Domestic Utility Solar+Storage PPAs

[TheTalkingMule]

This can't possibly be right. A 4.5cent/kWh PPA for solar+storage?

Updated: Tucson Electric signs solar + storage PPA for 'less than 4.5¢/kWh'

Tucson Electric Power has signed a power purchase agreement for a solar-plus-storage system at "an all-in cost significantly less than $0.045/kWh over 20 years," according to a company official. Exact prices are confidential, but a release pegged the PPA for the solar portion of the project at below $0.03/kWh.

The project calls for a 100 MW solar array and a 30 MW, 120 MWh energy storage system, both developed by an affiliate of NextEra Energy. If the pricing proves accurate, it would represent a major cost reduction for combined storage facilities since the signing of the last significant PPA — a $0.11/kWh Hawaii contract in January.

 

[renim]

This can't possibly be right. A 4.5cent/kWh PPA for solar+storage?

Updated: Tucson Electric signs solar + storage PPA for 'less than 4.5¢/kWh'

looks about right 3 cents for solar, + a bit extra for the battery

that does raise a question of equality and fairness, demonstrating that net metering is inherently not equitable or fair, that the price really should be closer to the wholesale PPA price.

 

[Ampster]

that net metering is inherently not equitable or fair

In California net metering has stimulated the growth of residential solar, which has helped the state reach its GHG reduction goals. That in turn offers the prospect of better health. That is fair enough for me. The long term trend toward incentivizing EVs may have an economic justice component if the number of refineries is reduced since many refineries in California are located near disadvantaged communities. California's results may not translate globally.

 

[TheTalkingMule]

Until you hit 5% of total supply, net metering is perfectly fine. Simply avoiding the cost of additional fossil plant construction makes it a net positive. In more mature solar markets, it obviously becomes a very simple problem of the math not working. The southwest will need to move to an open market with "prosumer" protections that give residential solar owners priority, but still keeps them within a rational demand-based market.

What this project really illustrates is that it's financially foolish to ever again build out ANY fossil plant in similarly climated markets. Why build a gas peaker plant when you can just put this operation out in the desert? Nevada was seriously considering a new $1B gas plant just 12 months ago, that's now a fisco-political impossibility.