"We still don't have any takers in the program," Assistant Utilities Director Jane Ratchye told the committee on Dec. 17. "We think we're close to having some takers."
Approved by a unanimous vote in March 2012, the program enables commercial customers to build solar systems on their properties and sell power to the City of Palo Alto Utilities under a long-term, fixed-rate contract. The current rate for this energy is 16.5 cents per kilowatt hour for a 20-year contract (the council raised it from 14 cents after getting no participants in its initial bid). Because this rate would entail a subsidy from ratepayers, the council agreed in December 2012 to cap participation to 2 megawatts. Even so, commercial customers have been reluctant to install solar panels for energy sales.
In considering the future of the program, a staff report from the Utilities Department argues that the 16.5 cent/kWh price is "sufficient to attract projects and that further education of property owners about the program will yield program participation."
The report touts behind-the-scenes progress.
"The program prompted developers to take a serious look at the cost of developing solar projects in Palo Alto, and some of them shared that information with CPAU staff."
Utilities Director Valerie Fong stressed the value of all parties in the discussion picking up experience in what is known as a "feed-in tariff" program.
"Staff would like to gain experience working with this tariff and working with developers," Fong said. "I think the market place needs this experience as well so that they can understand how to do projects under these sorts of opportunities."
The committee voted unanimously to keep the program going under the rate of 16.5 cents per kilowatt hour, though members agreed with Burt's suggestion to raise the cap from 2 megawatts to 3 megawatts. Burt, who chairs the committee, noted that the city has received some proposals for solar projects on city-owned properties, including at the Palo Alto Airport and at a city-owned garages. Though neither plan has materialized to date, the possibilities are still there, Burt said.
"We do have the possibility that we can go from ... waiting, waiting to where a couple of these pop and we have to say 'no' to one of them because we didn't have the allotted capacity in the program that would allow (them)," Burt said.
This story contains 480 words.
Stories older than 90 days are available only to subscribing members. Please help sustain quality local journalism by becoming a subscribing member today.
If you are already a subscriber, please log in so you can continue to enjoy unlimited access to stories and archives. Subscriptions start at $5 per month and may be cancelled at any time.