement – the most aggressive such effort in the nation – aims to move Hawaii decisively away from imported oil for electricity and ground transportation toward diverse, local renewable energy and energy efficiency. Our goal is energy and economic security for Hawaii and reduced greenhouse gas emissions responsible for the climate change to which our islands are especially vulnerable. Making the needed investments now can provide more stable energy costs in the long-run. It will require unprecedented cooperation and commitment among individuals, businesses, institutions and government. We need unity of purpose through good and bad times, success and setbacks, no matter whether oil prices go up and down. This list summarizes some key actions by the Hawaiian Electric Companies in cooperation with others after only one year. Increased Renewable Portfolio Standards (Act 155 - 2009) Hawaiian Electric Companies supported placing into law an increased renewable energy requirement of 40 percent of electric sales by 2030 and a new Energy Efficiency Portfolio Standard. New HCEI proposals submitted to the Hawaii Public Utilities Commission (PUC) • Feed-In Tariff (FIT): Creates standard rates to ease the process for private developers to add renewable energy to Hawaiian Electric Companies’ grids. After detailed hearings to obtain input from a broad range of stakeholders, the PUC issued basic principles for such tariffs.
  • RAM 6 and GTSR Participants Webinar Attendees

    RAM 6 and GTSR Participants Webinar Attendees

    Company Name: Pacific Gas and Electric Company Event Title: RAM 6 and GTSR Participants Webinar Event Date: 14-Jul-15 Event Time: 9:00 AM PPT Name Company 1 Abram Pearlman Cumulus Energy Scource 2 Alison Khalaf Pristine Sun 3 Angela Plummer Pristine Sun 4 Avram Pearlman Cumulus Energy Storage 5 Boyega Ajayi SolarReserve 6 Carolyn Campbell Recurrent Energy 7 Cynthia Hernandez Ormat Nevada Inc 8 Daniel Kim Westlands Solar Park 9 David Bruder Lockheed Martin 10 David Moran Drilling And Trenchi 11 Davin Arvonen Rds Properties 12 Deborah Builder 8 Minutenerty 13 Dipa Sharif ConEdison Development 14 Ed Cook E.ON 15 Eric Larson 8minutenergy Renewables 16 Erin Kenney Anahau Energy 17 Eun Gi Chung 8minutenergy Renewables 18 Frank Mossburg Boston Pacific Company 19 Fred Hanks Cal-Pacific Carbon 20 Fred Vaske 8minutenergy 21 Genevieve Liang Mirasol Development 22 Hans Stullken North State Solar 23 Harrison Luna Hecate Energy 24 Jack Pigott First Solar 25 James Cook First Solar 26 James Kelly Nrg Renew Llc 27 Jamie Nagel ZGlobal 28 Jason Joner Modoc Capital 29 Jennifer Desrosier SunEdison 30 Jennifer Hunt FuelCell Energy 31 Joe Briney sPower 32 John Barnes Solar Land Partners.Inc 33 John Monahan JCM Associates 34 jonathan Mancini Bridgewell Resources 35 Jonathan Rappe Soldevco 36 Josh Martin Westlands Solar Park 37 Joshua Martin Westlands Solar Park 38 Julian Chapa Julian Chapa 39 Kathryn Malone Edf Renewable Energy 40 Kayvon Deldawr SPower 41 Kenneth Quigley Cal-Pacific Carbon, LLC 42 Lee Kossla Colemko Llc 43 Marvis Averett Drilling World 44 Matt Barnes Grid Subject Matter Experts, LLC 45 Mhe Uruville Dell Toll Energy 46 Michael Joh Eight Minute Energy 47 Michael Morianti Abengoa Solar 48 Nicole Lepre Con Edison Development, Inc.
  • Solarpro 3.6, October & November, 2010

    Solarpro 3.6, October & November, 2010

    October/November 2010 PV Monitoring Granularity | Surge Protection ® Optimal Design, Installation & Performance solarprofessional.com Central Inverter Trends in Power Plant Applications Operations Management Optimize Personnel, Resources & Processes Interview: John Berdner SolarEdge Changing the US PV Industry…Again Array Voltage Considerations Best Practices for Source Circuits 2010 Inverter Specifications SUBSCRIBE Comprehensive Data for FOR FREE Sixty 3-Phase Products BOOTH 1222 SolarCity Intel Folsom Campus ...or anytime at Folsom, CA f solarprofessional.com Actions speak louder than words Visit us at Solar Power International 2010 Booth 4027 The Fronius Difference At Fronius, we’re proud of our products and service, always working to ensure the highest quality standards. To that end, we want to hear from you, our customers. What are we doing right? What can we improve? We strive to return phone calls and emails in a timely fashion. We have created a paper-free, low-stress service Please take a few minutes of your time to help up put your words into action by completing a survey. process supported by knowledgeable technical support. And we stand behind our products with a standard Visit www.fronius-usa.com and click on the link to our survey. Survey participants will be entered to win 10-year warranty, expandable to 15 years. We are always working to provide an excellent customer experience. some great prizes in a monthly drawing, from March through September, and a grand prize drawing to be held Simply put, we do what we say we will and call that “The Fronius Difference.” at Solar Power International 2010 in October.
  • Master List of Companies

    Master List of Companies

    Companies A1A Solar Contracting Inc. AA Solar Services LLC 0Titan Solar & Remodeling AAA 1 Solar Solutions AAA Solar 1 Stop Shop AABCO 1800 Remodel AAE Solar 1800 Solar USA Aapco 1Solar Abakus Solar USA Inc. 1st Choice Solar Abbott Electric Inc. 1st US Energy LLC ABC Leads 21st Century Doors & Windows ABC Seamless Corporate 21st Century Power Solutions ABCO Solar 2Four6 Solar ABest Energy Power 2K Solar Ablaze Energy 310 Solar LLC Able Energy 31Solar LLC Able Energy Co. 360 Solar Energy Able Heating & Cooling 360 Solar Group Able Roof Mr Roof 4 Lakes Home Restoration ABM Services & Renovations 7 Summits Roofing Absolute Solar 76 Solar Absolutely Solar 84 Lumber Abundant Air Inc 84 Lumber Company Abundant Energy 84 Lumber Company Abundant Solar A & R Solar AC Solar Inc. A Division of Mechanical Energy Systems Accelerate Solar A National Electric Service Inc. Accent Window Systems, Inc. A Plus Roofing Acceptance A Real Advantage Construction Access Geothermal A Two Z Windows & Doors Installing Access Insurance Quality A Wholesale Acclaimed Roofing of Colorado Window Company Accord Construction / Window Wise Austin A&E Mechanical Accuquote A&M Energy Solutions Accurate Architecture LLC A&R Solar ACDC Solar A.D.D. Solar Connect Acker Roofing A.I. Solar ACME Environmental A.M. Solar ACME International Services Inc. A-1 Electric Acordia A1 Energy LLC Acquisition Technologies A1 Plumbing Acro Energy A1 Solar LLC Active Energies A1 Solar Power Active Energies Inc. A-1 Windows & Doors, Inc. Active Energies Solar A-1 Windows & Doors, Inc. A-1 Windows & Active Solar Doors, Inc. Folkers Window Company PGT Addin Solar Industries Addison Homes LLC A1A Solar Addy Electric Adobe Reo Affordable Windows and Doors of Tampa Adobe Solar Bay ADT LLC AffordaSolar, Inc.
  • Operation Construction Development

    Operation Construction Development

    Major Solar Projects in the United States Operating, Under Construction, or Under Development Updated March 7, 2016 Overview This list is for informational purposes only, reflecting projects and completed milestones in the public domain. The information in this list was gathered from public announcements of solar projects in the form of company press releases, news releases, and, in some cases, conversations with individual developers. It is not a comprehensive list of all major solar projects under development. This list may be missing smaller projects that are not publicly announced. Particularly, many smaller projects located outside of California that are built on a short time-scale may be underrepresented on this list. Also, SEIA does not guarantee that every identified project will be built. Like any other industry, market conditions may impact project economics and timelines. SEIA will remove a project if it is publicly announced that it has been cancelled. SEIA actively promotes public policy that minimizes regulatory uncertainty and encourages the accelerated deployment of utility-scale solar power. This list includes ground-mounted solar power plants 1 MW and larger. Example Projects Nevada Solar One Sierra SunTower Nellis Air Force Base DeSoto Next Generation Solar Energy Center Developer: Acciona Developer: eSolar Developer: MMA Renewable Ventures Developer: Florida Power & Light Co. Electricity Purchaser: NV Energy Electricity Purchaser: Southern Electricity Purchaser: Nellis AFB Electricity Purchaser: Florida Power & California