$40M solar energy PPA now underway
An alternative source of energy in the form of solar panels is expected to become a familiar sight on the islands after the Commonwealth Utilities Corp. disclosed that a contract for an up to $40-million solar energy project is underway.
In a presentation to the CUC board of directors last week, American Capital Energy representative Tom Anderson disclosed that the company was awarded the exclusive right to negotiate a solar power purchase agreement with CUC in 2011. The firm wanted to install up to 10,000 kW on Saipan and Rota, the size of which was subsequently supported by a Novermber 2013 Renewable Energy Integration Study.
The target kilowatt-hour is equivalent to 10 megawatts and the project cost is estimated at $35 million to $40 million.
The company has identified 10 potential sites for the solar panels: Koblerville Road, Pendan St., Kagman Road, Chacha Road, Pale Arnold and Patitida Road, Navy Hill Road, Old CUC site, old Puerto Rico dump, As Matuis Drive, As Perdido Road, and Niyok Road.
In terms of financing, Anderson disclosed that the project is a third-party-owned PPA with CUC, which will cost $0.179 cents/kWh for energy delivered to the CUC grid.
ACE is guaranteeing delivery of a minimum of 75 percent of expected delivery amount.
Under the CUC-ACE power purchase arrangement, the project poses low-risk to CUC because the ACE-Saipan project team will bear the vast majority of the financial risk and the company will finance the project while CUC pays only for energy produced and delivered to the CUC distribution system.
“CUC wants to save money with the prospect of eventually sharing realized savings with the rate payers, while at the same time help the community achieve its renewable energy goals,” according to Anderson’s presentation, adding that the company wants to generate positive cashflow to pay back finance partners and make a return on investment. It also wants to grow its reputation as a go-to renewable energy solutions provider, according to Anderson.
$1.5M savings to CUC per year
The expected total capacity output is 13.5 million kWh per year, Anderson said, with anticipated energy cost savings to CUC. At present, diesel fuel prices cost per kWh generated at the CUC power plants is $0.30/kWh (based on the Renewable Energy Integration Study).
“Every kWh delivered by the PV arrays will eliminate the need for a kWh of diesel generated energy, resulting in a per kWh cost savings of $0.121/kWh. Assuming 13,500,000 kWh/year, CUC’s estimated energy cost savings will be $1,500,000 per year,” according to Anderson.
He added that integrated ramp-rate control technology (batteries and/or ultra-capacitors) will result in the delivery of more energy and reduce the need for ramp rate diesel production, yielding even greater savings to CUC.
During Thursday’s meeting, the CUC board gave the go signal to CUC management to “move forward” and finalize the contract with ACE, with consideration that the planned 10MW capacity be built on Saipan (8MW) and Rota (2MW).
Depending on the approval of CUC, the company is looking at building the project within 46 months.
I am writing you in response to the article about Solar-Power in the CNMI by CUC. I applaud CUC to give Solar-Power the go-ahead in CNMI. Also I would like to make the public aware, that Solar-Power can also be installed and used individualy in our homes. A Home -Solar -Energy System, using 2 large Solar-Panels and two 6 Volt Golf -car-Batteries ( in series) , which give you 12 V, a charge-controller and an invertor plus a quarter inch stranded wire, that will get you started to power all your lights ( LED ) , your TV, a fan and a small refrigerator. Your capasity can always be increased by adding more panels and batteries, This system on your rooftop would coast you approx. $ 1.000 – 1.200 in material. The coast for Solar-Panels has going down to 46 cent per Watt. You don’t have to be an electrician or engineer to install Solar-Panels on your rooftop. The components are all available on the internet. Enjoy our island sunshine and used to light up your live.
And if you are producing more than you consuming, the extra power goes back to the Utility and that’s where the Net Metering comes into play! Last week I saw a hugh Solar-Power plant between California and Nevada. At first I thought was a large lake or body of water. When you apply the Net Metering concepts, you should have more savings than what was presented. There are sciencetist now that are reshearching and testing for a photo cell that will work like a battery! Each cell in that solar panel can store electrical charge and can be used as need, especially at night when there is no sun.
Totally RIDICULOUS!! They tout a cost “savings” if they build it – THAT’S AN OUTRIGHT LIE!!! Just look at their own figures, then go to the U.S. Dept. of energy and look the cost of building ANY other power plant.
Diesel and coal can be built for around $2500 per KW; Natural gas at around $2000 per KW; wind at around $3500 per KW; SPMR (nuclear) at around $1100 per KW – now “they” tell us “they” will build a solar plant and REDUCE our cost (by a MINISCUL amount btw) for $4000 PER KW!!!!
There is ONLY one other type of power plant that costs MORE than this – and that is geothermal at around $10,000 per KW.
Will SOMEONE, ANYONE please tell me how our cost can be reduced with a power facility that costs MORE than any other feasible power plant in the CNMI???????? (“they” will reduce the cost from 30 cents to 18 cents FOR THE FUEL PORTION OF THE TOTAL CHARGE ONLY). “they” simply neglect to tell us how much additional cost will be involved for “ramp-rate” control technology and other REQUIRED technologies AND improvements required in the distribution system which will, presumably, be borne by CUC (YOU!). And what happens when the sun don’t shine? Read up on this: SOLAR IS ONLY ABOUT 12 per cent efficient. (wind doesn’t do much better at around 14-16%). There’s a LOT more, but too much for this short space.
Not only all that – but they manipulate their “figures” to give us a “savings” – 1) there is no way they can produce and sell power at 18 cents per kwh; 2) solar is NOT environmentally “friendly”. It requires a lot of space, maintenance, large land areas DEVOID of vegetation (which changes the micro-climate in the area) and the manufacture of the panels is one of the MOST “unfriendly” chemical concoctions in the world – let alone their eventual disposal. AND, the panels are extremely vulnerable to typhoons – imagine spreading all those panel materials all over the CNMI!!!