by Jill Cliburn

Are you planning a community solar program or looking for ways to make an existing program better? We think you will find every corner of this website useful; we've been assessing best practices and introducing innovations in this field for more than two and one-half years. But one of the lessons we have learned is that easy access to information counts. Community solar program designers and other stakeholders (inside and outside the utility) often find themselves facing a specific challenge—a burning question on a short fuse.

For that reason, we are thrilled announce the debut of a new set of easy-access web pages. We are referring to the Solutions pages, which you can find right at the top, on our Menu bar, above.

By now, a lot of readers are gone from this blog, off to explore the Solutions web pages. Yes! But if you are still reading, here’s a quick summary of what we offer and why.

What’s on the Solutions pages? Six sets of resources, each addressing a major challenge area for community solar program design process. These challenge areas come right out of our mission statement: First, we review the planning process itself, and the challenge of establishing a truly collaborative effort, which crosses utility-department boundaries. Second, we offer a brief introduction to high-value, strategic community solar design. Third, a discussion of procurement for products (including project development) and services. Some of those decisions come right away, as they define the community solar business model, and others come up as your utility team gets down to the details of program design and delivery.

Fourth, we take a look at target market research and market segmentation. At CSVP, we are happy to refer readers to other resources that build marketing intelligence and strategy; we zero in on target marketing and program customization as a fairly new and especially promising approach. We also echo the process-collaboration theme, as we suggest ways to get specific market research through internal collaboration.

Fifth, we provide resources in an area where the CSVP has broken new ground. That is, designing the program with solar plus storage or demand-response companion measures in mind. Even utilities that do not see solar-plus strategies on their doorstep should give this web page a look. CSVP offers a guide to using demand response (DR) measures to add integration value, and a separate guide to understanding storage choices on both sides of the meter. As utilities nationwide confront greater market-penetration of solar, the strategies we introduce can help, in terms of integration value, local-service risk management, and in terms of making a strong transition to succeeding in markets where lots of players offer lots of DER options to your customers.

Finally, an area of CSVP innovation, which again ties back to cross-departmental and customer-driven requirements of community solar. That is, assessing and increasing the net value of the offer, through a streamlined analytic approach we call GAP: Getting at Price. This approach identifies a strategic goal and then works back, to close the GAP between what the utility needs and what the customer wants in program pricing. In addition to an overview and exemplary generic models that show how GAP works, we offer a round-up of 12 current community-solar pricing models, for readers to review.

Our approach? There are a few unifying themes to all of the work that the CSVP has led.

Of course, it is all based on field experience. The individual firms represented on our team each have decades of experience working with utilities, and a few have been pioneers in the community solar field. In addition, we have relied on input from our Utility Forum, a loose network of six to ten utilities (public power, IOUs, and occasionally electric co-ops) to share their successes and frustrations. In most cases, they also reviewed our work products.

Another way CSVP define its approach is around the term practical. One interpretation: We are not shy about recommending the good works of others. That includes work from some of our colleagues who are also co-funded by the U.S. DOE SunShot Solar Market Pathways Program. We provide direct links to some of their works and also offer annotated, linked resource lists in most of our challenge areas. In those publications, you’ll find a fast path to resources that may be hard to find, but hit one or another nail right on the head.

CSVP’s focus has been on asking utilities to push beyond the ordinary—to use their cross-departmental expertise, technical insights and customer knowledge to create community solar programs that really are win-wins. CSVP is also known for promoting the concept of using community solar as a market-based laboratory. Where else will you find customers eager to work with you to try this new approach to distributed PV and indeed to distributed PV plus storage or DR, engaging the community in real solutions that are scaleable and replicable to address the needs of the 21st century grid?

We hope you will enjoy these resources. Please continue to engage with us, as we would love to see your comments or get back in touch with you. While each participating firm on our project offers its own, extensive expertise, this project is also keeping a core group of consultants on-board to expand our offerings, beginning with on-site trainings, facilitation, and specific expertise in each challenge area, to help you to initiate or improve your own high-value community solar program.

According to the Urban Dictionary, the status “It’s Complicated” refers to an ambiguous state that is beyond acquaintance, but not quite a relationship. It also may indicate dissatisfaction with a current relationship. So when Utility Dive recently asked me why the state of community solar policy is so complicated, it’s no wonder I flashed on the need for relationship re-boot between the key parties—the utilities and the solar developers—who both should have the long-term interests of customers in mind. Granted, the Community Solar Value Project (CSVP) has sat with the utilities most often, but we know our share of developers, too. Both sides in this relationship could use to sit down and recognize each others’ strengths and weaknesses.
 
The way I put it for Utility Dive is worth repeating, “Policies that keep utilities from working effectively with developers could be a lost opportunity.” Time and again, members of the CSVP team and I have been to workshops and events where the topic will touch on community-solar policies, and the utilities are missing. Likewise, the utility folks, who just a few years ago were very excited about community solar, often see “policy” on the agenda for a community solar event, and read it as a trigger warning for an ensuing a heap of trouble.
 
The Dive article itself demonstrated how broad utility participation could make community solar better. Author Herman K. Trabish, briefly recognized that there are numerous ways to add value, before jumping on a current favorite: project siting, or “locational value.” While that’s a worthy value, let me reiterate four different areas where utility-led community solar programs add value:

• Solar project siting and design,
• Financing and procurement,
• Target marketing, and
• Co-marketing with solar-plus companion measures

 
While I read Herman's article with great interest and respect (It’s complicated!), the fledgling community solar industry would be severely short-changing itself to put too much emphasis on locational value—or on any one strategy—alone. The challenge of entering a new landscape of integrated, distributed energy resources (DERs) is that it is an ever-changing place. A suitable local solar site with high locational value is rare and likely to change within the life of the project you put there. But a combination of technical and programmatic strategies, devised by utility- and developer-based innovators working together, could bring benefits that complete a solar-portfolio triad, along with with third-party rooftop solar and centralized utility-solar resources. What would a fleet of distributed community-solar projects, incorporating diverse benefits and net high-value, look like? How could utilities work with one or more developers over time to bring this about, with a greater long-run payoff for everyone?
 
If you’re interested in this discussion, our October webinar on the Value of Going Local provides a glimpse of a new analytic strategy that takes into account a few different value-add strategies, while avoiding the traps of a conventional (utility trigger warning!) Value of Solar analysis. We also recommend that if you want to learn more about the policies that do or do-not promote community solar innovation, we’ve had a webinar on that, too, featuring NRRI’s incisive policy analyst, Tom Stanton. You can replay the webinar or download the presentations here.
 
At CSVP, we are ready to embark on our third year. We’ve accumulated lessons learned and a list of questions that need resolution in order to support a thriving community-solar movement. One thing we know for sure: We need both utilities and developers to solve problems together, and we need regulators to let them.

For community-solar program designers, the first-cost of the solar project is always a consideration, but it is not the only consideration in promoting program success. The CSVP’s recent webinar on solar carports and shade structures illustrates this point. I can give you at least five reasons why solar shade structures merit consideration in your community-solar program plans, despite the added cost. And these reasons were underscored by our August webinar guests, Dan Ciarcia at Two Willows Consulting and Bob Boscamp at PowerParasol.

Reason #1: Carports Keep It Local
I’m not the only one who thinks community solar should be locally sited, on the distribution grid. Recent market research from SEPA and the Shelton Group suggests that most people who want community solar would like it to be sited locally—ideally within a short drive from where they live. Yes, there are some market segments that focus on price above all, but large segments say they would be willing to pay a small premium in order to keep community solar local.

The problem is, urban and suburban communities often have few good sites for ground-mounted solar projects. One of our Utility Forum members, Palo Alto Utilities, which is located in a community that is famous for its trees and its high property values, is a prime example. Palo Alto has not yet finalized plans for community solar, but it has already launched a carport-focused solar incentive. We anticipate that many communities—and especially those with sustainability goals—will demonstrate new ways to finance carport-based community solar, to keep participant costs acceptable.

Reason #2: Lower Solar Costs Make More Room for Improvements
A study from GTM Research in 2014 predicted a price premium ($/Wdc) for solar carports of 60 to 80 cents through 2018. CSVP has documented current premiums in the range of 45 to 60 cents in the West for relatively standard carport designs. Design innovations, improved installation procedures, and economies of scale as the industry grows can make a difference—but only up to a point. Most solar canopies use steel, at a relatively fixed cost.

But look at it this way: As PV costs decline, project sponsors can afford more of the add-ons that were beyond practical consideration a few years ago. A solar carport today is in same price range as a basic rooftop-solar project was in 2013.

Reason #3: Communities Want Green Parking
The U.S. Green Building Council now has a program called ParkSmart, which is gaining popularity in cities nationwide. This program has documented lots of ways in which solar carports improve community sustainability, from reducing the need for gas-fueled car air conditioning, to protecting night skies while supporting efficient lighting options, to reducing heat-island effects. Indeed, studies have documented that solar panels reduce heat island effects, relative to bare asphalt, by as much as two-thirds.

Reason #4: Community-Solar Carports Are Good For Business
A number of community solar projects have brought so-called anchor customers together with other participants in the community, to solve solar siting problems and increase economies of scale for community solar. Parking lots for retail shopping might be great anchor sites for community solar, where the business stakeholders take on a little more of the full project cost in order to benefit accordingly from the chance to offer their customers much-wanted shade. PowerParasol has cited research from the University of Arizona, indicating that shoppers will spend more time in stores (and spend more money), if their cars can be parked in shade.

Power Parasol also has demonstrated the value of solar in shading not only cars, but mingling people, as they participate in farmer’s markets, public performances, and outdoor events of all kinds.

Dan Ciarcia provided a compelling case for solar carports in cold climates, too. For example, one Honda dealership documented savings on snow plowing and sending sales staff to constantly move vehicles—adding up to a full week of worker’s pay for every snow storm. That’s not to speak of the extra advantage of being able to show more cars year-round.

Reason #4: An Invitation for School-Based Community-Solar Projects
One of the biggest markets for solar carports today is at schools. The buildings are hard to retrofit—especially in California and other places requiring architectural reviews. While some school districts are already obtaining carport solar from third parties, others are looking for solutions in partnership with utilities and whole communities. We’ve heard of at least one case where a utility considered treating the school as the anchor customer for a community solar project that would also offer shares to households in the community.

Reason #5: A Glimpse of the EV Future
Every electric utility should be preparing for an increase in electric vehicles. That includes early preparations for car-charging programs that contribute both energy sales and renewables-integration value. The Green Car Congress reported a recent study from Navigant, indicating that the EV market is growing at 60% year-over-year in North America. Of course, total market size is still small, and most utilities are not ready to go full bore into EVs. But a community-solar program that includes a carport-based charging demonstration is a great lead-in for talking about EVs with internal utility staff, local officials and customers.

A carport-based community solar program can keep the original concept of community solar as a test bed for new ideas alive and exciting. Most projects eventually would pay for themselves through energy benefits, but some carefully planned projects could pay for themselves sooner, through subsidization by anchor customers or even by charging a little bit every day for that prized parking spot in the shade.

Based on my experience, I advise utilities to take build a diverse portfolio of local community solar resources. This allows the resource base to grow with customer demand, and it gives utilities a chance to evaluate the real costs and benefits of alternative strategies.

And More...
A paper discussed in our July blog, on taking a new approach to solar value, includes a detailed discussion of how adding a few MW of carport solar to a larger community-solar portfolio can be achieved at no extra cost. (It also outlines a strategy that would work for many utilities in the West, utilizing flat-roofed solar carports that are cheaper to site and build, and which offer greater solar production on peak summer days.) In addition, we will be adding more resources on solar carports and other strategic solar designs to our website this fall.

When we began the Community Solar Value Project, we held a clear vision of shared-solar projects that would bring the utility and its customers together in a market-based demonstration of several DER strategies needed for an integrated and flexible grid. We envisioned tapping strategic solar siting and design plus DR and storage “companion measures”—orchestrated to help balance the load and increase the net value of local PV. Now, a year later, we’re almost there, except for a few challenges, including one in the guise of low-cost centralized solar.

Yes, it is hard to turn down a cheaper solar option. According to the Solar Energy Industries Association and GTM Research, solar costs fell last year to less than $1.50 per Watt for utility-scale fixed-tilt systems. If you were doing community solar primarily to deliver savings to subscribers, this might look like an answer. A number of utilities are now planning voluntary programs that tap big solar and package it kind of like wind-based green-power programs. Even community solar on the distribution grid is going to the urban fringe. In Minnesota, community solar developers have been co-locating 1-MW projects to reach economies of scale, with the state limiting developers to five co-located projects.

At the Community Solar Value Project (CSVP), we always recognized the benefit of scale. But we are focused on distribution-system projects, and preferably infill projects in the 500-kW to 2-MW range. Why? Well, one of our core assumptions is that distributed solar is here to stay. Whether or not the utility is involved, customers will pursue distributed solar. But if the utility were involved, the pairing of these large-commercial scale projects with DR and storage options (and in some cases, energy efficiency) represents what we call a “market-based laboratory” for field-testing many of the smart-grid and flexible-DER strategies that are currently stuck at the white-paper stage or in isolated pilot programs. As far as we know (and tell us if we’re wrong) no one has yet market-tested the economics of a distributed solar fleet strategy (achieving, say, 10 MW through a fleet of community-solar projects). Certainly there is little testing of distributed solar strategies that incorporate high-value companion measures. Sources like GTM Research and Rocky Mountain Institute and ICF International all have recently touted the distributed-energy future. And, for the most part, we believe them. But implementation in existing utility cultures, including engagement with and learning from “real” customers, is a project that needs to start now. The smart grid will not emerge fully armed, like Athena, from the head of Zeus. It will emerge from a trail of better and bigger attempts to get the thing right.

The CSVP recently started to work on an effort called “Filling the Pricing Gap,” to help utilities create and justify more competitive community-solar pricing for programs based (at least primarily) on local PV resources. You will see presentations and reports on our progress here in coming weeks. The folks at the Sacramento Municipal Utility District have been walking this road with us—or more accurately, they are usually in the lead, as they apply tremendous experience and in-house expertise to the challenge. One early example: they have taught us that a conventional “value of solar” argument is not such a practical solution for justifying near-term program design. For one thing it makes most utility guys’ hair stand on end. For another, it raises endless “what-if” questions about increasingly dynamic technical options, markets, and policies.
While others look for a VOS algorithm that would be, in effect a “theory of everything” for DER, we work to combine a relative few, fairly indisputable aspects of VOS analysis with targeted strategic arguments. This includes presenting what we call “realistic hypotheticals,” scenarios with ranges of numbers that are not intended to hit the value nail on the head, but which are nevertheless worth considering.

I use plural because we are addressing multiple internal stakeholders in the utility, all of whom have strong (and often conflicting) points of view. We are also addressing the utility’s most timely concern—that it needs to build and maintain strong customer relationships throughout these trying times. Watch our Library and Workshops pages for our reports from the field—where at least for the most part, we are keeping it local.