ORCSD Solar Energy Project

At last night's board meeting, there was a presentation from Revolution Energy  regarding installing solar technology at the high school.  To reduce the high capital expenditure of acquiring these products, the company has developed a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) to offset these costs.  In a nutshell, it requires no startup costs from the district and for the course of 20 years, pays a "rate" to Revolution Energy based on kWh output.  I have written a letter to the board this morning stating my feedback and viewpoints on this topic.  I am enthusiastic for this technology and am eager to reduce the carbon footprint but the company needs an answer by September 2011 to start the project, which I feel is too short of a timeframe for due diligence.

Hello, 

I watched with interest during the presentation last night.  The project and the minimal costs seemed a no-brainer to me.  Why wouldn't we do this?  The school can reduce its carbon footprint and save money as well.  However, I went home and was reading the news and caught that Evergreen Solar filed for bankruptcy on August 15th.  An important bit of information that Revolution didn't divulge as this company was their primary source according to the presenter.   

See here http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20093503-54/harsh-lessons-from-evergreen-solar-flame-out/?tag=mncol;title 

Also, thinking more about the 20 year contract and Moore's Law.  For those not in technology, it's a theory that we exponentially increase our technology advances every two years.  This law is applied mainly to the computer hardware industry but perhaps it is also applicable here on a slower scale.  So, to echo a board member's point, what if the solar technology in 20 years is so obsolete that advances in solar technology exponentially increase its efficiency and power output?  More importantly, in this tumultuous economic time, what if the company delivering the PPA is out of business as well as the manufacturer of the solar cells?  If the district wants it removed, who pays for that? 

While the technology is impressive and the PPA is creative, it is also a long-term risk I don't think is at a maturity level for the district to carefully deliberate and select at this point in time.  There are no guarantees that Revolution Energy will exist in 20 years and there is no guarantee that the technology purchased today will be applicable in 2032.   

Here is an article that discusses these new "leases" or PPAs:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20092374-54/sungevity-socks-away-cash-for-solar-leasing/?tag=mncol;title 

On the other hand, if this is truly a cost savings both short and long term with clauses in the agreement that handle these matters, then I would encourage us to move forward.  The opportunity costs may be too high to pass this up today.  As a member of the community, I would like to see the current rates we have been paying over the past 3 years compared with the cost per kWh that the PPA dictates.   

Again, I think it's a wonderful idea and I'm all for it as well as all other aspects of the sustainability committee however, it felt rushed by Revolution Energy last night.  I would want assurances that take care of many contingencies in the PPA before moving forward but I am not hopeful that we can meet these by the September deadline.  

Regards, 

Seth Fiermonti  

Durham