Post a New Topic
Original post made
on Mar 6, 2012
A couple years ago, we were treated to the following claims--
Roche to install large solar power system:
When the new system is operating at capacity, it will generate enough electricity to power about 172 homes. The system will generate about 1.4 million kilowatt hours in electricity each year.
The City of Palo Alto will provide an estimated $2.2 million in performance-based rebates to SSP over five years.
So .. what happened to this program? Was it installed? If not, why not?
> City Council member Pat Burt called it "an important step
> toward greater energy self-reliance since these renewable
> resources will be located within the city itself.
> "We will avoid costly transmission charges and reduce
> wasted energy losses from remote transmissions," Burt said.
Is Pat Burt for real? Palo Alto consumes about 1GWH/year:
Just how many panels, on how many roofs, does he think the PAU is going to install? (And we thought that smoking weed was illegal in this town!)
I think 'more-smoke-and-mirrors' asks a fair question. Seems like Pat Burt should take a shot at some kind of answer. Truth is, this geography is not the best place for photo voltaics. Why fight it?
The $2.2 million (plus indirect other costs?) might be better spent under-grounding some power lines. We know how to do that! From the looks of some of the frayed overhead power lines on Forest Ave it's only a matter of time!
We keep dropping those exponents. I believe 1 GWH/year in the first comment should read 1000 GWH/year or 1 TWH/year. That's about 115 MW constant load, or 2 kilowatts per person, but much less when you consider most of it is industrial and the daytime population is way higher than 60,000.
Note 2 kilowatts is only about 2 square yards of sunshine. (Ok, start multiplying by diurnal duty-cycle, conversion efficiency and weather, still not a real big number, but all those trees will have to go.)
Without time-of-use metering, there's very little incentive to generate power for the Palo Alto Grid. If Palo Alto Utilities pays $0.056 per KWH, why bother?
> Without time-of-use metering
Not certain this is really an answer for Palo Alto. Somewhere between 80% and 85% of the power consumed in Palo Alto is consumed by commercial accounts, with residential/other using the rest. Commercial(daytime/office) use would not really be a good candidate for time-of-use metering, but certainly the larger accounts would be in a good position to internally monitor their power use to make that sort of decision themselves. A large commercial account could rearrange its work schedules to make use of the lower billing rates--saving considerable money. However, as we see with all of the PAU efforts at "conservation", once in place--the costs of the utility is increased to offset lower revenues. So, just about everything associated with the PAU becomes a lose-lose, from the consumer's point-of-view.
Home energy audits would be a first step to deciding how useful time-of-use metering would be. Heating, refrigeration, appliances, and "other" would give consumer a solid sense of whether time-of-use metering would help reduce their monthly bills. Generally, better home insulation can be predicted to lower bills than anything else. Recently an article appeared on-line energy trade publication that conceded that homes would be better off with "more caulking" than "smart meters".
Another thought about Palo Alto "energy independence"--Stanford generates its own power, and uses grid power from PG&E as a supplement, so the 1000GWH number provided by the PAU is really lower than the actual power consumed within the geographic borders of Palo Alto. And then there is gas consumption, which is also "energy". Heating can use either energy source, so price/availability becomes an option to consumers, and gas consumption needs to be added into any claims of "energy independence".
Another key point missing from this Weekly article is what the cost/KWH will be from these roof-top generation efforts. Generally solar power is more expensive to generate than grid power is to buy. So, what good is "local solar" when your electric bill goes up by 30%-50%?
Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.
Post a comment
Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online.
Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information
We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.
Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?
- Barron Park
- Charleston Gardens
- Charleston Meadows
- College Terrace
- Community Center
- Crescent Park
- Downtown North
- Duveneck/St. Francis
- Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
- Esther Clark Park
- Evergreen Park
- Greater Miranda
- Green Acres
- Greendell/Walnut Grove
- Leland Manor/Garland Drive
- Meadow Park
- Monroe Park
- Old Palo Alto
- Palo Alto Hills
- Palo Alto Orchards
- Palo Verde
- South of Midtown
- St. Claire Gardens
- The Greenhouse
- Triple El
- University South
- Woodland Ave. area (East Palo Alto)
- Addison School
- Barron Park School
- Duveneck School
- Egan Middle School (Los Altos)
- El Carmelo School
- Escondido School
- Fairmeadow School
- Gunn High School
- Hoover School
- JLS Middle School
- Jordan Middle School
- Juana Briones School
- Nixon School
- Ohlone School
- Palo Alto High School
- Palo Verde School
- Santa Rita (Los Altos)
- Terman Middle School
- Walter Hays School
- another community
- Another Palo Alto neighborhood
- East Palo Alto
- Los Altos
- Los Altos Hills
- Menlo Park
- Mountain View
- Portola Valley
Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.
Draeger’s Los Altos eyes upgrades, expansion
By Elena Kadvany | 4 comments | 3,290 views
Housing is for People
By Steve Levy | 33 comments | 2,270 views
College Visit: Lehigh and Lafayette
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 4 comments | 1,598 views
"the Summit" (CompPlan): Forewarned is Forearmed
By Douglas Moran | 21 comments | 853 views
A quiet moment
By Sally Torbey | 8 comments | 643 views
Home & Real Estate
Shop Palo Alto
Send News Tips
Circulation & Delivery
Mountain View Voice
© 2015 Palo Alto Online
All rights reserved.