DOCSLIB.ORG

Responses to Budget & Finance Committee Questions on SEIP

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Responses to Budget & Finance Committee Questions on SEIP Responses to Budget & Finance Committee Questions on the Pilot Solar Energy Incentive Program GoSolarSF Power Enterprise, SFPUC Introduction to the Program The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission proposed to initiate, as a pilot program, the Solar Energy Incentive Payment program, pending before Budget and Finance Committee. The pilot program would provide a financial incentive for San Francisco residents and businesses to install solar (photovoltaic) energy systems on their properties. The pilot Solar Energy Incentive Program, announced in December 2007, and supported by the Public Utilities Commission in Resolution 08-0004, would provide from $3,000 to $5,000 for residential installations and up to $10,000 for commercial photovoltaic installations. The pilot program would offer a one-time incentive payment for local solar electric projects to reduce the cost of installation. The pilot program would have three distinct incentives for residential installations. The incentives are limits on assistance, meaning that the higher incentives are not additive to the lower ones, but are total incentives. The incentive for businesses is a simple capacity-based incentive. Residents Businesses Basic Incentive $3,000 City installer incentive $4,000 $1.50 per Watt a system is designed to generate, up to a cap of $10,000. Environmental justice $5,000 incentive Incentive payments are tied to individual electric meters, meaning that buildings with more than one meter or applicants owning more than one property are eligible for more than one incentive payment, subject to the provisions below. Any system whose California Solar Initiative incentive reservation date is on or after December 11th 2007 would be eligible for the pilot San Francisco incentive. The basic incentive would be available to any resident installing solar generation on his/her own property located within San Francisco. One incentive would be allowed per meter. The city installer incentive would exist to encourage the use of local installation businesses. It would be available to residents eligible for the basic incentive who contract with an installer holding a current San Francisco business registration certificate showing a San Francisco address as the place of business. The environmental justice incentive would be available to installations on property in lower income neighborhoods considered “environmental justice districts” because of their proximity to industrial sites and major highways. The SFPUC will apply the environmental justice incentive payments to installations on properties located within the zip codes 94107 and 94124. 2 The SFPUC intends to fund the pilot program by redirecting $3 million allocated to the Mayor’s Energy Conservation Account toward this program. The Board of Supervisors were asked to endorse the program, and express their intent to appropriate from $2 million to $5 million annually. Running the Numbers The installed cost of residential solar photovoltaics in San Francisco is close to $10 per Watt of capacity. A typical two-kilowatt system on a single-family home costs around $20,000 before rebates and incentives. The California Solar Initiative (CSI) rebate on a system this size is $2.20 per watt or $4400 on the system as of April 2008, and the federal tax credit is $2000.1 Incorporating the $3000–$5000 San Francisco incentive, the net cost will decline to $8,600– $10,600, or about half of the original cost. CSI rebates decline over time according to the amount of capacity put into service, as shown in the table below.2 The highlighting shows the steps within PG&E’s service territory at which rebates are being offered for the week beginning 14 April 2008. California’s three investor-owned utilities (PG&E, SCE, SDG&E) are the administrators of the CSI designated by the program’s regulator, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). One-time (‘EPBB’) rebate for small systems Performance-based incentive (PBI) for large MW in (< 100 kW, per kW installed) systems (> 100 kW, per kWh) Step step Gov’t. / Gov’t. / Residential Commercial Residential Commercial Non-profit Non-profit 1 50 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 2 70 $2.50 $2.50 $3.25 $0.39 $0.39 $0.50 3 100 $2.00 $2.20 $2.95 $0.34 $0.34 $0.46 4 130 $1.90 $1.90 $2.65 $0.26 $0.26 $0.37 5 160 $1.55 $1.55 $2.30 $0.22 $0.22 $0.32 6 190 $1.10 $1.10 $1.85 $0.15 $0.15 $0.26 7 215 $0.65 $0.65 $1.40 $0.09 $0.09 $0.19 8 250 $0.35 $0.35 $1.10 $0.05 $0.05 $0.15 9 285 $0.25 $0.25 $0.90 $0.03 $0.03 $0.12 10 350 $0.20 $0.20 $0.70 $0.03 $0.03 $0.10 Notwithstanding the decline in rebates, the number of solar-power installations has been increasing exponentially within San Francisco since the California Energy Commission began gathering data in 1998. In that initial year, the CEC recorded three solar installations, the number growing to around 140 year in each of 2006 and 2007. By the end of 2007, 618 installations had been completed within the city, for a total of 2 megawatts. These totals exclude municipal projects. The objective of the CSI is to stimulate California’s solar market, with a goal of one million solar roofs over ten years from the beginning of 2007. By proportion of population, this goal would equate to 22,850 solar roofs within San Francisco.3 The San Francisco Electricity Resource Plan of 2002 suggested a within-city target of 50 megawatts of solar capacity by 2012. Taking the average size of solar installations within San Francisco from the CEC data—which is around 3.2 kW, encompassing both residential and commercial systems—the 50-MW target in the ERP would equate to around 15,625 solar installations city-wide. Using an average of the year-on-year growth rates in solar installations over the past five years (ignoring the early years because of small sample size), we can project the growth of rooftop solar 1 The federal tax credit is scheduled to expire January 1, 2009. A number of legislative efforts directed toward its renewal/extension are pending. 2 CSI Handbook, page 7. 3 California’s population is around 35 million. San Francisco’s is around 800,000. 4/14/2008 Responses_B&FCommittee_20080416.doc 3 within San Francisco under the CSI. We take the lower of the two estimates of the total potential number of solar roofs within the city (15,400) as the ‘carrying capacity’ which this growth will approach. The GoSolarSF Incentive Payment Effect A $3 million budget for the San Francisco Solar Energy Incentive Program (SEIP) we estimate will fund 707 installations per year, net of administration costs. This estimate assumes around 4 installations are completed on commercial buildings in a year, each receiving a $10,000 incentive payment, with the balance on residential buildings, each receiving on average a $4,000 incentive payment. This is the estimated number of additional projects that could be stimulated by the San Francisco program. The graphs below shows the possible effects of the San Francisco program. Using state data on solar installations city-wide up to the end of 2007, we project the installation rate forward in two ways, incorporating the effect of the San Francisco program in each. The first projection assumes simply that the number of installations will climb towards a ceiling representing the availability of economically available roof space. Implicit in this projection is an assumption that either incentives are plentiful and long-lasting or that the solar industry becomes self-sustaining, by virtue of falling costs. We use a ceiling of 50 MW installed, which is the suggested target for rooftop solar by 2012 in the City’s 2002 Electricity Resource Plan. Out of this 50 MW, a portion will be attributable to the San Francisco incentive. In the second projection, the declining availability and value of state rebates limits the rate of solar installations. The assumption here is that solar power without rebates will remain significantly more expensive than grid power so, as CSI rebates decline, so will the solar installation rate. The Appendix describes the methods in detail. Simple projection of solar installations in San Francisco with and without SF incentive. 16,000 With SF solar incentive (max) Without SF solar incentive 14,000 ons i t 12,000 lla a t 10,000 ins r la 8,000 o s e v 6,000 i t a l u 4,000 m u C 2,000 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 4/14/2008 Responses_B&FCommittee_20080416.doc 4 Rebate-limited projection of solar installations in San Francisco with and without SF incentive. 9,000 With SF solar incentive (max) Without SF solar incentive 8,000 ons 7,000 i t lla a 6,000 t ins 5,000 r la o 4,000 s e v i t 3,000 la u m 2,000 u C 1,000 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 Under the simple projection, the maximum number of additional citywide installations stimulated by the San Francisco incentive evens out at 3535 out of a total of 13,889, or about one-third. Under the rebate-limited projection, the San Francisco incentive stimulates almost six times as many additional installations (7687 compared to 1324) by the end of 2016. Between these two scenarios lies a middle ground where state rebates will remain available at low amounts almost to 2016, as the CSI originally intended, but also where the cost of solar will decline as the market matures—if not to grid-parity then perhaps to within a fifty percent premium.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Advances in Concentrating Solar Thermal Research and Technology Related Titles
    Advances in Concentrating Solar Thermal Research and Technology Related titles Performance and Durability Assessment: Optical Materials for Solar Thermal Systems (ISBN 978-0-08-044401-7) Solar Energy Engineering 2e (ISBN 978-0-12-397270-5) Concentrating Solar Power Technology (ISBN 978-1-84569-769-3) Woodhead Publishing Series in Energy Advances in Concentrating Solar Thermal Research and Technology Edited by Manuel J. Blanco Lourdes Ramirez Santigosa AMSTERDAM • BOSTON • HEIDELBERG LONDON • NEW YORK • OXFORD • PARIS • SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO • SINGAPORE • SYDNEY • TOKYO Woodhead Publishing is an imprint of Elsevier Woodhead Publishing is an imprint of Elsevier The Officers’ Mess Business Centre, Royston Road, Duxford, CB22 4QH, United Kingdom 50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, OX5 1GB, United Kingdom Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how to seek permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangements with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions. This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as may be noted herein). Notices Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C to California’S Proposed Compliance Plan for the Federal Clean Power Plan: Target Recalculation Calculations
    Appendix C to California’s Proposed Compliance Plan for the Federal Clean Power Plan: Target Recalculation Calculations Prime Nameplate Generator mover Capacity Summer ARB Updated List EPA Original Plant Name Operator Name ORIS Code ID Fuel type type (MW) Capacity (MW) EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Rollins Nevada Irrigation District 34 1P WAT HY 12.1 12.1 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Venice Metropolitan Water District 72 1 WAT HY 10.1 10.1 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE J S Eastwood Southern California Edison Co 104 1 WAT PS 199.8 199.8 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE McClure Modesto Irrigation District 151 1 DFO GT 71.2 56.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE McClure Modesto Irrigation District 151 2 DFO GT 71.2 56.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Turlock Lake Turlock Irrigation District 161 1 WAT HY 1.1 1.1 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Turlock Lake Turlock Irrigation District 161 2 WAT HY 1.1 1.1 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Turlock Lake Turlock Irrigation District 161 3 WAT HY 1.1 1.1 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Hickman Turlock Irrigation District 162 1 WAT HY 0.5 0.5 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Hickman Turlock Irrigation District 162 2 WAT HY 0.5 0.5 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Volta 2 Pacific Gas & Electric Co 180 1 WAT HY 1.0 0.9 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Alta Powerhouse Pacific Gas & Electric Co 214 1 WAT HY 1.0 1.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Alta Powerhouse Pacific Gas & Electric Co 214 2 WAT HY 1.0 1.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Angels Utica Power Authority 215 1 WAT HY 1.4 1.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Balch 1 Pacific Gas & Electric Co 217 1 WAT HY 31.0 31.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Balch 2 Pacific Gas & Electric Co 218 2 WAT HY 48.6 52.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Balch 2 Pacific Gas & Electric Co 218 3 WAT HY 48.6 55.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE
    [Show full text]
  • Basics of Photovoltaic (PV) Systems for Grid-Tied Applications
    Basics of Photovoltaic (PV) Systems for Grid-Tied Applications Pacific Energy Center Energy Training Center 851 Howard St. 1129 Enterprise St. San Francisco, CA 94103 Stockton, CA 95204 Courtesy of DOE/NREL instructor Pete Shoemaker Basics of Photovoltaic (PV) Systems for Grid-Tied Applications Material in this presentation is protected by Copyright law. Reproduction, display, or distribution in print or electronic formats without written permission of rights holders is prohibited. Disclaimer: The information in this document is believed to accurately describe the technologies described herein and are meant to clarify and illustrate typical situations, which must be appropriately adapted to individual circumstances. These materials were prepared to be used in conjunction with a free, educational program and are not intended to provide legal advice or establish legal standards of reasonable behavior. Neither Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) nor any of its employees and agents: (1) makes any written or oral warranty, expressed or implied, including, but not limited to, those concerning merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose; (2) assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of any information, apparatus, product, process, method, or policy contained herein; or (3) represents that its use would not infringe any privately owned rights, including, but not limited to, patents, trademarks, or copyrights. Some images displayed may not be in the printed booklet because of copyright restrictions. PG&E Solar Information www.pge.com/solar Pacific Energy Center (San Francisco) www.pge.com/pec Energy Training Center (Stockton) http://www.pge.com/myhome/edusafety/workshopstraining/stockton Contact Information Pete Shoemaker Pacific Energy Center 851 Howard St.
    [Show full text]
  • 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
    [Show full text]
  • Desalination Task Force Memorandum
    DESALINATION TASK FORCE MEMORANDUM TO: DESALINATION TASK FORCE FROM: PROGRAM MANAGERS SUBJECT: ENERGY STUDY STATUS REPORT, PROJECT ASSESSMENT REVIEW, AND DISCUSSION ON PROJECT EVALUATION, SCORING AND RANKING METHODOLOGY DATE: OCTOBER 19, 2011 RECOMMENDATION: That the scwd2 Desalination Task Force receive the sixth Energy Study status report and schedule, provide feedback on the attached 16 draft Project Assessments (dPAs), receive an update on the October 13, 2011 Energy Study Technical Working Group (ETWG) Workshop, and provide feedback on the scoring, ranking and selection methodologies being described below and in the attached document(s). BACKGROUND: This memorandum serves as the sixth status report and will update the Task Force on work progress with regard to the Energy Minimization and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Study (Energy Study). With guidance from members of the ETWG and additional local energy experts, the Energy Study work to date has focused on establishing the potential energy use of the facility, further understanding the CEQA and regulatory framework used to evaluate that energy use, and vetting potential projects that could be implemented to reduce energy and indirect GHG impacts of the project. Sixteen projects (which can be generally categorized as water and energy efficiency projects, renewable energy projects, and/or GHG reduction projects) were recommended for in-depth evaluation by the ETWG. (For simplicity, the 16 projects will be collectively referred to as GHG reduction projects for the remainder of the document.) The dPAs provide a framework for understanding the project efficiency, and relative economic and social costs. These factors may ultimately be used to assemble cost effective and community-valued GHG reduction project portfolios, the foundation of the Energy Minimization and GHG Reduction Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • REVISED 2020 Power Source Disclosure Filing
    DOCKETED Docket Number: 21-PSDP-01 Project Title: Power Source Disclosure Program - 2020 TN #: 238715 Document Title: REVISED 2020 Power Source Disclosure Filing Public Redacted version of the 2020 Power Source Disclosure Description: Annual Filing of Direct Energy Business, LLC Filer: Barbara Farmer Organization: Direct Energy Business, LLC Submitter Role: Applicant Submission Date: 7/7/2021 1:51:24 PM Docketed Date: 7/7/2021 Version: April 2021 2020 POWER SOURCE DISCLOSURE ANNUAL REPORT For the Year Ending December 31, 2020 Retail suppliers are required to use the posted template and are not allowed to make edits to this format. Please complete all requested information. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS RETAIL SUPPLIER NAME Direct Energy Business, LLC ELECTRICITY PORTFOLIO NAME CONTACT INFORMATION NAME Barbara Farmer TITLE Reulatory Reporting Analyst MAILING ADDRESS 12 Greenway Plaza, Suite 250 CITY, STATE, ZIP Houston, TX 77046 PHONE (281)731-5027 EMAIL [email protected] WEBSITE URL FOR https://business.directenergy.com/privacy-and-legal PCL POSTING Submit the Annual Report and signed Attestation in PDF format with the Excel version of the Annual Report to [email protected]. Remember to complete the Retail Supplier Name, Electricity Portfolio Name, and contact information above, and submit separate reports and attestations for each additional portfolio if multiple were offered in the previous year. NOTE: Information submitted in this report is not automatically held confidential. If your company wishes the information submitted to be considered confidential an authorized representative must submit an application for confidential designation (CEC-13), which can be found on the California Energy Commissions's website at https://www.energy.ca.gov/about/divisions-and-offices/chief-counsels-office.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing a Solar Energy Potential Map for Chapel Hill, NC
    Developing a Solar Energy Potential Map for Chapel Hill, NC By Lyle Robert Leitelt A Master’s Project submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Regional Planning in the Department of City and Regional Planning. Chapel Hill 2010 Approved by: _________________________ Leitelt 2 Acknowledgements This Master’s Project includes the input of professionals who are knowledgeable in the realm of municipal solar mapping. Their help is much appreciated and was a significant contribution to this study. • Mark Greninger, Geographic Information Officer, County of Los Angeles Chief Information Office • Amanda Henley, Geographic Information Systems Librarian, University of North Carolina • Alexander Winn, Executive Coordinator, The George Washington University Solar Institute Leitelt 3 Table of Contents Project Purpose 4 Background 4 Study Area 9 Methodology 10 Analysis 15 Limitations of Solar Map 20 Conclusion 21 References 23 Appendix 27 Leitelt 4 Project Purpose Throughout the country, municipalities are mitigating climate change by following the concept of sustainability and promoting themselves as “green” communities. A combination of state incentives and renewable portfolio standards has encouraged the growth of efficient, renewable energy in some communities (US DOE, 2009a). Many cities are looking at ways to decrease emissions and make their communities as carbon neutral as possible. In turn, energy conservation is becoming a bigger issue in the realm of planning. There are several initiatives and projects that cities are promoting, most of which utilize renewable energy, including the installation of solar energy systems throughout the existing urban framework.
    [Show full text]
  • Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells and Modules from China
    Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells and Modules From China Investigation Nos. 701-TA-481 and 731-TA-1190 (Final) Publication 4360 November 2012 U.S. International Trade Commission Washington, DC 20436 U.S. International Trade Commission COMMISSIONERS Irving A. Williamson, Chairman Daniel R. Pearson Shara L. Aranoff Dean A. Pinkert David S. Johanson Meredith M. Broadbent Robert B. Koopman Director, Office of Operations Staff assigned Christopher Cassise, Senior Investigator Andrew David, Industry Analyst Aimee Larsen, Economist Samantha Day, Economist David Boyland, Accountant Mary Jane Alves, Attorney Lita David-Harris, Statistician Jim McClure, Supervisory Investigator Address all communications to Secretary to the Commission United States International Trade Commission Washington, DC 20436 U.S. International Trade Commission Washington, DC 20436 www.usitc.gov Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells and Modules From China Investigation Nos. 701-TA-481 and 731-TA-1190 (Final) Publication 4360 November 2012 C O N T E N T S Page Determinations ................................................................. 1 Views of the Commission ......................................................... 3 Dissenting opinion of Chairman Irving A. Williamson and Commissioner Dean A. Pinkert on critical circumstances ......................................................... 47 Part I: Introduction ............................................................ I-1 Background .................................................................. I-1 Organization
    [Show full text]
  • Operation Technology of Solar Photovoltaic Power Station Roof and Policy Framework
    Operation Technology of Solar Photovoltaic Power Station Roof and Policy Framework Expert Group on New and Renewable Energy Technologies (EGNRET) Of Energy Working Group (EWG) (May 2014) Operation Technology of Solar Photovoltaic Power Station Roof and Policy Framework APEC Project: EWG 24 2012A -- Operation Technology of Solar Photovoltaic Power Station Roof and Policy Framework Produced by Beijing QunLing Energy Resources Technology Co., Ltd For Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Secretariat 35 Heng Mui Keng Terrace Singapore 119616 Tel: (65) 68919 600 Fax: (65) 68919 690 Email: [email protected] Website: www.apec.org © 2014 APEC Secretariat APEC Publication number : APEC#214-RE-01.8 Page 2 of 170 Operation Technology of Solar Photovoltaic Power Station Roof and Policy Framework Operation Technology of Solar Photovoltaic Power Station Roof and Policy Framework Content 1 Introduction.............................................................................................8 1.1 Background ..................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Project Goal................................................................................................... 12 1.2.1 Solar Resources Analysis.......................................................................... 12 1.2.2 PV Technology Development .................................................................... 12 1.2.3 Policy Review ............................................................................................ 12 1.2.4 PV
    [Show full text]
  • Major Solar Projects.Xlsx
    Utility‐Scale Solar Projects in the United States Operating, Under Construction, or Under Development Updated January 17, 2012 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 utility‐scale 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 utility‐scale solar power plants larger than 1 MW that directly feed into the transmission grid. This list does not include large "behind the meter" projects that only serve on‐site load. One exception to this is large projects on military bases that only serve the base (see, for example, Nellis Air Force Base). While utility‐scale solar is a large and growing segment of the U.S. solar industry, cumulative installations for residential and non‐residential (commercial, non‐profit and government) solar total 841 MW and 1,634 MW, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Building Clean-Energy Industries and Green Jobs
    General Acknowledgements This research report is an university-based report that is independent of political affiliations, parties, and nongovernmental advocacy organizations. Research was supported by the National Science Foundation’s Program on Science and Technology Studies for the grant “The Greening of Economic Development” (SES-0947429). The grant enabled a summer training seminar led by David Hess (a professor of Science and Technology Studies at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute), with support from coinvestigator Abby Kinchy (an assistant professor of Science and Technology Studies at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute). Eight doctoral students in the social sciences who focus on environmental, science, and technology studies were selected for participation in the seminar based on a national competition. The training seminar enabled coursework and hands-on experience for the graduate students based on interviews and documentary research for sections of this report. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation or of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Specific acknowledgements to the many people we talked with are at the end of each state case study. Cover photos by Jaime D. Ewalt and Wayne National Forest. Inside photos by David A Banks, Jaime D. Ewalt, David J. Hess, Matthew Hoffmann, and Neville Micallef. Suggested Citation Hess, David J., David A. Banks, Bob Darrow, Joseph Datko, Jaime D. Ewalt, Rebecca Gresh, Matthew Hoffmann, Anthony Sarkis, and Logan D.A. Williams. 2010. “Building Clean-Energy Industries and Green Jobs: Policy Innovations at the State and Local Government Level.” Science and Technology Studies Department, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
    [Show full text]
  • Utility-Scale Concentrating Solar Power and Photovoltaics Projects: a Technology and Market Overview Michael Mendelsohn, Travis Lowder, and Brendan Canavan
    Utility-Scale Concentrating Solar Power and Photovoltaics Projects: A Technology and Market Overview Michael Mendelsohn, Travis Lowder, and Brendan Canavan NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. Technical Report NREL/TP-6A20-51137 April 2012 Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 Utility-Scale Concentrating Solar Power and Photovoltaics Projects: A Technology and Market Overview Michael Mendelsohn, Travis Lowder, and Brendan Canavan Prepared under Task No. SM10.2442 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Technical Report 1617 Cole Boulevard NREL/TP-6A20-51137 Golden, Colorado 80401 April 2012 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]