In an example that illustrates the number and complexity of the challenges facing solar power - and the larger movement towards clean and green energy and products - a lawsuit pitting two seemingly eco-conscious families against one another has been (tentatively) settled in Sunnyvale, CA. The dispute centers around a residential solar PV system and a strand of redwood trees that had grown tall enough to shade it. How you weigh the merits of localized, clean energy generation by solar PV against natural, oxygen-generating and eye pleasing tree, I'm not sure. But a judge found it clearly defined by California law that solar PV has the right of way. Luckily, this is a headline making case for the very reason that it is the exception to the rule. The Solar Shade Act is a valuable tool for providing home- and building-owners the assurance that their investment in solar PV will not be diminshed by a neighbor's upward expansion of their structure. This is surely not the last time, though, that distributed solar generation will face growing pains from unlikely, even ironic scenarios.
OK, so advanced technology development - CHECK - low cost manufacturing in China - CHECK - ok so that's everything we need for costs to drop 40% in a couple years? If solar power has actually achieved economic parity in California, as claimed, when is someone going to tell us Californians?
While Wal-Mart has been hush hush about the details until now, the names on the short list are perhaps unsurprising. PowerLight, SunEdison, and BP Solar will split the contract, with each doing 7 or 8 installs. Interestingly, while we have seen the service provider owning the RECs generated by their installs (presumably to sell them after market), in this case Wal-Mart will retain ownership of them. Presumably that knocks their contract cost up a bit, and provides evidence that Wal-Mart is thinking about a little bit more than just the bottom line in this case. Huzzah.
If there's one thing that so-called Big Box Stores have in abundance, it's roof space. So it's fitting slash appropriate that more of these "big box" retailers are looking placing solar PV generation systems on their robust roofts. There was last week's Kohl's Department Stores accouncement with SunEdison. Wal-Mart is ever so secretly evaluating solar energy generation. Now Target has begun to roll solar PV onto several of its California stores. A store in Stockton, CA, is used as an example; it's not made explicit the power output of the system, but one can estimate from the description that this store has a 300-350kW installation. Interestingly, it also mentions that only 40% of the roof is used. There're a number of reasons that they didn't build a bigger system - perhaps 300-350kW completely zeros out electricity costs for that store. That case would highlight the limitations of net-metering; why can't Target build a 700kW system on a store in sunny Stockton and use the excess generation to offset electricity usage at other locations? Feed-in tarrifts would allow them to do just that, using dollars from generation at one store to pay for usage at other stores.
Target has a good history of social responsibility - known for giving back to their communities in a more significant way than some other big box giants - so it's a bit more believable to hear them say " "Part of Target's DNA is our commitment to the community, and certainly that ties into the environment as well..."; but there is clearly an economic component that Target, Wal-Mart, Kohl's and others are beginning to catch on to.
