Pay It Forward Award (was NABCEP) [RE-wrenches]

asap at podnine.com asap at podnine.com
Sat Dec 21 15:15:17 PST 2002


Graham,
That was some seriously solid thinking you laid out below.  I'm giving you
the Pay It Forward Award for 2003 (given in advance).  Thanks for your
professional and long-term efforts in our industry.  I hope the powers that
be indeed listened.

I too want to look at all the big, bad installs out there I keep hearing
about.  I don't know whether to laugh or cry about the NABCEP any more.
There just such a long way to go it seems--in any direction now, forwards or
backwards.

Fortunately, our industry has quality 100+ watt modules (take your pick)
with MC's, SMA SB's, UNI-RAC SM's, and HV DC systems.  IMO, the under 10kW
CA PV grid-tie market is being safely installed, and looks to be in pretty
good shape for at least first half 2003, barring uncertain political
rationalizations meanwhile.  Thanks again for helping them and all of us.

Sincerely,
Peter Duchon
Systems Integrator
ASAP POWER!/1AU, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: Graham Owen [mailto:graham at solarexpert.com]
Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 11:56 AM
To: RE-wrenches at topica.com
Subject: RE: NABCEP [RE-wrenches]


Bill, Bob-O and All,

I did not go to Sacramento to fight NABCEP.  My focus was directed
towards four of the CEC proposed Major Changes. 1. The primary rebate,
2. The decline rate, 3. Total funding allocation and 4. System
performance meter requirements.

1.	Primary rebate should be reinstated at $4.25 per Watt as opposed to
$4.00,  this is a good compromise that can keep a good thing going.
$4.00 per Watt is too fast too soon.

2.	The proposed rate of incentive decline at $0.25 every six months is
also too much too fast.  The decline rate should be 5% annually. A 5%
reduction is in line with the historic trend of module price decreases.
If the incentive rate declines at the same rate as material costs, long
term business plans can be adhered to, stable jobs can be created and
most importantly we need a reduction slope instead of little cliffs that
result in gluts and a stop and go market.

3.	The total incentive funding allocation needs a higher percentage of
funding for systems over 30 kW. Larger solar installations installed for
 businesses who have a bottom line to watch typically get a great deal
of press and fanfare.  The result is that homeowners become more aware
of PV technology and believe that solar power must be a sound and viable
technology.  The CEC proposed $108 million for <30 kW and only $10
million for systems >30 kW.  I am in favor of 25% of funding for systems
>30 kW.

4.	Utility grade performance meters and warranted output by contractors
was opposed for the following reasons.  Contractors will be vulnerable
to conditions beyond our control, including: soiling, bird droppings,
vegetation growth, smoke and ash fallout, El Nino and the possibility of
another eruption of Mt Pinatubo which could obstruct sunlight for a
couple of years.   Performance meters also open the door to utilities to
start imposing exit fees.  Utilities are proposing a 3 cent per kWh
charge for solar production to counter their reduction in revenue and to
help pay for grid maintenance, especially since we are using their grid
as a big free battery.  My customers are opposed to having a utility
grade production meter because it presents the mechanism that could
allow for taxation of their solar production in the future.

This is why I went to Sacramento! I went as a representative of Cal
SEIA, which is the solar industry trade association in California.  The
PV industry is in the spotlight at CalSEIA, Mac Moore from BP is the new
Pesident, Don Loweburg is the new Vice President and the large PV
manufacturers have a strong voice as well.  I would strongly suggest
that more California PV people join CalSeia’s membership and to attend
board meetings where your voice and concerns can be heard.

Bill, I am wondering what percentage of installations in California are
substandard? Do you only look at problem installs?  I am willing to
volunteer a couple of days to go with you to see how bad these systems
really are.

Graham

- - - -
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

- - - -
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.bWljaGFl
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
==^^===============================================================







More information about the RE-wrenches mailing list