The U.S. energy storage market just had both its best quarter and best year of all time. According to the GTM Research/Energy Storage Association’s U.S. Energy Storage Monitor 2015 Year in Review, the U.S. deployed 112 megawatts of energy storage capacity in the fourth quarter of 2015, bringing the annual total to 221 megawatts. This represents 161 megawatt-hours for the year.

The 112 megawatts deployed in the fourth quarter 2015 represented more than the total of all storage deployments in 2013 and 2014 combined. Propelled by that historic quarter, the U.S. energy storage market grew 243 percent over 2014’s 65 megawatts (86 megawatt-hours).

The report breaks down the market into three segments: residential, non-residential and utility. The utility segment, also called front-of-meter, continues to be the bedrock of the U.S. energy storage market. In 2015, front-of-meter storage accounted for 85 percent of all deployments for the year. Most of these deployments were in the PJM market, where over 160 megawatts of energy storage systems went on-line in 2015.

The residential and non-residential segments combine to make up the behind-the-meter market. While much smaller, the behind-the-meter market grew 405 percent in 2015. The report notes that the residential market is geographically diverse but was led by Hawaii for the year. California led the non-residential segment.

GTM research forecasts that the annual U.S. energy storage market will cross the 1-gigawatt mark in 2019, and by 2020 it will be a 1.7-gigawatt market valued at $2.5 billion.

“We can look back at 2015 as the year when energy storage really took off,” said Ravi Manghani, GTM Research senior energy storage analyst and author of the report. “While most of the growth was limited to a single wholesale market of PJM, we expect growing interest for storage in several markets.”

“Energy storage is changing the paradigm on how we generate, distribute and use energy. With exponential growth predicted over the next couple of years, energy storage solutions will deliver smarter, more dynamic energy services, address peak demand challenges and enable the expanded use of renewable generation like wind and solar,” said Matt Roberts, executive director of the Energy Storage Association (ESA), adding, “The net result will be a more resilient and flexible grid infrastructure that benefits American businesses and consumers.”

Today, more utilities are considering storage along with an assortment of traditional and non-traditional assets to meet reliability, capacity and system upgrade needs. The recent extension of several federal renewable tax credits is expected to further boost energy storage as more storage paired with renewables will be deployed.

Key Findings

– The U.S. deployed 111.8 megawatts of energy storage in Q4 2015, which was higher than deployments in 2013 and 2014 combined.
– The U.S. deployed 221 megawatts of storage in 2015, up 243 percent over 2014.
– Installed system prices for utility projects for energy applications to be completed in 2017 will be lower by 29 percent versus 2015, and for power applications, the prices will be lower by 25 percent.
– GTM Research forecasts that the annual U.S. energy storage market will cross the 1-gigawatt mark in 2019 and by 2020 will be a 1.7 gigawatt market valued at $2.5 billion.
– In 2015, front-of-meter storage accounted for 85 percent of all deployments for the year.
– 20 state markets had energy storage policy activity in 2015, up from 10 states in 2014.

Solar Power World

Today, the business group Advanced Energy Economy announced that total revenue for global advanced energy was a record $1.4 trillion in 2015, making the industry twice as big as the airline industry, bigger than apparel/fashion, and approaching worldwide spending on media and entertainment. The U.S. advanced energy market hit $200 billion, nearly double the nation’s beer market, larger than pharmaceutical manufacturing, and closing in on wholesale consumer electronics.

In 2015, advanced energy revenue grew 8 percent worldwide over 2014, more than three times the rate of the global economy overall. U.S. advanced energy revenue grew 1 percent over 2014.

Growth in the U.S. advanced energy market was impacted by persistent low oil prices in 2015. Ethanol pricing is highly correlated with oil prices. So, while production increased slightly, from 14.3 to 14.7 billion gallons as the federal Renewable Fuel Standard was fulfilled, ethanol revenue dropped 33 percent, from $40.9 billion to $27.3 billion. Without counting ethanol, the U.S. advanced energy market grew at a 10 percent rate in 2015, or four times the growth of U.S. GDP.

These findings, along with details by market segment, are found in the annual Advanced Energy Now 2016 Market Report produced by Navigant Research for AEE. The 2016 edition includes global and U.S. revenue for the industry annually from 2011 to 2015, showing powerful growth over the five-year period.

“Advanced energy has made stunning progress over the past five years, reaching new heights both globally and in the U.S.,” said Graham Richard, CEO of AEE. “This vital industry is making the energy we use more secure, clean, and affordable, while creating economic growth. AEE and its business members are committed to accelerating this progress by working with state and federal policymakers, as well as the customers who are demanding advanced energy options.”

The report shows that 2015 global advanced energy revenue was 17 percent higher than 2011. The U.S. advanced energy market grew 29 percent since 2011.

Specific U.S. market findings were:

• Representing 30 percent of total U.S. advanced energy revenue in 2015, Building Efficiency led all segments for the second year in a row, reaching $63.6 billion, up nearly 11 percent over 2014, and 50 percent over 2011. This industry segment accounts for improved building envelope, appliance and electronics, and lighting as well as managing energy use with demand response and enabling information technologies.
• Electricity Generation was the second largest advanced energy segment, at $52.3 billion in 2015, and also experienced the second largest year-on-year growth, at 18 percent.

• Solar Photovoltaics was up 21 percent, to $22.6 billion. Revenue from solar PV nearly tripled since 2011.
• Wind was up 75 percent, reaching revenue of $8.2 billion.
• Gas turbine revenue was up 14 percent, to $10.5 billion, in 2015.
• Following global trends, U.S. Electricity Delivery and Management experienced the largest year-over-year growth, 24 percent, reaching $18.2 billion in 2015, led by Transmission investments.
• Reductions were seen in Fuel Delivery (down 31 percent), Transportation (down 9 percent), and Fuel Production, which was down 28 percent, primarily due to lower prices for ethanol, which track gasoline prices. Sales of hybrid vehicles were also impacted by low gasoline prices, while revenue from Plug-in Electric Vehicles still continued to grow, reaching $4.9 billion in 2015 – seven times 2011 revenue for PEVs.

“There has never been a better time for cost-competitive solar power,” said Howard Wenger, President, Business Units, of SunPower. “Strong worldwide demand for distributed generation and large scale solar power is being driven by innovative technologies delivering proven value, and by the global imperative to reverse climate change.”

Solar Power World

Wednesday, March 30, 2016
2:00pm ET/11:00am PT

Technology is constantly changing; are you using the right tools to ensure your business is operating as efficiently as possible? The desire for great customer service stays the same; are your offerings and sales techniques making it easy for the customer to go solar?

Join us in a special 1-hour presentation in which several presenters explain:

• How innovative software can streamline your business
• Why PACE financing can help enable you to service more customers
• What best practices are most effective when working with clients

Featured Speakers

Deep Chakraborty, CEO, Enact Systems

Bob Giles, CEO, PACEfunding
Bob brings more than 25 years of experience in public finance banking and solar PV sales channel management and finance. Bob was the founder and CEO of Ready Solar, which he sold to SunEdison in 2010. Ready Solar was the first company to productize residential solar systems to allow the HVAC, roofing, and electrical trade contractor—as well as home improvement channels—to enter the residential solar business. Bob received his MBA from University of Southern California.

Jim Jenal, Founder & CEO, Run on Sun
Jim founded Run on Sun in 2006. You may have seen his blog, read his book or be one of his 22,000 twitter followers. Jim has been quoted in the Los Angeles Times, the Wall Street Journal and the Guardian, as well as in numerous trade publications including Solar Power World. A NABCEP Certified PV Installation Professional since 2010, Jim also holds degrees in Mathematics, Computer Science and Law.

Moderator

Kathie Zipp, Managing Editor, Solar Power World
After graduating from Kent State University, Kathie was introduced into the world of trade journalism, specifically in the renewable energy sector. She takes what she learned from covering the wind industry into writing about the technology, installation and development of solar energy. Kathie feels grateful to be writing about solar in such an exciting time for the industry. She is inspired by the wonderful people she meets in solar, with their passion, innovation and wish to do good for the planet. Kathie also loves the opportunity she gets to travel in her career, and continues to do so in her personal time as well.

Solar Power World

Graham Smith, CEO, Open Energy

Article by Graham Smith, CEO of Open Energy

Many investors fear instability and volatility. Alas, those words characterize the United States market right now. Oil prices are at an all-time low, having fallen nearly 60 percent since June 2014. The upheaval in the commodity sector, in conjunction with global market shifts, is significantly affecting investor confidence in the solar sector. The argument? With dropping oil prices, renewables are a less attractive investment. But how accurate is this oversimplification?

Not at all.

Market fluctuations in any commodity can ripple out to the solar sector. Yieldco stocks have plummeted, even though oil and solar do not compete in the same market. Oil is primarily used as a transportation fuel, a heating fuel, and as a feedstock to make chemicals. Photovoltaic (PV) solar is used to generate electricity, where oil barely registers: according to EIA, petroleum made just one percent of U.S. electricity generation in 2014, the rest consisting of renewables, coal and natural gas. Even when it comes to that one percent, oil is simply not as cost-effective as a source of electricity generation. Deutsche Bank estimates that even with oil at $50/barrel, the fuel cost to produce electricity is over 9 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh). Compare that to solar, which averages just 5 cents per kWh. It’s a no-brainer. Solar is resilient against oil because they are simply not comparable.

If oil and solar are not competitors, how can low oil prices affect investor confidence in segments such as commercial solar?

One reason, of course, is that the oil price reflects global market shifts that are affecting investors across varying industries. China’s underperforming domestic market resulted in the devaluing of the yuan, affecting stock markets worldwide. In the United States, a volatile market is likely to slow the gradual increase in Federal Reserve interest rates, after recently being raised for the first time in 11 years. The uncertainty of federal rates may affect yield returns and investor confidence.

Or, one might assume that all solar investing is homogenous. In actuality, the types of investments across the sector vary greatly. Investing in a solar stock is very different from investing in a commercial project for the roof of a Walmart; a crowd-funded residential installation is an entirely different opportunity to utility-scale deployment.

It is this nuance that should redefine the conversation entirely.

Commercial solar investments can be low risk and stable over a long period of time, as they are not market-correlated. Once installed, a solar PV facility can reliably generate electricity for up to 30 years with relatively minimal additional investment costs.  This enables the owner to offer electricity at a fixed price over the life of the facility, benefiting both the owner and the electricity consumer.  When you add in the possibility of a credit-worthy entity (such as a Fortune 500 company, a school, or a municipality) buying the power on a long-term, contracted basis, the credit underwriting becomes much simpler and more attractive.  Non-residential solar stands out, therefore, as being able to offer de-risked, long-term, predictable cash flows.  So for a long-term investor looking for attractive, risk-adjusted returns on a non-market correlated basis, solar is fast emerging as an attractive investment asset class.

There are, of course, market factors that do affect commercial solar, but a low oil price is not one of them. Commercial solar faces challenges such as a widely fragmented marketplace. Project size and type varies significantly, which results in lack of predictability for lenders and leads to high transaction costs, as due diligence is costly. High transaction costs can limit access to capital, a deterrent in the growth of the commercial sector. While these are legitimate concerns, advancements made to increase standardization, automation and access to capital will help commercial solar meet its full potential.

And the potential is huge. In the northeastern United States alone, there is estimated to be $67.5 billion worth of rooftop project development opportunities to host mid-size solar installations, a large scale market opportunity to provide long term yields to knowledgeable investors.

The informed investor knows that variations in the price of oil have very little bearing on the resilience and attractiveness of solar power, both in the long-term, as well as the near future.  With recent technological and financial innovations, commercial solar is starting to thrive. Hard costs have decreased by 60 percent since 2011, according to Deutsche Bank, and are estimated to fall another 30-40 percent in the coming years.  When looking at long-term investments that are not tied to dividends and stock, solar is entirely separate from the oil conundrum. Solar assets last over 20 years, separating temporary market changes from yields. Commercial solar offers a stable, long-term, fixed income to investors, and it will continue to be a compelling investment insulated from the more alarming fluctuations of legacy energy production.

Solar Power World

By SPW editor Kathie Zipp

The industry rejoiced at news of the ITC renewal last December. Nevertheless, to some the decision seemed to come out of nowhere. SEIA President and CEO Rhone Resch addressed this point in a video during the opening session of the PV Conference & Expo (formerly PV America) in Boston this February.

Though the renewal seemed almost out of the blue, the video showed the extensive efforts made by SEIA, its board members and the industry to create a strategic renewal plan, which was vigorously implemented. SEIA lead nationwide advocacy campaigns, held lobbying days in Washington and flew 14 CEOs from around the country to Washington to meet to speak with Congress in one united voice, stressing the ITC’s importance. SEIA recognized the need for “champions” and found them in Sen. Dean Heller (R-NV) and Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) who helped support the renewal.

Christopher Mansour, SEIA VP of Federal Affairs, noted in the video that renewing a tax credit before it expires almost never happens. The solar tax credit was renewed one year early. Resch credits this to the support of the industry. “Collectively we are strong, but individually we are weak,” he said. As a member of the industry, I think we owe a lot to the guidance of our national trade organization.

I found the keynote from Peter Boyd, founder and CEO of Time4Good, equally thought-provoking. The conversation didn’t center so much around his company as it did on the idea of doing business for good in general. He spoke of the Paris climate agreement and how its interpretation happens in rooms such as the one in which we sat. Solar growth is a key part of reducing carbon emissions, and by obtaining a second chance to do business through the ITC renewal, America is given a second chance to be an active participant in the fight to reduce climate change and create a more livable world.

How cool is it that solar provides a way to make money and be successful while helping the planet? How lucky are we to be able to do business for good? Though the show floor of the expo was smaller than other conferences, it still buzzed with business. Curious crowds gathered around the booths of several innovative software companies almost non-stop. Even industry incumbents engaged in intimate conversations, excited to do business this year without an ever-encroaching roadblock.

High-fives and good vibes was the feeling of the PV Conference & Expo. I look forward to seeing the energy continue throughout other industry shows this year.

Solar Power World

SnapNrack, a manufacturer of solar panel mounting solutions, celebrates a joint UL 2703 listing with Enphase microinverters and SolarEdge optimizers.  Under SnapNrack’s UL 2703 listing and with the launch of their MLPE Rail Attachment Kit, installers are no longer required to bond optimizers with ground lugs and bare copper.  When using microinverters, ground lugs and bare copper are also not required to bond module rows.  Installing a system using the MLPE Rail Attachment Kit will help further reduce labor and material cost.

SnapNrack’s MLPE Rail Attachment Kit has been designed, tested and certified under the UL 2703 listing to work with Enphase microinverters and SolarEdge optimizers.  The MLPE Rail Attachment Kit is an efficient solution for attaching microinverters and optimizers directly to SnapNrack rails. The microinverter and optimizer are bonded to the system through the kit and its attachment to the rail, removing the need for WEEBs.  The kit comes pre-assembled and installs with a single 1/2” socket, utilizing standard channel nuts for Snap-In attachment to the rail.

Features include:

• MLPE Rail Attachment Kit is UL 2703 certified with Enphase microinverters and SolarEdge optimzers and provides further reduction of labor and material costs.

• Microinverter and optimizers are bonded to the system through the MLPE Kit and it’s attachment to the rail.
• No need to bond optimizers with ground lugs and bare copper.
• When using microinverters, ground lugs and bare copper are not required to bond module rows.
• Removes any need for WEEBs.

Solar Power World

Don Massa, product manager of Mounting Systems, Inc., will chair the committee, which will represent all PV mounting and racking segments including residential, commercial and utility-scale products.

The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) has announced the formation of the PV Mounting System Manufacturers Committee (MSMC). This committee will work with other SEIA members to ensure the industry is working together to advance solar products, services and policies. It will bring together manufacturers of the components that literally hold the solar industry together.

“With solar now the fastest-growing clean energy segment in America, it’s more important than ever for the industry to speak with a unified voice,” said Rhone Resch, SEIA’s president and CEO. “This committee will provide a platform for manufacturers of PV racking and mounting systems nationwide to come together and deliver both input and clarity on the key codes, standards and regulatory policies that affect the day-to-day operations of solar energy in the U.S.”

“Now, for the first time, PV mounting system manufacturers can band together in the development of practical, cost-effective codes and standards that directly impact the PV industry, especially racking and mounting,” said Don Massa, product manager of Mounting Systems, Inc. “We, as manufacturers, see an opportunity in working with SEIA to provide and promulgate industry best practices, education and training.”

The committee will work closely with SEIA’s Codes & Standards Committee and will solicit input into the development of building and electrical codes and standards specific to PV racking and mounting. It also will promote clarity and cost-effective standardization and provide training and education on the best installation practices and procedures consistent with SEIA’s Solar Business Code. Participation in the PV Mounting System Manufacturers Committee will be open only to SEIA members.

Founding members of the MSMC represent the largest mounting and racking suppliers in the industry and include: S-5, Roof Tech, Pegasus Solar, Anchor Products, Unirac, PanelClaw, Quick Mount PV, SnapNrack, Everest, and more.

Solar Power World

Whitman is pleased to announce that the firm has reached the milestone of 200 MW of designed solar photovoltaic (PV) projects. This is a major accomplishment for Whitman’s team of engineers, who added PV engineering to their list of services at the end of 2008, and continues to meet the needs of clients in many states.

What does 200 MW include? 

Whitman is involved in many aspects of the development of photovoltaic projects including site feasibilities, conceptual plans, surveys, electrical interconnection support and phase I environmental analysis.

The 200 MW milestone represents projects that have been fully completed or are currently in the design process. There are more than 125 projects in this pipeline that are currently operating or are in various stages of approval and design. These projects constitute work in 9 different states, and consist of roof tops, carports and ground mounts. Project sizes range from an11kW roof top to a 20 MW ground mounted system, and are constructed for uses such as utilities, pharmaceuticals, water treatment plants, commercial properties, public/private schools and large solar PV developers.

Whitman is an industry-leading environmental, engineering, waste management, and energy design and consulting firm with more than 30 years of professional experience.  We are privately held and mid-sized, with a staff comprised of experienced environmental specialists, scientists, geologists and engineers.  Whitman professionals are licensed to practice engineering in numerous states across the country.  Our approach focuses on providing the highest level of customer service, and ensuring our solutions are environmentally sound and safe, minimize liability, and make sense for each individual client.  Whitman’s state of the art corporate headquarters is located in Cranbury, New Jersey and our Southern Regional Office is located in Egg Harbor City, New Jersey. Our clients range from small companies to Fortune 500 corporations.

Solar Power World

Sections 690 and 705 of the National Electric Code have specific rules for sizing the DC and AC conductors associated with grid-tied PV systems. With these requirements, there are minimum conductor sizes that will allow safe operation in any installation.

The code doesn’t dwell on voltage drop considerations for PV inverters–there is no mention in either section; however, this is an important consideration for any installation, and particularly those requiring long cable runs on either the DC or AC side of the inverter.

PV inverters have a mandated normal operating voltage window, and excessive voltage drops in cabling that effectively moves the nominal operating voltage seen at the terminals of the inverter to one end of this window can result in nuisance tripping of the inverter and an associated loss of generation.

Basic wire sizing

The NEC calls out different requirements for determining the base ampacity of a conductor depending on its location in the PV system:

• NEC Section 705.60 states the base wiring ampacity for AC conductors used to connect the inverter to grid must be based on 125% of the inverter nameplate current rating.
• NEC Section 690.8 states the base wiring ampacity for DC conductors carrying current generated by PV modules be based on 125% of the STC short circuit current capability of the string/array.

Once base ampacity values are determined, they must be further compensated to account for conditions of use per Section 310.15 of the NEC. These conditions of use include adjustments for ambient temperature, number of conductors in a raceway (conduit) and height of a conduit above a rooftop. Each of these factors, when applicable, increases the base ampacity to generate a minimum required ampacity value. The minimum wire size required can be found using Table 310.15(B)(16) in the NEC, depending on whether 75°C or 90°C rated copper or aluminum wire is specified.

Note that most inverters do not have the wiring terminals rated for aluminum wire, and so copper conductors must be specified.

Voltage drop considerations
The minimum wire size obtained above doesn’t take into account voltage drops due to long runs between the array and inverter and between the inverter and the grid. For inverters, this is important: Every percentage of voltage drop results in a percentage of power loss from the inverter. While this may not seem like much, the cumulative energy (kWh) lost over the life of the system can be significant.

Most inverter manufacturers recommend a maximum of 5% voltage drop for the system— typically 2.5% on either side of the inverter. On large systems, many designers specify an even tighter value of 3% total or less, to maximize the energy harvest.

Once the wiring size per NEC requirements is determined, the expected voltage drop in the wiring must be calculated and compared to the desired limit.

Percent voltage drop in a two wire circuit is given by:

%ΔV = 2 x (I_MP/V_MP) x R’ x (L/1000)

where:

I_MP= current flowing in the conductor (for a string it will be the max power current rating of the PV module

V_MP= reference voltage, e.g., for a string, it is the voltage driving the current flow, for a PV array this is the maximum power voltage

R’ is the resistance/kft for the wire size determined via NEC considerations

L = the one way length of wire in the circuit

As an example, consider a PV output conductor that carries current from five strings, each of which has an I_SC = 9.2A and an I_MP = 8.5A. The length of the run is 400’, and the voltage across the string is 500V.

Then the basic NEC ampacity required would be (5 x 9.2) = 46A. Assume the ambient temperature surrounding the wire is 35C, there are only two conductors in the conduit and the conduit is raised above the rooftop to a height of 6”:

• Since the conduit runs across a rooftop and is spaced 6” above the surface, Table 310.15(B)(3)(c) indicates the ambient temperature must have a 17C adder, or for the wiring we must assume local ambient of 35+17 = 52C
• From Table 310.15(B)(2)(a), for 90C wire, based on an ambient of 52C, the derating factor for ambient temperature is 0.76.
• Since there are only two conductors in the raceway, the conduit derating factor is 1.0 (no derating)

Thus, the NEC minimum ampacity is AMP_NEC = 46.0/[(0.76)*(1)] = 60.52A, and using Table 310.15(B)(16), the minimum (90C/Cu) conductor to meet the requirement would be #6AWG.

From NEC Table 8, the resistance/kft for #6AWG wire is 0.510Ω/kft. For the voltage drop calculation use I_MP in the voltage drop equation, or I_MP would be 5 x 8.5 = 42.5A. Calculating the voltage drop,

%ΔV = 2 x (I_MP/V_MP) x R’ x (L/1000) = 2 x (42.5/500) x 0.51 x (400/1000) x 100 = 3.47%

Based on a desired 2.5% voltage drop for the DC side, a larger wire must be specified:

• For #4AWG, r’ = 0.321 Ω/kft and results in a %ΔV = 2 x (42.5/500) x 0.321 x (400/1000)x 100 = 2.18%
• For #3AWG, r’ = 0.254 Ω/kft and results in a %ΔV = 2 x (42.5/500) x 0.254 x (400/1000)x 100 = 1.73%

Thus, using #4AWG achieves the 2.5% max voltage drop figure; going to #3AWG more than meets the objective, but this choice also adds additional cost, which must be evaluated.

This article is contributed by Roy Allen, technical sales engineer at ABB Solar Inverters.

Solar Power World

Storage technology is crucial to the growth of solar, but its deployment could be challenging. Grid-connected energy storage lacks clear expectations and standards among manufacturers, so how can developers know their systems will operate correctly and safely?

“It’s a very confusing marketplace,” said Davion Hill, energy storage leader for North America at DNV GL. “There are IEC, UL and various other standards for batteries, but none say why or how you should use them—they’re just there. Putting myself in the shoes of developers or battery manufacturers, I can totally understand their confusion. We wanted to develop something to help navigate that path.”

Knowing successful storage implementation would require clarity and agreement on rules and regulations, DNV GL initiated the GRIDSTOR joint industry project.

GRIDSTOR aimed to accelerate implementation of grid-connected storage systems through a recommended practice for system safety, operation and performance. DNV GL invited a diverse selection of industry stakeholders—including major international suppliers, end users and regulators—to join the consortium. Together, they worked to fill gaps left by existing standards and create internationally-recognized guidelines. The consortium examined more than 150 standards—many from a DOE-published inventory—and listed them under sections of safety, operation and performance. The recommended practices are generic for all types of grid-connected electricity storage systems, with an emphasis on high-energy batteries.

“We didn’t just want to point to industry standards, but explain where, how and why to use them,” Hill said.

The BEST test
Though the GRIDSTOR recommendations are meant to be used by any manufacturer or testing agency, DNV GL also offers its own GRIDSTOR compliance, qualification and customized testing services in its BEST (battery and energy storage technology) facility in Rochester, New York.

For battery manufacturers, DNV GL can perform qualification tests and award an IEC certificate just like other accreditation centers, but Hill explained the center’s capabilities go much further.

“Many times manufacturers want to test how they’re better or different than their competition,” he said. “Not only can we accredit them to the same certificate to which their competitor was just certified, but we can make testing conditions harsher, playing with aspects such as temperature, to test where they’re strong. We act as an independent lab to test their claim.”

Still, many of the center’s clients have been turned out to be banks and developers looking for evidence that storage solutions will meet project expectations.

Michael Mills-Price is head of DNV GL’s inverter testing business and also works at the storage facility. He explained how he assists clients at all levels of the solar market, from residential through utility, who are now aggressively looking at storage as part of their future portfolios.

“Let’s say a developer is looking to do business in Hawaii, which has unique environmental and regulatory conditions,” he said. “The developer wants to know if a given storage solution will perform safely and well enough for that facility (household or commercial building) to maximize the project economics over the stated warranty period. We can develop tests to give them a good idea if the technology will meet their expectations.”

DNV GL can test a system—battery, battery management system and inverter—even at the individual battery cell level. Testers examine battery degradation rates associated with various charge and discharge cycles within parameters, such as specific loads and temperatures, associated with the unique application. Results are analyzed and compared with previous results in the center’s ever-growing database. Analysts are able to use internal software to build a case for the customer.

“We can say, OK, if you’re developing solar on homes in Hawaii with these loads and this battery or storage system, you can expect this performance from onset through to year five or 10 of the warranty period,” Mills-Price said. “There truly are sweet spots for different battery chemistries in terms of how they’re operated. By evaluating a myriad of conditions specific to an application, we can make recommendations based on real lab testing data.”

Challenges to storage testing
Unlike with inverter and module companies, Hill explained that most battery manufacturers still choose to do their own testing rather than have their product independently verified.

“Battery manufacturers have a strong competitive advantage in that they have been testing their battery cells longer than anyone,” he explained. “Doing in-depth third-party testing is long and expensive—something not every manufacturer or developer is willing to take on. If you are a developer looking at storage options in the middle of a time-sensitive contract and a battery manufacturer is showing you reams of their testing data, why would you stop and do independent testing?”

In these cases, DNV GL is often pulled in as the independent engineer to validate the data. “It’s not as good as running application-specific independent testing, but the market really isn’t always asking for that right now,” Hill said.

Possible solutions
Currently, independent testing procedures specific to solar don’t exist. Hill noted he has yet to see the solar industry push for these, but explained how other industries have. “Reliability is so key for the automotive market. You can’t develop a car, then leave your customers by the side of the road,” he said. “Their need to develop independent testing and validation was strong and early.”

Hill could, however, see a push in several instances. “Inverter and panel manufacturers could be a catalyst,” he said. “They’re used to showing developers third-party data and may come to demand this data from their battery vendors as well. Banks could also lead the way, asking developers to provide third-party testing data, who will in turn ask their vendors—whatever the bank says goes. Lastly, not to sound like a fearmonger, but usually a push comes after a crisis where millions of dollars are at risk. Then people say, ‘Why don’t we have this?’”

Hill agreed that if storage is going to be critical to solar, the industry needs to think ahead. In the meantime, the GRIDSTOR can help lower the risk of field failures and lost profits.

“The industry really isn’t focused on operations, but when it is we’re in a good position to help.”

By Kathie Zipp, editor, SPW

Solar Power World

SolarWorld announced the company’s U.S. manufacturing hub has produced its first bifacial Bisun modules for installation as part of a 205-kW system at the University of Richmond (Virginia).

The system will be the first commercial installation in the Americas to employ SolarWorld’s latest technology, which can generate up to 25 percent more energy, compared with standard mono-facial modules of the same nominal wattages.

New bifacial modules on the assembly line Thursday 2/18/16. © 2016 SolarWorld / www.fredjoephoto.com

Set atop the university’s Weinstein Center for Recreation and Wellness, the new system will compare performance of standard modules using advanced p-type mono-PERC (passivated emitter rear contact) cell architecture and Bisun modules using the same cell architecture. Bisun technology generates electricity both from direct exposure to solar radiation on the front side as well as reflected sunlight on the backside.

In addition, both types of modules will be installed on top of both a gravel roof and a roof of vinyl-like white material TPO (thermoplastic olefin) to produce further performance data comparisons. Actual power generation from bifacial modules depends on both the distance they are installed from a surface beneath them as well as the composition and therefore reflectivity of that surface.

SolarWorld will co-own the array with Secure Futures, based in Staunton, Va., which is developing the project. Under the first power purchase agreement within the service territory of utility Dominion Power Virginia, the University of Richmond will purchase power generated by the array. Installation is expected to conclude this spring.

“Thanks to the university, we will provide a system that produces clean power while also demonstrating the in-field capabilities of technological innovation,” said Mukesh Dulani, U.S. president of SolarWorld. “Aside from making the university greener, this installation will provide a strong set of performance data in a real-world application. Bifacial PERC modules represent a significant technological advancement in photovoltaics, and SolarWorld is once again leading the deployment of cutting-edge solar technologies. We look forward to showing customers the finished system.”

Solar Power World

Alpha Rho, an injection molder of rigid plastic boxes, is installing a 238.4-kilowatt solar energy system on its Fitchburg manufacturing center, which will produce more than 80 percent of the power needed to run the company’s manufacturing, warehousing and administrative operations, according to President David Tall.

The system, being installed by Hudson, Mass.-company New England Clean Energy, is projected to deliver electricity savings of more than $1.6 million over 25 years (factoring in inflation). In addition, Alpha Rho will benefit from a new revenue stream created by the sale of solar renewable energy certificates (SRECs), arranged by New England Clean Energy.

To finance the solar, Alpha Rho opted for a 7-year traditional lease from LFC Capital, Inc., which eliminated any upfront capital investment. Instead, Alpha Rho will make 100% tax-deductible fixed monthly payments, creating a low-cost path to ownership at a substantially reduced purchase option price.

“The return on investment with solar is phenomenal. The low cost of ownership thanks to the LFC lease, plus the SREC income and electricity savings, adds up to a significant impact on our bottom line profitability, while we do something good for the planet at the same time,” Tall said.

“Solar energy is a great option for businesses like Alpha Rho who are looking to divert high daytime electricity spending back into their business and workforce,” said Senator Jennifer L. Flanagan (D-Leominster).  “As the legislature continues its work to increase the net metering cap and expand the availability of SRECs for other small businesses, I am encouraged by Alpha Rho’s ability to invest in their economic future through this collaboration with other Massachusetts companies.”

The solar energy system is slated to be installed by New England Clean Energy on the roof of Alpha Rho’s 36,000-sq.-ft. facility in April. It will have 745 Canadian Solar 320-watt panels, SolarEdge inverters with optimizers under each panel, and Sollega racking and mounting hardware.

“We looked at various solar contractors over the past few years and decided to work with New England Clean Energy because they’re a local business with outstanding customer service and reviews,” Tall said.

“The environmental benefit of installing solar is as appealing as the financial benefit, since Alpha Rho is committed to sustainable operations,” Tall said. The solar energy system will reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the air by 412,800 pounds per year, which is equivalent to taking 39 cars off the road, or planting almost 150 acres of trees.

The Alpha Rho project team also included Dube and Hazelwood accountants of Leominster, Mass.; and Erb & Southcotte attorneys-at-law and Rollstone Bank & Trust, both of Fitchburg, Mass.

Solar Power World

PV rapid shutdown requirements were added to NEC 2014 (690.12) to improve electrical and fire safety hazards, namely for first responders. Conductors associated with PV systems may remain energized even after the electrical service disconnect has been opened. To alleviate this risk, the NEC has put in place specific requirements to de-energize conductors extending from a PV array.

Residential examples

PV system circuits installed in or on buildings must include a rapid shutdown function that is in accordance with NEC 2014, Article 690.12. Requirements include:

• Rooftop PV installations.
• Conductors which extend greater than 10 ft from the array (outside) or more than 5 ft inside a building are required to be de-energized upon command of shutdown.
• These conductors must be de-energized to below 30 V and 240 VA within 10 seconds of initiating rapid shutdown.
• Correct stickers and/or signage shall identify the rapid shutdown initiation method.
• All PV equipment performing the rapid shutdown shall be listed and identified.

PV equipment location should be carefully considered when installing a rapid-shutdown-compliant system. Below are examples on how compliance can be achieved for systems of various sizes.

Commercial example

Residential PV Systems
For a residential system, rapid shutdown compliance can be achieved by the following means:

• Use of a rapid-shutdown-complaint combiner installed within 10 ft of the array to de-energize conductors extending from the array to the inverter (Example 1).
• Inverter installed indoors with no more than 5 ft of conductors inside the building (Example 2).
• Inverter installed outside within 10ft of the array (Example 3).

Commercial PV Systems (String Inverters)
For commercial systems, rapid shutdown compliance is achieved when three-phase string inverters are placed within 10 ft of array (equipment outside) or within 5 ft of array (equipment inside).

Utility example

Utility PV Systems (Central Inverters)
For utility projects or systems utilizing three-phase central inverters, rapid shutdown compliance is achieved through rapid-shutdown-compliant combiner boxes installed at the array.

This article is contributed by Michael Nieman, applications engineer with Yaskawa – Solectria Solar.

Solar Power World

One of the nation’s largest solar developers approached a national grocery store chain about going solar. When it came time for the final pitch, the developer highlighted the ~150 locations that offered the biggest payback from installing solar. The customer thought the numbers looked good, but didn’t quite believe that the 150 locations were the best. He suggested one of his facilities in the California Central Valley, noting the ample sun in that location. The developer immediately pulled up the analysis for that site, noting the unfriendly tariffs and a rooftop filled with HVAC units and skylights. This is when the customer realized that the developer had done a detailed analysis for each location across the entire country, nearly 1,000 different buildings. “Their jaw dropped,” said the developer’s head of sales. “That was the moment we won the sale.”

This example is a classic case of a portfolio sale. The key elements of a portfolio sale are to break up the customer’s holdings into separate pieces and evaluate each of them individually. As a result, you can determine the subset of the projects that make the most sense and prioritize them above the others. In other words, you are turning down work if it doesn’t make financial sense for the customer. This builds credibility, by showcasing the fact that you are optimizing for customer value rather than your own revenue.

This approach also lets you tease out what the customer’s financial objectives are. In many cases, they will want the greatest return (i.e. the greatest profit margin). However, in some cases, they may have additional money to use. If so, you can then showcase a different solution for maximum net present value (NPV) or maximum revenue (which will typically be very different results from the maximum profit margin solution).

Developers are increasingly responding to portfolio opportunities using this technique. Advanced software design tools make it easy to evaluate hundreds of projects in the time it used to take to evaluate just a few. In the example described above, the developer used HelioScope to model each of the 1,000 potential buildings–a process that would have been impossible just a few years ago.

What this looks like

This technique can take different forms, depending on the customer. For example, with residential customers, you might break up their rooftop into different sections and structure the conversation around the total potential of their rooftop, versus the sections that make the most financial sense to build.

Alternatively, you could show their system in the context of their neighborhood, showing how their rooftop is better than their neighbors’ for installing solar. And if it isn’t, you can give them handouts to give to their neighbors for referrals!
With small businesses, try to find if the landlord owns other buildings (you can often find this from property tax information). Then you can turn their group of buildings into a small portfolio exercise. This is a great way to turn a lead on a single building into a much bigger opportunity, while at the same time establishing trust with the landlord through a much more nuanced discussion.

Finally, even for single commercial properties, think of the entire area as a portfolio of sites. What is the ROI on a carport canopy? What is the potential value of a ground-mount array at the side of the building? This not only helps to maximize total ROI but also helps get the owner or facilities manager thinking more creatively about how best they can install solar.

Advantages and Disadvantages

The main advantage to this approach is that winning a portfolio of projects can have a dramatic impact on a company’s bottom line. It’s more than just a big boost to revenue–having one main negotiation can mean significantly reduced customer acquisition costs. It can also give you the flexibility to stage out the installation process to keep costs low.

The main downside is that this approach certainly requires more preparation–often much more, since you’ll have to research the other locations in the owner’s portfolio and then do detailed analysis for each property. But it can often pay off with the combination of a larger potential transaction and improved close rates.

Read method three, “The Personalized Sale,” here. 

Read method two, “The Optimization Sale,” here.

Read method one, “Collaborative Selling,” here.

Paul Grana is the co-founder and head of sales & marketing for Folsom Labs.

Solar Power World

Advanced Roofing Technology, Inc.  a manufacturers’ representative company that offers building industry professionals—architects, engineers, managers, and owners—a distinctly different approach to material selection, and MiaSolé have entered into a Sales Representative Agreement. Advanced Roofing Technology, Inc. will sell MiaSolé FLEX modules in Hawaii and the Pacific Islands.

Advanced Roofing Technology was founded in 1991 and combines a total of 43 years of hands-on roofing and construction experience with more than two decades of marketing professionalism. Advanced Roofing Technology, Inc. has continually molded the firm to market demands and industry trends without compromising excellence in standards and practices.

Advanced Roofing Technology will sell MiaSolé FLEX modules, the most efficient thin-film lightweight flexible modules on the market today with an efficiency rating of +16%.  MiaSolé FLEX modules bond directly to the roof surface with a simple peel-and-stick adhesive. The low-profile FLEX module provides superior wind resistance and a seismic advantage over traditional rack-and-panel systems where their higher profile increases the likelihood of damage in a hurricane or earthquake, making FLEX modules the ideal solar solution for the Hawaiian and Island markets. This adhesive approach also eliminates the need for racking and reduces labor and logistics cost to provide a 20% lower BOS cost than traditional glass solar systems.

The FLEX-02 Series module is available in two formats. The FLEX-02W module is 39.3 inches x 102.3 inches and is rated at 360-watts, and designed for low-slope commercial single-ply roof systems.  The FLEX-02N module is 14.6 inches x 102.3 inches and is rated at 120-watts, and designed specifically for standing-seam metal roofs. The FLEX-02 Series module is IEC 61646 & IEC 61730 and UL 1703 certified.

The FLEX-02 module provides Advanced Roofing customers other significant benefits. The low weight of the module (<0.7 lb/sq ft) allows installation on roofs that cannot support the weight of traditional glass solar panels. Because the FLEX-02 panels adhere directly to the roof surface, there are no penetrations, eliminating the worry of leakage and damage to valuable contents within the building.  The FLEX-02 also is aesthetically pleasing, blending into both metal and TPO roofs and preserving the original look of the roof.

Solar Power World

Solar Power World

Ingeteam has just commissioned a solar photovoltaic (PV) plant in Minster, Ohio. The Minster PV plant, owned by Half Moon Ventures LLC, out of Chicago, IL has received an investment of $15 million. Thanks to the 4.3MWdc (3MWac) of installed solar capacity, this plant will produce 5.83GWh of energy per year. In addition, the facility has 7MW of power batteries, which will improve penetration rates of the plant in the distribution network and reach an estimated savings of $6,375,000.

For this project, Ingeteam supplied four (4) outdoor central PV inverters, each rated at 750kW and Ingeteam also carried out the inverter commissioning.

Michael Hastings, CEO at Half Moon Ventures stated that “the Ingeteam inverters supplied for our Jefferson Solar Park in Wisconsin gave us such good results that we decided to renew our trust we put in them, and we have not regretted it. Not only has Ingeteam’s inverter performance been exceptional, but their after sales support has been stellar. We are really sold on Ingeteam products.”

Javier Pérez, Executive Vice President at Ingeteam Inc., underlined that “it has been a pleasure working together with Half Moon Ventures again. We feel that this is a recognition that our inverters perform at the highest possible level and it has reaffirmed us that tomorrow we will harvest the fruits of the good job developed today.”

Solar Power World

Array Technologies, Inc. (ATI), a leader in solar tracking systems, announces the commissioning and interconnection of the 45 MW (ac) Sandstone Solar Project in Florence, Arizona.

Sandstone owner and operator, sPower, contracted turnkey solar power solution provider Swinerton Renewable Energy to lead engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) activities for the ground-mounted single-axis tracker photovoltaic installation. Wells Fargo & Company (NYSE: WFC) provided tax-equity financing for the project. Phoenix-based utility Salt River Project is purchasing all of the solar energy produced at the 45 MW facility as part of its sustainable portfolio. Sandstone Solar produces enough green power to supply more than 8,000 homes.

Built in about five months, Sandstone Solar is located on nearly 340 acres and features more than 182,000 Jinko solar modules mounted on the best LCOE tracker on the market, ATI’s DuraTrack HZ v3.

“ATI’s tracker technology is an important contributor to the success of the Sandstone Solar facility,” said Ryan Creamer, sPower CEO. “The DuraTrack system allows the panels to more efficiently capture energy as the sun tracks across the Arizona sky, which benefits SRP’s rate payers.”

“We partnered with Array Technologies not only for their high quality product, but because we knew they would meet our strict deadline and still provide the level of support needed for this great project,” said George Hershman, Vice President and Division Manager of Swinerton Renewable Energy.

“It is a true honor to work alongside such extraordinary partners as sPower, Swinerton and Wells Fargo,” explained ATI Founder and CEO, Ron Corio. “We pride ourselves on providing the lowest lifetime cost tracking technology in the world and these forward-thinking organizations understand the long-term value proposition offered by building, owning and operating a high-quality solar asset.”

Featuring patented rotating gear drive architecture, DuraTrack HZ v3 significantly reduces tracker installation time, requires no scheduled maintenance over its 30-year design life and includes a highly innovative load mitigation mechanism that allows each tracker row to respond to weather events and changing site conditions, automatically. Since the initial product release in June 2015, ATI has shipped and installed over 1 gigawatt of v3 with several gigawatts more projected through 2016 and beyond.

Solar Power World

Maui Solar Project (MSP) recently installed 20 kW of Solar Panels on the campus of local nonprofit organization, The Maui Farm. The Maui Farm, founded in 1985, provides farm-based, family-centered residential and educational programs that teach essential life skills for self-sufficient living. The addition of the PV to four homes and administrative office on The Maui Farm’s campus will save the organization an estimated $200,000.00 over the next 20 years.

“The Maui Farm continues efforts to streamline our operating expenses to ensure the most efficient use of public and private resources in our work with homeless families and the community”, said Executive Director Paula Ambre. “We are most grateful to Maui Solar Project for making our most recent initiative, the installation of photovoltaic energy systems, an affordable reality for our nonprofit organization.”

To arrange financing, often the biggest challenge for nonprofits wanting to transition to solar, The Maui Farm worked with MSP to do an in-house Power Purchase Agreement. The agreement is a great fit for both organizations. MSP’s Vice President of Operations Emily Erickson sits on the Board of Directors for The Maui Farm. “The Maui Farm promotes sustainable agricultural practices, environmental stewardship and healthy living. With the addition of photovoltaic energy on their campus, The Maui Farm can teach children, families, and community members about PV and depending less on fossil fuels. PV provides an educational tool as well as a great savings for the Agency’s budget”, said Erickson.

MSP installed 100 Hyundai 280 watt panels with Enphase Micro-Inverters on Uni-Rac Racking.

Kahului-based Maui Solar Project is a locally owned and operated company founded in 2008 by Edmond Alberton and Josh Porter. MSP is committed to supporting the local community and advocating for cleaner energy on our islands. On Oahu MSP’s sister company, HI Solar Battery, focuses on Off-Grid and Self-Supply systems. MSP is a member of the popular GEMS Financing Program. a partnership between the Hawaii State Energy Office and the Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority that makes clean energy improvements more affordable and accessible to Hawaii consumers. Through the program, MSP offers commercial and nonprofit loans as well as residential loans.

Solar Power World

Illustration courtesy of Mounting Systems

Last August, a roomful of representatives from solar mounting manufacturers expressed concerns about superfluous UL standards and overbearing AHJs at the Solar Mounting Training Conference, or SOMO, in Las Vegas. An event dedicated to the training of solar installers, SOMO also brought many of the major mounting manufacturers into range for an impactful conversation about the industry.

S-5! marketing director Keith Lipps and Mounting Systems product manager Don Massa were among those who discussed troubles facing manufacturers—the high costs associated with testing to UL 2703 standards chief among them—and floated the idea of creating an association for mounting manufacturers. The organization would unify disparate voices in the solar mounting industry.

On March 3, such an organization was born, as SEIA announced the formation of the PV Mounting System Manufacturers Committee (MSMC). The MSMC has already had an impact on the solar industry, said Massa, and it has big plans for the future.

“For the first time, PV mounting system manufacturers can band together in the development of practical, cost-effective codes and standards that directly impact the PV industry, especially racking and mounting,” Massa said.

The MSMC formed as a committee under SEIA to avoid costs associated with creating a new trade association and provide access to SEIA’s resources. As part of an agreement, only mounting manufacturers that are members of SEIA can participate in the committee. It is possible the committee could become its own trade organization in the future, Massa said.

Influencing AHJs

It’s often said that solar mounting is 10% of the system cost and 90% of the challenge, as it’s the part of the project that varies the most from location to location.

“Modules don’t change. Inverters don’t change. Mounting systems are the one element of a PV array that is totally variable depending on the site where the array is being installed,” Massa said. “And trying to adapt equipment to the site and still meet all the codes and standards is a complex and difficult thing to do.”

Because of the ambiguous nature of many standards and codes, mounting manufacturers find themselves working with AHJs daily, said Jeff Spies, senior director of policy at Quick Mount PV, one of the manufacturers on the committee. He said common issues include the proper way to ground PV modules and how fire setbacks work.

“The codes and standards were written in confusing language and they’re open to interpretation,” Spies said. “The hope is we can have more clarity on the intent of these codes. Education is a big part of it.”

With dozens of mounting manufacturers and each one interacting with AHJs individually, facts and opinions can become muddled, causing confusion among AHJs. Sometimes that prompts them to create their own standards, which can be unreasonable. Forming a committee lets major mounting companies interact with AHJs with one voice in agreement, said Spies.

“If we approach as a committee, they’ll pay attention,” Spies said.

This approach has worked in Los Angeles County, where the department of building safety once imposed extraordinary requirements on mounting manufacturers. It was the main impetus of the MSMC, Massa said.

“LA County had its own requirements above what would be required in the code that would be more impractical than some of the bad stuff in the standard,” Massa said. “And no individual manufacturer had the clout or the ability to stand up to LA County. In essence, you either did what they wanted or you didn’t do business in LA County. So that’s what put us over the edge.”

After meeting with the department, Massa was able to convince the county to limit its requirements.

“Both sides gave a little and took a little, and now we have an agreement with the county on how manufacturers can meet requirements without it being a totally different thing than UL standards and codes,” Massa said. “We showed LA County why some of this stuff is impractical, and they showed us why some things were important, and we came to a fairly practical middle ground that satisfies both parties.”

While the committee presently does not have any other AHJs in its sights, the Los Angeles County experience serves as a model for the type of impact it could have.

Influencing standards

UL standards governing mounting include UL 1703, UL 2703 and UL 3703. Standards are written by a standard technical panel within UL. Various task groups make recommendations to standards and seek to clarify them when necessary. Task groups are comprised of industry stakeholders, including mounting systems manufacturers.

The MSMC will be active in these task groups and, according to interviews, is now particularly interested in labeling requirements placed on mounting manufacturers.

“The standard says the system will have a label. Well, none of the manufacturers make systems. We make components that an installer turns into a system in the field,” Massa said. “It’s very easy to say we should put labels on all the parts, but that would add enormous cost, and there is no practical way to do it.”

The committee also hopes to influence mechanical load testing. According to UL 2703, manufacturers must test their systems with every module they intend to put on it.

“The way it’s written is a ridiculous requirement and totally impractical,” Massa said. “The standard makes no mention or indication that you could use a category of module frames; it says you must test with every module. That’s a huge expense.”

Standards and codes like this can be changed and have been through previous committees within SEIA, said Justin Baca, vice president of markets and research at the trade organization. In one example, there was discussion about requiring every solar system in the U.S. to have module-level shut down. Different sectors of the industry had different opinions on the requirement, Baca said. The problem, however, is that the bulk of manufacturers wouldn’t have been able to provide a product within strict time constraints, damaging the solar market. It needed to be implemented in a thoughtful way, he said.

“Some products like a microinverter could have delivered, but the market is more than micro-inverters,” Baca said. “So that’s something where that requirement wasn’t put in place in this cycle.”

Baca, too, stressed the importance of going to stakeholders with a unified voice.

“If you don’t have an association doing that sort of thing, you go to a venue and you have differing opinions between solar companies being laid out and presented to people who are not experts in solar,” Baca said. “You go in there with five different messages and get none of the requests.

“Here we work it out. We come in and we speak with a voice that’s thought out.”

In the coming weeks, committee organizers will send information about it to companies that have expressed interest.

Solar Power World