LADWP PV lockout is over [RE-wrenches]

[Graham Owen]

Wrenches,

The LADWP four-month PV lockout has ended and Department personnel on 
8/15/02 removed the locks.  Hooray!!

There is a new 5 step inspection process, one of which includes making 
an appointment with a Department Electric Service Representative to 
establish where the AC disconnect will be located, this is prior to the 
system installation.  This may sound like a waste of valuable contractor 
time, but the way I see it, I am happy to be installing systems again in 
my back-yard which means less drive time, substantially lower permit 
fee’s, much less hassle with non-LA Building and Safety Departments and 
of course the higher financial incentive for my customers.  I am very 
pleased this unfortunate event has passed.

Now I feel a need to quickly rant about what I perceive as what’s really 
going on in LA.

Last year my company installed the first system under the Green LA Solar 
Power Program.  Numerous times in the past year I had a feeling that 
LADWP didn’t really want to achieve their publicly stated goal of 
100,000 solar roof tops by 2005.  There have been constant glitches and 
delays, which have kept the pace of installations at a lower level than 
was achievable. There are only about 300 residential systems installed 
so far.

Since deregulation of electricity in California 2.85% of ratepayers 
utility bills are diverted into a Public Benefit Trust fund for 
environmentally friendly projects, which benefit the public.  LADWP 
lobbied to get these funds under their control from the City of Los 
Angeles for the Green L.A. Program.  A predetermined amount was set 
aside for a solar energy incentive.  The problem is the wording in the 
program.  “Buydown funds not spent each year may be used for Department 
solar photovoltaic projects”. That is LADWP gets the money for their own 
use.

It appears that LADWP wants to use as much of these funds for their own 
projects as possible.  I believe the reasoning behind this decision is 
that the Department will not have to credit ratepayers for solar 
generated electricity.  In effect they get the ratepayers to subsidize 
solar power for their grid without having to deduct the amount generated 
from incoming revenue.

The problem with this scheme, it costs the Department about $17 a watt 
for union prevailing wage installations, compared to $9 per watt average 
non-union contractor cost.

I believe the solar subsidies were initiated for environmental reasons, 
period.  More solar panels can be installed by non-union labor than can 
be installed by union labor for each block of funding.  This is 
something politicians should be able to comprehend and hopefully future 
renewable energy subsidy programs will not have loosely worded documents 
with obvious conflicts of interest.

Sizable contractors, which utilize the skilled labor of union 
electricians, have a place in large commercial PV system installations 
where increased labor costs are offset by lower material costs resulting 
from bulk purchasing.  When I see the labor union interests flow over 
into the residential market I see storm clouds on the horizon.

Graham Owen
GO Solar Company

- - - -
To send a message: RE-wrenches at topica.com

Archive of previous messages: http://www.topica.com/lists/RE-wrenches/

List rules & etiquette: http://www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/etiquete.htm

Check out participant bios: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/index.html

Hosted by Home Power magazine

Moderator: michael.welch at homepower.com

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: michael.welch at homepower.com

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bz8Qcs.bz9JC9
Or send an email to: RE-wrenches-unsubscribe at topica.com

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================