This blog previously noted that, in the absence of federal initiative, states now are leading the way in Solar Energy development. Cooler Planet via Climate Progress relays solar PV (photovoltaic) installation data from the California Energy Commission.

Growth of solar photo voltaic installations has gone from only 1,675 grid connected photovoltaic installations in 2002 to 29,628 installations in 2008. State incentive plans, pioneered by California and replicated in Florida and other states, are credited with such growth.
According to SolarBuzz:
In 2006, 112 megawatts of solar photovoltaics were installed in the US Grid Connect market, up from 80 megawatts in 2005. Demand was led once again by California, which accounted for 63% of the national market. Notwithstanding funding program bottlenecks, New Jersey saw very strong growth in 2006, representing 17% of the national market.
Earl Killian rhetorically asks Climate Progress readers, “Why would California and New Jersey, with only 12% and 2.9% of U.S. population respectively, account for such a large fraction of PV installations?”
Perhaps, incentive programs (most recently the California Solar Initiative and the New Jersey Clean Energy Rebate Program) and other policies are working.
Internationally, Germany (8.8× U.S. in 2006 MW installed) and Japan (2.6× U.S.) are the leaders in PV installations, with California a “distant third” according to Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Germany has become a world leader in renewable energy through federal legislation. Industry observers attribute such a successful solar energy industry to implementation of a feed-in tariff.Most places where PV is economic have some combination of the following (but usually not all):
- Efficient use of energy, e.g. California, New Jersey, Japan, and Germany (but much of the U.S. is inefficient) . Efficiency is cheaper than PV, so it pays to do that first. If you’re already efficient, PV may make sense.
- High retail electricity rates (e.g. California, New Jersey, and Japan, maybe Germany–note: high rates do not mean high bills; California’s are about the same as the rest of the nation because of efficiency) .
- Rebates / Incentives (e.g. California, New Jersey, and Japan) .
- Time of Use (TOU) net metering available (e.g. California, probably others) . With net metering, your electric meter runs backward when you generate more than you use, and runs forward other times. With TOU the rate you pay or receive varies by time of day, typically with afternoon rates much higher than other times, reflecting the much higher cost of electricity to utilities during times of heaviest load.
- High insolation (e.g. California, but definitely not Germany or New Jersey) .
- Financing (e.g. home equity loans in U.S., “soft loans” in Germany), so that PV is profitable in the first month instead of requiring multiple years to break even (the payment on the equity loan should be less than the cost of the electricity purchases avoided) .
In the 2002 Johnson & Johnson Corporate Report, Angelina Galiteva, the director of strategic planning, Los Angeles Department of Water & Power, appeared with Senaka Nanayakkara, Neutrogena director of facilities engineering, behind a backdrop of 62,000 square feet of solar panels, the largest commercial solar rooftop installation in California. The company developed a partnership with the City of Los Angeles to reduce operating costs and monthly energy consumption for the company by 35 percent.Three other points probably help to avoid utility hostility:
- Decoupling (the idea that utility profits are not tied to revenue, since customer PV reduces utility revenue) .
- Significant excess daytime load over nighttime (since PV avoids the need for costly “peaking” power plants) .
- Renewable Portfolio Standards (e.g. Germany, Japan, and California) that mandate certain percentages of renewable energy.
Of the various items, incentives (#3) are helpful, time of use net metering may be the most important. For example, under PG&E’s E-7 rate for PV, one can sell PV electricity back to the grid during peak hours at $0.30/kWh, and then buy it back off-peak at $0.09/kWh. That factor of three makes a difference.






2 Comments
– Earl K. writes:
Just after yesterday’s post on photovoltaic (PV) installs in CA and NJ, I found a 43-page update from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) in my inbox. The second paragraph of the executive summary tells the good news:
In 2006 the U.S. installed 108 MW of PV. If most of the 209 MW of applications reported above are built in 2008 (18 MW where already operating in 2007), we will see at least a doubling of U.S. PV.
The California Solar Initiative (CSI) is budgeted for $3.3 billion of incentives over 10 years for 3,000 MW. Incentives will decrease in ten steps over the 10 years so even if applications in the first year are $533 million, this does not indicate CSI will run out of funds. Non-residential applications appear to be ahead of goals, while residential is lagging somewhat.
Also, Cooler Planet has added more features to their interactive map, so you may want to check it out again.
For World Watch Institute, Janet L. Sawin provides an excellent summation of the status of the global photo voltaic market.
One Trackback
[...] blog previously has noted that, in the absence of federal initiative, states are leading the way in Solar Energy development, [...]