UTILITY Solar Market Snapshot Sustained Growth in 0 May 0 Miriam Makyhoun, Research Manager Ryan Edge, Research Analyst Nick Esch, Research Intern sepatop0.org
UTILITY Solar Market Snapshot Table of Contents Executive Summary... page National Solar Market Snapshot Solar market expansion... page How much solar was installed in 0... page What market segments saw the most growth... page How does concentrating solar compare with photovoltaics... page Utility Solar Market Snapshot Which utilities integrated the most solar capacity... page Which utilities interconnected the most solar systems... page Hot Topics Overview... page 0 Rate design moves to the forefront... page New strategies for grid integration... page Expanding into new states... page Community solar and utility-owned residential solar... page Appendices A-: Solar megawatts by utility type... page A-: Solar installations by utility type... page A-: Solar penetration by utility type... page A-: Solar by state... page Methodology... page About the Report In 00, SEPA began surveying electric utilities on the amount of solar they integrated each year, driving to uncover the most accurate and granular solar market data in the industry. This year s innovative infographic report format takes a fresh approach to presenting the 0 solar market that combines significant data discovery with cutting edge takeaways. Page
UTILITY Solar Market Snapshot Executive Summary Solar markets continued significant growth in 0 n Added. gigawatts (GW) across more than,000 new systems; total installed solar nationwide is. GW across more than,00 locations. n Annual capacity growth rates for the following market segments: Residential: % Nonresidential: % Utility-scale: % n Solar costs are declining with an industry wide drive to lower non hardware soft costs in areas such as financing and customer acquisition. The solar market is heavily concentrated in particular utilities and states n Most solar-active utilities are in California, Hawaii, Arizona, New Jersey, and North Carolina. n Aggregate solar portfolio by utility type: Investor-owned: 0% of capacity is made of utility-scale solar projects Public power: Residential and nonresidential rather than utility-scale solar drive capacity Cooperative: Portfolios are composed of an equal mix of utility-scale, residential and nonresidential solar Key business issues likely to persist for the next to years n Rate restructuring to account for distributed energy resources will continue to drive discussion amongst utilities, regulators and stakeholders. n Utilities, as well as regulators, need to innovate to meet evolving customer demands for clean, affordable electricity. n Forecasts are predicting a very sharp drop in solar build-out after the federal tax incentive steps down in 0. n Grid integration of distributed energy resources is emerging as an opportunity for technical adaptation and improved utility planning procedures. n Community solar programs continue to receive strong interest from utilities of all types. n Solar is increasingly becoming a least-cost option for utilities. All capacity in this report is in alternating current (AC). Utility-scale refers to solar facilities of capacities of megawatts and greater. Page
NATIONAL Solar Market Snapshot Solar market expansion CA NV NY NJ MA AZ Top 0 Solar States 0 NM MWs added in 0 alone See Appendix A- for a table of each state s annual and cumulative solar capacity and project data. TX HI NC States by Cumulative Capacity n, n,0 -, n 0 - n 0 - n 0 - Solar market expansion is driven by several factors: policy support for for renewable resources, the level of retail rates, the availability of incentives, and the strength of the solar resource, among others. n California, the leading state for solar growth, has an aggressive renewable portfolio standard (RPS) and other complementary state policies supporting solar development. n Both California and Arizona, the second place state for annual solar growth, have significantly higher solar production compared to the rest of the nation. Greater solar insolation boosts the economics of solar, in some instances making the cost of solar energy competitive with the price of natural gas. n North Carolina, the third place state for annual solar growth, has been climbing the charts for most competitive solar state over the past several years. Factors influencing its solar uptake include its RPS and state tax credit, and long-term power purchase agreements with fixed prices that provide competitive economics for many of the state s developers. n New Jersey, another state with significant solar penetration, bolsters its market with solar renewable energy credits (SRECs) that are traded for compliance purposes. Each state receives more than kilowatt hours per square meter per day ( kwh/m /day), compared with the rest of the nation, which receives an average of less than kwh/m /day. Page
NATIONAL Solar Market Snapshot How much solar was installed Megawatts 00, 0,,0 0,, 0, 0, 0, Annual MW, Cumulative MW Number of installations 00,,0 0,, 0,, 0,0, 0, Annual Systems,0 Cumulative Systems n Approximately. GW of new solar was added in 0, bringing U.S. solar capacity to. GW. This included more than,000 new systems, bringing the national total to more than,00. n U.S. solar capacity has increased at an average annual growth rate of % over the past four years. n Declining technology costs combined with federal and state incentives have made residential solar installations an attractive investment for homeowners and continue to spur sector growth. n Utility-scale projects those of MW or more continue to deliver the majority of new solar capacity with, MW in 0. For the second year in a row, solar was the second largest source of new U.S. generating capacity behind natural gas. Page
NATIONAL Solar Market Snapshot What market segments saw the most growth 00 0 0 0 MW 0,0 MW Residential: % of capacity but slightly less than % of installations Nonresidential: 0% of capacity but % of installations Utility-scale: % of capacity but 0.0% of installations, MW Annual growth rate in capacity for individual market segments: n The residential market saw an annual growth rate of %, propelled largely by third-party development, which represented 0% of the market. n The nonresidential market, stagnant over the last few years, saw a bump in deployment of %, possibly due to the standardization of financing options for commercial and industrial projects. n The utility-scale sector is maintaining steady growth at % annually. It continued to lead in capacity in 0, adding, MW, compared with, in 0. Continued growth is expected over the next two years as developers rush to complete projects prior to the federal investment tax credit (ITC) step-down. Average system size: Residential: 0.00 MW Commercial:.0 MW Utility-Scale: MW http://www.greentechmedia.com/research/report/u.s.-pv-leaderboard See U.S. Code D for individuals and U.S. Code for corporations. The corporate ITC will be reduced from its current 0% rate to 0% on January, 0. The credit for individuals is scheduled to expire entirely by early 0. Page
NATIONAL Solar Market Snapshot How does concentrating solar power compare with photovoltaics 00 PV 0 0 0, MW MW 0 CSP n Concentrating solar power (CSP) performed well in 0, with the completion of three projects totaling MW which accounted for % of utility-scale solar installed in 0. n The longer construction time and higher cost per Watt for CSP technologies appear to have hindered its growth ahead of the ITC step-down. CSP does provide ancillary grid services and a level of dispatchability that photovoltaic (PV) technologies lack, which may revive interest in CSP in the future. n PV has remained the market leader for solar technology deployment for the past several years and is forecast to maintain its top market position through the end of the decade. A single 0-MW CSP plant The Crescent Dunes project in Nevada is due to be completed in 0. PV project average system size = 0.0 MW CSP project average system size = MW 0 MW, MW Cumulative CSP through 0 0-0 CSP Pipeline Pictured here is Ivanpah, a CSP plant in the California Mojave Desert. Page
Utility Solar Snapshot Which utilities integrated the most solar capacity Annual Solar Megawatts by Utility (MW) 0 Annual Watts-per-Customer (W-ac) 0 Pacific Gas and Electric (CA),0 Southern California Edison (CA),0 San Diego Gas & Electric (CA) 0 Duke Energy Progress (NC, SC) National Grid (MA) Arizona Public Service (AZ) Jersey Central Power & Light (NJ) Tucson Electric Power (AZ) NV Energy (NV) El Paso Electric (NM, TX) Average for All Others Total for All Others, Pickwick Electric Cooperative (TN), Farmers Electric Coop - (IA), City of St. George Energy Services Department (UT) Kauai Island Utility Cooperative (HI) 0 San Diego Gas & Electric (CA) 0 Pacific Gas and Electric (CA) Southern California Edison (CA) Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. (HI) Maui Electric Company Ltd (HI) Tucson Electric Power (AZ) Average for All Others Cumulative Solar Megawatts by Utility (MW) 0 Cumulative Watts-per-Customer (W-ac) 0 Pacific Gas and Electric (CA),0 Southern California Edison (CA),0 San Diego Gas & Electric (CA), Arizona Public Service (AZ) 0 Public Service Electric & Gas Company (NJ) 0 Duke Energy Progress (NC, SC) NV Energy (NV) Jersey Central Power & Light (NJ) National Grid (MA) Xcel CO - Public Service Company of Colorado (CO) Average for All Others Total for All Others,0 City of Milford (DE),0 Pickwick Electric Cooperative (TN),0 Farmers Electric Coop - (IA), Navarro County Elec Coop, Inc. (TX), Vineland Municipal Electric Utility (NJ),0 Kauai Island Utility Cooperative (HI), Rockland Electric Company (NJ) Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. (HI) Pacific Gas and Electric (CA) 0 Big Horn County Elec Coop, Inc (MT) 0 Average for All Others n The top two utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison, represent % of the total solar capacity installed for the year. n While California, Arizona and New Jersey have lead the way, utilities in North Carolina, Hawaii, Massachusetts and Colorado have been consistently adding solar as well. Six utilities have surpassed,000 Watts of total solar per customer. Page
Utility Solar Snapshot Which utilities interconnected the most solar systems Annual Interconnections by Utility 0 Pacific Gas and Electric (CA), Southern California Edison (CA), San Diego Gas & Electric (CA),0 Arizona Public Service (AZ), Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. (HI), Xcel CO - Public Service Company of Colorado (CO), National Grid (MA),0 Long Island Power Authority (NY), Salt River Project (AZ),0 Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (CA),0 Average for All Others Total for All Others,0 Cumulative Interconnections by Utility 0 Pacific Gas and Electric (CA), Southern California Edison (CA) 0, San Diego Gas & Electric (CA), Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. (HI), Arizona Public Service (AZ),0 Xcel CO - Public Service Company of Colorado (CO), Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (CA),0 Long Island Power Authority (NY),0 Salt River Project (AZ), Public Service Electric & Gas Company (NJ),0 Average for All Others Total for All Others, Annual Percentage of Net Metered Projects per Customer 0 Maui Electric Company Ltd (HI) % Hawaii Electric Light Company (HI) % Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. (HI) % Kauai Island Utility Cooperative (HI).% Electrical District No. (AZ).% San Diego Gas & Electric (CA).% Roseville Electric (CA) 0.% Pacific Gas and Electric (CA) 0.% Trico Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AZ) 0.% Southern California Edison (CA) 0.% Average for All Others 0.% Cumulative Percentage of Net Metered Projects per Customer n The top 0 utilities accounted for % of the annual interconnections, with more than,000 installations in 0. Pacific Gas & Electric interconnected,0 systems per month, the equivalent of almost systems per work hour. This volume is increasing the pressure on utility management needs, from planning and contracting to inspections and interconnections. n 0 utilities % interconnected more than PV systems per month in 0. n Hawaiian utilities continue to lead in the number of interconnections per customer. They saw a notable dip in annual interconnections in 0 because their distribution grids reached functional limits for supporting PV capacity. The situation has been remedied by new interconnection policies requiring advanced inverter functionality and demand-side management strategies designed to better integrate distributed solar resources. 0 Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. (HI) % Maui Electric Company Ltd (HI) 0% Hawaii Electric Light Company (HI) % Kauai Island Utility Cooperative (HI) % Inland Power and Light (WA, ID) % San Diego Gas & Electric (CA) % Roseville Electric (CA) % Hercules Municipal Utility (CA) % Garkane Energy Coop, Inc. (AZ) % Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Co-op (AZ) % Average for All Others 0.% Last year, utilities averaged at least one interconnection per day. Page
UTILITY-Solar Hot Topics Snapshot Overview Rates Rate restructuring will continue to be a point of friction between utilities and distributed solar. So far, some utilities have responded by proposing increased fixed customer charges or targeted demand charges to solar customers. Others, driven largely by state policies such as in New York and California have decoupled revenues from volumetric energy sales. Grid Integration Utilities serving certain locations with high penetrations of distributed solar specifically in Hawaii, California and New Jersey have turned their attention to innovative grid integration strategies. Advanced inverter functionality, energy storage, and solar energy production forecasting are the leading strategies on the supply side; while demand response and locational deployment provide some solutions on the customer side of the meter. New Markets, Least-Cost Resource In the past year, prices for power purchase agreements (PPAs) in several states continued to fall and approached or in some cases even beat those for natural gas-generated electricity. The improving economics are moving solar into new states. Utilities are even beginning to report that they approach solar as a least cost resource. Utility Rooftop Solar Ownership Several pilot utility rooftop solar ownership programs, targeted at the residential market, are being developed by the following utilities in 0: investor-owned utilities Arizona Public Service (APS) and Tucson Electric Power (TEP), municipal utility CPS Energy in San Antonio, Texas, and electric cooperative Wright-Hennepin in Minnesota. The APS and TEP programs will target 0 MW and. MW of residential installations, respectively, and allow residents to host PV systems on their roofs while the utility finances, controls and bears the risk of the installed solar system. Both APS and TEP are considering ways to address underserved customers such as low-income consumers, as well as to identify locations on their distribution systems that would benefit from local generation. In addition, an emphasis on panel orientation is being tested with west-facing systems, which are better aligned with each utility s afternoon peak. Community Solar The percentage of utility respondents who are offering or considering a community solar program rose 0% since last year. During this past year, utilities that were not considering a program are now doing so while six utilities that were considering programs have implemented them. The percentage of utility respondents who are offering or considering a community solar program rose 0% since last year. Page 0
UTILITY-Solar Hot Topics Snapshot Rate design moves to the forefront,0 Net Metered MW Cumulative MW, 00 0 0 0 0 The debate surrounding net energy metering (NEM) continued to heat up in 0. Utilities, state governments and industry research groups have argued that net metering is effectively a subsidy for customers with solar generators by those without. This perceived inequality challenges the utility ratemaking process as utilities struggle to meet their cost-of-service and long-term capital financing obligations with revenue projections that, up to this point, have not accurately reflected customer investments in energy efficiency and distributed generation. Net metering applies to % of all solar installations. n NEM accounts for, cumulative solar projects, or % of all systems installed and % on a capacity basis. n % of respondents are planning or considering a restructure of rates to account for better cost allocation among customer classes. The figure grows to % when utilities offering or considering feed-in or value of solar tariffs are included. n utilities reported they are currently exploring a value of solar tariff (at present, Austin Energy in Texas was the only utility implementing one in 0). n responding utilities currently offer feed-in tariffs. Page
NATIONAL Solar Market Snapshot New strategies for grid integration Locational Deployment Solar Energy Forecasting Advanced Inverters Energy Storage n Energy Storage: n Solar Energy Forecasting: n Locational Deployment: n Advanced Inverters: responding utilities are exploring new grid integration strategies, 0 of which are currently offering or planning to offer at least three of these strategies, indicating a holistic approach to grid integration. n Locational deployment - Information systems, incentives and other strategies are used to influence where new distributed solar generators are sited in order to maximize their benefits to the grid or to minimize their integration difficulties. 0% () of respondents are employing locational deployment. % () of respondents are planning, researching or considering it. n Advanced inverters - PV system inverters are used to provide ancillary services to the grid, including reactive power support, voltage and frequency ride-through support, and curtailment. % () of respondents are pursuing advanced inverter functionality in some capacity. % () of respondents are researching or considering it. n Energy storage - Technologies (excluding pumped hydro) that store energy from intermittent renewable sources for the purpose of supplying that energy for peak load or to provide ancillary services to the grid, including ramp rate control, resource firming and dispatchability. % () of respondents have implemented energy storage solutions % () of respondents are researching or considering it. n Solar energy forecasting - Solar production data are used in conjunction with forecasts for system load and weather for the purpose of utility resource planning and grid management. % () of respondents use solar forecasting for planning purposes. % () of respondents are researching or considering it. Page
UTILITY-Solar Hot Topics Snapshot Expanding into new markets Installed Forecast,000,000,000 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 Look for solar to continue growing into new states as the economics improve in solar s favor particularly for utility-scale installations. Large-scale solar plants have been announced for states in regions with newly emerging solar markets. The list includes Utah, along with states in the Midwest (Indiana, Missouri, Minnesota and Michigan) and the Southeast (Alabama, Florida, Georgia and South Carolina). Expect this trend to continue as PPAs for large-scale solar projects become competitive with utilities avoided-cost rates. n responding utilities representing states reported they were approaching solar as a least-cost resource for their integrated resource planning. n Several recent PPA announcements point to solar becoming a cost-competitive resource in a variety of locations: Austin Energy (Texas) signed a PPA for less than $0 per megawatt-hour (MWh) for 0 MW. TVA (Alabama) signed a PPA for $ per MWh. Salt River Project (Arizona) signed a PPA for roughly $ per MWh. The large-scale project forecast drops abruptly in 0 when the federal ITC is expected to step down from 0% to 0%. n Sustaining factors that may support this sector post-itc: EPA s rule (d), the Clean Power Plan State-level renewable portfolio standards Falling solar technology costs Solar as part of a balanced portfolio to better manage fuel price risk http://www.austinchronicle.com/news/0-0-0/aes-solar-deal-game-changer http://www.rechargenews.com/solar//tva-moves-to-buy-0mw-of-large-scale-solar-from-nextera http://www.srpnet.com/newsroom/releases/0.aspx Page
UTILITY-Solar Hot Topics Snapshot Community solar and utility-owned residential solar Not planning Planning Offering went from not planning to planning active Community Solar programs went from planning to offering % % went from not planning to offering Growing interest in community solar from utilities responding in both 0 and 0 Community solar programs, in which utility customers share a larger solar installation, are rapidly increasing in popularity among utilities. At least community solar programs are currently active in the U.S., of which are utility-managed, while are managed by a third-party. n Nearly % of utility respondents are offering or considering a community solar program. n Utilities expressed a strong preference for utility-managed programs (%) more than twice as high as third party-managed programs (%). Utility-owned solar on residential rooftops In 0, four utilities are beginning to offer rooftop solar leasing programs with utilityowned, customer-sited solar installations on residential rooftops: Arizona Public Service and Tucson Electric Power in Arizona, CPS Energy in San Antonio, Texas, and Wright- Hennepin Electric Cooperative in Minnesota. % % Utilitymanaged Thirdparty managed n Not planning n Implementing or planning These programs are designed to leverage the benefits of distributed generation for the grid, in some cases complemented by other strategies such as locational deployment, west-facing orientation and advanced inverters. Utility ownership enables a broader set of consumers to go solar including low income customers and those with sub-optimal credit scores, meeting customer demand for clean, carbon-free electricity and serving as a hedge against suboptimal utility rate hikes. Page
Appendix A-: Solar megawatts by utility type Investor-owned Annual MW 0 Pacific Gas and Electric (CA),0 Southern California Edison (CA),0 San Diego Gas & Electric (CA) 0 Duke Energy Progress (NC, SC) National Grid (MA) Arizona Public Service (AZ) Jersey Central Power & Light (NJ) Tucson Electric Power (AZ) NV Energy (NV) El Paso Electric (NM, TX) Investor-owned Annual Systems 0 Pacific Gas and Electric (CA), Southern California Edison (CA), San Diego Gas & Electric (CA),0 Arizona Public Service (AZ), Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. (HI), Xcel CO - Public Service Company of Colorado (CO), National Grid (MA),0 Connecticut Light and Power Company (CT), Public Service Electric & Gas Company (NJ), Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. (NY), Investor-owned Cumulative MW Pacific Gas and Electric (CA),0 Southern California Edison (CA),0 San Diego Gas & Electric (CA), Arizona Public Service (AZ) 0 Public Service Electric & Gas Company (NJ) 0 Duke Energy Progress (NC, SC) NV Energy (NV) Jersey Central Power & Light (NJ) National Grid (MA) 0 Xcel CO - Public Service Company of Colorado (CO) Investor-owned Cumulative Systems 0 Pacific Gas and Electric (CA), Southern California Edison (CA) 0, San Diego Gas & Electric (CA), Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. (HI), Arizona Public Service (AZ),0 Xcel CO - Public Service Company of Colorado (CO), Public Service Electric & Gas Company (NJ),0 Jersey Central Power & Light (NJ), National Grid (MA) 0, Hawaii Electric Light Company (HI), Investor-owned Cumulative Investor-owned Cumulative % Watts per Customer Net Metered Projects per Customer* Rockland Electric Company (NJ) Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. (HI) % Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. (HI) Maui Electric Company Ltd (HI) 0% Pacific Gas and Electric (CA) 0 Hawaii Electric Light Company (HI) % Maui Electric Company Ltd (HI) San Diego Gas & Electric (CA) % Arizona Public Service (AZ) 0 Pacific Gas and Electric (CA) % Hawaii Electric Light Company (HI) Arizona Public Service (AZ) % Tucson Electric Power (AZ) 0 Entergy New Orleans Inc (LA) % Southern California Edison (CA) 0 Southern California Edison (CA) % Atlantic City Electric (NJ) 0 Tucson Electric Power (AZ) % 0 Jersey Central Power & Light (NJ) 0 Xcel CO - Public Service Company of Colorado (CO) % * Net metered projects per customer is the number of customer-sited solar projects divided by the number of total customers. It is a way to measure distributed solar penetration. Page
Appendix A-: Solar installations by utility type Public Power Annual MW 0 CPS Energy (TX) Long Island Power Authority (NY) Salt River Project (AZ) Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (CA) 0 Imperial Irrigation District (CA) City of St. George Energy Services Department (UT) Sacramento Municipal Utility District (CA) 0 Austin Energy (TX) 0 Anaheim Public Utilities (CA) Silicon Valley Power/City of Santa Clara (CA) Public Power Cumulative MW MW Sacramento Municipal Utility District (CA) Long Island Power Authority (NY) Salt River Project (AZ) CPS Energy (TX) Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (CA) Imperial Irrigation District (CA) Austin Energy (TX) Silicon Valley Power/City of Santa Clara (CA) Vineland Municipal Electric Utility (NJ) 0 Gainesville Regional Utilities (FL) Public Power Annual Systems 0 Long Island Power Authority (NY), Salt River Project (AZ),0 Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (CA),0 Sacramento Municipal Utility District (CA), Austin Energy (TX) 0 CPS Energy (TX) 0 Imperial Irrigation District (CA) 00 Roseville Electric (CA) Seattle City Light Riverside Public Utilities (CA) 0 Public Power Cumulative Systems 0 Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (CA) 0 Long Island Power Authority (NY) 0 Salt River Project (AZ) Sacramento Municipal Utility District (CA) Austin Energy (TX) CPS Energy (TX) Roseville Electric (CA) 0 Seattle City Light 0 Imperial Irrigation District (CA) Riverside Public Utilities (CA) Public Power Cumulative Public Power Cumulative % Watts per Customer Net Metered Projects per Customer City of Milford (DE),0 Roseville Electric (CA) % Vineland Municipal Electric Utility (NJ),0 Hercules Municipal Utility (CA) % Sterling Municipal Light Dept (MA). Town of Concord (MA) % Silicon Valley Power/City of Santa Clara (CA) City of Palo Alto Utilities (CA) % City of St Marys (OH) City of Healdsburg (CA) % Imperial Irrigation District (CA) 0 Sacramento Municipal Utility District (CA) % City of St. George Energy Services Department (UT) Electrical District No. (AZ) % City of Dover (DE) City of Moreno Valley (CA) % City of Moreno Valley (CA) 0 Riverside Public Utilities (CA) % 0 Bryan Municipal Utilities (OH) 0 Salt River Project (AZ) % Page
Appendix A-: Solar penetration by utility type Co-op Annual MW 0 Pickwick Electric Cooperative (TN) Kauai Island Utility Cooperative (HI) Southern Maryland Electric Cooperative (MD) Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Co-op (AZ) Trico Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AZ). -County Electric Power Association (MS). Farmers Electric Coop - (IA). United Power (CO).0 Delaware Electric Cooperative (DE). Holy Cross Energy (CO).0 Co-op Cumulative MW Kauai Island Utility Cooperative (HI) Pickwick Electric Cooperative (TN) Navarro County Elec Coop, Inc. (TX) 0 Southern Maryland Electric Cooperative (MD) Appalachian Power (VA, WV) Trico Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AZ) Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Co-op (AZ) Delaware Electric Cooperative (DE) Chickasaw Electric Cooperative (TN) 0 Choptank Electric Coop, Inc. (MD) Co-op Annual Systems 0 Kauai Island Utility Cooperative (HI) 0 Southern Maryland Electric Cooperative (MD) Trico Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AZ) 0 Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Co-op (AZ) United Power (CO) Delaware Electric Cooperative (DE) 0 Holy Cross Energy (CO) Kit Carson Electric Cooperative (NM) Farmers Electric Coop - (IA) CoServ Electric (TX) Co-op Cumulative Watts per Customer Pickwick Electric Cooperative (TN),0 Farmers Electric Coop - (IA), Navarro County Elec Coop, Inc. (TX), Kauai Island Utility Cooperative (HI), Big Horn County Elec Coop, Inc (MT) 0 Garkane Energy Coop, Inc. (AZ) Chickasaw Electric Cooperative (TN) Kit Carson Electric Cooperative (NM) Inland Power and Light (WA, ID) 0 Trico Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AZ) Co-op Cumulative Systems 0 Kauai Island Utility Cooperative (HI), Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Co-op (AZ), Trico Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AZ) 0 Southern Maryland Electric Cooperative (MD) Delaware Electric Cooperative (DE) 0 Holy Cross Energy (CO) Guadalupe Valley Elec Coop Inc (TX) La Plata Electric Association (CO) Pedernales Electric Coop, Inc. (TX) Otero County Electric Coop Inc. (NM) Co-op Cumulative % Net Metered Projects per Customer Kauai Island Utility Cooperative (HI) % Inland Power and Light (WA, ID) % Garkane Energy Coop, Inc. (AZ) % Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Co-op (AZ) % Trico Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AZ) % Otero County Electric Coop Inc. (NM) % Washington Electric Co-op (VT) % Graham County Electric Coop Inc (AZ) % Plumas-Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative (CA, NV) % 0 Diverse Power Incorporated (AL) % W = Watt-ac Page
Appendix A-: Solar by state States Annual MW-ac Annual Systems Cumulative MW-ac Cumulative Systems States Annual MW-ac Annual Systems Cumulative MW-ac Cumulative Systems CA,0 0,0,,0 AZ,,, NC 0, NJ,,, MA, 00,0 NY,,0 HI 0,, NV,0, TX,0, NM 0, IN 0 0 CO 0,, CT, 0,0 TN,0 VT, UT,, GA 0,0 MD,0, FL,0, IA,0, OR, 0, WA,0,0 PA, OH,00 DE, RI 0 VA,0 MO,0 MN 0 0, WI 0, DC,0 0, LA 0, NH 0, MI,0 KY MS KS 0 SC AR 0.0 AL 0. NE 0.0 0 OK 0. ID 0. WV 0.0 WY 0.0 AS 0.0 0 ND 0.0 IL 0.00 ME 0 0, MT 0 0, AK 0 0 0 SD 0 0 0 Page
Methodology Solar Electric Power Association (SEPA) first identified over 00 solar-active utilities with at least MW of installed solar capacity through previous surveys and net metering data from U.S. Energy Information Administration (U.S. EIA) Form. These utilities were contacted via email and phone in January and February of 0, and 0 utilities responded by submitting either an Excel file or an online survey (% response rate). The data includes the 0 responding utilities, and utilities from U.S. EIA, giving a total of,0 utilities represented in the study. This represents % of the electricity providers in the U.S. SNL Financial power plant data was incorporated to verify large-scale project forecasting and procurement. SEPA vetted the accuracy of survey information through personal contacts at utilities and external data sources. For the Watts-per-Customer category, utilities must have at least 00 bundled customer accounts. All generating capacity is presented in grid-compatible, alternating current. Contact SEPA for more information. This figure includes,0 utilities and it excludes power marketers. http://www.publicpower.org/files/pdfs/uselectricutilityindustrystatistics.pdf Solar Electric Power Association 0 th Street, NW, Suite 00, Washington, DC 00-0 0--0 0 Solar Electric Power Association. All Rights Reserved. Page