Solar PV Economic Impact Analysis for CPS

2
 UNIVERSITY OF THE INCARNATE WORD
H-E-B SCHOOL OF BUSINESS

CAPSTONE 2009
INSTRUCTOR: DR. DAVID G. VEQUIST IV

BY
HARISH CHAUDHARI
CHIEN
Table ofMING HO
Contents
HALDUN UNAL
Scope Statement for CPS Solar PV Project:........................3

PV Market Overview..........................................................4

PV Growth Factors.............................................................7

Renewable Portfolio

Standards………………………………………………………………

Texas' Solar Energy

Potential…………………………………………………………………

.8

Analysis of PV incentive program and PV Growth

Trend…………………………9

New Jersey Renewable Energy Manufacturing

Incentives…………………….14

3
California Solar Initiative Research, Development and

Demonstration

Plan………………………………………………………………………

……………………………..15

New Jersey Rebates and

Installations…………………………………………………..15

California Incentives and PV

Installations……………………………………………..16

Employment Effect of the PV..

………………………………………………………………19

California Incentive

Structure……………………………………………………………….2

Recommendation............................................................24

Strategy 1.......................................................................24

Strategy 2.......................................................................27

Strategy 3.......................................................................33

Suggestion......................................................................34

Reference........................................................................36

4
Scope Statement for CPS Solar PV Project:

Business Objectives

CPS will be building a solar energy capacity. According to one scheme planned

to achieve this goal solar power equipment suppliers will partner with the commercial

building owners. The rooftop of commercial buildings will be utilized for the purpose

of generating electric power through photovoltaic(PV) panels. A substantial amount of

business is expected to be created. An assesment of the business that will be created is

needed. Assesment should concentrate on the impact of the business to job creation in

San Antonio.

5
Magnitude of the project

Assesment will be made for 100MW of solar generated distributed energy.

Contributing factors

Solar power capacity goal: 100MW by 2020.

Price per watt for solar generated energy: CPS is paying $0.27 per kW

Minimum renewable energy requirement for the State of Texas:

Net grid status: No net grid. CPS will purchase the power generated.

The solar energy generation in a distributed energy model.

6
 PVs will be installed by contractors. There will be a need for installers and

suppliers and other personnel in the installation of the panels and there will be a need

for personnel in the operation and management of the installed solar panels.

Project shall include comparisons of similar schemes in other cities.

Project will deliver a complete assessment of the business and employment the

solar power generation will create in the Greater San Antonio Area.

PV Market Overview
In 2008, total US PV installations reached 286.9MW which reflects an annual

increase of 79% from the previous year. At the end of 2008 the cumulative installed

capacity PV capacity was 789MW.

7
 As per data from a report by Interstate Renewable Energy Council, at the end of

2008 California had the largest cumulative PV capacity. California, New Jersey and

Colorado had installed capacities of 526MW, 70MW and 36MW respectively which

make them the top 3 states.

8
 At the end of 2008 California had the largest PV capacity installed per capita

with 14.6MW; Nevada was second with 14.2MW and Hawaii was third with

10.6MW.

9
 In the chart below we can observe the percentage share of installed PV capacity

by state at the end of 2008.

10
 Many states showed significant increases in PV installations. California PV

installations increased by 92%:

11
 Other areas that we have to review are the research activities and the number of

businesses. The chart below depicts the current situation for select states in number of

businesses, in federal research awards and number of scientific publications for

comparison. Percentages of research activities show the shares in the US total.

12
PV Growth Factors

Interstate Renewable Energy Council lists the factors which helped the strong

growth in PV installations: One of them is the change in investment tax credit which

13
is shown as the most important federal solar component policy. The change included

an increase for increase for commercial installations and covering residential

installations. Another driver has been the incentives offered by the states which

helped installations more than double in several states. Renewable Portfolio Standards

which mandated a specific solar power generation solar percentage in it made a

significant impact on installations. In California, where the largest energy installations

have been taking place the incentive program California Solar Initiative (CSI)

continued to make progress and contributed to the overall increase PV installations in

the US.

14
 In addition, we believe increasing awareness among public regarding the benefits

of the renewable energy for a cleaner environment and sustainable economy with less

dependence on fossil fuels, have an important role in the growth of PV installations.

Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS)

RPS is a term used to define the minimum renewable energy percentage the

utilities should have in their total power production capacities.

There was a considerable activity in state level RPS requirements in 2008 and

2009. California increased its RPS to 33% by 2020. Missouri increased its renewable

goal from 11% to 15% and specified the solar power generation to be at minimum at

2%. Several states created provisions for solar energy while enacting or modifying

15
their RPS policies. RPS is one of the drivers which have guaranteed the growth in

solar PV generation.

Texas’ Solar Energy Potential

It is not surprising that Department of Energy designated San Antonio as one of

the Solar America Cities in 2008. According to State Energy Conservation Office,

Texas ranks first amongst all states in solar power generation potential.

Analysis of PV incentive program and PV Growth Trend

Every state has different solar energy developments and incentive programs.

Some states develop it early, and some states do it lately. The following charts show

the number of different size PV systems, average costs, and incentives under different

incentive programs from 16 states from 1998 to 2008. The data was made available in

16
the Tracking the Sun II study of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. These 16

states include the top solar states such as California, New Jersey, Colorado, and

Arizona. The charts include data from the available years specific to the program and

differ from each other since they have different starting and ending years.

17
18
19
20
21
22
 In order to figure out how many residential and commercial PV systems can be

created by per incentive dollar, our group assumes that if the size of PV system lowers

or equals 10 KW which is residential PV system and the size of PV system higher

than 10 KW which is commercial PV system in this report. The following graphs

show that the increases of number of residential and commercial PV system from

2004 to 2008:

23
24
 From 2004 to 2008, the average of residential PV system incentive on per PV

Watt was $3.4, and the averages of total PV system and capacity were 7878 units and

35.17 MW. Hence, average per incentive dollar can create 2317 PV systems and 10.34

MW in these years. In terms of commercial PV system, its average of incentive on per

PV Watt is $3.8, and its averages of total PV system and capacity are 2290 PV

systems and 10.22 MW from 2004 to 2008.

Every year, increases of number residential and commercial PV systems have

different growth rates. There are some factors indirectly or directly impact them. They

are PV system’s install cost, incentive program for per PV Watt, unemployment, and

25
GDP. The following graphs show that residential and commercial PV systems’ install

cost, unemployment, and GDP from 2004 to 2008:

26
 Residential and Commercial incentive programs for PV system’s support are

regularly going down every year. Sometime they keep the same supports. However,

although residential and commercial PV install costs are gradually decreasing every

year, they might increase sometime. Hence, when people have to pay more money for

PV installation, this would directly decrease their demands for installation PV system.

For example, the average of PV install cost was increase in 2005. In this year, the

growth rate of residential PV system was negative and the growth rate of commercial

PV system was around 22% which is low than 37% of average growth rate.

New Jersey Renewable Energy Manufacturing Incentives

27
 As of September 23, 2009 New Jersey Board of Public Utilities’ decided to pay

incentive dollars for PV equipment including solar panels, inverters, and racking

systems which are purchased from a certified New Jersey Manufacturer. In order to

qualify for the incentive at least 50% of the equipment purchased must be

manufactured in New Jersey.

Renewable Energy Manufacturing Incentives

Incentive Maximum Maximum

($/ Watt) System Size Incentive

Solar Panels

Residential: 0 - 10 kW $0.25 10 kW $2,500

28
Non-Residential: 0 - 50 kW $0.14 50 kW $7,500

Non-Residential: 51 - 100 kW $0.12 100 kW $12,000

Non-Residential: 101 - 500 kW $0.08 500 kW $40,000

Inverters and Racking Systems

Residential: 0 - 10 kW $0.15 10 kW $1,500

Non-Residential: 0 - 50 kW $0.09 50 kW $4,500

Non-Residential: 51 - 100 kW $0.07 100 kW $7,000

Non-Residential: 101 - 500 kW $0.05 500 kW $25,000

29
California Solar Initiative Research, Development and

Demonstration Plan

This plan has allocated $50 million of the CSI funding for research, development

and demonstration programs. Its goals include increasing technology efficiency and

technology adoption increase.

New Jersey Rebates and PV Installations

Rebates which are provided in the State of New Jersey resulted in more than

108MWs in PV capacity in 9 years from 2001 to 2009. Total rebate provided to the

projects were about $292 million. The number of projects was 4,522 which consist of

30
3,645 systems with 10kW or smaller capacities and 877 projects larger than 10 kW

capacities.

31
The projects in New Jersey by market segmentation can be observed in the table

below:

New Jersey Solar Installations by Market Segment As of 10/31/09

Market Segment # Installed Capacity Total Rebate $ % of Installed

Projects (KW dc) Capacity

Commercial 545 56,165.8 $100,647,166 51.96%

Residential 3,664 26,769.5 $116,938,981 24.77%

School Public K-12 66 10,391.5 $31,557,164 9.61%

Municipality 25 5,074.7 $8,679,595 4.69%

Government Facility 30 3,857.4 $13,338,328 3.57%

32
 University Public 14 2,300.9 $7,350,274 2.13%

SUNLIT 48 1,078.0 $3,400,192 1.00%

Non Profit 70 952.0 $3,526,943 0.88%

Farm 46 839.7 $3,268,403 0.78%

School Other 11 413.6 $1,652,558 0.38%

University Private 3 245.0 $2,194,660 0.23%

Total 4,522 108,088.3 $292,554,263 100.0%

Total* = Program to date totals for Paid projects plus projects pending payment; preliminary results

subject to true-up based upon inspection results.

Source: http://njcleanenergy.com/renewable-energy/project-activity-reports/installation-summary-

by-technology/solar-installation-projects

33
 California Incentives and PV Installations

Today when we consider the cost associated with the PV system ownership, we

can see that the incentives provided by the governments either at local or at state

levels have been helping the development of PV market; hence, the PV generated

power. In order to calculate if there is a good return of the investment made possible

with these incentives provided we took the data of three consecutive years from the

California Solar Initiative Statistics web site. We eliminated the cancelled applications

in the raw data. After finding the total incentive amount and the total cost of the

projects for each year, we divided the total cost by total incentive amount. The result

34
implies the effect of the solar incentives provided by the State of California. The first

calculation was made for both large and small size PV systems. Average of the ratio

for the systems for three years is 383% which translates to “for every solar PV

incentive dollar provided, $3.83 of business may be created.”

California Incentives vs. Total Cost of Projects

Number of Incentive Total Cost Total Cost/Total

Applications Incentive Amount

2007 6,057 283,687,357 882,481,715 311%

2008 10,842 302,718,695 1,205,003,460 398%

2009 12,294 215,284,117 944,535,153 439%

35
Total 29,193 801,690,169 3,032,020,328 Average: 383%

Source: http://www.californiasolarstatistics.ca.gov

The average of the same ratio for systems smaller than 10kW is 486%.

36
 California Solar Initiative: Incentives vs. Total Cost of Projects 2007 - 2009

Systems < 10 kW

Number of Incentive Total Cost Total Cost/Total

Applications Incentive Amount

2007 5,746 63,276,114 258,154,134 408%

2008 10,344 93,789,744 455,660,290 486%

2009 11,968 92,727,704 522,258,816 563%

Total 28,058 249,793,562 1,236,073,240 Average: 486%

37
 Source: http://www.californiasolarstatistics.ca.gov

The average ratio for PV systems larger than 10 kW is 329%.

38
 California Solar Initiative : Incentives vs. Total Cost of Projects 2007 - 2009

Systems > 10 kW

Number of Incentive Total Cost Total Cost/Total

Applications Incentive Amount

2007 311 220,411,242 624,327,581 283%

2008 498 208,928,952 749,343,170 359%

2009 326 122,556,413 422,276,337 345%

Total 1,135 551,896,607 1,795,947,08 Average: 329%

Source: http://www.californiasolarstatistics.ca.gov

39
 The result of this analysis is showing us that the incentives are driving the

investment growth and continuity in PV. PV incentives are catalysts for the solar PV

projects at the current level of the cost associated with them.

40
Employment Effect of the PV

Effect of the Solar and Wind Generated Energy in Energy Sector

Employment

Studies have shown that renewable energy increase the employment more that

the traditional power generation sources, such as gas, coal and fossil fuels. In report

by the Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory of the University of California,

Berkeley shows that as the percentages of the renewable energy sources are increased,

the employment created by the energy sector is increased dramatically. In the study, a

20% Renewable Portfolio Standard which will be achieved by 2020 was assumed.

41
The study also made the assumption that 3,858,452 GWh electricity generation in the

US do not change until 2020 due to efficiency gains.

Electricity Generation Source % with Employment Estimates

20% RPS by 2020*

Scenari Biomas Win Sola Coa Natural Construction, O&M Total

o s% d% r% l% Gas % Manufacturing AND Employmen

, Installation Fuel t

Processin

Scenari 85 14 1 0 0 52,533 111,136 163,669

o1

42
Scenari 60 37 3 0 0 85,008 91,436 176,444

o2

Scenari 40 55 5 0 0 111,879 76,139 188,018

o3

Scenari 0 0 0 50 50 22,711 63,657 86,369

o4

Scenari 0 0 0 0 100 22,023 61,694 83,987

o5

*20% RPS by 2020 assuming that the electricity demand in the US as at the time report was

prepared remains the same.

Source: Table ES-2, Report of the Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory, April 13, 2004.

Daniel M. Kammen, Kamal Kapadia, and Matthias Fripp (2004) Putting Renewables to

Work: How Many Jobs Can the Clean Energy Industry Generate? RAEL Report,

University of California, Berkeley.

43
44
Job Creation in PV Industry

According to a study by the American Solar Energy Society (ASES) the US can

create 4.5 million jobs by 2030 if appropriate policies are implemented. The same

study predicts by 2020 PV industry can generate 105 thousand jobs.

45
 One of the studies for job creation in PV industry was prepared for Canada. In

Ontario it is estimated that 35 jobs can be created per MW by 2025.

There are different estimates from different studies across the US and around the

world which, we believe, may be resulting from the methodologies used for the

studies, from the difference in job definitions and project implementations and / or

from the optimism level of the researchers. For example, the California Energy

Commission (CEC) estimate for manufacturing jobs is 3.18 and for installation jobs is

0.73 which quoted in a study, while Greenpeace estimates the PV manufacturing jobs

as 20 and the installation jobs as 31 before 2010(5). Centers of Excellence in

46
California have surveyed the solar-related firms in Southern California and have

found that those firms are employing between 5,900 and 6,900 workers. In addition,

73% of the firms reported that they plan hiring more employees and that they expect

44.7% increase in employment over the next 12 months when the study was prepared

in 2008(6). ASES has reported the revenues and the jobs created in the PV industry in

Colorado and in the US as shown in the tables below:

PV Industry Revenues and Jobs In the US

Revenue PV Total Jobs PV Industry Revenues and Jobs In
Jobs CO
2006 $1.0 Billion 6,800 15,700 Revenue PV Total
2007 $1.3 Billion 8,700 19,800 Jobs Jobs
Source: The American Solar Energy Society, Boulder Colorado 200 $55 275 650
6 Million
Source: The American Solar Energy Society,
Boulder Colorado

47
 Although, the job creation numbers which are estimated varies across

organizations, we strongly believe that PV electricity generation in a distributed

energy model will create more jobs in the San Antonio Area.

California Solar Initiative (CSI) Incentive Structure:

CSI was designed to provide incentives to eligible residential and non-residential

solar PV projects from 2007 through 2016. It has a budget of $2.165 billion. 33% of

48
the budget is allocated to residential projects and 67% of it is allocated to non-

residential projects.

EPBB Payments (per watt) PBI Payments (per kWh)

MW Statewide MW Reside Comme Gov't/N Resident Comme Gov't

Step in Step ntial rcial onprofit ial rcial /Non

profit

1 50* n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

2 70 $2.50 $2.50 $3.25 $0.39 $0.39 $0.50

3 100 $2.20 $2.20 $2.95 $0.34 $0.34 $0.46

4 130 $1.90 $1.90 $2.65 $0.26 $0.26 $0.37

49
 5 160 $1.55 $1.55 $2.30 $0.22 $0.22 $0.32

6 190 $1.10 $1.10 $1.85 $0.15 $0.15 $0.26

7 215 $0.65 $0.65 $1.40 $0.09 $0.09 $0.19

8 250 $0.35 $0.35 $1.10 $0.05 $0.05 $0.15

9 285 $0.25 $0.25 $0.90 $0.03 $0.03 $0.12

10 250 $0.20 $0.20 $0.70 $0.03 $0.03 $0.10

Source: CSI Program Handbook July 2009,

http://www.gosolarcalifornia.ca.gov/documents/CSI_HANDBOOK.PDF *First 50

MW under SGIP.

50
 The program has triggers. Once system capacity in the applications reach the

MW in a particular step program administrators start to offer the incentives at the next

level. For example, when enough applications are made for the 70 MW in step 2,

program moves toward step 3 and the incentives decrease.

From January 01, 2007 until December 02, 2009 30,562 applications resulted in

an installed capacity of 277.1 MWs and a pending capacity of 137.2 MWs. Total of

the incentives for this capacity was $908 million.

Recommendation

51
 After our group’s analysis and research, we create three strategies and

recommendations that might help CPS to increase its PV capacity and PV

development:

• New Solar Homes Program

• Solar Homes for San Antonio Program

• CPS Solar PV Farm

• San Antonio Solar Research and Development Center

• San Antonio PV Manufacturing Incentive Program

Strategy 1
New Solar Home Program

52
 California government has launched a one million solar roofs program to

stimulate people to install PV system and increase total PV system capacity. It also

has cooperated with local builders to build new houses with PV systems. When

people buy these new houses, they can directly enjoy the advantages of solar energy.

Through this program California not only can increase its PV system capacity, but

also can let more people to know solar energy’s benefits.

San Antonio is the 7th largest city in the United States. Accord U.S. Census

Bureau, San Antonio has more than 1.35 million populations, and its annual

population growth rate is around 2% from 2002 to 2008. This means its average

population can increase almost 27,000 every month. Since these population choose to

53
work and live in San Antonio, these are many new buildings be built every year.

According to U.S. Census Bureau’s record, the annual average number of new

building is around 10,000 from 2004-2008. Therefore, if CPS can cooperate with

local builder to positively promote PV system to customers and install PV system on

new buildings. CPS’s total PV capacity would enhance a lot.

Moreover, according to the report of Energy Pulse, 75% of Americans feels it is

important that their utilities include renewable resources. Moreover, 50% of U.S.

consumers would be willing to pay more money for renewable energy. Hence, many

people have a high willing for renewable energy. If CPS can adopt this plan to

54
positively introduce and install solar PV systems for customers, this would let more

people to install and accept solar systems.

Testing Strategic Actions

Pro.

More people use and install PV systems

Customers promote Solar PV system to new customers

Might indirectly decrease install cost

Cons.

Local builders do not want to cooperate with CPS

55
 Customers have bad experiences for solar PV system

Decrease potential customers

Increase personnel expense

Implementation

Goal:

Total PV capacity achieve 100MW by 2020

Assumes:

CPS implements the plan next year and ends this by 2020 (10years)

Every year new house: 6,000

Average Home Size PV system: 4.5 KW

56
After cooperate with Local Builders:

Best Case (70% of new houses installed PV systems):

6,000 X (0.7) X 4.5 X 10 = 189,000 KW= 189 MW

Expected Case (40% of new houses installed PV systems):

6,000 X (0.4) X 4.5 X 10 = 108,000 KW = 108MW

Worst Case (10% of new houses installed):

6,000 X (0.1) X 4.5X 10 = 27,000 KW= 27MW

The following chart shows how the best case can help CPS increase the volume

of total solar PV capacity by 89 MW (from 100 MW to 189MW), the expected case

57
not only can help CPS to achieve its goal, but also increase the volume of total solar

PV capacity by 8 MW (from 100 MW to 108), and the worst case will decrease CPS’s

total solar PV capacity.

58
Strategy 2
Solar Homes for San Antonio

We believe the trigger mechanism in the CSI incentives structure has generated

good results. Therefore, we recommend a similar structure for CPS to implement in

San Antonio. Since, in the initial steps higher incentives will result in faster customer

acquiring, a higher incentive level than the current $0.27 should be considered. We

recommend implementing a Solar Homes for San Antonio initiative which should aim

to create a 160MW solar capacity in San Antonio. The incentive structure should be

similar to the one depicted below:

59
 PBI Payments (per kWh)

MW Step San Antonio MW in Step Residential

60
1 5 $0.39

2 7 $0.34

3 10 $0.26

4 12 $0.22

5 14 $0.15

6 18 $0.09

7 20 $0.05

8 22 $0.03

9 25 $0.03

61
 10 27 $0.03

In order to estimate the economic impact of the PV capacity created, we used the

CSI application data. We have to note that the application data includes completed

incentive payments and incomplete incentive payments. However, it provides us with

the potential economic impact of the PV deployment, since application has the

incentive amount and the cost of the projects. From the California Solar Initiative web

site provides application data with the installed and the pending capacity. Between

January 01, 2007 and December 02, 2009, the total of the pending and the installed

62
capacity in California was 414.3 MW. From the application data, the total cost of the

projects from January 01, 2007 to November 11, 2009 $3,032,020,327.662. This cost

of the projects reflects the business created; therefore in California approximately in 3

years, $3,032,020,327.662 of business was created. We will assume that the incentives

for residential and non-residential have the same effect in creating business. If we

divide the total business created by the capacity, we will have an estimate of the

business potential per MW that PV projects may create. This amount per megawatt

equals to $7,318,417.

63
 PBI Payments / kWh)

MW San Antonio MW in Residential Business Potential

Step Step

1 5 $0.39 $36,592,086.99

2 7 $0.34 $51,228,921.78

3 10 $0.26 $73,184,173.97

64
4 12 $0.22 $87,821,008.77

5 14 $0.15 $102,457,843.56

6 18 $0.09 $131,731,513.15

7 20 $0.05 $146,368,347.94

8 22 $0.03 $161,005,182.74

9 25 $0.03 $182,960,434.93

10 27 $0.03 $197,597,269.72

Business Potential Total: $1,170,946,784

65
 The total impact of a 160 MW solar PV deployment may be equal to

$1,170,946,784 during these ten steps. Let’s assume that each of the ten steps takes 1

year to complete. The ASES report indicates that in 2006, the employment was 6,800

jobs in the PV industry. According to this data for every million dollar 6.80 jobs were

created in the industry. In the same study, the total number of employment that was

created in addition to the jobs created was calculated. The multiplier for the out-of-

industry employment can be calculated by the following formula: (Total employment

- Industry employment)/(Industry employment). We calculated 1.31 as the multiplier

by using this formula.

The employment estimates for each year are in shown in the table below:

66
 Solar Homes for San Antonio Employment Estimate-1

Year San Antonio MW PV Industry Other Business

Deployed Each Year Employment Employment Potential

1 5 249 326 $36,592,086

2 7 348 456 $51,228,921

3 10 498 652 $73,184,173

4 12 597 782 $87,821,008

5 14 697 913 $102,457,84

67
6 18 896 1,173 $131,731,51

7 20 995 1,304 $146,368,34

8 22 1,095 1,434 $161,005,18

9 25 1,244 1,630 $182,960,43

10 27 1,344 1,760 $197,597,26

68
 $ Millon

69
 Given the variety of the estimates for the jobs created for the PV industry, we

believe it would be wise to provide a different estimate. For this purpose we estimated

the employment with an average of the estimates of 5 organizations which was given

in a similar study from UC Berkeley; the average of the estimates was 20

manufacturing and 13 installation jobs per MW or 33 jobs per MW. When the

distinction is made for the types of the jobs, regardless of the ratio accuracy of the

estimate, it may be better conceived why PV manufacturing would cause more jobs in

an area. In the table below there is the number of jobs that may be created per MW in

the PV industry and its effect in other employment using the multiplier we calculated

above.

70
 Solar Homes for San Antonio Employment Estimate - 2

Year San Antonio MW PV Industry Other Business

Deployed Each Year Employment Employment Potential

1 5 165 216 $36,592,086

2 7 231 303 $51,228,921

3 10 330 432 $73,184,173

4 12 396 519 $87,821,008.

5 14 462 605 $102,457,84

71
6 18 594 778 $131,731,51

7 20 660 865 $146,368,34

8 22 726 951 $161,005,18

9 25 825 1,081 $182,960,43

10 27 891 1,167 $197,597,26

72
Strategy 3
Ownership of a PV Farm

There are vast potential for solar energy. According to a PV industry analysis, with

some incentives, the solar photovoltaic market could attract more than a thirty-four

billion investment by 2015. Texas could attract almost five billion of the investment.

There are best resources available in West Texas, a strategy of such size would be

73
more than enough to meet the country’s energy demand. In fact, the solar energy

industry has the ability to create between 28,000 and 42,000 new jobs in the U.S. by

2015. The value of ownership of such farms for electricity it produces is significantly

higher during the peak demand for electricity – for instance summer hot days when air

conditioners are at full blast.

Photovoltaic has a small advantage over solar thermal in which these types of solar

farms do not need water. Such investment for large solar farms could be strategically

located in any area whether dry or no access to natural resources.

Pros

Create Jobs

Meet Peak Demand

74
 Tax Incentives

Cons

High cost

Maintenance of Solar Farm Capabilities

Suggestions
San Antonio Solar Manufacturing Incentives

In our opinion, CPS can help bring the solar PV industry manufacturing and assembly

jobs to San Antonio. Therefore, we suggest additional incentives paid to solar PV

equipment fully or partially manufactured in San Antonio. Furthermore, CPS may

seek either PV start-ups or already established foreign and domestic solar film

75
 manufacturing companies which need venture capital or incentives for a viable

investment in investment.

Estimate of San Antonio PV Manufacturing Incentive for a Residential PV

System

In this estimate, we assumed the average residential system size as 7.3kW it was in NJ

solar installations data. We also assumed the local origination percentage as 50%,

which means 50% of the PV system was manufactured in San Antonio. If $0.25

additional incentive would be paid then based on the assumptions incentive payment

would be $1,825 and the local revenue from this incentive would be $913 per system

Estimate of San Antonio PV Manufacturing Incentive for a Residential PV System - System Size 0-10 kW

Incentive $ Average System Size kW Incentive Payment Local revenue per system

0.25 7.3 1,825 913

76
 Estimate of San Antonio PV Manufacturing Incentive for a Commercial PV

System

For an estimate of a commercial size we assumed that average commercial PV system

size would be 103.5kW as derived from NJ solar incentive data. We determined the

incentive payment as $0.07. Again, assuming a 50% local origination we calculated

the incentive payment as $7,245 per average commercial system where $3,622.5 of

this payment would stay with local San Antonio manufacturers.

Estimate of San Antonio PV Manufacturing Incentive for a Commercial PV System - System Size 101-500 kW
incentive $ Average System Size kW Incentive Payment Local revenue per system

0.07 103 7245 3,622.5

77
San Antonio Solar Research and Development Center

Recommendation: A collaborative research and development center which will bring

the brain power of San Antonio together. The research center should focus on while

demonstrating the efficiency of the current technologies; it should also perform

research on how efficiency of the existing technologies can be increased. Another area

it should concentrate on is the discovery of the new technologies through experiments

and research. Therefore; the San Antonio Solar Power Research and Development

Center can employ students and academicians from engineering and business schools.

78
Sources:
• http://www.dsireusa.org/documents/PolicyPublications/IREC_Updates_

%20Trends_2009.pdf

• eetd.lbl.gov/EA/emp/reports/lbnl-2674e.pdf

• http://www.njcleanenergy.com/renewable-energy/programs/renewable-

energy-manufacturing-incentive

• http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/energy/Solar/rdd.htm

• http://njcleanenergy.com/renewable-energy/project-activity-

reports/installation-summary-by-technology/solar-installation-projects

• http://www.californiasolarstatistics.ca.gov/reports/12-02-

2009/Dashboard.html

• Daniel M. Kammen, Kamal Kapadia, and Matthias Fripp (2004) Putting

Renewables to

79
 Work: How Many Jobs Can the Clean Energy Industry Generate? RAEL

Report,

University of California, Berkeley.

• American Solar Energy Society, Estimating the Jobs Impacts of Tackling

Climate Change, October 2009,

http://www.ases.org/pdf/ASES_TCCJobs_Summary.pdf

• http://www.cansia.ca/Content/Documents/Document.ashx?DocId=11879

• http://www.census.gov/

• http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/06/eveningnews/main2540879.sh

tml

• http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/index.cfm?

re=1&ee=1&spv=0&st=0&srp=1&state=TX

• http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/index.cfm?

CurrentPageID=1&State=TX&RE=1&EE=1

• http://www.puc.state.tx.us/index.cfm

80