The Switch: Is Solar Power Only A Rich Man's Renewable Source?

Without energy from the sun, life on earth would be impossible. Turning that energy into electricity is one of the keys to saving the earth, according to renewable power advocates.

In today’s edition of OPB’s energy series, “The Switch” , Rob Manning reports that if solar is going to take off in the Northwest, it will mean re-shaping our relationship with energy.


This is the sound of solar power.

It’s considered an intermittent resource, although one of the more predictable ones, since you know it produces electricity when the sun is up.

 The Switch

When you flip the switch, where does your power come from?
And what will power Northwest homes and businesses in the future?
We're asking these questions and more for our special series The Switch.

And solar is about as renewable as it gets – when the sun comes up, the rays get captured in panels and converted into energy.

Even factoring in the cost of producing the panels, solar energy is way cleaner than fossil fuels. And unlike wind -- which can kill birds -- or hydro -- which can kill fish -- there’s no known collateral damage from solar installations.

But right now, solar doesn’t even register as one of the seven biggest sources of electricity in Oregon.

Portland General Electric’s Mark Osborn.

Mark Osborn: “We’re continually looking in areas – some of the potentials might be near our Boardman power plant, because there’s transmission available in that area. The solar resource is a little better over there than it is on the west side of the Cascades.”

 Prologis
 PGE's Pro Logis roof project

The closest thing to a solar power “plant” right now is PGE’s warehouse rooftop in Northeast Portland. It’s accessible only by a ladder.

Rob: “It's a nice view from up here.”

Mark Osborne:  “Oh yeah, a view of Mount Hood. Beautiful view of the Columbia River, on a beautiful sunny day like this, it’s a great place to hang out....”

PGE leases this roof from the multi-national corporation, Pro Logis. The technology is a little different, too. Rather than solar panels, the roof is carpeted with thin-film solar absorbers.

Mark Osborn: “You can walk on it, and that makes it very flexible, for doing work on a roof, you don’t have to walk around them.”

Osborn says upfront installation costs can make projects like the Pro Logis lease too expensive. He says PGE’s focus for now is to allow customers to get discounts on their power bills for solar they generate themselves.

Pat Schellerup and Heath Kearns are with “Mr. Sun Solar.” They’re looking over solar panels their company put on another roof in Northeast Portland.

 Solar Project
 

Heath Kearns says these conventional photovoltaic solar panels will reduce the electricity bills of future tenants of this building.

Heath Kearns: “Along with the fact that it’s a very efficient building the way they’ve constructed it, it should cover about half the energy needs of the dwellings.”

Mr. Sun also installs another kind of solar -- called “solar thermal.”

Pat Schellerup: “We wish that people would recognize solar thermal more."

Mr. Sun general manager, Pat Schellerup says solar thermal focuses the sun’s rays to heat up water, for showers, or for your dishwasher.

Pat Schellerup: "When people hear the word ‘solar,’ they think of the nice shiny electric panels, and it’s just kind of what everybody commonly knows.”

But sales manager Heath Kerns says older solar thermal technology does a much better job of cutting hot water costs than newer photovoltaic solar panels.

The cost per kilowatt hour for solar in the Northwest ranges from a high of 21 cents for PV all the way down to 2 cents for the cheapest solar thermal.

Heath Kearns: “You know, this system, this single collector, with a 120 gallon tank down there, is going to produce 1900 kilowatt-hours a year. You know, that’s almost the same amount of energy that all nine of these panels are going to produce in a year.”

But Kearns says it’s gotten harder to sell people on solar thermal, since federal tax breaks equalized the cost of the two technologies.

But for a lot of people, all solar is still too expensive.

 Mark Pengilly's Home
 Mark Pengilly's Northwest Portland home

Mark Pengilly: “The roof surfaces that are most suitable are this one here, and then here on the south-facing covered porch. And together, I could get about four kilowatts, on those two surfaces.”

Mark Pengilly’s home is in the hills northwest of Portland, where he lives with his wife, and his Rottweiler.

Pengilly says he and a like-minded neighbor went to solar workshops with the intention of putting panels on both their roofs.

Mark Pengilly: “We invited three solar installers to come out and do bids, and when we looked at the bids, we decided that even though we’d really like to do this, it didn’t make financial sense, it didn’t pencil out, because it would be nearly 30 years before we'd get our money back.”

Pengilly says his system would have cost him $14,000 up front, and later, he’d get up to $10,000 of that back - over a few years - through tax incentives.

The last four grand he'd recover - very slowly - by cutting his electric bill by about $25 a month.

 Mark Pengilly
 Mark Pengilly

Mark Pengilly: “In fact, one of the installers said to me ‘this was, essentially, a rich man’s game.’ If it’s only a rich man’s game, we aren’t going to be able to solve the global warming crisis. We need to have a solution that enables everybody to contribute to the solution.”

There’s a variety of ideas for changing the system -- like expanding leasing by utilities or third party companies. They’d make money by funding the upfront costs but reaping the long-term payback from solar. 

Pengilly likes the German model. In Germany, where solar power is expanding fastest, homeowners are guaranteed payment by the kilowatt for all the solar energy they produce.

Big industry players, like Boris Klebensberger, with the German panel maker, Solar World - like that model, too. At last year’s “ribbon cutting” for Solar World's big new plant in Hillsboro, Governor Ted Kulongoski and Senator Ron Wyden listened as Klebensberger emphasized that U.S. citizens should have a right to sell solar electricity. 

Boris Klebensberger: “It’s a civil right. You can carry weapons – fine. Not that I’m not worried, huh? But I would by far more appreciate if there was also the right for every American citizen to also plug his PV system into the system. And therefore help us and you, all of us together, to make the change.”

Utilities have raised questions about the concept known as feed-in tariffs.

The utilities wonder how they’d work, both financially, and from an operational standpoint.

Solar savvy homeowners like Mark Pengilly say the utilities are just reluctant to give up their monopoly on power production.

Vermont and the city of Gainesville, Florida, recently approved feed-in tariff policies.

The Oregon legislature is currently considering a five-year pilot program to try out the model.


[Editor's note: Some changes have been made to the text since this story was posted on-line, so that it more closely reflects the story that aired.]

Comments

June 8, 2009
12:29 p.m.
Journalism has sunk to a new low. This story is merely a commercial mouthpiece for SolarWorld and Mr. Sun... riddled with factual errors and a failure to provide any independent context. Windpower does not "kill birds". One no-longer-existing 1980s installation in California had a problem with some bird kills -- a problem which is literally never seen with contemporary windpower installations. One wonders if the reporter has ever even seen a wind farm... if you are aware that turbine blades spin at only 60rpm or so, the suggestion of bird kills doesn't even pass a sanity check. The same problem goes for the contention (again an unfiltered relay of incorrect propaganda) that hydropower "kills fish." Again, old hydropower had that problem. Contemporary installations do not. PV (and how about we call it by it's correct name rather than dumbing down the story further by referring to PV as "solar power"?) is not "more reliable" than other intermittent sources of power, namely windpower. Again, doing a bit of research, even as simple as reading a Wikipedia article or making one inquiry of an expert from your listeners' network would have elevated this story to be factually correct and informative.

— Posted by haley

June 8, 2009
8:07 p.m.
I am a long-time Portland-based management consultant to the energy sector, and while I continue to support solar as an emerging electricity source, I think this article misleads the audience by suggesting that we are already there. We're not. Solar continues to be far less efficient than other fuel sources from an electricity production standpoint, with average cost per kWh continuing to be in the 20-30 cent range versus close to 10 cents for wind and close to 5 cents for coal. Utility-scale solar installations (even solar thermal, not PV) remain untenable at that price point. I would have appreciated an article that was more balanced, discussing the benefits and drawbacks of solar versus other fuel sources, what challenges solar is facing in terms of innovation and becoming more cost efficient, and what some of the ways forward are. As such, this article read more like a promotional vehicle rather than objective, insightful journalism. Eric Chung

— Posted by ericchung

June 8, 2009
10:14 p.m.
Thanks for your comment. 1.) on the issue of wind turbine bird mortality: The technology has certainly gotten a lot safer for birds in recent years. That's not to say that wind turbines can't kill birds. They "can," though the newer ones tend to do so to a lesser degree. 2.) on hydro killing fish: even recently upgraded dams on the Columbia and Snake Rivers kill a few percent of the fish that come their way, according to studies from the Bonneville Power Administration and Army Corps of Engineers. Rob Manning rmanning@opb.org

— Posted by Rob Manning

June 9, 2009
11:27 a.m.
As nice as solar PV is, this story was exactly right about how much more affordable solar hot water is. In fact, solar hot water should be the first contact the public has with solar energy. We have had a solar hot water system for a little over a year now, and we're entirely happy with it. You can see it on the web at www.solar-hot-water.org as well as examine our performance data, and our installation and paperwork for rebates, tax credits, etc. After all of the tax credits, rebates, etc., it cost us $4500. The same system bought today would be $3000, after the revised credits went into effect at the beginning of this year. We're over in Maryland, but I suspect our cloudiness is similar to yours. And we're all sunnier than Germany ;-) For me, I like to compute the payback time, but I'm not really that concerned with it, since there are lots of things we buy in life that have zero payback, yet we still buy them. I think it's nice to be able to buy something that even has a payback. Hopefully, someday solar hot water systems will be as ubiquitous as air conditioners.

— Posted by rumpole


Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post.

Login or register to set up an account.

© 2009, Oregon Public Broadcasting.

Search · Inside OPB · Report Reception Problems · Privacy Policy · Terms of Use · Contact Us · Pressroom · Employment · Community · Audio Streams · RSS Feeds


PBSNPRPRIBBC