According to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA), the U.S. connected 20.2 GWac of utility-scale power plants to the grid during the first half of 2024. This capacity includes 12 GW from solar power, which represents 59% of the total additions. Additionally, 4.2 GW of this new capacity was attributed to energy storage.

Florida and Texas led the nation in utility-scale solar development, contributing 38% of the new solar capacity. Notable projects include the 690 MW Gemini Solar facility in Nevada, which integrates solar and storage, and the 653 MW Lumina Solar Project in Texas.

Energy storage was the second most significant technology by capacity with a total deployment of 4.2 GW. California led the charge, contributing 37% of the total energy storage capacity, followed by Texas (21%), Arizona (19%), and Nevada (13%). Together, these states accounted for 90% of the energy storage capacity added, with the 380 MW battery at the Gemini facility being the largest of the period.

Fossil fuel retirements far outpaced new fossil capacity deployments. The EIA noted that 5.1 GW of capacity was retired, with 53% from methane (2.7 GW) and 41% from coal (2 GW). In contrast, only 0.4 GW of new gas capacity was deployed.

The U.S. energy sector’s growth trajectory is expected to continue its upward trend. For the second half of the year, the EIA forecasts an additional 42.6 GW from new capacity deployments, including 25 GW from solar and an additional 10.8 GW of energy storage. Combined with the first-half capacity of 12 and 4 GW, the nation could finish 2024 with 37 GW of new utility-scale solar and 15 GW of new energy storage facilities.

Is 37 GW real or a mirage?

Whether we can actually reach the projected record capacities of solar will be dependent on politics. The nation is currently debating the imposition of new AD/CVD tariffs, which if implemented at the rates suggested by the filers, would lead to the United States paying three times the international price for solar panels. Historically, similar AD/CVD tariffs led to delays and cancellations for about 20% of utility-scale solar capacity in 2022.

Solar industry analyst Roth MKM has suggested that developers are proceeding cautiously, potentially deferring some 2024 projects to 2025 due to these tariff risks. Just last week, U.S. module manufacturers filed a petition with the U.S. Department of Commerce seeking critical retroactive tariffs.

In 2023, the U.S. added just over 18 GW of utility-scale solar, according to the EIA. Including all capacities, from residential to utility-scale, Wood Mackenzie significantly adjusted their capacity estimations upward to just over 40 GWdc of solar power deployed in 2023. At the start of 2024, the EIA projected about 36 GWac of new utility-scale solar capacity. Combined with small-scale solar projections from various groups, it was suggested that nearly 53 GWdc of new solar capacity might be deployed in the United States in 2024. The EIA indicated that if the current pace continues, then 37 GW of utility-scale solar will be deployed in 2024, more than doubling last year’s record capacity.

Solar panel manufacturers First Solar, Hanwha Q Cells, Meyer Burger, Mission Solar, REC Silicon, Convalt, and Swift Solar, grouped under the American Alliance for Solar Manufacturing Trade Committee (AASMTC), have filed a new complaint by the Wiley Rein law firm with the U.S. Department of Commerce alleging increased solar panel imports from Vietnam and Thailand as a result of the Alliance’s prior antidumping and countervailing duties (AD/CVD) legal filings.

The AASMTC, citing “critical circumstances,” has filed for retroactive tariffs on all solar panels imported since their filing in April.

The filing states that, due to the April AD/CVD actions, “several China-based companies operating in Thailand and Vietnam appear to have actively accelerated their U.S. solar exports, likely to evade impending duties.” The filing suggests that solar module imports from Vietnam have increased by 17%, while those from Thailand have grown by nearly 40%. In total, the increase relative to the prior months was about 2.6 GW of module capacity.

At the beginning of 2024, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) and other groups suggested that the U.S. might install 53 GWdc of solar in the upcoming year. If realized, this would represent a 32% increase over the 40 GW of solar deployed in 2023.

Roth MKM, a solar industry analyst, provided insights on the complexities of the situation with an industry lawyer:

The data Wiley is using is not accurate, as it includes product subject to Solar I (i.e., the China case, because of circumvention). So, we have to wait to see what the accurate data says. And, even if DOC ultimately goes affirmative, the ITC also has to reach an affirmative finding, and the ITC rarely finds critical circumstances. So, this will cause (is already causing) havoc in the industry, but will likely turn out to be a flash in the pan.

In 2022, the EIA reported that the threat of AD/CVD tariffs had prompted delays or the cancellation of around 20% of utility-scale solar generation capacity. Solar industry analyst Roth MKM has suggested that solar developers are currently slowing project deployments due to the AD/CVD tariff risks associated with solar module procurement, pushing 2024 installations into 2025.

If the Department of Commerce were to implement the tariffs suggested by the group, it would lead to the United States paying three times the international price for solar panels. ACORE (American Council on Renewable Energy) president and Chief Executive Officer Ray Long said a finding of AD/CVD violation “could unintentionally cede U.S. leadership in the solar industry to other countries.”

Last week, the Biden administration maintained a 14.5% tariff on imported solar cells and increased the volume of cells allowed from 5 GW to 12.5 GW to keep up with growth in solar module manufacturing facilities.

The Connecticut Attorney General has initiated legal action against two individuals and three companies for committing multiple crimes, including impersonation of homeowners and unauthorized installation of solar panels.

The state’s lawsuit targets Sierra Howes and Dakota Grumet, principals at Elevate Solar Solutions, Bright Planet and Sunrun, the company responsible for the installations and system ownership. This action addresses three distinct cases in Connecticut, namely the Windsor, Stafford Springs and Wethersfield transactions.

In one particularly bold instance, known as the Windsor Transaction, Howes and Grumet proposed a residential solar project costing $306 per month to a homeowner who rejected the offer. Subsequently, an employee from Bright Planet is alleged to have forged the homeowner’s digital signatures. The lawsuit also includes a recorded call of a Bright Planet employee impersonating the homeowner to Sunrun:

The Sunrun representative then asks Sierra Ford to put the consumer on the line to confirm the details of the transaction. The consumer is female. However, the voice purporting to be the consumer’s on the recorded call is a deep male voice. The voice purports to confirm the consumer’s name, but erroneously reverses the first and last names, as was done on the contract.

On October 9, approximately a week after the deceptive call, Sunrun, notably efficient on this occasion, installed a 14.22 kW residential system without permits.

The Stafford Springs and Wethersfield transactions similarly showcase unethical practices. In Stafford Springs, a homeowner consented to a solar agreement, but claims to have never received a contract to review, later discovering the total cost would exceed $135,000 over 25 years. In both instances, the solar panels were installed in late 2022 without initial permits, which were only later approved by local authorities. To date, neither system has been activated.

In all three instances, the solar modules are still on the respective homes. The Attorney General’s complaint enumerates fifteen counts of legal violations, with four charges each against Sunrun, Bright Planet and Elevate Solar Solutions. These charges include unfairness, deception, per se violations (violations that are inherently illegal), and willfulness.

In the broader context of door-to-door sales, several U.S. states have taken similar legal actions. Minnesota, for instance, recently sued four of the nation’s largest solar finance companies. Vision Solar has faced lawsuits in multiple states, including Connecticut and Arizona. Additionally, Vivint Solar, prior to its acquisition by Sunrun, was sued in New Mexico. Most recently, Rhode Island enacted a law requiring background checks for residential solar salespeople.

Rhode Island has enacted the “Residential Solar Energy Disclosure and Homeowners Bill of Rights Act” to protect homeowners from predatory door-to-door sales tactics in the solar industry.

The law applies to any individual selling a solar system purchase agreement, a lease agreement, or a power purchase agreement (PPA). It covers anyone soliciting a homeowner or selling a solar project for up to four individual housing units simultaneously. Notably, the law does not apply to solar lease deals with payment terms of less than five years, transactions that involve a generator, or commercial systems.

The law requires all parties selling residential solar to register with the state and renew the registration annually. For the solar company, at least one person in charge of residential sales must have their name and address on file with the state. Additionally, all individuals directly selling to homeowners must undergo a national background check, including fingerprinting, which must be submitted to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The registration process will be managed by the Rhode Island Division of Taxation.

The Department of Business Regulation is authorized to investigate complaints, impose administrative penalties, revoke registrations, and order violators to cease operations. The department can also impose fines of up to $5,000 per violation for up to four years after the violation has occurred.

The law mandates that specific documents be provided to homeowners. A hard copy or email of the solar agreement must be given to the homeowner. Additionally, the state will issue a standard disclosure form that must include the following information:

• A statement indicating whether operations and maintenance are included in the agreement.
• A written estimate of projected savings over the system’s expected lifespan.
• An estimate of savings beyond the system’s anticipated useful life.
• Data fields used to calculate the savings projections.
• The electricity escalation rate applied in the savings assumptions.
• Information on tax credit eligibility.

Additionally, the new law gives residential customers the right to rescind or cancel the deal for seven days after entering the agreement.

The law goes into effect in March 2025.

The bill was prompted by an increase in consumer complaints regarding aggressive and misleading sales tactics by some solar companies. By implementing these regulations, the state aims to build public trust and encourage the adoption of solar energy while protecting consumers from unscrupulous actors. Attorney General Peter F. Neronha, along with other state officials, has emphasized the importance of these protections in fostering a reliable and transparent solar industry in Rhode Island.

Several other U.S. states have taken action against door-to-door sales companies. Minnesota recently sued four of the nation’s largest solar finance companies. Vision Solar has been sued in multiple states, including Connecticut and Arizona, while Vivint Solar, prior to its acquisition by Sunrun, was sued in New Mexico. Sunrun, along with several other solar door-to-door companies, has also been sued in Connecticut.

(Read: “U.S. government announces resources to protect solar customers“)

Eighteen members of the House Republican Conference have written to Speaker Mike Johnson, emphasizing the need to “prioritize business and market certainty” amid calls to repeal or amend the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

Signed into law by President Joseph Biden on August 16, 2022, the IRA was approved by both the Senate and the House of Representatives the previous week without any Republican support.

Even though no Republicans voted for the bill, investments stemming from the bill have predominantly flowed into Republican Congressional districts, according to their historical voting patterns.

Source: Environmental Entrepreneurs

The letter was delivered on August 6, 2024, just one day before the two-year anniversary of the IRA’s passage through the Senate, which was finalized by a tie-breaking vote from Vice President Kamala Harris.

The letter critiques the bill as flawed, arguing that it will distort energy markets. Yet, it also asserts that “American energy dominance increases national security, and creates American jobs,” indirectly suggesting that the IRA supports ‘American energy dominance’. The Representatives report that many companies have leveraged the energy tax credits to fund significant investments in new U.S. energy infrastructure. Furthermore, they express concerns from industry leaders and constituents alike, who fear the existing energy tax regime may “once again be turned on its head due to Republican repeal efforts.”

Prematurely repealing energy tax credits, particularly those which were used to justify investments that already broke ground, would undermine private investments and stop development that is already ongoing. A full repeal would create a worst-case scenario where we would have spent billions of taxpayer dollars and received next to nothing in return.

The Republican Representatives are:

• Andrew R. Garbarino – New York’s 2nd District
• David G. Valadao – California’s 22nd District
• Lori Chavez-DeRemer – Oregon’s 5th District
• Marcus J. Molinaro – New York’s 19th District
• Erin Houchin – Indiana’s 9th District
• Anthony D’Esposito – New York’s 4th District
• Michael V. Lawler – New York’s 17th District
• Jen A. Kiggans – Virginia’s 2nd District
• Nick LaLota – New York’s 1st District
• Young Kim – California’s 40th District
• John R. Curtis – Utah’s 3rd District
• Don Bacon – Nebraska’s 2nd District
• Thomas H. Kean, Jr. – New Jersey’s 7th District
• David P. Joyce – Ohio’s 14th District
• Mariannette Miller-Meeks, M.D. – Iowa’s 1st District
• Juan Ciscomani – Arizona’s 6th District
• Earl L. “Buddy” Carter – Georgia’s 1st District
• Mark E. Amodei – Nevada’s 2nd District

The letter was spearheaded by Representative Andrew R. Garbarino of New York, who in August 2022 voiced his opposition to the IRA, labeling it as misleading and potentially harmful to the economy:

I voted AGAINST the deceptively named ‘Inflation Reduction Act’ just like I voted against the reckless Build Back Better scheme. Two hundred and thirty economists agree that the so-called Inflation Reduction Act is expected to contribute to skyrocketing inflation and burden the American economy. Aside from completely failing to reduce inflation, this bill fails to address the SALT deduction cap while raising taxes that will impact the middle class.

The debate over the IRA’s naming and its effectiveness is debated. Political pundits suggest that Senator Joe Manchin’s rationale for the name was a politically palatable counter to the criticized “Green New Deal,” not an effective anti-inflation measure. While it is clear that the peak of the nation’s recent inflationary peak aligned with the IRA’s signing, and that inflation has since fallen precipitously since the signing, economic analyses have not demonstrated a causative impact on inflation.

Operations and maintenance (O&M) operator Zack Hobbs, in collaboration with commercial solar developer and former CPA Casey Gilley, has established a new partnership, CSS Repower. Their goal is to purchase and repower solar “fixer-upper” farms.

Hobbs, through his ownership of Carolina Solar Services, a specialist in solar O&M, has access to solar power plants in need of repowering services. However, the asset owners prefer to spend their time and capital on new projects.

“Many solar farms in North Carolina were built between 2010 to 2015 and are reaching “middle age,” which is showing up in the form of deteriorating modules or unsupported and underperforming inverters,” said Hobbs. The asset owners don’t want to deal with these troublesome assets as they are focused on new development projects.

As the fractional CFO for Carolina Solar Services, Gilley has developed spreadsheets to model the return on investment for repowering services to help asset owners financially justify their repair and upkeep actions.

“[There are] lots of challenges with repowering, mostly the 80/20 rule as it relates to tax, negative capital accounts as a result of accelerated depreciation, and engineering and renovation work (which CSS Repower and Carolina Services can perform),” said Gilley. “It’s going to be a financial engineering exercise to find good projects, something that I think I’ll be good at.”

CSS Repower targets distressed and underperforming solar assets:

• $2 million to $20 million project size
• Value-add solar farm “fixer-upper” repowering projects.  
  • Acquisition of underperforming assets at a discount
  • Replacement of modules & inverters
  • Maximization of DC capacity under existing interconnection or application to expand system size with the addition of battery storage
  • Projects qualify for new tax credits as long as at least 80% of the existing equipment is replaced (80/20 rule)
  • In-house operations & maintenance team to complete all electrical engineering & construction work
• Projects eligible for 30% to 50% tax credits + accelerated/bonus depreciation
• Timeline:  90 to 180 days from closing until completion (a major advantage as projects are already approved and interconnected, reducing risk and expediting transactions)

Having recently read a pv magazine article about backsheet cracking, Gilley shared his concerns: “the more I learn about solar, the less excited I am about owning sites for more than 20 years. I recently looked at a large site that now has 64% of the modules with severe backsheet cracking. This will be a challenging warranty claim with the manufacturer as the warranty only covers the modules, not lost production. For such a massive site, we’re talking big bucks in lost revenue and downtime during repair.”

Gilley added, “This goes back to not only building and designing the projects right the first time, but also having good insurance and good O&M providers for the projects and underwriting accordingly in the financial model.”

Gilley and Hobbs believe that their combined experience in financial optimization, engineering, and O&M has uniquely prepared them for this opportunity.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) projects that investment in solar photovoltaics will exceed $500 billion in 2024, surpassing the combined investment in all other electricity generation sources.

According to the World Energy Investment 2024 report from the IEA, total energy spending, including fuels and infrastructure, will exceed $3 trillion for the first time this year. Of that, $2 trillion will be directed toward clean energy technologies.

Clean energy technology investments are rising globally, with China leading the way, but significant increases in spending are evident across all continents. Overall, investment in renewable electricity generation is expected to reach a moderate $770 billion.

The $770 billion figure is considered “moderate” because the precipitous drop in solar panel prices has slowed the dollar increase in solar investment, even as capacity continues to grow rapidly. The chart above shows that more money is going into solar than all other forms of generation combined, reaching $500 billion in 2024.

The IEA notes that in 2023, each dollar invested in wind and solar PV yielded 2.5 times more energy output than a dollar spent on the same technologies a decade ago.

Globally, fossil fuel generation investments are projected to reach $80 billion for new generation facilities, with coal investment falling by 30% and gas decreasing by 8% compared to 2023 levels. The largest portion of the overall $3 trillion will be spent on fuel purchases, nearly $1.1 trillion, with only a small single-digit percentage going to low-emission fuels.

Investment in wind is expected to reach $200 billion, nuclear could touch $80 billion, which is double its 2018 investments. Battery storage is projected to reach $50 billion.

Private household investment in energy doubled from 9% of the total in 2015 to 18% at the end of 2023, driven largely by spending on rooftop solar, building efficiency, and electric vehicles. Since 2016, households have accounted for “40% of the increase in investment in clean energy spending,” which the IEA says is the largest share by far. Advanced economies saw 60% of their growth coming from private decisions, bolstered by strong policy support.

The moderating effect of falling hardware prices for solar panels, energy storage, and, to a lesser extent, wind turbines, has significantly offset the increased cost of capital.

Even with increased capital costs, and while hardware manufacturers face financial challenges, renewable projects themselves are seeing improved profitability. The IEA reports that returns on investment capital increased by one-third in 2023 compared to the previous year, due to the declining costs of hardware. The decrease in solar module prices on its own has lowered the projected levelized cost of electricity for solar power facilities by 5%, with energy storage projects experiencing even greater payback improvements due to their own price collapses.

A truckload of batteries caught fire after an accident on a California highway on Friday, July 26, just before 6 a.m. PST, leading to significant delays as the lithium product burned through the weekend.

According to the California Highway Patrol:

The collision occurred when the driver of a 2020 Freightliner, trailering a flatbed trailer loaded with a sealed container of six industrial grade lithium-ion batteries, lost control and overturned onto the right shoulder of northbound I-15. Subsequently, the battery container became detached from the flatbed trailer and also rolled onto the right shoulder.

The truck was carrying just over 75,000 pounds of lithium batteries, six in total, which were headed to a project in Wisconsin. The battery manufacturer and solar power facility owner have not yet been publicly disclosed.

Due to the location of the accident, heading east out of Los Angeles, it is unlikely the batteries were manufactured by Tesla. The Tesla Lathrop, California megafactory is located due north of this facility and would likely have used a different set of highways to reach Wisconsin.

The San Bernardino County Fire Department stated, “Multiple attempts were made to move the container from the freeway shoulder to open land using heavy equipment from the County Fire’s Special Operations Division, including an excavator and a dozer. Ground improvements and grading were completed in preparation for relocating the container to a safe area for long-term mitigation and cleanup. However, the container’s weight, exceeding 75,000 pounds, has made these efforts unsuccessful so far.”

The fire burned for at least twenty-four hours, posing significant hazards. It was announced that at 2:30 a.m. on Sunday, July 28th, crews had done enough work to reopen two lanes of the interstate. About an hour later, all northbound lanes were reopened. As of Tuesday afternoon, state officials reported that the fire was still burning to some degree.

Also on Tuesday, the California Highway Patrol released the name of the driver, but their injuries, if any, have not been announced.

Caltrans, the California transportation manager, said that they “coordinated delivery of essential supplies and medical aid, including 100 gallons of diesel and 60 gallons of gasoline to stranded motorists on I-15 and to those being diverted to I-40.” Additionally, multiple pallets of water were delivered to the site as temperatures in the desert began to increase. The Highway Patrol was also conducting welfare checks on vehicles stopped in the miles-long traffic jam.

There has been considerable discussion recently about the growth in power grid demand in the United States, following roughly two decades of relatively minimal growth. This anticipated increase in demand is largely driven by electricity-hungry artificial intelligence chips. The conversation about the resources required to power these data warehouses varies by region; in the southeast U.S., it primarily centers around new methane facilities, whereas Texas is focused on expanding solar, wind, and battery storage, supplemented by substantial existing gas resources. In contrast, California is actively pursuing new clean energy deals.

In NextEra’s second-quarter earnings call, the company reported its second-best renewable energy origination quarter ever, with the addition of more than 3 GW of renewables and storage projects to their project backlog. When including wind repowering alongside new wind, solar, and storage projects, the company expects to deploy between 36.5 and 46.5 GW of new capacity from 2024 to 2027.

As the nation’s largest clean energy developer, NextEra generates revenue from methane, pipelines, wind, solar, storage, nuclear, and coal, with approximately half of their revenue coming from fossil fuels. However, the company’s strategic discussions indicate a shift towards prioritizing solar plus storage over methane for future generation leadership.

John Ketchum, the company’s President and CEO, stated:

This marks our second best origination quarter ever. These results support our belief that the bulk of the growth demand will be met by a combination of renewables and battery storage…we also are well aware of the realities of new build gas-fired generation, it’s more expensive in most states, is subject to fuel price volatility and takes considerable time to deploy given the need to get gas delivered to the generating unit and the three to four year waiting period for gas turbines.

The company, known for its meticulous attention to detail and a dedicated mathematics department, has been reluctant to provide specific growth projections. Some analysts believe that the actual increase in electricity demand will be much less pronounced than what headlines may imply. The ambiguous statements from NextEra may also indicate that the company anticipates more moderate growth rates.

For example, instead of specifying the anticipated growth, the company stated, “NextEra expects power demand to grow four times faster over the next decades compared to the prior 20 years.” This statement raises questions, particularly regarding the company’s definition of “next decades” and the baseline of minimal demand growth over the past two decades.

Source: Statista

Regarding the total renewables to be deployed, NextEra is a bit more exacting, and optimistic. The company highlighted the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s projections, which suggest that renewable and storage additions will deploy three times faster in the next seven years compared to the previous seven. Additionally, NextEra noted that their overall project pipeline has reached 300 GW of capacity, representing a 20% increase over last year’s figure of 250 GW.

The company expects to deploy 7.1 GW of solar power in 2024-2025, followed by an additional 6.1 GW in 2026-2027. Over a third of this capacity will be deployed in the southeast, with Florida driving much of that growth. The Midwest region will represent nearly another third of the solar deployment capacity during the same period.

“We’ve dug in deep on agrivoltaics, it’s now our default option for land use in our solar arrays,” Jesse Robertson-DuBois, Director of Sustainable Development at Bluewave, told pv magazine USA.

“The first approach on a project is ‘How can we accommodate agrivoltaics?’ It’s the first thing we do in development. Sometimes that turns out to be cropping, sometimes it’s sheep grazing, sometimes cattle – and sometimes we won’t have a good food related option, so we go to pollinators,” Robertson-DuBois explained.

Agrivoltaic solar power energy facilities are beginning to deliver on their promise. Despite organized public opposition to large solar plants, projects spanning 1,000 acres are successfully being integrated into regional agricultural practices. Polling indicates that public dissatisfaction tends to increase with solar facilities larger than 100 megawatts, while even smaller installations around 50 acres, or approximately 10 megawatts, can also attract negative attention.

Robertson-DuBois has a rich background in agriculture and farmland policy. He owns a farm in western Massachusetts where his daughter grazes sheep. Engaged in diversified agriculture for most of his life, he recently shared his enthusiasm for spending a weekend working with hay and vegetables on a farm near his home.

In the early stages of developing a new facility, Robertson-DuBois prioritizes building a trusting relationship with the farmer. This mutual trust is crucial as they navigate the evolving aspects of the project. A key part of their discussions involves identifying which pieces of farm equipment are essential for ongoing operations and which can be replaced or modified as project details are finalized.

For instance, in a project in Western Massachusetts, Bluewave opted to replace a tractor and a hay machine rather than modifying the entire array. The driveline of the Array Technologies solar tracking system (similar to a vehicle’s driveshaft and circled in red in the image above) was initially positioned lower than the height of those machines. Although it had already been raised to 10 feet above the ground to comply with Massachusetts agrivoltaic regulations, further elevating it to accommodate the farm equipment would have quadrupled the steel costs. This expense far exceeded the cost of replacing the machines.

From the collection of five agrivoltaic projects in Massachusetts, for which Bluewave raised $91 million, one is fully operational both agriculturally and in terms of solar power generation. The site supports cattle grazing, which has shown minimal impact on the animals. “They started grazing this spring, the grass growth and productivity are good. The cattle are loving the shade. They graze in one area, then move back under the modules, then move to the next grazing area,” noted Robertson-DuBois, before reminding us that the American Solar Grazing Association reports that over 100,000 acres of solar installations are grazed by various animals.

State programs are increasingly supporting agrivoltaic power plants. The SMART program in Massachusetts, initiated in 2018, offers up to six cents per kilowatt-hour for agrivoltaic projects. Meanwhile, newcomers like New Jersey and New York are exploring their own initiatives. Notably, the New York agrivoltaic pilot program is focusing on more challenging farming opportunities. Unlike ‘standard’ agrivoltaic technologies like sheep grazing or supporting pollinators, New York’s program is incentivizing the integration of agrivoltaics with livestock such as cows and even cannabis cultivation.

Robertson-DuBois explained in the Northeast U.S., designing solar trackers to withstand heavy snow loads typically results in a structure robust enough to accommodate cattle using them as scratching posts. The key, he noted, is to move certain less rugged pieces of hardware like wiring and combiner boxes out of reach.

When discussing the integration of solar power with soy cultivation – America’s second largest crop – Robertson-DuBois delved into the specifics:

Soy [has] absolutely, huge potential. It’s a bush crop, where the outer leaves on the plant are really there to protect the inside leaves. Soy has what is called what is a long photoresponse period; when exposed to too much light, the stomata close, shutting off photosynthesis. Then the soybeans kinda sit there saying ‘I don’t know if I’m ready yet’. At Bluewave, we’ve been watching research that reduces this photoresponse time and increase photosynthesis.

Robertson-DuBois also noted the viability of other grains like wheat, barley, and oats. While grain corn, which can easily grow over 12 feet in height, presents more challenges, sweet corn, intended for human consumption, is considerably shorter at 7-8 feet and might be more suitable.

Robertson-DuBois says that focusing on the farm and the farmer’s needs, as well as the impact on the local community, is crucial for advancing projects. When deploying solar on a hundred year old wild blueberry farm, Jesse and his team practiced building techniques that preserved the existing vegetation.

At Bluewave’s Deighton, Massachusetts facility, where grazing and vegetable cultivation are combined, Bluewave implemented careful construction practices to protect the soil from compaction and preserve organic material.

“Building trust with the community, understanding the farm, and putting real projects in the field – with real challenges being solved – that are [spread over] tens of acres is how Bluewave is moving forward in agrivoltaics,” Robertson-DuBois stated.

Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have achieved a significant breakthrough in stabilizing a key component of perovskite solar cells. They have developed a method to synthesize Spiro-MeOTAD, a crucial material for charge transport, without using noble metals. This development led to the creation of a solar cell with an impressive 24.2% efficiency, although it experienced rapid degradation.

The research, led by Dr. Matthias J. Grotevent and Nobel Prize laureate Moungi G. Bawendi, demonstrated that their new method can produce a Spiro-MeOTAD material that remains stable even after 1,400 hours of testing at elevated temperatures (85°C) under continuous one-sun illumination. This durability is critical for materials exposed to the high temperatures and humidity typical of solar panel environments.

Their study, titled “Additive-free oxidized Spiro-MeOTAD hole transport layer significantly improves thermal solar cell stability,” underscores the potential of this new method. The researchers discovered that “even at low doping concentrations of 1%,” Spiro units could increase their electrical conductivity by orders of magnitude.

One of the key benefits of the material blend is its high glass transition temperature, which is above 115°C. This allows the solar cell to exhibit enhanced thermal properties, making it more suitable for use in high-temperature environments.

In all of this, the research team says that while the thermally stable Spiro unit is only in a solar cell that reaches 6% efficiency, they see a path via future research to stabilize the 24% efficiency solar cell.

According to the study, Spiro is currently an expensive material, priced online at $334 per gram. However, the researchers predict that the price could drop significantly with bulk orders reaching kilogram levels, potentially falling to $30 per gram or even $3/gram. When asked about the material’s cost by pv magazine USA, Dr. Grotevent estimated that a full-sized solar panel would require approximately 0.33 grams of Spiro, assuming a layer thickness of about 120 nanometers. This would result in a material cost of less than $0.003 per watt for a solar panel with an efficiency of over 20%, adding about $1.06 to the overall cost of the module.

Researchers are exploring three main approaches to deploying perovskites, which have so far seen limited use. The first method involves stacking perovskites atop silicon within the solar cell, a technique that has gained significant attention for its high efficiency, exemplified by Longi’s record-setting 34.6% perovskite-silicon tandem solar cell. The second approach, currently undergoing testing by GCL Perovskites, involves constructing nearly complete perovskite solar panels and layering them over similarly complete silicon solar panels to combine their outputs. The third approach features standalone perovskite panels without silicon, as demonstrated by the 1 MW China Three Gorges solar power facility.

Clearway Energy has secured financing for a 200 MW solar-plus-storage project and a 113.5 MW energy storage facility in California. The company will utilize $700 million in construction financing to deploy these projects, which have long-term agreements with San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E), South California Edison (SCE), and the Power & Water Resources Pooling Authority (PWRPA).

The Luna Valley facility features 200 MWac of solar power coupled with 169 MW of energy storage. As indicated in the site layout above, the batteries are positioned at the site of the solar inverters, suggesting potential DC coupling with the solar power.

Nestled in Fresno County, the Luna Valley facility is surrounded by a mix of existing and future solar power plants. To the south, it is neighbored by the existing Tranquility Solar Project. The Adams East Solar Projects lie to the east, while the Scarlet Solar Power Project, currently under development, is situated to the west.

This facility is one of sixteen current and prospective solar facilities within a fifteen-mile radius.

The Luna Valley facility has secured power purchase agreements (PPAs) with SDG&E, SCE, and PWRPA, while the Daggett Storage facility has an agreement exclusively with SDG&E.

According to the California Independent System Operator (CAISO), SDG&E has contracted equal amounts of solar and energy storage from the Luna and Dagget facilities. These resources are linked in a “virtually paired hybrid contract” as part of legislative efforts to replace the potentially retiring 2.2 GW Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant. The combined resources are designed to be available daily from 5 P.M. to 10 P.M., providing power for at least five consecutive hours.

The energy storage facility, featuring a four-hour 113.5 MW battery, marks the final phase of the now complete 482 MW Daggett Solar plus 394 MW Energy Storage complex. To fulfill the five-hour runtime requirement, the facility operates the 113.5 MW battery at a derated 91 MW.

A sound study reveals that daytime noise levels within the facility’s perimeter could reach up to 55 decibels (dB), comparable to a loud conversation. Just outside the fence, sound levels peak between 40 and 45 dB, with the lower end akin to a whisper and the upper end similar to a normal conversation or a running dishwasher.

Polling from Resource for the Future (RFF) reveals that the popularity of solar power among the U.S. population has dropped to 83%, down from 91% in 2013.  During this period, the only energy source to see an increase in popularity was nuclear power, which rose by 11%. All other sources of electricity generation saw declines in public approval.

The poll, titled “American Understanding of Climate Change,” was conducted in collaboration with the Political Psychology Research Group at Stanford University and Resources for the Future (RFF). Polling data has remained relatively stable since 1997, when 77% of respondents said they believed Earth’s temperature “has probably been increasing” over the past 100 years. The figure peaked at 85%, dropped to 69% in 2016, and recently settled at 75%.

Over the same period, the percentage of people who believe the temperature will continue to increase over the next 100 years has remained steady at around 75%. Similarly, the proportion of those who believe human actions have contributed to global warming has hovered around 83%.

During this timeframe, global temperatures have risen by 0.6°C.

Over 80% of respondents believe global warming will be a very or somewhat serious problem for the world, while about 75% believe it will be a serious issue for the United States. This is a slight decrease from the mid-80% range in 1997.

The report also found that a consistent majority believes regular people, businesses and government should be doing “at least a moderate amount” to address global warming, with rates of 74%, 78% and 80%, respectively.

The decline in solar power popularity to the low 80% range aligns with data from the Pew Research Center. While specific data from New York and the U.S. National Renewable Energy Laboratories were not available, they likely show similar trends based on project size and location.

Pew’s data highlights a political divide in support for solar power in the U.S., with Democratic support remaining above 90%, while Republican support has fallen to 70%.

A New York state analysis also found that, on a scale from 1 to 5, rooftop solar has a support level of 4.47 versus 3.12 for utility scale solar. This disparity of opinion is fairly consistent across rural and urban areas of the diverse state.

The New York analysis also found that system size and siting has a significant impact on support. Community solar projects, described as distributed assets generally smaller than 50 acres and selling electricity to locals, have more support than larger utility-scale solar facilities over 50 acres.

The rooftop versus ground-based solar divide is so sharp in some areas that fossil fuel-funded “faux responsible solar” groups use it as a base for their outreach.

Sol Clarity is developing an electrodynamic screen (EDS), which charges dust particles with a static charge and then uses an electromagnetic wave to sweep them off the solar panels. The company is currently seeking investment partners to help scale its operations and is testing the technology on a community solar project in the Northeastern U.S.

In the video above, the dust can be seen suddenly falling off the panels when the electromagnetic wave is engaged.

The Massachusetts-based company has tested its EDS material at a community solar facility in the Northeast owned by developer Nexamp. More recent tests were conducted at a facility in Chile, and next year, they plan to implement the technology at a power plant owned by Engie in California. The startup has received support from two state-funded groups that assist startups, Mass Ventures and the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (MassCEC), and raised a $920K Seed I round with Equinor ventures, Techstars, and Friends & Family to begin work on their first commercial pilot.

At the Nexamp site, Sol Clarity installed eleven full-scale solar panels equipped with EDS systems, complete with power boxes and intricate circuitry.

According to a 2018 paper, Sol Clarity expects the EDS system to operate for one to two minutes daily. The paper estimates that less than 1 watt-hour of electricity will be used per square meter per cleaning cycle, allowing for approximately 500 solar modules to be cleaned daily with just 1 kWh of electricity.

The product, which can be installed in the factory or retrofitted in the field, consists of either two or four layers, plus a power box. The factory-installed product includes an optically clear adhesive layer, plus a dielectric layer that contains the printed electrodes. The retrofit version adds two additional layers that separate the printed electrodes from the top dielectric layer.

Other players in the EDS field include SuperClean Glass, which is still refining its product to meet commercial standards. Jim Smith, VP of Business Development and Engineering Lead, commented, “Having passed the first few milestones of industry standard tests, this next phase is focused on scaling up and driving costs down.  We need to develop systems and processes to produce a football field of patterned glass per day and drive costs down for a competitive ROI. Of course the societal benefit is in the elimination of the use of potable water.”

The company has been reserved about the volume of information they share, but they did release data indicating that the net transmissibility of light through their electrode coating on a cadmium telluride solar panel is 99.05%.

Another EDS company, CleanFizz, has conducted tests in Saudi Arabia, showing that their product can remove over 95% of soiling losses from solar panels. They recently announced the closure of a $1M investment round at the end of 2023 and are now seeking $50 million to build a 300 MW manufacturing facility in Switzerland.

Although the financial viability of cleaning solar panels is often debated, there is clear evidence that soiling significantly reduces electricity output, as was shown by high pollen east coast sites in a recent analysis – along with driving hot spot damage, potentially significantly lowering the lives of solar modules. Pollen’s unique characteristics, and the dynamics of rain, have made all three of the EDS firms target arid and semi-arid regions.

The State of California’s Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has approved five clean energy project power purchase agreements submitted by Southern California Edison. Three of the projects are solar power plants with a total generating capacity of 525 MWac, while the other two are geothermal projects. According to Fervo Energy, these geothermal projects represent the largest geothermal power purchase agreements in the world.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s Form EIA-860M, at least one of the Atlas facilities will be coupled with energy storage.

According to the filing with the CPUC, each of the three solar power projects is expected to have an AC capacity factor of just over 36%. In comparison, the Fervo Energy geothermal facilities offer a capacity factor of just over 82%.

In their filing, the CPUC cites the state’s “mid-term reliability” capacity requirements of 3.8 GW by 2036, noting that both the geothermal and the solar-plus-storage projects meet those needs.

California aims to reduce emissions to 25 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMT CO2e) by 2035. The state projects 800 MW of geothermal capacity by 2026, 1.1 GW in 2027, and 2 GW by 2033.

The Atlas Solar V, VI, and X power plants are owned by solar developer 174 Power Global LLC, a subsidiary of the South Korean company Hanwha. Hanwha also owns Qcells, the largest silicon solar module manufacturer in the United States.

Located in Salome, Arizona, the solar facilities will transmit their electricity via the Atlas Solar Tie Line Project, a 500kV transmission line. This line will interconnect the proposed Atlas facilities with the Ten West Link 500 kV transmission line, eventually facilitating the use of the electricity in Blythe, California.

The facilities are situated in an active solar development region managed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and the Arizona State Land Department.

The two geothermal facilities are located at the same site in southwest Utah. The first phase, 70 MW, is expected to come online in 2026, with the second phase scheduled for 2028.

Publicly available documents from western electric utilities hint that Fervo’s power purchase agreements may range between $0.08 and $0.10 per kWh. The company recently announced that drilling times in February were 70% faster and 50% cheaper than in 2022.

Tesla set a company record by deploying 9.4 GWh of energy storage in the second quarter of 2024, more than doubling its largest previous quarterly deployment. The 9.4 GWh value was 131% greater than the previous quarter, and 157% greater than the volume deployed in Q2’2023.

The company’s first two quarters of energy storage deployment in 2024, are equal to just over 91% of the entirety of the capacity deployed in 2023 – with the second quarter alone equal to almost 64% of 2023’s total deployment capacity.

The announcement was made in an unconventional section of Tesla’s end-of-quarter press release, which typically focuses on the number of vehicles manufactured. This quarter’s release highlighted the company’s significant strides in energy storage, showing its increasing importance to the bottom line.

From 2016 through the first quarter of 2024, Tesla’s energy business consistently contributed less than 10% to total revenue. The only exceptions were in 2017, where contributions peaked at 9.49%, and in the first quarter of 2024, at 9.41%, with all other periods seeing contributions remain below 7.25%. Based on estimates derived from vehicles sold and the substantial projected increase in energy storage revenue, we anticipate that energy revenue will account for 15% to 21% of Tesla’s overall revenue in upcoming periods, likely leaning towards the upper end of this range.

The capacity increase follows the initiation of operations at Tesla’s Megapack assembly facilities in Lathrop, California, in 2022, and in Shanghai, announced in 2023. Each facility is capable of delivering up to 40 GWh of Megapacks annually.

Unlike its regular updates on vehicle production, Tesla does not disclose the volume of energy storage products manufactured each quarter. Instead, it reports on the revenue from products it can recognize, which coincides with when the battery packs are activated. It is likely that several tens of GWh of capacity have been manufactured and delivered but remain unrecognized due to accounting practices.

The featured image in this article showcases the recently activated Sierra Estrella energy storage facility in Arizona.

In addition to its operational achievements, Tesla has relaunched its online energy storage pricing tool, now featuring significantly lower prices.

The company’s pricing for a 1.9 MW/3.9 MWh Megapack is currently listed at $1,039,290, which equates to $266/kWh. This price does not include installation or delivery and requires a $1,000 deposit to secure the order.

In April 2023, the price of the same hardware was $1,879,840, at a rate of $482/kWh. The price has decreased approximately 44% during the 14-month period.

This price reduction aligns with a general market trend that has seen energy storage cell costs in China drop from between $110 and $130/kWh to near $50/kWh.

GCL Perovskite, a branch of GCL Tech within the GCL Poly and GCL Solar group, introduced their latest perovskite and perovskite-silicon tandem solar modules. A key highlight was the public IEC test documentation, indicating they may have conquered the perovskite degradation challenge. The company plans to incorporate this technology in the top layer of their tandem modules, aiming for efficiencies above 27% in limited deployment testing next year.

The Solar Roll by Apollo, featured in the main image above, is a flexible roll measuring 20.1 feet in length and 6.6 feet in width. This innovative setup combines six 300-watt solar panels into a 1.8 kW array capable of generating more than 10 kWh in a single day. The unit, equipped with MC4 connectors, is designed for easy integration with any standard solar inverter.

Throughout the three days of Intersolar, as detailed on the pv magazine Intersolar Live Blog pages – Day 1, Day 2, and Day 3 – attendees witness an impressive array of battery products. Numerous manufacturers showcased their latest offerings, particularly focusing on home battery solutions.

EcoFlow’s latest release, the PowerOcean Plus, represents a significant increase in residential system size and capacity. This smart hybrid inverter can manage up to 40 kW solar input with a 29.9kW AC output. Notably, it can support up to 60 kWh of battery capacity, 15 kWh more than its predecessor. Kevin Benedict, EcoFlow’s product and solutions manager, explained that this upgrade was a direct response to customer demand for larger systems to optimize home solar use and EV charging.

The presence of electric vehicles and their charging infrastructure was also a focal point at the event.

The Evum-motor aCar, showcased with a solar panel cleaning robot strapped to its flatbed, is tailored for operations and maintenance tasks. Starting at €33,990, this versatile vehicle is offered in several configurations: the base model features a 16.5 kWh battery with a range of 91 km. Additional options include a 23 kWh battery, which extends the range to approximately 128 km for an additional €4,290, and a 33 kWh battery that offers up to 203 km for an additional €10,890. Available in six base packages, the aCar punches above its weight with a payload capacity of 1,100 kg and a towing capacity up to 1,500 kg.

The aCar’s design, including its 1.5 meter width, allows it to fit comfortably between the rows of panels on solar farms, enhancing its utility. Its low-speed torque is specifically advantageous for traversing loose and steep terrain, facilitating the transport of essential hardware and personnel to less accessible areas. The inclusion of the solar panel cleaning robot underscores the vehicle’s practical application in maintaining and operating remote or large-scale solar operations.

Electric bike charger econec shared three electric bike chargers: the eBike Box micro for home use, eBike Box mini C for businesses, (featured in the image below), and eBike Box Vision for public charging. A notable feature of these systems is their customizable charger. Representatives noted that the e-bike industry has around 25 charging standards, with the public charging model, the eBike Box Vision, accommodating up to five unique plugs. Although Bosch dominates the market with 50% to 60% of all charger adapters, it offers two different types of connectors. Currently focused primarily on the European market, Econec is actively seeking U.S. partners as it works to expand its certifications.

Aiko is poised to launch the ABC Infinite Gen 3 solar module range, with efficiencies ranging from 24.2% to 25.2% in the fourth quarter. The standout 650 watt module, featuring 25.2% efficiency, aims to be the highest efficiency module globally upon its release. These products will be produced in the company’s two manufacturing facilities, with capacities of 10 GW and 14 GW of modules per year. A significant efficiency enhancement in these modules is the relocation of the busbars to the backside of the solar panels. While this adjustment reduces the bifaciality value to nearly 70%, it opens more silicon to face the sun on the front site, white significantly improving shade management capabilities.

Georg Giglinger, an environmental engineer, shared via Twitter what may have been the highest wattage module at Intersolar: Tongwei’s 765.18 watt rated, 24.63% efficiency panel.

Announced directly from the floor in Munich, Germany, Nextracker has acquired specialty ground screw manufacturer Ojjo in an all-cash transaction valued at approximately $119 million. Ojjo’s truss systems are designed to use half the steel of conventional foundations, aim to reduce grading requirements, and would be the foundation that supports NexTracker’s motors and torque tubes.

The pv magazine team at Intersolar Munich 2024 included over 30 representatives from regions such as Ireland, England, Western and Southern Germany, the U.S., among others.

Basis Climate has delivered an investment tax credit (ITC) transfer worth $600,000 for a 1.2 MW solar project, complete with a twelve-page transfer agreement plus requisite due diligence documentation. This transaction, facilitated under the new provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), signals a significant shift in the tax credit landscape, expanding access to smaller-scale solar projects.

Tax equity, a financing arrangement where investors fund solar power projects in exchange for federal tax benefits like investment tax credits, is a complex field that integrates capital and labor. Initial costs for assembling these deals can start under $100,000 but may quickly escalate to millions. These expenses, covering fees for lawyers, accountants, and engineers, support extensive review of data rooms and the drafting of extensive contracts, focusing on compliance and diligence. The objective is to ensure that large investment groups can safely deploy billions of dollars in compliance with the U.S. Internal Revenue Service regulations.

The introduction of the IRA brings about ITC transferability. This mechanism provides a less formal alternative to traditional tax equity, facilitating the use of solar ITCs by investors.

When pv magazine USA consulted tax equity professionals, now also working with transfers, at the Solar Energy Industries Association’s annual Finance, Tax, and Buyer’s Seminar in March about the potential for simpler “six- to eight-page” tax transfer contracts, their response was a mix of skepticism and amusement. Such brief documents would stand in stark contrast to the extensive documentation required for solar tax equity transactions due to their complexity and regulatory demands. Our sources indicate that shorter contract lengths would align better with those used in the movie industry, which also navigates its own tax credit processes.

In the past, even the smallest projects that attracted tax equity investors required $1 to $2 million in tax benefits to offset the $75,000 in fees. That landscape is now evolving.

Source: Basis Climate’s online portal

Basis Climate, an internet-based tax credit transfer platform, has closed nearly $250 million in deals and boasts a $2 billion pipeline across various technologies, including solar, energy storage, renewable natural gas, wind, and electric vehicle charging. Over the past month, the company has managed over $50 million in term sheets and offers, with more than $70 million in signed deals progressing towards closure.

WeWould Solar, a single-purpose entity providing ancillary power to on-site agricultural processing in Gainesville, Florida, partnered with Basis Climate on the $600,000 ITC sale. The project is for a net-metered, behind-the-meter solar power initiative within the utility region managed by the Clay Electric Cooperative. The transaction took place through Basis Climate’s website, with the ITC being acquired by Creditable Capital.

Derek Silverman, co-founder & chief product officer at Basis Climate, shared insights with pv magazine USA.

The project is slated for development in three phases, each anticipated to be 1.2 MW. Notably, since the initial phase was under 1 MWac, it was exempt from prevailing wage or apprenticeship requirements. The installation will use SMA Sunny High Power PEAK3 inverters, Canadian Solar bifacial BiHiKu 425 W modules, and TerraSmart’s Glade Wave racking.

Source: WeWouldSolar energy monitoring dashboard

Creditable has disclosed that it is underwriting ITC transfer transactions targeting a 10% to 15% return on investment, net of fees and expenses, for its investors. For a $600,000 transaction, with limited information available, a return in this range suggests that Creditable Capital paid approximately 85 to 87 cents on the dollar. This payment rate is at the lower end of the typical industry range, where 90 to 95 cents on the dollar is common for larger solar power projects involving investment-grade asset owners and sophisticated development and construction firms.

First Solar, meanwhile, received 97 cents on the dollar when it sold its manufacturing tax credits.

Risk management

Silverman highlighted that the project’s diligence covered approximately 20 key areas, including organizational documents, project design, construction plans, operational strategies, insurance placement, and project valuation and qualification. Finalizing these core areas early helped Creditable Capital concentrate on higher-risk aspects, such as determining the project’s eligible basis and mitigating recapture risks, which involve the risk of having to return tax benefits if the project fails to comply with regulatory requirements.

For projects where asset owners lack strong financial foundations, buyers commonly secure tax insurance to safeguard against recapture risk. This insurance also provides a financial safety net, known as a backstop indemnity, in case the project’s liabilities exceed its assets. In the case of Creditable, the financial guarantees provided by the asset owner were sufficient, eliminating the need for tax insurance. However, when sellers lack a robust balance sheet, buyers generally obtain tax insurance to ensure comprehensive protection.

Adam Stern, founding partner of Creditable Capital, commented on their funding strategy, stating:

Creditable is getting more comfortable with the funding at a point in time after diligence is completed with a holdback for the IRS registration. Creditable, through its investors and financial institution relationships, is working to provide bridge loans on projects that it is buying the credits for.

A lingering risk in these transactions is how the IRS will require buyers and sellers to verify aspects of the deal, such as the determination of the basis.

Determining the appropriate ITC is a complex process due to the US Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) detailed and evolving definitions of what constitutes an eligible project ‘basis’. For example, essential infrastructure like fences and roads, required by code for project deployment, are not considered part of the eligible basis, thus not qualifying for the 30% ITC. Similarly, interconnection costs had been excluded until recent changes under the IRA, which now allows projects under 5 MWac to include these costs in their ITC calculations.

In the traditional tax equity market, buyers of ITC needed to demonstrate significant involvement in the solar projects, taking on considerable operational and developmental risks, and ensuring long-term revenue from the projects flowed to them through complex financing arrangements. Some of requirements have been relaxed, although thorough due diligence and responsible investment practices remain essential.

A community solar project developed by Wunder Power in Maryland, part of an ITC sale facilitated by Basis in 2023. Image: Basis Climate.

From pv magazine Global

Chinese solar module maker CGL Technology presented its latest perovskite solar module technology at the Intersolar tradeshow in Munich, Germany, this week.

“This module has met IEC testing standards that would suggest it would degrade in a pattern that is similar to standard silicon solar modules,” the company’s spokesperson, Martin Wang, told pv magazine, noting that the company expects this perovskite product to be deployed as part of a perovskite-silicon tandem solar module which will begin mass production in late 2025.

Wang also revealed that GCL perovskite modules were used in the 1 MW perovskite solar power project deployed by China Three Gorges in late 2023.

The company said the deployment of their pure perovskite module at the China Three Gorges solar project represented the state-of-field testing stage of the product. The company hopes to deploy multiple 1 MW projects before the end of the year across different geographies with different environmental traits, to test the viability of the perovskite module.

At the booth, GCL showed two perovskite solar modules: one a pure perovskite module, and the other a perovskite silicon tandem solar module. The pure perovskite module has an efficiency of just over 19%, while the tandem module’s efficiency is just over 26%.

Wang explained that the perovskite solar panel had passed TUV Rhineland IEC 61215 and IEC 61739 certification tests, which would suggest that the solar modules would degrade like a standard silicon solar panel. Wang implied that GCL was moving slowly into the market with that statement because the tests are designed to degrade silicon products, and not perovskite products.

GCL has supplied pv magazine with the IEC certification document. Further documentation to better interpret the degradation results has been requested.

The modules came from a 100 MW test line that has been in place since 2021. The majority of the modules from this test line, which totaled 10 to 15 MW in 2023, have been recycled, as the modules progressed toward units they felt were worthy of deployment.

Wang said that GCL believes the degradation of their perovskite silicon tandem module will be better than that of standard silicon modules. Starting at the end of next year, GCL will begin deploying their perovskite silicon tandem solar module.

A key detail on the product that is different from many others in the market is that the tandem aspect of the product is on a module level – not the cell level. What this means to the manufacturer is that “95% of the hard work” will have already been done in the creation of the perovskite module.

Wang also explained that combining two solar panels was a much simpler process than making a tandem solar cell, and that of the hand-crafted perovskite silicon tandem modules, the units work 95% of the time, and that once the manufacturing line is in place this value will reach near 100%.

Wang said that on a cost-per-watt basis – not expected market price – the company expected the perovskite silicon tandem module would cost 50% of a crystalline silicon module that costs $0.15 per W, meaning $0.075 per W. He said the 50% value that was used in marketing on the perovskite silicon module was done when polysilicon was more expensive, and thus modules were more expensive.

When asked by pv magazine about future efficiency gains, Wang said GCL – in this case – is a perovskite company first. “We should realize the full potential of perovskites, and we should adapt silicon to the perovskite – instead of the other way around,” he stated.

By next year, they expect the tandem module to break 27% efficiency – with greater than 30% “guaranteed”. Currently, in the tandem structure, it is the perovskite module that is contributing the majority of the efficiency, as it is generating at 19% – while the silicon is only running at 7% efficiency.

The current silicon base module used is a TOPCon unit, however, GCL believes that heterojunction will be the best long-term solution due to the product’s higher voltage.

At Intersolar Munich 2024, Chinese solar cell and module maker Aiko Solar showed its Generation 3 Comet series of solar panels featuring a world record power conversion efficiency of 25.2%.

“The new products rely on our proprietary all-back-contact (ABC) solar cell technology,” Claudio Godinho, Europe Service Director at Aiko Solar, told pv magazine at the company’s booth in Munich. “The Comet Generation 3 solar module will be available in the fourth quarter of 2024. The module will be manufactured at their 10 GW and 14 GW facilities.”

Godinho noted that the modules use only copper in their backside located solar cell connections. The company said they can use copper, which tends to require thicker busbars, partially because they’ve moved those connections to the backside of the module.

Five versions of the new module series will be made available, with power output ranging from 625 W to 650 W and efficiency spanning from 24.2% to 25.2%. The open-circuit voltage is between 54.49 V and 54.99 V and the short-circuit current is between 14.60 A and 15.00 A. It has a size of 2,278 mm x 1,134 mm x 30 mm and a weight of 27 kg.

All products are built with 3.2 mm tempered anti-reflective glass and aluminum frames. They also feature an IP68 enclosure and a maximum system voltage is 1,500 V. The panels have a temperature coefficient of -0.26%/C and an operational temperature ranging from -40 C to 85 C (-40 F to 185 F).

Aiko Solar provides a 30-year performance warranty, with a purported 1% degradation in the first year and a guaranteed end power output of no less than 88.85% of the nominal power after 30 years.

The module features solar cells that overlap by about 0.3 mm. This reportedly generates more electricity within the same area – adding approximately 0.5% more sun-facing silicon. Moving all of the string connectors – the ABC technology – to the backside of the module increases the light absorption area by 1.1%, according to the manufacturer.

Aiko says approximately 93.5% of the solar module’s surface area is solar cells. Moving the solar cell interconnections to the backside of the solar panel does lower the bifaciality of the product to 70%. The backside contacts also give the module advantages in partial shade situations.

New York State’s “Renewable Optimization and Energy Storage Innovation Program” is dedicating $5 million to support long duration energy storage (LDES) projects, with project applications due by September 24, 2024 at 3 PM EST. This funding, administered by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), targets innovative solutions capable of delivering energy storage for durations of 10 to 100 hours, within the specified technical categories:

1. Electrochemical:
   • Including flow batteries and advanced battery solutions
2. Mechanical
   • Innovative pumped hydro and compressed air/gas solutions
   • Mechanical/gravity energy storage
   • Geomechanical energy storage
3. Thermal
   • Pumped heat electrical energy storage
   • Thermophotovoltaic (TPV) storage
   • Innovative mediums such as water, sand, molten salts, and rocks

Now in its third iteration, the program finances up to 50% of each approved project’s cost. It prioritizes projects that tackle renewable integration challenges like grid congestion, hosting capacity constraints, and the siting limitations of lithium-ion batteries in New York City. NYSERDA seeks to support technologies that are not yet commercially scaled and are still in developmental stages. Eligible expenses include product development and demonstration projects.

Additionally, the application package stipulates that companies receiving awards must not conduct business in or with Russia.

Proposal evaluation criteria

The proposal scoring criteria lists twenty-eight questions, including:

• Is the proposed work technically feasible, innovative, and superior to existing alternatives?
• Are the fundamental scientific principles well understood and clearly articulated?
• Does the proposed solution have strong potential for commercialization, addressing demonstrated customer needs and significant market opportunities?
• Is there an appropriate plan for performance monitoring and data analysis included in the proposal?
• To what extent will there be economic benefits in New York State in the form of subsequent commercial activity and economic growth?
• How widely can the technology be deployed, both in New York and globally?
• How realistic is the schedule for achieving the goals of the proposed project?
• How significant is the commercial potential of this technology?

This funding round follows significant investments in previous years. In the summer of 2023, four demonstration projects received nearly $4 million. Ecolectro was granted just over $1 million to advance sustainable hydrogen technologies; Form Energy received $1.2 million for their iron flow batteries; Polyjule deployed a 167 kW/2 MWh plastic-based battery with slightly over $1 million; and Urban Power was awarded about $700,000 to develop a 100 kW/1 MWh zinc battery.

In 2022, Borrego Solar, JC Solution, Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Power to Hydrogen, and Roccera were awarded $16.6 million to develop long-duration energy storage solutions. This funding effort was part of a broader initiative that began in 2020, when New York embarked on a project with Zinc8 to develop long-duration zinc energy storage. Following successful development, Zinc8 decided to manufacture its zinc-air batteries in New York State.

As shown in chart above, New York targets significant energy storage milestones by 2050: achieving 10.4 GW over four hours (41.2 GWh) and 6.7 GW over eight hours (53.6 GWh), pushing toward a total of nearly 100 GWh in bulk energy storage. Yet, as of early 2023, despite its mention in the state’s energy roadmap, New York has not quantified energy storage capacities exceeding ten hours.

The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) announced that $5 million is now available for demonstration projects that co-locate solar and agriculture within the state. Each project can receive up to $750,000. The state aims to expand the body of knowledge on the technical and financial viability of solar agrivoltaic facilities.

Participants in the program must agree to share data on the projects, including costs, benefits, lessons learned, and to host educational events open to the public.

Applications can be submitted through the NYSERDA website September 12, 2024, at 3 p.m.

Agrivoltaic facilities that are part of a larger solar facility should submit their application accounting only for the solar power area that is part of the agrivoltaic experiment. For instance, a 5 MW solar facility that integrates corn cultivation within 1 MW of solar panels should apply as a 1 MW agrivoltaic facility.

Agrivoltaic projects must be a minimum of 100 kW and are limited to 5 MWac.

According to NYSERDA summary documentation, eligible crops, livestock, and livestock products include, but are not limited to:

• Field crops, including corn, wheat, oats, rye, barley, hay, potatoes and dry beans.
• Fruits, such as apples, peaches, grapes, cherries and berries.
• Vegetables, such as tomatoes, snap beans, cabbage, carrots, beets and onions.
• Horticultural specialties, including nursery stock, ornamental shrubs, ornamental trees, and flowers.
• Livestock and livestock products, including cattle, sheep, hogs, goats, horses, poultry, ratites (such as ostriches, emus, rheas and kiwis), farmed deer, farmed buffalo, fur bearing animals, wool bearing animals (such as alpacas and llamas), milk, eggs, and furs.
• Maple sap.
• Christmas trees derived from a managed Christmas tree operation whether dug for transplanting or cut from the stump.
• Aquaculture products, including fish, fish products, water plants and shellfish.
• Woody biomass, which means short rotation woody crops raised for bioenergy, and does not include farm woodland.
• Apiary products, including honey, beeswax, royal jelly, bee pollen, propolis, package bees, nucs and queens. “Nucs” are defined as small honeybee colonies created from larger colonies, including the nuc box – a smaller version of a beehive, designed to hold up to five frames from an existing colony.
• Actively managed log-grown woodland mushrooms.
• Industrial hemp as defined in Section 505.

Projects that solely include pollinator-friendly ground cover, apiary installation and maintenance, sheep grazing, or crops for biofuel generation are not eligible.

The project application package includes a “General Eligibility Checklist.” A negative response to any of the questions on this form may disqualify the proposal from further consideration.

Source: NYSERDA

A variety of eligible groups, including solar developers, farmers, landowners, nonprofit organizations, educational institutions, and local governments, can submit projects. Individuals and business owners may also apply independently. Teams looking to enhance existing or under-development distributed solar projects must apply through the NY SUN portal and be certified as NY SUN contractors. Additionally, projects associated with the NYSERDA Large Scale Renewable program are eligible.

The total potential prize of $750,000 is split into two parts; it allocates up to $500,000 for funding incremental solar hardware to ensure the facility’s viability. The remaining $250,000 is designated to support the agricultural aspects of the project. Funding will cover no more than $0.50 per watt for the incremental costs of the solar power plant.

In its preliminary findings, the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) found reasonable indications that the domestic solar module manufacturing industry is being materially harmed by imported solar cells from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam. These countries have been identified as providing governmental incentives for setting up manufacturing facilities, sparking this investigation.

The complaint was initially brought forward by the American Alliance for Solar Manufacturing Trade Committee, which includes prominent members such as First Solar, Hanwha Qcells USA, and Mission Solar Energy, according to the USITC. The group’s press release also named Convalt Energy, REC Silicon and Swift Solar.

Industry insiders told pv magazine USA that this outcome was expected from this group. 

A detailed report titled “Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam; Inv. Nos. 701-TA-722-725 and 731-TA-1690-1693” is scheduled for release on July 5, 2024, on the USITC website.

The specific outcome from this meeting is that the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) will continue its most recent ongoing investigation on the topic. Commerce will release its preliminary determination results on Countervailing Duties on July 18, with Anti-Dumping results due on October 1. These will be followed by final rulings from Commerce and the USITC’s final rulings on the subject.

In its initial filing, the USITC reported that over the past three years, the four countries have exported 71 GW of solar modules to the U.S., valued at $21 billion. During the same period, the U.S. installed a total of 83.8 GW of solar capacity. Suggested by USITC data, there’s an estimated 50 GW of solar modules currently stored in warehouses across the country. The U.S. Energy Information Administration projects that more than 50 GW of new solar capacity will be installed in the U.S. in 2024.

A significant portion of these imported solar modules is used in utility-scale solar projects.

The merchandise under investigation includes crystalline silicon photovoltaic (CSPV) cells and modules, as well as laminates and panels containing these cells. Excluded from this investigation are thin-film photovoltaic products made from materials such as amorphous silicon, cadmium telluride, or copper indium gallium selenide, typical of products manufactured by First Solar. Off-grid CSPV panels are also excluded from this investigation.

Currently, the cost of importing solar panels into the U.S. could increase dramatically, according to Clean Energy Associates, if the panels originate from China. The collective effect of multiple tariffs – including Section 201, 301, Anti-Dumping, and Countervailing Duties, could raise the price of imported panels by 15% with no Chinese connections, and up to 286% for Vietnamese modules, should the proposed rates be approved.

As the United States reassesses its shrinking manufacturing base relative to China’s expanding influence and considers the global geopolitical landscape, solar panel import tariffs continue to play a pivotal role in shaping the industry. Solar modules are now the world’s leading source of new energy, and international relations often hinge on energy politics. This is exemplified by the current war in Europe, which was precipitated by Russia using its gas resources to slow the continent’s response to its invasion of Ukraine, leading to a massive increase in the adoption of photovoltaics across the continent.

Since October 10, 2012, the Commerce Department, then under President Barack Obama, has subjected all solar modules containing key components from China to an import tariff. Now, in 2024, as the solar industry strives to fully scale and establish itself, the U.S. has imposed five import tariffs, one geographical import ban, and has also recently initiated an additional tariff case now under investigation.

Christian Roseland, an analyst at Clean Energy Associates, released a document titled “US Trade Policies That Affect Solar PV.” This document lists seven policies:

2012

Starting from the oldest, the original Antidumping and Countervailing Duties (AD/CVD) case of 2012 was applied to all solar cells originating in China. According to a fact sheet from the U.S. International Trade Administration, the Commerce Department found that “Chinese producers/exporters have sold solar cells in the United States at dumping margins ranging from 18.32 to 249.96 percent. Commerce also determined that Chinese producers/exporters have received countervailable subsidies of 14.78 to 15.97 percent.”

Although Suntech and Trina were most publicly associated with these solar panel import tariffs, the ruling covered all solar cells from China, including 59 additional companies explicitly named in the document.

2014

While it didn’t technically affect solar cell prices, in 2014, the Obama administration charged “Five Chinese Military Hackers for Cyber Espionage Against U.S. Corporations and a Labor Organization for Commercial Advantage.” These charges stemmed from the theft of “thousands of files including information about SolarWorld’s cash flow, manufacturing metrics, production line information, costs, and privileged attorney-client communications relating to ongoing trade litigation, among other things.”

2015

In February 2015, a second pair of duties targeted solar modules assembled in China and solar cells from Taiwan. The solar module duty focused on Trina and was extended to include Jinko Solar. It applied to all companies assembling solar modules in China using solar cells from any manufacturing hub. It was determined that China had started to manufacture cells outside its borders, only to import them later for module assembly. The second ruling aimed to curtail Chinese companies that were specifically investing in the production of solar cells in Taiwan for subsequent reimportation into China.

The tariff rates were 26% for Trina, 78% for Jinko, with a standard 52% for a large number of companies. Companies not on the original list faced a nationwide tariff of 165%.

2018

Following lawsuits by Suniva, the Trump administration implemented two additional tariffs: Section 201 & Section 301, applying to solar modules and hundreds of other items, respectively. The Section 201 tariff imposed a 30% import tariff on all solar modules from all countries, decreasing 5% annually until its scheduled end. The Biden administration later extended this tariff.

Initially, the Section 201 tariff excluded bifacial solar modules, as no significant U.S. production existed. However, as the U.S. module manufacturing base began to scale, the Biden administration recently reinstated a 15% tariff on bifacial modules.

2022a

The Uighur Protection Act aimed to ban all materials coming from the Xinjang region of China, identified as originating from forced labor. This region is noted for its solar polysilicon production, facilitated by inexpensive coal-powered electricity. As a result, significant volumes of solar modules were blocked from entering the U.S. by Customs.

In response, many solar manufacturers began to shift their sourcing of solar polysilicon away from this region, including all products coming into the United States. To prove the origin of the product, the industry has started to develop supply chain verification techniques, and some Chinese solar manufacturers have initiated agreements with international polysilicon groups.

2022b (2012 – Part 2)

After a lawsuit was dismissed in 2021 due to anonymity concerns, Auxin Solar filed an AD/CVD lawsuit targeting Chinese manufacturers who had relocated solar cell and module production to Southeast Asia, claiming these actions violated the 2012 circumvention ruling. In winter 2022, the ruling confirmed circumvention by four companies, while another four major companies were found compliant.

The ruling specified that Chinese-origin solar cells would not be tariffed if at least three of six key subcomponents, including silver paste, aluminum frames, glass, backsheets, ethylene vinyl acetate sheets, and junction boxes, also originated outside of China.

President Biden paused the resultant tariffs for two years to foster the expansion of the U.S. solar industry, aligning with the goals of the inflation Reduction Act. The suspension was strategically planned to bolster the manufacturing and installation sectors of the solar industry during a critical growth period before any reductions in imports were enacted. Recently, Auxin challenged this decision by filing a lawsuit against the pause. This tariff suspension is scheduled to conclude on June 6, 2024.

2024a (2018 Part 2)

The current administration has extended and increased tariffs under the Section 301 ruling established in 2018, now covering solar cells, as well as batteries for cars and grid storage. The tariff on solar cells has risen from 25% to 50%, and battery cells have seen increases up to 25%. Today, importing solar cells from China, which cost between a few cents to a nickel per watt, would see a tariff increase from $0.0125/Wdc to $0.025/Wdc with this hike.

2024b – Pending Investigation

A petition filed by the American Alliance for Solar Manufacturing Trade Committee, which includes First Solar, Qcells, Meyer Burger, REC Silicon, and others, claims that the U.S. “manufacturing renaissance” is threatened by heavily subsidized Chinese cells and modules. These are alleged to be in violation of antidumping and countervailing duty (AD/CVD) laws.

The petition advocates applying the logic of the 2012 and 2015 AD/CVD rulings, which contend that certain countries hosting solar cell and module assembly factories – Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam – are unfairly subsidizing those factories, affecting all crystalline solar cell and panel manufacturers in those countries.

In their filing, the group says, “Although the Petitioner does not identify specific subsidy rates from the Subject Countries, the Petition alleges that solar cells and modules are imported and dumped in the U.S. market at the (above) margins.” The rates alleged are 70.35% for Thailand, 81.24% for Malaysia, 127.06% for Cambodia, and 271.45% for Vietnam.

How to apply solar panel import tariffs

Solar tariffs are collected by customs agents. While the buyer ultimately pays for the tariffs in the long run, the immediate financial responsibility depends on the import technique – EXW, FCA, DDP, etc. This determines who writes the check at the moment of import approval and who might be responsible if the amounts are incorrect or if evolving laws change the tariff amounts.

When calculating the AD/CVD and Section 201/301 tariffs, each tariff percentage is applied to the purchase price of the product. Among the four AD/CVD tariffs, a single charge is applied, but this only pertains to modules from specific regions. Conversely, both the Section 201 and 301 tariffs are imposed on all solar modules globally.

For example, if a solar module costs $0.10 per watt, then the Section 201 tariff at 15% would add $0.015 per watt, and the Section 301 tariff at 50% would add $0.05 per watt.

For a 2015 AD/CVD non-compliant solar module, the tariffs would vary significantly by manufacturer and country. For instance, when importing from China, tariffs are 26% for Trina products, 78% for Jinko, with a standard rate of 52% applying to a large number of companies. Non-listed companies would face a 165% tariff, leading to additional costs ranging from $0.026 to $0.165 per watt due to tariffs.

Should the 2024b tariff be applied as proposed, tariffs would increase costs significantly, adding $0.07035 per watt for modules assembled in Thailand up to $0.27145 per watt for those from Vietnam. However, none of these countries would have the Section 301 tariff applied, as that tariff only applies to products manufactured in China.

In total, a solar module initially costing a dime per watt could eventually cost between $0.191 and $0.38 per watt – an increase of 91% to 286%.

In comparison to the Inflation Reduction Act

Solar panel import tariffs are primarily intended to support the development of a new U.S.-based solar module manufacturing supply chain, which is financially backed by the Inflation Reduction Act. This act introduces a series of tax credits designed to bolster domestic manufacturers.

For solar modules, the credits are as follows:

• Solar cells: 4 cents per direct current watt of capacity
• Solar wafers: $12 per square meter
• Solar grade polysilicon: $3 per kilogram
• Polymeric backsheet: 40 cents per square meter
• Solar modules: 7 cents per direct current watt of capacity

For inverters, the credit varies depending on the type and is applied per watt of alternating current:

• Central inverter: 0.25 cents
• Utility inverter: 1.5 cents
• Commercial inverters: 2 cents
• Residential inverters: 6.5 cents
• Microinverters: 11 cents

Additionally, torque tubes for racking will receive a credit of $0.87 per kilogram, and structural fasteners will receive $2.28 per kilogram. Detailed information on these production credits is available starting on page 414 of the Inflation Reduction Act.

Solar import tariffs aim to level the playing field by addressing the market price disparities of solar power hardware originating from China, while supporting domestic manufacturers. This strategy is part of the United States government’s broader efforts to protect national security and combat climate change.

Recently, these tariffs have ranged from symbolic warning shots to upward price adjustments that might increase the cost of solar modules and energy storage. Additional looming tariffs on solar panels, aluminum, steel, and other materials could further escalate industry costs.

Canadian Solar is a global company whose products bear multiple import tariffs. As well, in response to the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), Canadian Solar plans to begin manufacturing solar cells in Indiana and assembling modules in Texas.

During a case initiated by the global Hanwha Q Cell at the U.S. International Trade Commission, Jonathan Stoel, a partner at Hogan Lovells LLP and counsel for Canadian Solar’s U.S. Module Manufacturing Corporation, made a statement they also provided to pv magazine USA. He argued that the case was “brought entirely on false pretenses and based on fundamentally erroneous predicates.”

Stoel outlined the perceived inaccuracies:

• The assertion by other petitioners that 36 GW of solar panels are at stake in this ruling is a significant overestimation, likely intentional.
• The claim that the majority of the solar manufacturing industry supports the tariffs is misleading. In reality, only three companies – major one though – have advocated for the tariffs. It was noted that most companies planning to assemble solar panels in the U.S., due to the IRA incentives, oppose the import tariffs on solar cells because they rely on importing these components.
• Solar cells and solar modules are distinct technologies. Stoel cited evidence that Hanwha’s Q Cell operates two separate facilities for manufacturing solar cells, while also importing solar modules. It is important to note, as pv magazine USA adds, that the nation’s largest solar manufacturer, First Solar, integrates the production of solar cells and modules in a single process. However, this case specifically addresses crystalline solar cells, which First Solar does not produce.
• Stoel emphasized that Hanwha’s expansion in Georgia was primarily motivated by government incentives, which is the very thing that this case seems to push back against.

In response to the points raised, Stoel urged the court to recognize several key aspects of the case: (1) it was filed on dubious grounds; (2) major manufacturers, not a majority, are opposed to imports; (3) modules and cells are distinct products; (4) the import volumes are far less significant than suggested and have not caused material harm; (5) adverse price effects have not been observed; (6) the court should consider the financial health and growth of the industry, spurred by incentives introduced by the IRA; (7) many US companies involved, including Hanwha’s Q Cell which initiated the case, have substantial international connections.

Despite the claims regarding the absence of adverse price effects, the cost of solar cells and modules in the United States has dramatically decreased. This reduction is due to a collapse in Chinese polysilicon pricing and a rapid increase in manufacturing capacity. Since even Chinese manufacturers, such as Longi, have acknowledged that this surge in capacity is negatively affecting their business, it can be fairly inferred that competing companies might perceive these developments as disadvantageous.

Ultimately, while the tariffs are presented as protective measures for domestic industries, their effectiveness is debatable. The global dynamics of the solar market and strategic responses by manufacturers suggest that these measures might serve more as diplomatic signaling than impactful economic barriers. Historically speaking, as noted in the above chart, tariffs alone haven’t shown to grow the U.S. solar manufacturing base – however – the IRA did.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) released proposed guidance to sunset the existing Investment Tax Credit (section 45) and Production Tax Credit (section 48) of the Inflation Reduction Act. This transition will consolidate all clean energy generation projects, including wind and solar, into the technology-neutral Clean Electricity Production Credit (section 45Y) and Clean Electricity Investment Credit (section 48E). These new tax credit sections will be applied to all projects placed in service after December 31, 2024.

In a press release, the IRS stated that the purpose of this new structure was to create a consistent framework for all clean energy technologies:

The technologies recognized in today’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) include wind, solar, hydropower, marine and hydrokinetic, nuclear fission and fusion, geothermal, and certain types of waste energy recovery property (WERP). The proposed guidance also clarifies how energy storage technologies would qualify for the Clean Electricity Investment Credit.

The document allows for technologies that may have aspects of their lifecycles that depend on fossil fuels; however, the IRS states these products must include a lifecycle greenhouse gas analysis and demonstrate net-zero emissions.

According to the American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE), the tax credits are projected to “lower the average annual electric bill by $29.74 per household by 2030, and $42.95 by 2035.”

Called a “game-changing policy” by Ray Long, President and CEO of ACORE,  he said, “The tax credit increases American energy security and reliability by deploying new clean electric generation from wind, solar, battery storage, and other zero-carbon technologies. Analysis has shown that by 2035, clean energy capacity will increase by up to 50%.”

The IRS noted that the NPRM also outlines how to apply tax credits to interconnection costs for projects smaller than 5 MWac. These costs, incurred by solar projects to upgrade local transmission and distribution networks, are now covered under Section 48 of the Investment Tax Credit, which the IRA modified to include qualified interconnection costs.

Further cost structures are also detailed, for instance, the IRS notes that qualifying facilities need roads – and thus, the cost of roads is covered under tax credit considerations.

Proposed §1.45Y-2(b)(3)(iii) would provide that roads that are an integral part of a qualified facility are those roads integral to the intended function of the qualified facility, such as onsite roads that are used to operate and maintain the qualified facility. Proposed §1.45Y–2(b)(3)(iii) would also clarify that roads used primarily for access to the site, or roads used primarily for employee or visitor vehicles, are not integral to the intended function of the qualified facility and thus are not an integral part of a qualified facility.

The Center for Rural Affairs (CFRA) has released an analysis, Sifting through Solar: Land-Use Concerns on Prime Farmland, which discusses the potential expansion of solar power by 2050 on Midwest farmland.

The report highlights that solar projects have generated 147,000 rural jobs and delivered substantial land lease payments to farm owners, with farm owners in Iowa receiving $73.4 million in 2022 alone.

According to the CFRA, the U.S. Department of Energy’s Solar Futures study estimates that by 2050, 1,600 GW of solar power will be needed to fulfill 40-45% of electricity demand, with 210 to 420 GW anticipated to be installed in the Midwest. The analysis further notes that if all the projected solar capacity for the Midwest were installed solely on farmland, totaling 114.8 million acres, “it would only occupy 1.45% to 2.90%” of farmland.

Moreover, a significant portion of land is neither considered prime farmland nor currently used for agriculture at all.

Challenges

The CRFA highlights Iowa, notable not only for its extensive ethanol production but also for significant resistance to solar development. Repurposing these ethanol-producing lands for solar could theoretically power the entire U.S., including all electric vehicles and heating systems.

The analysis identifies two technical land designations, “prime farmland” and “corn suitability rating” (CSR), as potential barriers to placing solar installations. These designations could be overly restrictive under current policies.

In Minnesota, advocates contend that the classification of prime farmland, established in the 1980s to curb the spread of coal and nuclear facilities, is outdated. Unlike these facilities, solar installations do not permanently alter the land and can be decommissioned, allowing the land to return to its original farming use after lying fallow, potentially improving its condition for future agricultural use.

In Iowa, proposed legislation aimed to limit solar installations to land with a CSR value of 65 or less failed to pass. Had it passed, placing solar installations on 65% of the state’s farmland would have been illegal, and a large portion of the remaining 35% was considered less than viable for solar due to various land characteristics.

CFRA’s efforts to address land use concerns could be deployed as part of an effective comprehensive educational strategy. Stakeholders must understand the significant income potential from solar installations alongside the threats posed by local anti-solar legislation to the financial security of family farms.

Financial comparisons and community impact

Considering the attractive solar lease rates, dedicating even a small percentage of farmland to solar energy can substantially enhance a farm’s financial stability. For example, in 2023, the United States Department of Agriculture’s National Agricultural Statistics Service reported that non-irrigated cropland cash rent averaged $269 per acre in Iowa and $259 in Illinois. High-quality farmland can command rents over $400 per acre, while the least profitable farmlands fetch as low as $58 per acre.

Contrast these figures with the typical solar lease in these states, ranging from $750 per acre for up to hundreds of acres to as much as $3,000 per acre for up to 20 acres.

Community solar programs, which tend to lease fewer acres, offer higher rates ranging from $1,200 to over $5,000 per acre depending on the state. For example, a farmer with 400 acres who converts their least productive 15 acres – representing 3.75% of their land – for a 2 MWac community solar farm could see annual earnings surge to $45,000. This amount is approximately 11.5 times the previous earnings of $3885 from these acres, based on the average cash rent of $259 per acre in Illinois.

Even at the lower end, solar leasing would at least double the cash rent of the most lucrative farmland and could provide a dramatic increase for less profitable lands. For instance, in Johnson County, Illinois, land renting at $58 per acre could see income increase 13-fold with a $750 per acre solar lease rate.

To achieve 1,600 GW of solar capacity in the U.S., just over 10 million acres would be required, of which 1.2 million to 2.5 million acres would be utilized from the Midwest’s almost 700 million acres of total land area.

With 10,300,000 acres available nationally for solar installations, projected land lease revenues available to owners would range from $7.725 billion annually to an impressive $30.9 billion, with billions in lease revenues available in the Midwest.

To further harmonize solar development with agricultural land use, several strategies can be implemented:

• Enhancing biodiversity: Planting native or perennial vegetation under panels can improve soil health and provide pollinators and wildlife. Sites managed with native vegetation have been shown to have a restorative effect on the environment.
• Integrating agrivoltaic practices: Agrivoltaic practices such as livestock grazing, crop growing, and beekeeping allow land to remain in agricultural use while simultaneously producing energy.
• Ensuring land restoration: Solar projects have a minimal impact on land quality, and the land can be restored to its original farmland state at the end of the project’s life cycle, estimated to be between 30 to 35 years.
• Implementing decommissioning plans: Once solar arrays reach the end of their life cycles, county decommissioning plans should mandate the restoration of the pre-construction environment.
• Combating disinformation Campaigns: Washington-based, fossil fuel-associated, groups such as Susan Ralston’s “Citizens for Responsible Solar’‘ focus on inciting controversy and disseminating misinformation. These groups actively work to influence local governments to impose bans and legislative limitations on solar projects.

Florida Governor Desantis has signed new legislation that removes the state’s goals of developing plans to reach 100% renewable electricity by 2050. Their law also bans all offshore wind within one mile of the coast. Last week, they even banned using the term “climate change” in government documents.

The state is currently under stress by insurance agencies pulling out of covering homeowners due to an increase in intensity and damage from hurricanes driven by climate change.

On Twitter, DeSantis wrote:

We’re restoring sanity in our approach to energy and rejecting the agenda of the radical green zealots.

Newly signed legislation, CS/CS/HB 1645, has repealed renewable energy targets set by the Agricultural Commissioner in 2022. These statewide renewable energy goals required utilities to generate 40% of their electricity from renewable sources by 2030, increasing to 63% by 2035 and 82% by 2040, with a goal to reach 100% renewable energy ten years later.

Data from pv magazine USA’s 50 States of Solar indicates that over the twelve months leading up to and including February, Florida generated 6.88% of its electricity from solar power. In February alone, utility-scale solar power contributed 7.46% to the state’s electricity, marking a significant increase due to numerous solar projects that came online in January.

Small-scale solar contributed 1.88% to Florida’s total electricity in February, bringing the cumulative contribution from solar to 9.33% for that month. While the legislation bans wind, Florida does not utilize wind power, either onshore or offshore. The state’s wind resources are not considered financially viable, according to charts made available by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

Additionally, CS/CS/HB 1645 allows power companies to construct methane pipelines up to 100 miles long without needing a certification, an increase from the previous 15-mile limit.

In response to hurricane threats, previous legislation aimed to develop solar energy technologies to supply electricity to critical areas when the main infrastructure fails. However, the new law has stricken the word “solar” from the legislation.

The new law also mandates state research into advanced nuclear technologies.

Interestingly, in 2022 the Florida Governor surprised many across the nation when he vetoed a bill that would have initiated the reduction of net metering for residential and commercial behind the meter solar power.

According to the Solar Energy Industries Association, Florida will deploy 15,592 MW of solar over the next 5 years, which would rank it third in the United States.

California’s recent strides in emission-free electricity and energy storage have garnered global attention, from top-tier publications to outlets on the other side of the globe.

According to data from the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) and record keeping by Stanford Professor Marc Jacobson, “for 45 days straight and 69 of 75, California #WindWaterSolar (electricity) supply has exceeded demand part of each day. On May 20, (supply exceeded demand for) 7.58 h, peaking at 135.4% of demand. On average over 75 days, WWS>demand for 5.3 h/day.”

This performance is bolstered by the extensive use of batteries during the evening electricity peak demand period. As seen in the chart above, the batteries (seen in dark blue) play a crucial role during these ramping periods.

Essentially, the engineers managing California’s power grid have adapted to harness inherently unpredictable power sources.

When it comes to solar, these impressive figures still underestimate the impact of sunlight. This is because they only account for utility-scale generation, with rooftop and behind-the-meter projects contributing an additional 15 GW of capacity worth of electricity – almost equal to utility scale capacity.

For utility-scale supplied solar power, April in CAISO showcased an impressive performance. Generally, April is the third-highest month for solar as a percentage of all electricity, per data from pv magazine USA’s 50 States of Solar report.

However, this past April, the instantaneous “All-Time Max Demand” record was broken four times, rising from an 80.4% record set in April of 2022, to a new record of 97.5% on April 20th this year.

This raises an interesting question: why did ‘All Time Max Demand Served’ jump so significantly this year, especially after it had remained mostly static throughout 2023? It all boils down to increased battery capacity, which has allowed solar to expand its influence more effectively. Notably, we recently saw utility-scale battery capacity surpass 8 GW, which has now began to offset the evening peak demand periods.

Since the electricity for these batteries primarily comes from solar power, perhaps we should also consider that solar is meeting the evening peak demand?

pv magazine USA conducted an analysis of CAISO generation data and discovered that on April 21, solar electricity actually peaked at more than 123% of total electricity generation.

Solar can supply more than 100% of demand due to the net effect of batteries charging. On this date, solar also accounted for almost 38% of all electricity generated within the CAISO region, marking the peak value for the month. Additionally, the following day, CAISO recorded a new high for peak solar output at 18,374 MW.

The chart also highlights the April 8th eclipse – noted with a large dip in generation in light blue around 11 a.m. PST.

According to gridstatus.io, April 21st also marked a new record for battery output at 10:10 p.m., reaching 6,458 MW. This record has since been surpassed multiple times, with the current peak now at 7,528 MW. This record is expected to continue to grow as more utility-scale energy storage is deployed this year.

Over the entire month of April, solar was the largest source of electricity by far, contributing just over 31%. In total, solar combined with hydro, wind, nuclear, and geothermal provided almost 70% of the electricity, with methane generating 19%. Given that imports historically are historically 50% emission-free, this would put the total emission-free electricity used in California in April at approximately 75%.

The Biden Administration has released a fact sheet detailing multiple solar panel related policies, including the removal of the bifacial solar panel exemption. This exemption previously allowed certain solar panels to bypass the Trump-era 15% tariff. The reinstatement of this tariff is expected to increase the cost of commercial, industrial, and utility-scale solar projects by 1% to 2%.

White House Fact Sheet

The administration also reiterated its focus on the solar sector, along with plans for continued expansion of its manufacturing base. This release follows yesterday’s announcement where the administration heightened the import tariffs on Chinese solar cells from 25% to 50%.

In late 2022, the Biden administration imposed tariffs on solar modules from four Southeast Asian countries but delayed their implementation for two years to ensure business continuity. With this delay set to end next month, the White House announced that the “Department of Energy and the Department of Commerce will closely monitor import patterns to ensure the U.S. market does not become oversaturated” with stockpiled modules or products resulting from other unfair practices that might circumvent the ruling.

In response to today’s announcement, Danny O’Brien, President of Corporate Affairs at Qcells, expressed support: “Today’s announcement is yet another signal that President Biden is serious about ensuring the long-term success of solar manufacturing in the United States.”

However, the Solar Energy Manufacturers Association (SEMA) found the action lacking. “Lifting the exemption reinstates a 15% tariff, providing important, but sadly still insufficient, relief from anti-competitive trade practices until the tariff is set to expire in February 2026.”

SEMA is committed to collaborating with the administration to ensure the utilization of all solar panels from tariffed regions within the country by December 2024. Some estimate that over 100 GW of solar panels are currently stockpiled in the U.S., with projections of more than 45 GW by the end of 2023.

The fact sheet also indicated that the Treasury Department is set to release additional guidance on the domestic content requirements of the Inflation Reduction Act. It states, “Today’s Notice creates a new elective safe harbor that gives clean energy developers the option of relying on Department of Energy-provided default cost percentages to determine bonus eligibility.”

To support the domestic solar panel assembly industry, the cap on importing solar cells under Section 201 tariffs was raised from 5 GW to 7.5 GW. This measure aims to support the announced 125 GW of solar module assembly manufacturing capacity without stifling emerging solar cell production.

Bifacial solar panels, which are predominantly used in commercial, industrial, and utility-scale solar power projects, were previously exempt from tariffs. With the removal of this exemption, the cost of imported bifacial solar panels, typically ranging from $0.10-0.25 per watt, will increase by $0.015 to $0.0375 per watt. For commercial projects with installation costs between $1.50 and $2.75 per watt, these increases will result in system price hikes of about 1-2%. Bifacial panels now represent 98% of all solar panels imported into these sectors.

Due to significant reductions in solar panel prices, which have fallen from $0.30-0.40 per watt two years ago, the impact of these tariffs remains less severe today. However, the industry still faces financial uncertainties as the June 2022 tariff delay approaches its expiration, and new AD/CVD cases have been filed recently.

This article was amended on 5/23/24 to correct the change in solar panel prices, which have fallen $0.30-$0.40 per watt rather than the $30 to $40 per watt as originally state.

The Biden Administration has imposed a series of tariffs on hardware imported from China. In the case of the solar module business, these measures serve more as a warning shot than a severe penalty. A pending pair of anti-dumping/countervailing duty (AD/CVD) cases pose a more significant risk to price increase. However, general hardware pricing decreases serves to bludgeon the effect on end user energy pricing.

According to a White House statement:

The tariff rate on solar cells (whether or not assembled into modules) will increase from 25% to 50% in 2024. The tariff increase will protect against China’s policy-driven overcapacity that depresses prices and inhibits the development of solar capacity outside of China. China has used unfair practices to dominate upwards of 80 to 90% of certain parts of the global solar supply chain, and is trying to maintain that status quo. Chinese policies and nonmarket practices are flooding global markets with artificially cheap solar modules and panels, undermining investment in solar manufacturing outside of China.

Moreover, the administration has raised import tariffs on battery cells from China used in electric vehicles and energy storage systems. In 2024, tariffs for electric vehicle battery cells will increase to 25%, with energy storage tariffs following suit in 2026.

The direct import of solar cells from China was less than 1% in 2021, underscoring the limited direct impact on solar cells these tariffs may have in the U.S. market. Instead, the majority of solar cells used in the U.S. are sourced from regions like Southeast Asia, which offers similar pricing without the tariffs imposed on Chinese products.

Consequently, while the tariff increases appear substantial, their actual effect on the overall U.S. solar industry is likely muted, as importers have already diversified their supply chains away from Chinese manufacturers. 

If one were to import solar cells from China today, they would cost a few cents to a nickel per watt. With this increase from 25% to 50% – a solar cell priced at five cents per watt would see its tariff increase from $0.0125/Wdc to $0.025/Wdc. 

Meanwhile, solar panels are available for less than ten cents per watt in Spain, while they can be gotten for about twice that in the United States.

For energy storage, while a tariff increase to 25% for cells is notable, it may have its impact softened by broader industry shifts, specifically ongoing and further expected price reductions. Last summer, battery cell prices in China ranged from $120-130/kWh but are expected to drop to $40/kWh or less this summer.

A 25% tariff on a battery cell priced at $130/kWh would increase the cost by $32.50/kWh. However, with prices now around $40/kWh, the same tariff results in an increase of just $10/kWh. This increase remains modest compared to the overall price reduction of nearly $100/kWh, highlighting how dynamic global market conditions can mitigate localized policy impacts.

Further complicating the financial landscape for solar panels, there are broader trade regulation uncertainties. Notable discussions include potentially ending the 15% bifacial solar panel tariff exemption from the Trump era and a pending petition that could escalate tariffs for solar panels and cells from Southeast Asia, regions that are primary alternative manufacturing sites for Chinese companies previously affected by tariffs. Even today, a new lawsuit on module imports has been filed…

WattEV has officially opened the world’s largest solar-powered truck charging station in Bakersfield, California. The facility is equipped with a 5.7 MW solar array, featuring a pre-wired racking system from Australian solar manufacturer 5B, designed for rapid deployment and minimal installation costs. Additionally, a 2.7 MWh energy storage system is integrated into the plant to mitigate peak demand charges from the numerous truck chargers.

The depot boasts extensive technical capabilities, including:

• 5.7 MW solar array
  
• 2.7 MWh of battery storage
• 16 dual-cord 360 kW grid-connected chargers
• 15 single-cord 240 kW CCS chargers
• 3 MCS 1,200 kW rapid chargers

To better understand how the solar-plus-storage systems are integrated into the facility, pv magazine USA consulted Umar Javed, the president of WattEV. Umar detailed the specific power management across the chargers:

The 15 CCS chargers of 240 kW are powered by solar and battery storage only.  Each group of 5 of these chargers is powered by a 1.2 MW power cabinet. That same power cabinet is connected to a 1.2 MW MCS charger. The power cabinet contains internal DC power allocation. All the power can go to one MCS or to 5 CCS and other power sharing profiles in between. This design allows for transition from the current CCS standard to MCS.

WattEV’s press release detailed how the integration of the 240 kW CCS and 1,200 kW MCS chargers with the onsite solar facility is managed by software designed to optimize solar generation with scheduled truck charging needs, specifically to minimize demand charges. This system ensures operational continuity even during grid outages.

The solar power portion of the facility is currently 5.7 MW, with plans for future expansion to 25 MW alongside increased charging capabilities.

WattEV opted for 5B’s Maverick solar deployment system, which consists of 90 modules per package, with four packages fitting into a shipping container. According to the company’s website, each module within the packages uses solar panels rated between 550 and 580 watts. Each package of 90 modules totals about 50 kW of solar. The company states that a crew of three to four can install a megawatt of modules in a week.

The project was awarded a $5 million grant from the State of California in 2021.

Strategically located on State Highway 99, a key freight corridor, the Bakersfield site is ideally situated to serve major agricultural and industrial regions in California. This location leverages high traffic volumes and serves as an essential node in WattEV’s broader network plans.

WattEV intends to replicate this model at other key freight corridors, planning to augment both solar capacity and charger availability. This expansion, integral to their broader Truck-as-a-Service (TaaS) strategy, aims to enhance long-haul electric trucking across California.

The Energy Observer, a solar and wind-powered catamaran, is nearing the end of its extensive global journey, having sailed over 64,000 nautical miles while circumnavigating the globe. The vessel has demonstrated the viability of renewable energy-powered maritime travel, even across the most challenging oceanic conditions.

Last week, pv magazine USA met with Luc Bourserie, the systems engineer of the Energy Observer, in Boston Harbor. The 100-foot-long boat is powered by a sophisticated energy system that uses power from solar and wind, stores long-term energy in hydrogen and stores short-term energy in batteries.

The Energy Observer features 2174 square feet (202 square meters) of Solbian flex modules and newer bifacial modules. Rated at just over 33 kW, the real-world peak output of the panels is around 26 kW due to the panels’ fixed-angle placement all over the craft, optimizing for maximum cumulative output rather than peak efficiency.

At one point, solar panel upgrades were necessary. Initially, the vessel was equipped with hard-framed glass bifacial modules. Ocean water splashing forcefully broke some of the panels installed in front of the solar wings, so they were replaced with custom-made mono-face flexible panels. The bifacial panels that remained intact were kept at the rear, where reflection has a greater impact.

The design team selected flexible Solbian modules for their adaptability and durability and found that they were an ideal choice for curved surfaces, and their availability in various shapes and sizes ensured coverage for nearly any area. The modules are also robust enough to be walked on, a crucial feature for constrained spaces on the ship.

The ship uses 13 DC to DC converters, rated at 3 kW each, manufactured by BRUSA Electronik AG, an electronic mobility specialist based in Switzerland. These converters increase the voltage of solar output from 20 to 30 volts up to the 400 Vdc required by the main 100 kWh lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide (LiNMC) batteries used for propulsion and the 24 Vdc 20 kWh battery used for control systems. The converters are equipped with Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT) controllers that optimize the conversion efficiency of solar modules under various lighting conditions. 

In strong winds, the Energy Observer can harness additional energy by engaging its propellers (in reverse), turning them into turbines that generate power. The ship’s innovative sails, known as Oceanwings, were first tested on this vessel and have since been adopted by the Canopée, a French container ship that transports rockets across the Atlantic. These sails cut fuel consumption by up to 30% compared to traditional diesel ships.

Bourserie said that the Oceanwings automatically adjust to maximize energy capture. These prototype sails have required ongoing development and some replacement components to withstand the rigors of maritime conditions.

The vessel is equipped with an innovative hydrogen storage and compression system that stores hydrogen at 350 bars in eight composite tanks, using a two-stage compression process developed with Nova Swiss to handle the transition from 30 bars (the electrolyzer’s output pressure) to 350 bars. The tanks offer a superior energy-to-weight ratio compared to batteries, storing ten times the energy at half the weight, and the multi-stage compressors are dramatically lighter weight than traditional models designed for fixed stations. This allows for efficient compression and storage of up to 62 kg of hydrogen.

The 62 kg of onboard hydrogen storage can power the ship’s fuel cells for approximately six days, providing 1 MWh of electricity and 1 MWh of thermal energy. Supplied by Toyota, the cells are a modified version of those used in the company’s Mirai vehicle.

While covering over 64,000 nautical miles, the Energy Observer generally navigated close to coastlines. However, it also undertook several significant open-ocean voyages across the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans. These segments taught the crew to strategically manage their energy resources.

For instance, Bourserie told pv magazine USA, on days with good conditions – strong sun and wind that allows them to avoid using motors – “We don’t do electrolysis in navigation, [as it’s a] matter of protecting the compressors, and besides, the excess energy would not be so much. To continue harvesting power from the sun, we’ll cook in the afternoon for the evening or use the washing machine, producing fresh water from sea water at that time.”

On CNET, ship scientist Katia Nicolet underscored the daily importance of energy management on board. There were often instances where the crew would need to consult Bourserie on energy usage, asking questions like, “Can we run the dishwasher? Can we have a hot meal tonight, or are the batteries too low?”

The crew faced unique challenges from the COVID pandemic as well, including an extended period of greater than 45 days without docking, highlighting the resilience and self-sufficiency of both the crew and the vessel’s renewable energy systems.

As the Energy Observer prepares for its final Atlantic voyage from Saint-Pierre et Miquelon, it stands as a testament to the potential of renewable energy in powering our future on the seas.

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Solar Energy Technologies Office (SETO) recently announced the 2024 Photovoltaics Research and Development program. This new initiative aims to distribute $20 million across eight to fifteen teams, with individual grants ranging from $1 to $4 million.

SETO has outlined two main focus areas for this funding: “Photovoltaic Advances in Cell Efficiency, Reliability, and Supply Chain,” and “Building Academic Capabilities in Cadmium Telluride”.

The first area seeks to develop solar cell and “minimodule” prototypes aimed at lowering module costs and the carbon footprint of manufacturing and supply chains. This includes advancements in building-integrated and vehicle-integrated solar systems. SETO is particularly interested in projects that promise low-carbon synthesis of metallurgical-grade silicon and innovative designs for crystalline, III-V, and organic solar photovoltaic cells.

The initiative also aims to address the high costs of III-V solar cells, currently priced at $77/Wdc, making them non-competitive for terrestrial solar generation. For metallurgical-grade silicon, the goal is to reduce CO2 emissions from the current 4 to 5 kg CO2 per kg of 2N c-Si (solar-grade silicon) to less than 1 kg CO2 per kg of silicon. It is expected that between six and ten awards will be distributed, ranging from $1 to $1.5 million each, totaling $10 million.

The second focus area targets advancements in cadmium telluride technology, which could greatly benefit First Solar, America’s leading solar panel manufacturer. This funding will support projects that require the development or upgrade of cadmium telluride research facilities. The objective is to enhance the design and testing processes within the cadmium telluride research community, facilitating rapid advancements and technology transfer.

Additional priorities under this funding include:

• Increasing the rate of learning and speed of advancement in CdTe cell and module research. 
• Improving the efficiency, durability, and energy yield of state-of-the-art CdTe PV cells. 
• Developing and validating new CdTe PV cell designs that have the potential to substantially outperform the current state of the art.  
• Improving the quality and scale of materials produced at academic institutions to facilitate technology transfer to industry.

For this second topic, SETO expects to allocate two to five awards, each ranging from $1 to $ 4 million, with a total allocation of $10 million.

Key dates for the program are:

Global actions, or inactions, are likely to lead to a rise in the average planetary temperature by more than 1.5°C due to escalating carbon dioxide levels. This potential rise has led researchers to examine the consequences using the Representative Concentration Pathway 4.5 Scenario, which predicts a 4.5°C rise. Many scientists warn that such warming could present significant global challenges.

In response to these findings, a team from the University of Michigan projects that climate change induced warming could increase the value of residential rooftop solar by between 19% and 25%. This expected rise in value is primarily attributed to increased demand for on-site electricity, complemented by a slight boost from enhanced solar electricity generation due to fewer cloudy days anticipated in the future.

The logic behind the first factor is simple: higher temperatures will necessitate increased use of air conditioning, leading to greater electricity consumption. As a result, buildings can derive more value from the solar power generated on their roofs by utilizing it immediately. This direct usage reduces reliance on net metering and diminishes dependency on distribution and transmission lines.

The study estimates that climate change could increase total household cooling energy by 40% to 100% in cities across various U.S. cities. The impact, however, varies by location; Miami experienced the most significant increase, while Minneapolis, situated much farther north, saw a slight decrease in the financial benefits of rooftop solar for households, specifically in terms of cooling costs. Among the 17 cities analyzed, Minneapolis was the only one to report a reduction in electricity consumption, due to its increasingly temperate weather.

Numerically, the analysis indicates that the electricity required for cooling these locations, measured in kilowatt-hours per year per square meter, will increase from 5, 11 and 24 kWh/m2 in cold, mild, and hot cities to 9, 16 and 31 kWh/m2, respectively, by the end of the century.

A second layer of analysis examined the potential electricity generation by solar panels under future weather conditions, revealing mixed results. Rising temperatures are expected to reduce solar power efficiency, thus decreasing their output. Conversely, the models suggest fewer clouds on average, which would boost generation.

Weather effects, which vary regionally, significantly impact solar output. For example, persistent high pressure in the upper atmosphere could drive solar irradiance up to 30% above normal, setting new records for solar generation and temperature in North America as seen in mid-February 2024.

The research team indicated that these two variables, when considered across all 17 cities, essentially neutralize each other.

Additional considerations for the value of residential rooftop solar in times of climate complexity include enhancing local resiliency and reducing the need for costly upgrades to distribution and transmission power grid infrastructure.

California announced that they’ve crossed the line of having 10 GW of energy storage installed on its power grid. As of the announcement, the state had noted that exactly 10.379 gigawatts of output was connected, which was an increase from 770 megawatts that was connected in 2019.

The state projects that it’ll need 52 GW of batteries connected to its grid by 2045. Along with an additional 57.5 GW of solar, state models suggest an additional 15.7 GW of four hour lithium ion batteries, and 19.5 GW of eight hour lithium ion batteries. Additional pumped hydro and long duration energy storage are also considered, however, in the models the volumes projected for now are low.

While the press release, and generally available public data, does not release data on the amount of hours that these systems would output, one can roughly estimate the hours based upon state standards, and general industry hardware standards.

The state has installed 154,155 total energy storage systems as of April 15th. Of those, just over 98% are residential systems totaling 1.076 GW of output capacity. Of the remaining, 2,777 are commercial systems, while 175 are directly grid connected utility scale facilities.

For the residential and commercial systems, totaling 1.647 GW, the general industry standard is to install from two to four hours of storage capacity behind the output capacity. If we estimate an average of three hours per output megawatt, then 4.951 GWh of storage may be available behind these units.

In California, because of policy, most utility scale batteries are four hours – suggesting the state’s 8.736 GW of out capacity has 34.944 GWh of storage behind them.

In total, 39,895 GWh of energy storage was connected to the grid as of a couple of weeks ago.

More significant than the capacity value though, is what the batteries are doing.

In 2019, California knew it had a challenge: fossils were retiring & evening peak periods were power failure prone. The state saw a need for <4.7 GW of power to handle these periods by 2022, and so implemented plans to deploy energy storage plus additional solar to fill up these batteries.

This spring, we’ve seen batteries do exactly what they were design to do – take over the evening peak periods.

For instance, on April 27th at 8.40 PM PST, utility scale batteries were outputting over 6.5 GW of power – the largest source of electricity by far. There were multiple hours when the batteries were the largest source as well.

An additional 8 GW of energy storage is expected to be deployed in the next year.

The Attorney General (AG) of Minnesota is taking legal action against GoodLeap, Sunlight Financial, Solar Mosaic and Dividend Solar Finance for allegedly inflating the cost of residential solar projects during financing. These finance companies are accused of selling over $200 million worth of residential solar projects from 2017 through 2023, inflating them by approximately $35 million by concealing fees within the financing agreements.

The state is seeking an injunction to halt these practices, along with the proper finance charge disclosures, refunds to affected consumers, and the payment of civil penalties.

Sunlight Financial filed for bankruptcy last year after continuing to offer low-interest rate loans despite rising interest rates.

The complaint summarizes the allegations: “Defendants deceive consumers by charging a hidden and costly upfront fee that they add into the stated price of each financed system while falsely telling consumers that the inflated price only reflects the system’s cost rather than financing.”

Key allegations include:

• Concealment of the upfront fee from consumers.
• Omission of the fee in sales proposals and finance cost disclosures.
• Prohibition of Minnesota solar companies from identifying and explaining the fee in their marketing and when offering alternative payment options. Finance companies are also alleged to have pressured solar companies to raise their cash prices to align with their financed prices.

The key aspect of the sales included very low interest rates combined with incentives based on the project price, making loan payments competitive with electricity rates. The instant loan approval, zero cash down, and minimal paperwork requirements allowed residential contractors to quickly facilitate high sales volumes.

Some have compared the streamlined loan process to the ‘no doc’ mortgages of the 2000s subprime housing crisis.

For some customers who did not scrutinize the fine print, the expected electricity savings were negated. The inflated loan amounts meant homeowners received higher tax credits, which needed to be applied to their bills. For those who did not follow through, or were ineligible for the full tax credit, the loan payments increased significantly. This happened after 18 months when the loan re-amortized at a higher amount that included the tax credit.

The upfront dealer fees varied between 10% and 30%, with some as high as 36% of the project, according to the AG. Over 5,000 individual systems were financed by the four companies during the period under review.

However, the four companies being sued did not make the loans; instead, they provided their financial tools to various local sales and installation companies. Notable among these were “All Energy Solar (2,311 sales financed by Defendants), Everlight Solar (1,742 sales financed by Defendants), Avolta Power (493 sales financed by Defendants), and Sun Badger Solar (307 sales financed by Defendants).”

The filing from the AG detailed the volume of loans made by each defendant:

• From 2018 through 2023, GoodLeap made at least $33,045,208.68 in loans to 853 Minnesota consumers. GoodLeap’s average fee is 19.32% of each loan. The average amount charged to consumers and added to their loan balance is $7,552.19. GoodLeap has charged at least $6,442,014.47 in fees on Minnesota consumers between 2017 and 2023.
• From 2017 through 2023, Sunlight Financial made at least $75,077,388.11 in loans to 2,162 Minnesota consumers.  Sunlight Financial’s average upfront fee is 21.4% of each Minnesota consumer’s loan amount. The average amount charged to Minnesota consumers and added to their balance is $6,285.79. Sunlight Financial has charged a total of at least $13,589,869.31 in upfront fees to Minnesota consumers between 2017 and 2023.
• From 2019 through 2023, Solar Mosaic made at least $85,477,542.01 in loans to 2,147 Minnesota consumers. Solar Mosaic’s average upfront fee is 17.6% of each consumer’s loan amount. The average amount charged to consumers and added to their loan balance is $5,842.59. Solar Mosaic has charged a total of at least $12,666,727.44 in upfront fees to Minnesota consumers between 2017 and 2023.
• Through 2023, Dividend made at least $14,104,831 in loans to 257 Minnesota consumers. The average amount of Dividend’s upfront fee is 18.8% of each borrower’s loan amount (including a small number of loans with 0% fees). The average amount charged to borrowers and added to their loan balance is $9,041.69. Dividend has charged a total of at least $2,323,714.32 in upfront fees to Minnesota consumers.

The market’s finance dynamics have shifted significantly due to these loans. Following prolonged low interest rates after the Great Recession in 2008, these companies expanded their market share against cash and third-party ownership in the United States.

According to Zoë Gaston, Principal Analyst of U.S. Distributed Solar at Wood Mackenzie Renewables & Power, the loan segment, after peaking in 2022 at nearly 70%, market share fell by 6% in 2023 and is expected to decline further in 2024. Gaston noted that, “the segment will start to recover in 2025 but will not gain market share until 2027, when it starts growing faster than the overall residential solar market.”

Wood Mackenzie forecasts that third-party ownership will fill the gap left by long-term loan products, achieving a 41% market share by 2026.

Over 10 million homes are located within one mile of the 8,000+ large-scale solar (LSS) projects, as reported by Energy Markets & Policy (EMP) at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. This number is expected to grow significantly, despite efforts by certain groups to spread falsehoods and hinder progress. Solar power does remain the most popular form of electricity nationwide, despite its popularity declining in more conservative and rural areas as a result of targeted attacks.

To better understand the perceptions of those living near solar power facilities, the EMP team, in collaboration with the University of Michigan, conducted a comprehensive, 12-page survey that explored 49 different aspects of living near LSS projects.

Data solicited from 4,974 households was published in ‘Perception of Large-Scale Solar Project Neighbors: Results from a National Survey’. The group shared the responses from 984 households located within three miles of 380 unique LSS projects, with 71% of these households located within one mile of the projects.

According to the EMP study, neighbor attitudes remained fairly consistent until projects surpassed 100 megawatts, at which point the sentiment shifted dramatically, displaying a 12 to 1 ratio of negative to positive responses. This strong opposition was closely linked to concerns about the impact on local aesthetics, overall quality of life, and perceptions of unfairness in the project planning process.

Notably, only 20% of those surveyed were aware of the projects before construction began, and about one-third discovered the projects’ existence only upon receiving the survey. Those who see large solar installations on a daily basis were significantly more likely to express negative attitudes toward these projects.

When asked about expanding LSS projects and other types of energy infrastructure, respondents showed the strongest support for rooftop solar, with less than 10% opposition. Support for new LSS projects ranked second, followed by wind energy, gas plants, pipelines, wells, and nuclear energy, in that order.

Interestingly, if a solar power project must be built, agrivoltaic projects (which integrate agriculture with photovoltaic systems to maximize land use) received the highest approval ratings, with less than 10% expressing a negative view, and 50% being positive or very positive.

The results showed that 85% of these neighbors held a positive or neutral view of their local solar power projects, 11% viewed them negatively, and 4% had a very negative perception. Attitudes were slightly less favorable among those living within a quarter mile of a facility.

Overall, support for constructing additional solar facilities was strong, with 42% in favor and only 18% opposed. However, attitudes shifted significantly as project sizes increased. Research from upstate New York echoed these findings, showing a change in perception when projects exceeded 50 acres.

Silent Yachts has launched the first three-decker redesign of its Silent 62 solar electric catamaran. The Silent 62 3-Deck features three separate solar module arrays totaling 17 kWp, an integrated energy storage system recently upgraded from 286 kWh to 350 kWh. Introduced in 2019, the Silent 60 series builds on the legacy of the Silent 64, which made headlines in 2018 as the first solar-powered yacht to successfully cross the Atlantic. The ship cruises at 6 to 8 knots and can reach peak speeds of 16 to 18 knots.

Owned by Austrian business leaders and based in Fano, Italy, Silent Yachts has recently expanded into a new production facility. This facility spans over 230,000 square feet and includes five buildings equipped for shipbuilding, two of which are topped with solar modules. The company celebrated the launch of its first boat from this new facility in February 2023.

pv magazine USA spoke with owners Michael Köhler & Mick Long about some of the finer details of their craft.

The Silent 62 3-Deck yacht’s highlight is its configurable third deck, which comes in three configurations: an open ‘sky lounge,’ a closed sky lounge, or a closed owner’s suite. The new model featured an open sky lounge, complete with a bar, galley and a 12-seat dining table. This yacht is outfitted with 42 SunPower X400+ modules totaling 16.8 kWp, backed by a 40-year warranty. Where the Flybridge model incorporates lightweight Solbian Maxeon3 panels on its retractable roof to reduce weight, the roofs of the 3-Deck versions are equipped with SunPower glass panels. Models ordered this year will include marginally higher wattage, pushing the total potential production up over 17 kWp.

The CEO of Silent Yachts, Michael Köhler, confirmed the use of these panels, along with a robust 350 kWh lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4) battery pack. This pack features a quiet liquid-cooling system that enhances charging rates and extends the lifecycle to up to 3,500 recharge cycles. Propulsion is provided by dual 340 kW electric motors. The system operates primarily at 24VDC for navigation, lighting, and pumps, with household appliances at 230VAC and high-power systems like motors and thrusters at 800VDC.

The Silent 62 yacht is equipped with advanced desalination equipment capable of producing up to 3,600 liters of fresh water per day. This system is efficient, consuming about 4 kWh to produce 1,000 liters of water, which aligns closely with the daily output of approximately one or two of the yacht’s solar panels. This integration ensures that water production is sustainable and minimally impacts the yacht’s overall energy reserves, making it ideal for extended voyages where freshwater is crucial.

A Youtube channel “Heart of Gold Lifeboat” provided a review of an earlier variant of the Silent 60, detailing the specifications and orientation of the electrical equipment and powertrain. The newer Silent 62 3-Deck has been updated with RS230 AH batteries, each offering 11.8 kWh, arranged in a 28-unit configuration. This model also features a proprietary power management system, which replaces the previously used Victron Energy Quattro combined inverter/charger. Additionally, the Volvo Penta D3 220 generator has been upgraded to a Hyundai S270 semi-commercial engine.

Accommodating up to 12 guests in its five cabins, the Silent 62 3-Deck is priced starting just over $2 million.

At first, many people ignored what solar power could do ; solar was seen as a cool space science experiment. Then when solar started to grow and technology matured, they chuckled at how small the volume being installed was versus the massive volumes of coal, gas and oil that were being extracted daily.

Now solar power, and more recently, energy storage, are being installed more than any source of energy ever, and the opposition sometimes takes the form of spreading misinformation from centralized, fossil funded sources so as to affect the local acceptability of solar. And it has had an effect.

The Sabin Center for Climate Change at Columbia Law School collected fourteen false solar power claims in its document, Rebutting 33 False Claims About Solar, Wind, and Electric Vehicles.

Among its prior climate work,  the law school has launched the Renewable Energy Legal Defense Initiative in 2019, as well published discussions of legislation that might slow renewable energy deployment.

The list of false solar claims rebutted were:

1. Electromagnetic fields from solar farms are harmful to human health.
2. Toxic heavy metals, such as lead and cadmium, leach out from solar panels and pose a threat to human health.
3. Solar panels generate too much waste and will overwhelm our landfills.
4. Clearing trees for solar panels negates any climate change benefits.
5. Solar energy is worse for the climate than burning fossil fuels.
6. Solar projects harm biodiversity.
7. Solar projects will reduce agricultural production, hurting farmers and rural communities.
8. Solar development will destroy U.S. jobs.
9. Reliance on solar will make the United States dependent on China and other countries.
10. Utility-scale solar farms destroy the value of nearby homes.
11. Solar energy is more expensive than fossil fuels and completely dependent on subsidies.
12. Solar panels don’t work in cold or cloudy climates.
13. Solar energy is unreliable and requires 100% fossil fuel backup.
14. We do not have sufficient mineral resources for large-scale solar development.

While solar power is very popular, in fact the most popular source of electricity in the United States, there are nuances within this popularity. Rooftop solar is the most popular, but solar is getting pushback as it grows beyond 50 acres. And while renewable and clean energy itself are also very popular, there are fossil-fuel industry funded disinformation campaigns that can significantly alter popular opinion. 

The report from the Sabin Center does not examine the origins of the false claims, nor the motivations of those who disseminate them. Each of the fourteen claims were responded to individually, creating fully developed responses that sometimes repeat information in other rebuttals.

For instance, in rebutting false claim #10, utility-scale solar farms destroy the value of nearby homes, the analysts showed that very few individuals would experience any effect on the value of their homes from nearby solar power, and those that do feel an effect would experience a small value shift. They also found that some might find a property value increase.

The research showed that in Indiana found, “properties within 1,320 feet of solar farms sold by an average of 1.92% more than comparable properties that were not located near any solar farms.” They also found, “homes located within 0.5 miles of solar farms were found to experience price reductions of 1.5%, compared to properties 2 to 4 miles away; however, homes located more than 1 mile from a solar farm were found to experience no statistically significant effect on its price.”

A third study pointed out that within one mile, in suburban areas, there might be a 1.7% decrease in property value, but in rural areas, this price difference disappeared.

The analysis also pointed out that, “the presence of a fossil fuel fired power plant within 2 miles of one’s home decreased its value by 4% to 7%, with the largest decreases within 1 mile and for high-capacity plants.”

While disinformation is abundant in the nation, with almost all large solar facilities getting some pushback, it is also true that the volume of successful solar power facilities being deployed far outpaces the naysayers. For instance, capacity deployed grew by more than 50%, and solar capacity in the queues has broken and held above 1,000 GW.

However, it is also true that large-scale solar has seen its popularity fall a bit. Even though many of these topics have been long since debunked as false, the report is written to help “cultivate balanced and informed opinions,” particularly residents of communities contemplating utility-scale renewable energy projects.

In the fall of 2023, Sister Margaret, a retired nun from the Mission of Chalatenango in El Salvador, reached out to pv magazine USA seeking support in saving electricity costs by installing a small solar power system. The Sister resides in a convent in Santa Ana with nine other sisters who can no longer physically work, but continue their service through their prayer life.

Sister Margaret found a local contractor, Grupo Solaire, which quoted the convent on a small project that would cover 73% of the site’s electricity demand. The original system’s cost is approximately $1,582 plus a utility connection fee of $650.

pv magazine USA launched a GoFundMe for the solar power project, and as of April 10th has raised $2,160 from a collection of wonderful people. The customer asked for the contractor to find a solar module combination that can cover 100% of their electricity demand, without going over the local utility rules that limit too much solar generation.

In total, we’re seeking to raise $2,912 for a 1.275 kWdc system along with the grid connection fee. The $2,160 meets 74% of the goal.

Please considering donating.

Going forward, the Pastoral Center is also looking for solar power to help save on bills, however, they’re not yet ready. The center had been limited in use, and thus had very minimal electricity bills, and didn’t meet the minimum requirements to request a solar power project based on their prior twelve months of electricity usage. They do believe that sometime in the next six months they’ll have enough of a bill history to apply for a second solar power system.

Naked Energy has announced plans to manufacture its combined solar photovoltaic and solar thermal units in Texas. The new facility will be located in Dallas, with ELM Solar, a subsidiary of ELM companies, overseeing the manufacturing of components.

ELM Companies will invest $3 million in the new facility, which is expected to manufacture all products destined for the North American market by 2025. The partners anticipate producing 150,000 “Virtu tubes” by 2028. ELM Solar currently serves as Naked Solar’s North American distribution partner.

Naked Energy’s product lineup includes the VirtuHot and the VirtuPVT units. The VirtuHOT unit can heat water up to 120°C (248°F) using solar thermal energy. These thermally isolated tubes can heat water even in sub-zero temperatures by allowing sunlight in while keeping the cold out.

Recently, Naked Energy deployed a project at Creighton University in Nebraska (see Featured Image), deploying 69.9 kW of VirtuHOT HD units. The installation consists of 240 systems, each featuring an absorber plate, a borosilicate glass tube, and an integrated mounting system. These units are designed to provide hot water for a dormitory housing approximately 400 students.

The VirtuPVT generates electricity and heat up to 75°C (167°F). The system integrates a heat absorber plate, conventional silicon solar cells, a borosilicate glass tube, and an integrated reflector placed in between the individual tubes to capture extra sunlight.

The hardware is sold in five tube subunits. Each tube measures 2,165 mm (7.1 feet) in length, while a complete set of five tubes measures 1,500 mm (4.9 feet) in width. The system is designed to accommodate standard-sized 6-inch monoPERC solar cells, with each tube capable of generating 74 watts of power, resulting in a cumulative output of 370 watts across an area of 3.2 square meters.

When vertically mounted, the electricity generating units have higher electricity production in the spring and fall, as the sun tends to be higher overhead during summer months, shading the solar cells as shown by an installation in the United Kingdom.

In comparison, a conventional residential solar panel dedicated solely to electricity generation typically provides around 400 watts within a 2 square meter area.

Naked Energy told pv magazine USA that right now, Naked Energy is shipping all parts to ELM Solar. However, they said the entire value chain for Naked Energy’s products in the U.S. will be sourced from U.S. companies by the end of 2025, meaning customers of ELM will benefit from IRA incentives by then. By default, the solar thermal and solar electric hardware currently qualify for the 30% tax credit.

Researchers have found that NYSolarCast, New York state’s dedicated tool for predicting solar generation forecasts, is often more accurate in predicting solar generation than existing tools, and is also updated more frequently, every 15 minutes. The study, NYSolarCast: A Solar Power Forecasting System for New York State, shows the tool’s proficiency in forecasting global horizontal irradiance (GHI) using data from various locations in the state, often outshining its commercial counterparts.

The New York Independent System Operator (ISO) region, exclusive to the Empire State, employs five-minute wholesale electricity settling periods, segmenting electricity sales into five-minute intervals for efficient grid distribution. With natural fluctuation from wind and solar energy, plus the addition of substantial and rapidly responsive energy storage systems, the utility of frequently updated electricity generation projections cannot be overstated. This step mirrors global advancements in energy management, similar to the significant industry shift witnessed when Australia commenced its transition to five-minute settlements.

NYSolarCast, developed by researchers from the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in 2021, was tailored to help New York state manage its expanding solar power infrastructure. The tool’s forecasts of GHI, which is an indicator of potential electricity production from solar plants, are updated every 15 minutes at select solar farms and on an hourly basis for each zip code.

The tool’s predictive accuracy is honed by training on a plethora of data streams. This includes three years of real-world data from 10 utility-scale solar power plants and 490 distributed solar sites, paired with the corresponding weather conditions when available. These data points are further enriched by weather information from New York state’s expansive network of 126 NYS Mesonet stations.

NYSolarCast aligns its forecasts with the data from Mesonet weather stations, shown below:

The NYS Mesonet is a comprehensive network of 126 surface weather stations that deliver “real-time averaged observations at a temporal resolution of 5 minutes.” These stations, spaced approximately 19 miles apart, ensure at least one station per county across all 62 counties and the five boroughs of New York City. They monitor and transmit data on a variety of atmospheric parameters, including temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure, GHI, wind velocity and direction, and precipitation.

The research team notes that while NYSolarCast is open source and therefore freely accessible and usable by all, it may serve best as a framework rather than direct code application. This is attributed to the distinct weather input features of New York state, which vary greatly from region to region, each necessitating tailored tools and resources.

The source code of the tool is available for download on GitHub.

When analyzing the data, the authors conducted tests to determine the importance of various predictors (factors that influence the accuracy of their solar generation forecasts). They discovered that certain key pieces of data, such as weather conditions or solar irradiance levels, were only relevant for a short period, around 45 minutes before conditions changed.

The authors observed that prediction errors varied throughout the day, with a noticeable increase in the late afternoon to evening hours. They attributed this rise in inaccuracies to the data becoming less current as the day progresses. While this time frame doesn’t align with the peak solar generation period of 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., the evening hours are often marked by higher electricity costs on the grid, making accurate predictions especially valuable.

Throughout a one-year validation period, wherein forecasts “were produced and delivered on a quasi-operational schedule,” the findings presented a complex and nuanced picture. Despite revealing various potential areas for improvement, the core results of the study remained clear:

NYSolarCast GHI forecasts overall out-performed both smart persistence and the NWP blended forecast of hourly-issued WRF-Solar and HRRR models at all intra-day (out to 6 hours) lead and valid times.

Furthermore, the forecasts made by NYSolarCast were “nearly always better” than those derived from tools situated precisely at the weather stations. This is likely because the tool could analyze real-time data straight from active solar farms, unlike weather stations, which had limited access to real-time data.

One potential area for improvement identified by the researchers is the integration of real-time data from the utility-scale solar facility pyranometers, which measure the intensity of solar radiation. Although this data contributed to the validation process, its inclusion in the predictive phase was hindered by the delay in data accessibility.

We often shine the spotlight on states leading in solar energy deployment, lauding their significant contributions to renewable energy infrastructure. Nevertheless, there are states that seem to be lagging in the solar race, potentially sidetracked by other priorities or constrained by limited solar resources. In several cases, the sluggish pace can be directly traced to a combination of competing emission-free energy products, policy, economic, geographic, and political challenges.

Analysis based on the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA) data, refined by the PV Intel 50 States of Solar data visualization tool on pv magazine USA, illustrates a different sort of competition: states contending for a dubious distinction as the ‘least enterprising’ in solar installations. Unraveling the intricacies of who is lagging in solar power adoption, and why, leads to a more complex discussion.

The five states that generated the lowest percentage of electricity generation from solar power in 2023 were North Dakota, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Alaska, and South Dakota at 0.01%, 0.09%, 0.27%, 0.28% and 0.29%, respectively.

In fact, the bottom 14 states on the list get less than 1% of their electricity from solar power.

The disparity in solar power generation across states can often be attributed to several factors, including but not limited to:

• State and local policies on renewable energy
  
• Price of electricity
• Public awareness and education on the benefits of solar energy
• Geographic and climatic conditions that affect solar potential
• Availability of alternative emission-free electricity from wind, hydro, and nuclear

Several Midwestern states, abundant in wind power, have valid excuses for lower solar adoption. For example, number one on our list, North Dakota, generates 38% of its electricity from wind, similar to Oklahoma, which ranks third. Despite ranking fourth from the bottom in solar adoption, South Dakota boasts the third cleanest electricity in the nation, with nearly 70% of its electricity coming from carbon-free sources, primarily driven by wind power.

Of the bottom five, this then leaves West Virginia and Alaska as laggards.

Alaska’s lag in solar power is understandable, given its geographic location. As the northernmost state in the U.S., with parts of Alaska situated in the Arctic Circle, the state experiences extended periods of darkness during the winter months.

This leaves West Virginia as the remaining state among the bottom five solar power states, which is not surprising for several reasons. The state has been a significant part of the nation’s coal electricity generation infrastructure for over a century and remains one of the biggest coal producers and users today. Additionally, the state’s political landscape is heavily influenced by the coal industry, with Governor Jim Justice owning coal mines and nationally prominent Senator Joe Manchin’s family fortune also tied to coal.

However, there is hope for West Virginia, with hundreds of megawatts of solar power coming to the state, and a new long-duration battery factory under construction.

The distributed solar industry has experienced significant growth in recent years, with Ohm Analytics showing a more than a doubling of quarterly capacity since 2020. This growth was built atop residential solar, which itself had more than doubled its deployed capacity. However, 2023 witnessed a slowdown in distributed generation’s growth, falling to 8% compared to 2022, with the fourth quarter experiencing a 7% contraction.

As the residential sector’s doldrums from the fourth quarter extend into 2024, the industry is left to ponder the extent of the potential contraction and whether commercial, industrial, and community solar segments will play a larger role in sustaining the market.

The Ohm Analytics’ Annual 2023 DG Solar and Storage Report revealed that in recent history, the residential sector has been the growth engine for the smaller (residential, commercial, industrial, and community solar) sectors. (These sectors differ from the ‘utility’ sector, which is larger than all distributed sectors combined and connects to the wholesale electricity market.) In Q4 2023, it was growth in smaller commercial and industrial sectors at 9%, and community solar at 3%, that softened the impact of residential falling by 12%.

Last year’s decline in residential solar was driven by rising interest rates, which forced slower moving finance companies out of business, and California’s decision to hit the brakes on net metering incentives. The switch to NEM 3 in California initially led to an increase in residential deployments as many rushed to submit applications before the April 14, 2023 deadline.

The fourth quarter slowdown was uneven across the nation, with states like Texas, Florida, and Arizona, which rely heavily on loans, being most affected. In contrast, northeastern states with higher costs continued to grow, with some partially developed states like New York and New Jersey growing by 20%, and early growth states like Pennsylvania seeing an 80% expansion.

Despite the challenges, with California’s NEM 3, a silver lining is emerging: the expansion of energy storage. Ohm noted that residential storage grew by 22% for all of 2023, with Q4 2023 seeing a strong 66% increase. This growth aligns with the fall in price of energy storage battery cells and the massive global expansion in 2023.

Roth MKM, informed by various industry inputs including Ohm Analytics consultations, anticipates more weakness in the residential solar sector in 2024. Initially, Roth predicted a 12% residential decline, but in January, they revised this to a potential 15% drop due to further declines in California (which were then ranging from 30% to possibly 50%). Now, without a turnaround by May or June, Roth believes the residential solar sector could fall by 20 to 30% from its 6.5 GW of deployed capacity in 2023.

The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) recently hosted its annual Finance, Tax, and Buyer’s Seminar in Times Square, New York City. This year’s seminar built on the main topic of 2023, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), and explored its various facets in greater depth.

Key topics included the much-discussed tax credit transferability rules, the process of filing for and monetizing “elective pay” (also known as direct pay), domestic content and brownfield tax adders, capital structures, and the evolving finance structures as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and Treasury Department continue to release financial guidance.

Tri Merit, a specialist in renewable energy tax credit solutions, presented “The Process for Monetization of Renewable Energy Tax Credits.” The presentation highlighted a significant talking point for selling solar to non-profits: to convert the IRA tax credit into a direct payment, the non-profit must file the IRS 990-T form.

Their presentation outlined the steps for submitting various applications to the IRS, including parts of the process currently delayed due to the development of necessary online tools that will allow for the submission of the required documents.

pv magazine USA’s discussion with Tri Merit revealed their approach of early collaboration with project developers and CPAs to develop financial models. Represented by Barry Define and Randy Burge, Tri Merit provides a comprehensive document for developers to integrate into their financial models. As projects progress, Tri Merit assists with finalizing documentation for IRS submission, working with tax professionals to fine-tune values and navigate IRS website forms.

Despite the purported simplicity of the tax credit transfer process, multiple presentations highlighted the risks and challenges associated with monetizing the credits, especially among larger organizations dealing in projects priced above $10 million. Foley & Lardner LLP, a law firm with extensive experience in tax and energy law, presented “General Overview of Tax Credit Transferability,” which delivered a wealth of high-level information on the subject.

The Foley presentation covered the risks of tax credit recapture by the IRS, which can occur when solar projects fail to meet the technical requirements that initially qualified them for tax benefits. These recapture risks are a major factor driving the extensive documentation requirements, which continue to include significant fees and recapture insurance, necessary to complete tax credit transfers.

The presentation also detailed the processes of the newly developed finance structure that has emerged with the introduction of transferability. This structure begins with the traditional tax equity finance model that has been in use for years, but it now incorporates an additional tax credit transfer step at the end. A key aspect of this process, which is more complex and costly than a simple tax credit transfer, is that it enables solar developers to include a “step up” (or development fee) in the transaction at an amount approved by the IRS. It also has the potential to monetize the project’s depreciation.

Research from Australia suggests that employing electric vehicle-to-grid (V2G) connections at a 10% penetration rate can reduce peak demand charges for local substations by 6% and substantially lower fueling costs for electric vehicle (EV) owners. However, without proper management, EV penetration levels above 20% could negate those benefits.

The study, ‘Network tariffs for V2G,’ conducted by enX and commissioned by the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, aimed to explore the interaction between dynamic electricity and network tariffs (which are real-time, similar to wholesale pricing tools) and the increasing number of EVs connecting to the grid. The study also sought to understand how these EVs could help alleviate grid pressure in comparison to fixed time-of-use tariffs.

Findings indicate that V2G connections under dynamic pricing, specifically tariff types s3 & s6 in the chart above, led to the greatest substation peak demand shaving. These same dynamic pricing tariffs also saved significant amounts on EV owners’ electricity bills, with some V2G participants earning a net positive revenue on their vehicles’ electricity use, including one small account that covered 100% of their overall electricity use.

The analysis examined the load at the Metford substation in New South Wales, Australia, specifically focusing on one of the highest peak demand days of the year, March 6, 2023. On this day, the maximum peak demand reached 41.6 MW at 6pm. Under a dynamic pricing electricity and network tariff focused on peak shedding, the substation experienced a reduction of 2.54 MW in peak load. This reduction accounted for 6.29% of the substation’s peak demand value.

The analysis also found that an early morning peak is developing and expected to reach a high-stress point as V2G EVs hit a 20% uptake rate.

The dynamic pricing model achieved the most significant reduction in peak demand when applied to both network charges (including transmission, distribution, and demand-type charges) and electricity pricing. This model priced electricity based on current market rates, contrasting with time-of-use pricing that relies on fixed periods of higher and lower rates.

The analysis also revealed that a combination of bidirectional network support tariff and spot passthrough pricing (scenario s5) resulted in a reduction of 2.11 MW, nearly matching the 2.54 MW in savings from the optimal model. Models s3, s5, and s6 all generated significant savings for their car owners, as well as significant peak shaving for the substation.

In total, the analysis modeled 520 unique user accounts, including customers with solar power installations of varying sizes and diverse patterns of electricity usage. The study was motivated by projections for the year 2050, which predict a significant increase in EV battery capacity. According to the document, EV battery capacity is expected to reach approximately 2.4 TWh, four times the estimated power grid storage capacity of 0.64 TWh. The researchers emphasize that unlocking the potential of these batteries will be crucial for optimizing the power grids of the future.

We are in the midst of a year-long acceleration in the decline of battery cell prices, a trend that is reminiscent of recent solar cell price reductions.

Since last summer, lithium battery cell pricing has plummeted by approximately 50%, according to Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Limited (CATL), the world’s largest battery manufacturer. In early summer 2023, publicly available prices ranged from 0.8 to 0.9 RMB/Wh ($0.11 to $0.13 USD/Wh), or about $110 to 130/kWh.

Pricing initially fell by about a third by the end of summer 2023. Now, as reported by CnEVPost, large EV battery buyers are acquiring cells at 0.4 RMB/Wh, representing a price decline of 50%to 56%. Leapmotor’s CEO, Cao Li, expects further reductions, with prices potentially dropping to 0.32 RMB/Wh this summer, marking a decrease of 60% to 64% in a single year.

EnergyTrend observed that energy storage battery cells are priced similarly to electric vehicle battery cells.

Additionally, CnEVPost reports that the battery cells being sold come equipped with advanced technologies, including faster charge rates, higher cycle life, improved temperature management characteristics, and higher energy density packaging.

A February report from Goldman Sachs attributes the accelerated price declines partly to a slight slowdown in electric vehicle adoption, leading to lower commodity prices. The finance group revised its global battery demand growth projection to 29% for 2024, down from the previous estimate of 35%, with a 31% growth expected in 2023.

Goldman also forecasts a 40% reduction in battery pack prices over 2023 and 2024, followed by a continued decline to reach a total 50% reduction by 2025-2026. Goldman predicts that these price reductions will make electric vehicles as affordable as gasoline-powered vehicles, leading to increased demand.

One of the most notable commodity price declines related to EVs is that of lithium hydroxide. Its price surged from late 2021 through 2022, then began to tumble in early 2023, and continues to decrease today.

The price decreases are attributed to several factors, including a perception of stabilizing demand as manufacturers struggle to make EVs profitable, which has led to a softening of speculative investment in vehicle metal futures markets. Other contributing factors include supply chain improvements, decreasing inflation, and new lithium supplies coming online.

Other metals, such as copper, have fallen from pandemic-era highs but have not returned to pre-2020 prices.

Interestingly, both batteries and solar panels have seen their prices drop by about 90% since 2010, with both products currently experiencing accelerated price declines. The Rocky Mountain Institute’s December report, “X-Change: Batteries – The Battery Domino Effect,” presents a chart mirroring the trends seen in solar panels over the last fourteen years.

Looking back thirty or forty years, the costs of both batteries and solar panels have decreased by 99% or more for their base units.

Driven by these price declines, grid-tied energy storage deployment has seen robust growth over the past decade, a trend that is expected to continue into 2024.  The U.S. is projected to nearly double its deployed battery capacity by adding more than 14 GW of hardware this year alone. China is anticipated to become the grid storage leader, with deployments of just over 24 GW of capacity expected. EnergyTrend forecasts a global deployment of 71 GW of capacity, representing a 46% expansion over the 177% growth seen in 2022.

There is abundant anecdotal evidence from public and private sources corroborating these price declines in the marketplace. A significant example is the drop in electric vehicle prices over the past year, so substantial that Hertz had to publicly adjust the value of its Tesla fleet due to falling resale values. pv magazine USA has spoken with multiple energy storage vendors who have reported significant reductions in pricing, though one noted that while cell pricing has fallen significantly, the broader balance of system surrounding the battery cells has not fallen as quickly.

One vendor mentioned that advancements in battery cell technology, leading to increased energy densities, have contributed to lower deployed system costs per kWh.

The latest New England Independent System Operator (ISO-NE) capacity auction for 2027-28 concluded with coal failing to secure a spot, while solar, storage and wind all increased their market share.

ISO-NE announced that approximately 950 individual energy resources successfully bid to provide capacity if needed. Out of these, 603 were solar power or solar-plus-storage facilities, accounting for 16.6 GW of the total 31.5 GW of capacity.

The size of the sources ranged from 7 kW to 1.2 GW. The smallest facility, a 7 kW solar power plant named “Grasshopper 142 Blackstone,” is located in southeast Massachusetts. The largest solar plant, Three Corners Solar, which is located in Maine, secured a bid for 77.1 MW of capacity.

Facilities receive a monthly payment based on their available kWac capacity. The auction’s preliminary price is $3.58/kW per month, 38% higher than last year’s bid, but similar to bids placed five years ago.

The 7 kW Grasshopper solar facility bid that it could guarantee 2.462 kWac of capacity, earning a monthly payment of $8.81 and an annual total of $105. The facility must rebid next year. The Three Corners Solar facility, bid for its full capacity of 77.1 MWac but only for the summer period from June to September. It will earn $276,018 for each month and $828,054 for the summer season.

In 2019, Sunrun secured capacity payments for a distributed solar and storage portfolio for the first time, with delivery beginning under the contract in fall 2022. Since this initial bid, known as “FCA 13,” Sunrun has consistently secured contracts each year. Most recently, they won with three portfolios, totaling 5.67 MW of capacity.

The ISO noted that 1.7 GW of energy storage won bids, with 700 MW of those being new facilities this year. Energy storage first won capacity bids in the 2019 auction with 5 MW of capacity.

Offshore wind had a big moment with Vineyard Wind 1, an ~800 MW facility nearing completion, securing capacity payments on its first bid. The facility clinched two blocks: a 146 MW/50 MW winter/summer capacity and a larger 347 MW/185 MW block. Notably, wind farms typically offered more capacity in winter, whereas solar installations mainly provided value in summer or had reduced winter capacity when paired with energy storage.

The largest resource in New England to win capacity was the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant in New Hampshire, which secured 1.25 GW of capacity.

The Merrimack Generation Station in Bow, New Hampshire, a 482 MW coal plant that had been winning capacity bids until 2023, failed again to win any bids. The plant’s last payments of $785,000 a month will end with the closure of the 2025-2026 capacity season. According to the plant owners, the only financial path forward is to rely on revenue generated from supplying electricity during winter peak demand periods.

There are no other coal facilities currently operating in New England. However, wholesale electricity emissions in the region have not decreased for several years. This is because natural gas still dominates the grid, representing 46% of generation. Additionally, the retirement of multiple nuclear facilities has contributed to this trend.

In 2023, solar photovoltaics accounted for 5.5% of total U.S. electricity generation, which amounted to 4,251 TWh. Utility-scale solar (1 MWac and larger) contributed 3.8% to the total electricity generation, while the remaining 1.7% was generated by small-scale solar. Overall, solar’s share of total generation increased by 17.5% from 2022’s 4.7%.

However, the growth rate of solar power declined somewhat over the previous year. In 2022, solar output increased by 40.6 TWh, while in 2023, it increased by only 33.2 TWh, even less than the 33.9 TWh increase in 2021.

The growth in 2023 was primarily based on the 20.2 GW of solar capacity deployed in 2022, which was a decrease from the 23.6 GW deployed in 2021. The slowdown in 2022 can be attributed to various factors affecting the supply chain, including COVID-19, fluctuations in module demand and polysilicon availability, and discussions around U.S. import tariffs.

With an expected deployment of 35 GW in 2023, a nearly 25% increase in total capacity, the share of solar in the generation mix is also expected to grow by about 25%.

If electricity demand remains flat in 2024, and growth is 25%, then solar could account for 6.9% of all electricity generated this year.

With a record 53 GWdc of new capacity expected to be deployed in 2024, growing the nation’s physical solar fleet by over 30%, solar could reach 9.0% of all electricity generated in 2025. This means solar is on track to generate well more than 10% of all electricity in 2026.

The data was released by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA) in their Electric Power Monthly report for December. PV Intel processed the data, and supplied it to pv magazine USA via its 50 States of Solar series.

For the year, solar’s monthly share of electricity ranged from a peak of 7.2% in May to a low of 3.4% in January. Solar thermal electricity contributed 0.07% of all electricity generated, showing a slight decrease.

The EIA reported that total electricity demand for the year decreased by just under 1% from 2022’s 4,291 TWh generation. This year’s total generation is the second highest ever recorded in the U.S., second only to 2022.

Emission-free electricity, which includes nuclear, wind, hydroelectric, solar PV, geothermal, and solar thermal, met 39.9% of all U.S. electricity demand for the year. Nuclear accounted for 18.2%, wind for 10%, hydroelectricity for 5.6%, geothermal for 0.4%, and solar thermal for 0.07%. Hydroelectricity continued its decline from a recent high of 7.4% in 2017.

April saw the highest monthly share of emission-free electricity for the year at just over 45%, although it was slightly lower than the previous April. On April 2, at 1 p.m., according to the EIA’s Hourly Electric Grid Monitor, the lower 48 states reached 56.3% of their power grids being driven by emission-free sources.

Wind and solar together met 15.5% of all generation over the last twelve months, a 4.7% increase from 2022. All of this growth came from solar power, as wind power actually decreased in 2023. The peak month for wind and solar was April, coinciding with the peak month of emission-free electricity.

The highest absolute generation month for solar is generally July, while wind peaks in March or April. The wind and solar values peak in the “shoulder seasons” of spring and fall, during periods of lower electricity demand.

The EIA also released its final power plant map and count for 2023. In total, the EIA tracked 6,197 solar power photovoltaic plants in the nation at the end of year, out of 25,889 total power plants. The Solar Energy Industries of America suggests we’re nearly at, and potentially have already surpassed, 4 million total solar power plants, including all small-scale residential and commercial facilities.

Of the solar facilities tracked by the EIA, the total capacity reached 89,451 GWac as of the end of 2023. In 2023 alone, 399 facilities with a combined capacity of 17.675 GWac were brought online. Among these, the largest were the 500 MWac Aktina Solar and Roseland Solar Project, constructed by Hecate and Enel, respectively, in Texas.

In fact, four of the top five largest new solar power plants built in the U.S. in 2023 were located in Texas.

At the state level, California was the national leader, generating 27% of their electricity from solar. Nevada and Massachusetts followed closely, each producing over 20% of their electricity from solar. Notably, in Massachusetts, more than 15% of its electricity came specifically from small-scale solar. Other states, including Hawaii, Rhode Island, Vermont, and even Washington D.C., also made significant contributions, with each generating nearly or just above 10% of their electricity from small-scale solar.

This article was amended on March 5, 2024 to say that solar could reach 9.0% of all electricity generated in 2025 rather than 8.4%.