By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

Another one bites the dust: Another nuclear plant is going offline - this one five years earlier than planned - at least in part thanks to the power of four nearby wind plants, which will partially replace the generating power of the nuclear facility. NextEra's Energy has decided to close the 615 MW Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC) five years prior to its expected decommissioning in part because the energy conglomerate can sell power from its four wind plants more inexpensively and cleanly. The company supplies energy for Alliant Energy, which supplies electricity to customers in Iowa and Wisconsin.
[wds id="3"]
The four wind farms will replace 340 MW of the generation capacity, and Alliant plans to build its own wind plants in Iowa to make up the rest. What makes the decision most remarkable is that it comes against the backdrop of plans being hatched in Washington D.C. to interfere in the nuclear market and prop up uneconomic nuclear and coal plants using national taxpayer money to do it. Estimates on what the bailout will cost vary, but some experts have put the number as high as $34 billion. It's worth asking the denizens at the Department of Energy why they feel it's important to keep these plants open when the companies on the ground - like NextEra and Alliant - are obviously perfectly OK with closing the plant. Heck, Alliant is even paying NextEra $110 million in September 2020 to ensure the plant closes five years before its power-purchase agreement (PPA) with the plant runs out. So what on Earth are the regulators and politicians in Washington thinking? Stories like this one out of Iowa need to be heard at the highest levels of our government in the hopes that the harebrained bailout scheme can still be headed off. Senators and Congressmen need to be held accountable for trying to pick winners and losers in the electricity generation game. Otherwise, they're just a bunch of hypocrites paying off their donors.

Mediocre Sausage Making. The MA legislature passed a solar bill yesterday and pardon my lack of excitement. While a bill moving key features forward and a path to remove the fixed charges are included, the NEM cap continues to be punted and the opportunity to give consumers more ability to add solar has been lost for now. Nonetheless, there are important legislative wins and some messages to other utilities that hope to structure anti solar rates, for that this is a solar victory. Hats off to the advocates in solar for getting forward movement but the twitter statement from Vote Solar’s Sean Garren summarizes the final bill. “In like a lion, out like a lamb”
Reviewing California’s Solar Mandate. I appreciate the continued partnership with Barry Cinnamon and his wonderful podcast, The Energy Show. In the latest edition, you will hear him discuss the CA solar mandate on new homes. This is an important topic for me in my day job at Quick Mount PV. New homes represent a great opportunity to lower the cost of solar in a new installation while presenting ways to install attractive solar in a way that still holds quality for 30 years. That quality is sometimes missed because the transaction isn’t with the longterm owner so we appreciate the opportunity to educate homebuilders and installers on making sure its a leak free, quality installation.
Educated Consumers Consume Less. Last week during the heat wave in California (I can confirm that it is warm, but not Florida hot) consumers were asked to lower their energy consumption to ensure blackouts wouldn’t happen. That’s the funny thing about consumers, they can be helpful when educated and can be one of the best demand response tools if planned for properly. That’s the other side of renewables integration that folks don’t plan for. Consumers can, especially with new technology, adapt their habits to get what they want which is 100% renewable energy.
Solar Tariffs To Nowhere. Another great data point about the tariffs, this time the steel and aluminum tariffs. The tariffs are causing disruption more than innovation and in some instances result in worse installs for consumers. If aluminum prices rise, installers don’t replace tiles properly, take a look at the header image on the article. The installer did some sort of hack instead of using a proper tile replacement flashing, happy to show them one if they’d like.
Does Your Neighbor Solar? When I put solar on my home, my neighbors had lots of questions about it. How do you arm your customers and how do you respond to neighbors that are interested in solar? Would love to highlight great ideas here.

Have a great day!

News

 

Opinions:

Have a great day!
Yann


The Energy Show: By Barry Cinnamon

The Energy Show: By Barry Cinnamon

California continues to lead the country when it comes to clean and inexpensive energy. Here is an example – In May the California Energy Commission passed a rule that goes into effect on January 1, 2020 that requires solar on all new homes. The rule applies to all new homes, apartments and condos under three stories tall. The rule also includes an option to include an energy storage system (which we believe will become a standard feature with all solar systems). We have received a number of calls and emails from people both in favor of and against this new rule since it was passed. What we really like about this new rule is that new home buyers will definitely save money. We’ve done hundreds of installations on new homes and the monthly energy savings are always more than the monthly mortgage increase. Always. According to data from the California Energy Commission, the cost of a new solar system would be an extra $40 per month on a typical mortgage. And that’s without the tax credit. The monthly savings on the homeowner’s electric bill would be $80 per month. So the net monthly savings is $40 per month, or almost $500 per year. So every new home that has solar on it is going to come out almost $500 cash flow positive every year. Based on our installation experiences, I think the CEC’s cost numbers are on the high side and savings number are low – so the benefits are even better. This New Solar Homes Mandate is good for home buyers, and will increase the awareness of solar on existing residential rooftops. But there are some negatives about this new rule. Some people have a visceral reaction against mandates. They simply don’t want to be told what to do. Moreover, adding solar will slightly increase the cost of a new home. Nevertheless, our government mandates things like seat belts, clean air, new home warranties and energy efficiency. By mandating popular consumer safety and efficiency benefits, costs generally come down for everyone, to the overall benefit of society. For more about California’s New Solar Homes Mandate, Listen Up to this week’s Energy Show.