Thursday, December 9, 2010

77% Utility Savings With Solar Power

Source: Solar Power Cost Blog

*Note These figures are based on California electric prices, but it is still an interesting report showing just how much a household can save on energy costs by adopting solar panels.

This example is taken from a solar cost analysis for a 5-kilowatt (kW) solar energy system for a homeowner in northern California.

As you can see, after installing solar panels, our California homeowner’s annual electricity costs are reduced by 77 percent! In other words, our annual electric bill goes from about $2075 to $685, a total savings of $1390 in the first year of operation.

These electric bill savings are incredibly reliable — and they add up. Over the course of the system’s life, we could expect to save over $90,000 on electricity costs – all thanks to our brand-spanking-new solar home energy system.

A few more notes:

  • Solar panels generate more electricity during the summer months, when days are longer. In fact, our solar energy system in this instance generates enough power in May and June to effectively eliminate our bill in those months!
  • Thanks to net-metering, if our solar panels produce more electricity in a given month — say June — the utility will issue us credit for it on July’s bill.
  • You’ll notice that, in this case, our use of electricity peaks in June, July and August. An electricity usage pattern like this is usually caused by increased use of air conditioning. When you get a solar home energy quote or an energy audit, an installer will analyze your particular usage patter and suggest energy solutions that are best suited for your needs.
  • Even though solar panels produce more power in June, July and August, it’s important to note that solar panels actually perform more efficiently in cool temperatures. This is because semiconductors — like the silicon in most solar panels — face modest efficiency losses as temperatures increase.

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Georgia Has Just As Much Solar Potential As California


This map shows the average value of total solar energy received in peak sun hours per day on an optimally tilted surface during the month with the lowest solar radiation. As you can see, most of GA has between 3.5 and 4.0 peak sun hours per day. CA ranges from 3.5 to 4.5 while states like Utah, Nevada, and Arizona average 5.0 peak sun hours and up.

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

Supreme Court To Review Climate Change Lawsuit Against Power Companies

Source: AJC

In a new case about climate change, the Supreme Court will hear an appeal from electric utilities that are trying to short-circuit an effort by states to force cuts in power plant emissions.

The court agreed Monday to consider ending a federal lawsuit by eight states, New York City and others that accuse the power companies of being among the largest emitters of carbon dioxide in the world. The suit asks a federal judge to order reductions in the emissions in plants in 20 states.

A federal judge initially threw out the case, but the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York said it could continue.

The lawsuit says carbon dioxide is one of the chief causes of global warming. The greenhouse gas is produced when coal, gasoline and other fossil fuels burn.

Similar lawsuits are pending in California and North Carolina.

The American Electric Power Co. and the other utilities do not want courts getting involved in the issue. The companies argue that only the Environmental Protection Agency can set emissions standards.

The other utilities are Cinergy Co., Southern Co. Inc. of Georgia, Xcel Energy Inc. of Minnesota, and the federal Tennessee Valley Authority.

The Obama administration, representing the TVA, urged a middle course that would have avoided a full-blown hearing at the high court.

The administration angered environmental groups with its position that the states should not be allowed to proceed in federal court because, among other reasons, the EPA already has begun to take actions to compel cuts in carbon dioxide emissions.

EPA regulation is a more efficient process than a federal lawsuit, the administration said.

In 2007, the court split 5-4 in its first global warming case in a ruling that declared that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are air pollutants under the Clean Air Act. The court said the EPA has the authority to regulate those emissions from new cars and trucks under the landmark environment law. The same reasoning applies to power plants.

The case will be argued in the spring.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who was on the 2nd Circuit panel that heard the case, is not taking part in the Supreme Court's consideration of the issue.

The states in the lawsuit are: California, Connecticut, Iowa, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin. The Open Space Institute, the Open Space Conservancy and the Audubon Society of New Hampshire also are plaintiffs.

The case is American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut, 10-174.

Selling Natural Gas - The New Mary Kay?

Rebecca Bigbie asked a crowd in a hotel conference room in Peachtree City recently to imagine making $4,000 a month whether or not they did anything to earn it.

The agency responsible for certifying Stream to sell natural gas, the Georgia Public Service Commission, said it is charged with protecting natural gas customers, not salespeople, and Stream’s rates and services have been similar or better than other gas companies. Regulating Stream’s agreements with sales directors is the job of the Governor’s Office of Consumer Protection, said Mike Nantz, director of PSC’s consumer affairs division.

The governor’s consumer office said it looked at Stream at the request of the PSC. “For all we could tell, Stream complied and was within the law,” said spokesman Bill Cloud.

Some consumer experts say regulatory agencies often struggle to distinguish between multilevel marketing and pyramid schemes.

Since the company’s founding in Texas in 2005, Stream says, more than 172,000 people signed up as Ignite directors — independent contractors who sell gas to customers and recruit more directors. These directors collectively paid at least $51 million to join. The company says it has more than 400,000 energy customers. That includes at least 20,000 gas customers in Georgia, according to the PSC.

Stream would not say how many Ignite directors live in Georgia.

It’s possible to be both a Stream customer and sales director, but it’s not clear how many customers are sales directors too.

Robert FitzPatrick, who runs a watchdog group called Pyramid Scheme Alert, examined the most recent income disclosure from Stream’s website for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Fitzpatrick has served as an expert witness in pyramid cases.

Fitzpatrick said his calculations show 90 percent of Stream’s sales force lost nearly all their investments; 8.5 percent made no profit; only 1 percent made what he said amounts to minimum wage-level income and fewer than 0.1 percent earned substantial income.

“It’s like a chain letter,” he said.

Asked about Fitzpatrick’s analysis, Thies said the company makes clear to prospective associates that success depends on their efforts.

“It is true that a large number of people may or may not make their money back,” Thies said. “The business model itself does not dictate your level of success.”

Perry Betts, of Ringgold, a plaintiff in the Georgia suit, saw a good opportunity when he was introduced to the company by a woman from his church. His “eyes are a little more open now,” he said, and he realizes he cost the one man he recruited into sales hundreds of dollars and could have “victimized” friends and family, all because he thought selling gas had to be well regulated.

“It seemed to me if they were approved by the state as a provider, they had a stamp of approval from the regulators,” Betts said. “I don’t know any other way to look at it. They weren’t selling cookies.”

Selling like Mary Kay

Multilevel marketing strategies are increasingly common nationally and include household names like Mary Kay. They are legal under federal and state law.

However, Federal Trade Commission officials generally distinguish multilevel marketing from illegal pyramid schemes by explaining that pyramid schemes promise consumers or investors large profits based primarily on recruiting others to join their program, not based on profits from sales of goods to the public.

Stream says its focus has always been selling a real product — energy.

The company was licensed by Georgia to sell gas in 2008. But even before it was approved to market gas, Ignite directors began recruiting in the state, PSC records show. Ignite sales pitches swept through neighborhoods, churches and companies.

“They were holding ‘revival’ meetings all over Georgia, promising to make millionaires out of anyone willing to take a few ‘simple’ steps to gain financial freedom,” said Cynthia Cornelius, then head of PSC consumer affairs, in an e-mail to the AJC.

That’s how Stream came to Peachtree City, with its concentration of Delta employees.

In web presentations and lavish rallies, including one with a performance by Cirque du Soleil, Ignite offers tips like how to focus on FRANK — friends, relatives, associates, neighbors, and kids — and how to avoid the “Valley of Death.” That’s when a director scares off a prospective recruit by saying too much too soon.

There was a covert element in the early days, as seen in complaints to the PSC. One forwarded an e-mail advertising an Ignite “webinar,” but warned the company was in its “quiet period” and did not have permission to market gas.

“Please do not randomly forward this email,” it said. “Send the link only to personal contacts and make sure no one contacts the PSC.” Stream blamed rogue directors, who were disciplined.

Ignite’s high-ranking directors sell the company as God’s work, according to training material; in an online audio clip, one executive director likened marketing Stream energy to Harriet Tubman’s work freeing slaves. To appeal to the more materialistic, the training material advertises unlimited bonuses with the potential for “geometric growth to infinity.”

Some participants say Stream serves them well.

Mike Hubbard, a Peachtree City resident, said he likes the “recession proof” income he gets on gas sold to his customers and to those of directors he signed up — between 50 cents and $3 a month per customer.

Hubbard paid the standard $300 to join plus $25 a month for an Ignite website.

The pilot who recruited Hubbard, meanwhile, got a bonus of $100 to $325, once Hubbard signed the required number of customers, according to the range of bonuses in Stream’s promotional material. Bigbie, at an even higher level, received a bonus of $75 to $225.

And so the bonuses flow.

Regulatory dispute

The PSC referred inquiries about Stream’s marketing strategy to the governor’s consumer office in 2008, said Cornelius, who headed the PSC consumer division. She said her staff “tried to engage” that office, “just couldn’t get [them] to bite.”

But the governor’s consumer office did investigate, Cloud said, and found that Ignite implied it had permission to market gas before it did; did not explicitly describe the duties of directors, and omitted a required opt-out provision in contracts.

Stream and Ignite signed a letter of understanding, admitting no wrongdoing and promising to follow the law.

The company also agreed to a year of monitoring. During that time, Cloud said, the office received no complaints “of consequence” and Stream seemed to follow the agreement.

The consumer protection agreement didn’t address whether Ignite emphasizes recruiting more than sales.

Cloud said his office will investigate the matter again, due to issues raised by the AJC.

Customers make it legal

Ignite directors are not shy about discussing the importance of recruiting.

Presley Swagerty, a top-ranking director known as “The Coach,” said he made $117,000 in one month, and $10 of it came from energy customers, according to a website run by several Ignite directors.

In Peachtree City last month, Bigbie said that, even though leadership says it’s about the residual income from energy customers, “60 to 80 percent of your check is bonus money” from recruiting new directors.

Still, “customers make this legal,” she said.

Stream’s Thies disputed Bigbie’s and Swagerty’s claims. He said 68 percent of 2010’s payout to the sales force was for commissions on energy customers. The remaining 32 percent, he said, was bonuses paid for recruiting directors who obtained a set number of customers. It’s four or less, according to company literature.

“No Ignite associate has ever been paid simply for the act of associate recruitment,” he said.

Yet, FitzPatrick, the pyramid expert, said that misses the point.

“Would it be worth your time to sell just the gas?” FitzPatrick asks. “Most people would say ‘no,’ that’s not how you make money. Then what are you selling if you recruit someone into the same business you’re not making money from? You’re selling a seat on a chain.”

Still, some participants say the model works for them. Among them: Randy Hedge, a top-ranking Ignite director known as “The Cowboy.”

“I don’t care if they call it an octagon, a parellellogram, a rectangle,” Hedge told an audience in 2006. “They’re sending me a check.”

Marketing in tiers

Here’s what the Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Consumer Protection says about multilevel marketing and pyramids:

“Multilevel or “network” marketing plans are ways to sell goods or services through distributors. Typically, these plans promise that if you sign up as a distributor, you’ll get commissions not only from the sales you make, but also from the sales of the people you recruit to become distributors.”

Not all multilevel marketing plans are legitimate. Some are pyramid schemes. It’s best not to get involved in plans where the money you make is based primarily on the number of distributors you recruit and your sales to them, rather than on your sales to people outside the plan who intend to use the products.

Joining a pyramid is risky because the vast majority of participants lose money to pay for the rewards of a few people at the top.

Pyramid schemes are sometimes confused with Ponzi schemes, such at the one that got Bernie Madoff sent to prison. The Securities and Exchange Commission describes a Ponzi scheme: “A Ponzi scheme is an investment fraud that involves the payment of purported returns to existing investors from funds contributed by new investors.”

The price of gas

Once licensed in 2008 to sell gas in Georgia, Stream Energy set a price that was among the lowest in the state.

Its rates have since drifted toward the middle, compared with the other nine marketers in Georgia, but have generally remained below most providers’.

Stream has posted natural gas prices with the state Public Service Commission for 32 months.

Here’s a summary of their pricing in that time:

Cheapest

May and September 2008, January and February 2009

Highest-priced
She asked them to imagine taking their families on a cruise. She said they could make $2 million in a year selling natural gas for Stream Energy.

“Can you fail your way to $22,000 a month?” asked Bigbie, an executive director with Ignite, Stream Energy’s marketing arm. “That’s what I did.”

Bigbie confided to the audience: When an Ignite representative initially approached her, she did not have the $325 joining fee. But “I said, what’s another $325?” and added the fee to her credit card debt.

Nods rippled across the audience.

It’s a scene that has played out in Georgia hundreds of times since 2007.

But if the offer sounds too good to be true, that’s because it is, two consumer advocates say. Most who sign up as sales directors will lose money, they say.

A Texas lawsuit claims it’s more than just a bad deal, it’s illegal. The suit alleges that Stream sells energy as cover for a sophisticated pyramid scheme designed to take money from the vast majority of sales recruits and funnel it to the top.

The Texas case is in early stages and Stream is vigorously defending itself. A similar lawsuit filed in Georgia by the same attorney was dismissed this year on procedural grounds. However, a Texas appellate court recently declined to dismiss the Texas case on the same issue.

Paul Thies, senior director of communications for Stream, adamantly denied the company is a pyramid scheme. He said Stream uses a legitimate multilevel marketing strategy, like Avon, paying its sales force on their own sales as well as those of the salespeople they recruit.

Scott Clearman, the lawyer suing Stream, says the state’s weak consumer-protection laws have left Georgians vulnerable.

March 2010

The value of experience

This is not the first venture into multilevel marketing by Stream executives. Chris Domhoff, a founder of Ignite, and other executives helped run Excel Communications, according to a lawsuit filed in Texas against Stream.

Excel was founded in 1988 to market long-distance phone service in the newly deregulated telecommunications industry and became one of the largest resellers of communications services in the country. The company was purchased in 2002 by VarTec, which filed for bankruptcy in 2004.

Along with the executives, some top sales associates at Excel also now work for Ignite. High-level director Presley Swagerty — the Coach — used the same back story for both companies, telling recruits for Excel and Stream that he was a high school basketball coach with bills piling up before each company changed his life.

Friday, December 3, 2010

Designers Create Solar Benches

Source: SolarFeeds

Designers Sean Park, Olbae Woo and Owen Song have collectively designed a concept bench that will not only generate electricity from solar energy, but will also utilize recycled material for its construction. The design is as simple as it can be. The bench includes a battery that will store electricity generated by thin solar panels placed on the surface. The main frame of the body is made up of recycled aluminum and recycled plastic. The designers claim it to be capable enough of generating electricity in conditions when the weather is not favorable.

It can be installed anywhere without any specific requirements for its working. An embedded Wi-Fi module will let people access the internet, and at night this very bench will use stored electricity to function as night-lighting system. The outer cover can be customized to match it with a particular environment such as parks. In brief, the concept aims to provide simple and low cost multifunctional service to future generations.

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

A Solar Installation Spree as the Deadline for Federal Grants Approaches


Source: NY Times

Owners of commercial buildings are rushing in such numbers to meet an end-of-the-year deadline for a federal Treasury grant program for solar energy installations that inventories of some equipment have dried up, solar energy experts said.

Incentives for owners to install solar panels on their warehouses, or even on excess land, have been growing in recent years, with one of the most important being a federal tax credit for 30 percent of the solar project’s cost. That credit was converted to a Treasury grant program in February 2009 as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Instead of having to wait to take the credit against taxes owed, owners receive a check within 60 days of the project’s completion.

As an example, an owner installing a typical 500-kilowatt photovoltaic system on a 100,000-square-foot rooftop at a cost of about $2.2 million would receive $660,000. Depending on how the building is used, that 500-kilowatt system could generate all the building’s power or, for high-demand uses like data centers or refrigeration, as little as 2 percent.

According to a September study by the U.S. Partnership for Renewable Energy Finance, a group of renewable energy financiers, investment in solar systems nationwide doubled from 2008 to 2010 under the Treasury grant program, going from $3.4 billion to an estimated $6.7 billion by the end of 2010. By Oct. 26, 1,118 solar energy systems had been installed under the grant program, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association, a trade group.

But the federal grant program will expire on Dec. 31. If Congress does not renew it, it will revert to an investment tax credit valid through the end of 2016. Without an extension of the Treasury grant program, industry groups say they expect investment in solar systems to shrink drastically.

Few commercial owners could come up with the capital expenditure necessary without the help of the 30 percent Treasury grant, said Jamie Hahn, a managing director at Solis Partners, a solar developer based in Manasquan, N.J. He said that after Congress established the grant program, the market for solar installations on commercial buildings changed from one in which the installations were mostly owned by investors, who then sold power back to building owners, to one where the business owners themselves did the installations.

“Prior to the cash grant coming out, about 70 percent of large-scale commercial solar projects were owned by third-party investors,” he said. “The cash grant made it feasible for actual building owners and companies themselves to own the solar assets.”

Whoever owns the system gets the most benefit, Mr. Hahn said. With federal, state and local subsidies, he said, the investment in a solar system can be extremely attractive. It can even generate income for the business, while locking in or providing free electricity for the 25 years the systems are typically under warranty.

Owners of commercial buildings are lining up to install their solar systems before the grant program expires. Donnelly Mechanical Corporation, a mechanical contractor based in Queens, plans to install a 50-kilowatt system on a 25,000-square-foot building with warehouse and office space, said Robert Ragozine, the company’s president. That will reduce the company’s electricity bill by about 15 percent.

Mr. Ragozine said he expected to meet the Dec. 31 deadline. To qualify for the grant, either a large enough part of the construction of the solar installation must be completed or 5 percent of the cost must be incurred. But if Donnelly does not make the deadline, Mr. Ragozine said, it will continue with the project and receive the tax credit.

Donnelly’s project is intended to maximize incentives. The solar installation is small for the size of the rooftop, but anything larger would not qualify for a solar rebate program, worth $1.75 a watt, offered by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority.

“We could fit more on the roof, but we’ll max it out at 50 kilowatts,” said Mr. Ragozine, whose solar installation will cost about $275,000. “That’s a maximum rebate of $87,500.”

Other perks include a federal tax benefit for depreciating the system over five years instead of 39, he said. Also, New York City allows building owners to deduct 8.75 percent of the solar installation costs over a four-year period from their property taxes, with a maximum of $62,500 in taxes offset, Mr. Ragozine said.

“With the solar installation that we’re looking at, we would probably be able to save $11,000 to $12,000 a year off our electric bill,” he said. “And with the incentives, we’re looking at a payback about Year 4.”

Incentives have greatly shortened the period of time that owners must wait to break even on their investment. LPS Industries, a packaging maker in Moonachie, N.J., worked with Solis Partners to install a system on its 165,000-square-foot rooftop last June at a cost of $5.7 million. Adding in federal and state incentives, LPS anticipates payback in about five years, said Madeleine Robinson, the company’s chief executive.

Ms. Robinson said she had been so pleased with the solar installation — for which she received her 30 percent Treasury grant about 20 days after installation — that she would like to install a solar farm on adjacent vacant land owned by LPS. The 704-kilowatt system on the roof at LPS now provides almost 25 percent of the company’s energy, saving about $10,000 to $20,000 monthly, she said.

Also, New Jersey, instead of offering rebates, has a thriving market for Solar Renewable Energy Certificates, which enable owners of solar installations to sell their clean energy credits to utilities looking to avoid penalties enacted by the state for generators of “dirtier” energy. Companies can sell these credits for 15 years after the system’s installation.

Other building owners have been scrambling to qualify for the Treasury grant. As a result, crucial equipment, like solar panels and inverters, are on back order, taking as long as eight to 12 weeks to arrive, Mr. Hahn said.

But owners still have time to sign a contract and start a paper trail demonstrating that they have paid for 5 percent of the project by Dec. 31, he said.

Owners who are considering a new roof could qualify for the credit by installing a system made by Solyndra, a solar manufacturer in Fremont, Calif., that uses photovoltaic cylinders that capture light not only from the sun, but also from a reflective white roof. Solyndra has determined that the re-roofing, if done before Dec. 31, can qualify for the Treasury grant — and the 30 percent grant will include the cost of re-roofing.

Mr. Hahn said the Solyndra system was optimal for owners facing weight constraints because it is light, and for those facing heavy winds because as air flows between the cylinders.

“You might get a roof laid in two weeks,” Mr. Hahn said, “and as long as the roof makes up over 5 percent of the project, that would qualify you for the Treasury grant.”

Cracker Barrel to offer electric vehicle chargers

Source: AJC

Cracker Barrel, modeled to represent a slower time of rocking chairs on old wooden porches, will soon feature a very modern technology — electric vehicle chargers.

Cracker Barrel Old Country Store Inc. has launched a pilot project in which it will install Blink electric vehicle chargers, provided by ECOtality Inc., at 24 restaurants across Tennessee.

The pilot is part of a broader effort by ECOtality to get charging stations in more places across the country.

Cracker Barrel restaurants are mostly located near major highways where travelers can get to them, and back on the road, easily. ECOtality says this makes them an ideal fit for the charging stations.

Guests will be able to get a full charge in under 30 minutes.

No word yet as to where the power will be sourced from, but we at Energy Roofing Systems are hoping such a forward thinking vision would include the adoption of solar technology.