-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
jhm
Well-Known Member
My sense is that BoS tends to be a catchall term for whatever is not explicitly detailed. So when GTM is saying that 75% is BoS, I think this refers to everything but the panels and possible inverter, about 70 c/W and 12 c/W respectively. Unfortunately the article I posted was simply reporting on GTM's research and did not get into these details. So we'd need to dig a.little.deeper to know precisely what GTM allocates.to BoS.
More quotes from southern California.
Solarcity has no "retained earnings" at these prices.
http://www.solarpaneltalk.com/showthread.php?23025-Quotes-are-in-survey-says
Solarcity has no "retained earnings" at these prices.
http://www.solarpaneltalk.com/showthread.php?23025-Quotes-are-in-survey-says
jhm
Well-Known Member
Sunrun - Investor Relations
Sunrun posted Q2 2015 results last week. They've got 472.5 MW cumulative deployed, up 46% y/y. They claim the second largest residential fleet. So they seem to be growing at the rate of the US residential market, albeit some of their growth is through acquisition of other solar installers.
What I find most interesting is that their total cost per Watt is $4.08 compared to $2.91 for SolarCity. These coats may not be directly comparable since Sunrun's business model is not nearly as vertically integrates as SolarCity. Sunrun outsources alot of sales and installation. Even so, the installation cost per Watt for Sunrun is $3.07, which if fully outsourced is still above SolarCity's total cost. But for comparison, the installed cost for SolarCity is $2.13 well below $3.07 for Sunrun. Sunrun spends $0.69 per Watt on sales and marketing while SolarCity is at $0.53. So pretty much across the board SolarCity enjoys a leaner cost structure. I certainly wish Sunrun all the best. Reducing their cost per Watt will be key to surviving the ITC stepdown. In Q1 their cost was $4.36 which they brought down to $4.08 in Q2. This is moving in the right direction. I suspect that until they get their costs down to competitive with SolarCity, they will they will not be able to grow as fast as SolarCity.
From the policy point of view, we really do want Sunrun to pick up the pace. That is, all residential solar installers compete at a political disadvantage to the utilities. With each new solar customer and each new solar job, the solar industry gains in political clout. So at this point, it is beneficial for each solar installer to grow scale just as quickly as they can.
Sunrun posted Q2 2015 results last week. They've got 472.5 MW cumulative deployed, up 46% y/y. They claim the second largest residential fleet. So they seem to be growing at the rate of the US residential market, albeit some of their growth is through acquisition of other solar installers.
What I find most interesting is that their total cost per Watt is $4.08 compared to $2.91 for SolarCity. These coats may not be directly comparable since Sunrun's business model is not nearly as vertically integrates as SolarCity. Sunrun outsources alot of sales and installation. Even so, the installation cost per Watt for Sunrun is $3.07, which if fully outsourced is still above SolarCity's total cost. But for comparison, the installed cost for SolarCity is $2.13 well below $3.07 for Sunrun. Sunrun spends $0.69 per Watt on sales and marketing while SolarCity is at $0.53. So pretty much across the board SolarCity enjoys a leaner cost structure. I certainly wish Sunrun all the best. Reducing their cost per Watt will be key to surviving the ITC stepdown. In Q1 their cost was $4.36 which they brought down to $4.08 in Q2. This is moving in the right direction. I suspect that until they get their costs down to competitive with SolarCity, they will they will not be able to grow as fast as SolarCity.
From the policy point of view, we really do want Sunrun to pick up the pace. That is, all residential solar installers compete at a political disadvantage to the utilities. With each new solar customer and each new solar job, the solar industry gains in political clout. So at this point, it is beneficial for each solar installer to grow scale just as quickly as they can.
TheTalkingMule
Distributed Energy Enthusiast
SCTY volatility seems to have cooled considerably and call prices are coming back down to Earth. Hoping this trend continues a couple weeks!
jhm
Well-Known Member
Can SolarEdge Make a Power Electronics Breakthrough in Solar Inverters? : Greentech Media
For those following SolarEdge's technology, this article helps explain how HD wave works. There's alot of little switching going on in this. It makes me wonder how it could be integrated with batteries.
For those following SolarEdge's technology, this article helps explain how HD wave works. There's alot of little switching going on in this. It makes me wonder how it could be integrated with batteries.
jhm
Well-Known Member
Utility-Scale Solar in Hawaii, Batteries Included : Greentech Media
More details about the dispatchable solar battery project for Kaua'i. The PPA is 14.5 c/kWh for 20 years. All power from 17 MW array will feed into 52 MWh battery. SolarCity built an earlier 12 MW array for the coop, which covers about 5% of the power used on the island. This second project should provide another 7% of island power.
The 14.5 c/kWh PPA is surely less cost to the coop than the diesel generated power it will replace. This price should also be competive with NG combustion turbines on the mainland used for peaking power, which have levelized costs starting at 18 c/kWh on new plants. Recall that Gov. Ige has opposed building LNG to Hawaii. This SolarCity project should buttress his case against the economics of bringing natural gas to the islands. Dispatchable solar is cheaper.
Curiously, SolarCity has not identified who the battery maker will be.
Addendum...
I did a little research on diesel generators. A 2MW diesel generator operating at 3/4 load for peak efficiency produces about 14.5 kWh per gallon. At $2.50/gal, this is about 17.2 c/kWh or at $3/gal, 20.7 c/kWh. This is just for the fuel. I'm guessing that the capex and non-fuel opex are easily in range of 5 to 10 c/kWh. (Let me know if you've got some data on this.) So just on fuel the PPA of 14.5 c/kWh saves the coop 3 to 6 c/kWh plus whatever the non-fuel costs may be.
More details about the dispatchable solar battery project for Kaua'i. The PPA is 14.5 c/kWh for 20 years. All power from 17 MW array will feed into 52 MWh battery. SolarCity built an earlier 12 MW array for the coop, which covers about 5% of the power used on the island. This second project should provide another 7% of island power.
The 14.5 c/kWh PPA is surely less cost to the coop than the diesel generated power it will replace. This price should also be competive with NG combustion turbines on the mainland used for peaking power, which have levelized costs starting at 18 c/kWh on new plants. Recall that Gov. Ige has opposed building LNG to Hawaii. This SolarCity project should buttress his case against the economics of bringing natural gas to the islands. Dispatchable solar is cheaper.
Curiously, SolarCity has not identified who the battery maker will be.
Addendum...
I did a little research on diesel generators. A 2MW diesel generator operating at 3/4 load for peak efficiency produces about 14.5 kWh per gallon. At $2.50/gal, this is about 17.2 c/kWh or at $3/gal, 20.7 c/kWh. This is just for the fuel. I'm guessing that the capex and non-fuel opex are easily in range of 5 to 10 c/kWh. (Let me know if you've got some data on this.) So just on fuel the PPA of 14.5 c/kWh saves the coop 3 to 6 c/kWh plus whatever the non-fuel costs may be.
Last edited:
doggusfluffy
Closed
The movement in Solar City basically reflects the activity in this thread. If the pace and size of offerings are any indication, Solar City has seen a huge surge in demand. None of the analysts covering Solar City have mentioned this.
Also, this is a bit important.
http://businessdayonline.com/2015/0...rgy-tariffs-as-nbet-unveils-new-ppa-template/
Also, this is a bit important.
http://businessdayonline.com/2015/0...rgy-tariffs-as-nbet-unveils-new-ppa-template/
Did anyone try to aggregate up their offerings, draw trend-lines and stuff?
Some Tesla threads are full of charts. Would be nice to have some of that expertise over here. I will try to do it when I get a chance.
jhm
Well-Known Member
We know for sure that in Q2 they booked 395 MW, but only installed 189 MW. They had doubled the sales force, and the 395 MW booked is the fruit of that. To double every year, they need to increase installed MW by 20% each quarter. So they pretty much started Q3 with enough booked jobs for the whole quarter. No demand problem. Weather in Q3 should not have imposed disruptions as in Q1. So I'm pretty optimistic about installed MW for Q3.
Additionally, Q3 is full of sunlight. So electricity sales are always biggest in Q3. Historically, SolarCity has been GAAP profitable in Q3. This is something that simple minded shorts may be overlooking. SolarCity is a highly seasonal business. It's time for Ra to smite some shorts.
jhm
Well-Known Member
Head of UKidea of large power stations for baseload is outdated†: Renew Economy
I think this view is very profound. Steve Holliday, CEO of National Grid, has turned to customer centric thinking about energy. From the customer's perspective, onsite solar is now the baseload supply. What centralized power producers and the grid provide is strictly supplemental.
Investors in SolarCity have known this for quite awhile, but it is nice to see it so well articulated. When you take a customer centric view of power, you naturally want to focus on onsite power generation and local distribution, microgrids. The further removed your business is from the customer, the more vulnerable to disintermediation it becomes. Thus, you need to focus on flexibility and agility so that you can constantly move closer to what creates value for the customer as opportunity open and close. I think SolarCity is extremely well positioned for this. Customers need to see them as their primary power provider and the utility as a backup provider. Baseload is the solar on your roof, peak load is your battery, backup is your grid connection.
I think this view is very profound. Steve Holliday, CEO of National Grid, has turned to customer centric thinking about energy. From the customer's perspective, onsite solar is now the baseload supply. What centralized power producers and the grid provide is strictly supplemental.
Investors in SolarCity have known this for quite awhile, but it is nice to see it so well articulated. When you take a customer centric view of power, you naturally want to focus on onsite power generation and local distribution, microgrids. The further removed your business is from the customer, the more vulnerable to disintermediation it becomes. Thus, you need to focus on flexibility and agility so that you can constantly move closer to what creates value for the customer as opportunity open and close. I think SolarCity is extremely well positioned for this. Customers need to see them as their primary power provider and the utility as a backup provider. Baseload is the solar on your roof, peak load is your battery, backup is your grid connection.
jh.... onsite solar is now the baseload supply. What centralized power producers and the grid provide is strictly supplemental. .....utility as a backup provider. Baseload is the solar on your roof said:
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Thanks for the quote. Insightful indeed, impressive to see a high-up representative for the utilities able to be so agile and flexible in his thinking.
Yes, things will quickly get turned on its head in large parts of the world, where solar+storage will be the new de facto base load.
There's an interesting parallel here to BEVs: I think many people buy their first BEV expecting it to be a secondary car for the household, but soon the BEV becomes the primary car and the ICE becomes the back up vehicle.
jhm
Well-Known Member
Sure, borrow as much as you like.
I'd add that this model also provides a framework for valuing what the grid provides once a family has solar plus battery. One could add a gas or diesel generator for backup. Utilities cannot charge more for their backup service than what it would cost to lease a small 1kW Generac standby system, ~$10/month plus minimal fuel. The solar and battery minimizes the amount of fuel consumed while the battery also provides peak power capacity above the 1kW provided by the generator. So the question becomes what can the utility offer the homeowner with solar and battery to keep them connected?
Sure, borrow as much as you like.
I'd add that this model also provides a framework for valuing what the grid provides once a family has solar plus battery. One could add a gas or diesel generator for backup. Utilities cannot charge more for their backup service than what it would cost to lease a small 1kW Generac standby system, ~$10/month plus minimal fuel. The solar and battery minimizes the amount of fuel consumed while the battery also provides peak power capacity above the 1kW provided by the generator. So the question becomes what can the utility offer the homeowner with solar and battery to keep them connected?
That system will work in southern CA. Reliable sunlight throughout the year, not many cloudy days.
Many other places like north-eastern US, there is the issue of seasonal changes in supply (solar) and demand (ac/heating, weekdays vs weekends). You would need quite a lot of batteries to balance supply with demand. I'm not sure if a small 1kW generator will be able to help bridge the gap.
jhm
Well-Known Member
The generator could produce upto 24 kWh on a day without solar power. If that is less than daily consumption on such a day, then you may need 1.5 to 2kW generator for 36 to 48 kWh per day. It is simply there to replace the shortfall in solar. The amount of batteries need to be enough kWh of energy needed on a day with adequate sunlight for daily consumption and enough kW to cover your peak demand. The basic advantage of batteries when using a generator to cover shortfall in solar is that it allows you to get by with smaller generator. You don't need a 5kW generator if you have 5 kW of batteries plus say a 1.5kW generator. So two 7 kWh Powerpacks is all you need on a sunless day. If that is also enough to cover you over night following a sunny day assuming sufficient PV, then you are set for the whole year. Beyond that the point of adding more PV or more batteries is simply to reduce the amount of fuel that you consume over the year. So one has to do more delicate modeling to optimize the system, but some of this can be done adaptively. Start with basic system like 8 kW PV, 14 kWh Powerwalls, and 1.5 kW generator, and run it for a year. If you find that you need kWh on sunny days, then install more PV. If you need more kWh at night on sunny days or more kW at anytime, then add another Powerwall. If you find that adding another Powerwall would offset enough fuel to pay for it, then do so. Once you find that adding more PV or more storage does not net out against the cost of fuel, then your system is optimized. Of course, part of the equation here is how cheap incremental PV or batteries have become. Suppose that another Powerwall would save you $2400 in fuel over the next ten years. Then wait until the price has come down to that level before you buy it. If consumers take this sort of incremental approach, I think they will be able to get off the grid quickly and then take advantage of falling prices in solar and batteries. The money you saved early on, also helps fuel expansion. Demand for Powerwalls could be pretty steady for many years and families add one every year or two. If the price of fuel goes up sharply, then Powerwall demand will rise with that. Over ten years a family could grow their system to the point that when the generator breaks down, they don't bother to replace it. It was just a transitional device to get off the grid early.
From the utility perspective, they need to worry about the cheapest path off the grid. That's where their business model breaks down.
umm, this may have been discussed, but using PVWatts from NREL, a 8kW PV array @ 39.9 degrees north (Washington DC area) would make ~12,000+ kWh/yr. 20kWh/day/december, 40kWh/day/July. there is your baseload in mid-atlantic states. A powerwall(s) or 3, 7 - 21kWh worth would do fairly well. So SCTY with powerwall to me is a very good concept PVWatts Calculator
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
