Homeowners near the Massachusetts coastal town of Ipswich in Essex County will have a great opportunity tomorrow to learn about the new solar initiatives that took effect in the state following the new year.

The Friends of the Ipswich Public Library — a group of local residents dedicated to the enhancement of the Ipswich Library — are hosting a solar seminar at the library beginning at 7:30 PM. The group has invited representatives from Sunlight Solar Energy — a primarily east coast designer and installer of solar photovoltaic (PV) energy systems for over 20 years — to help homeowners seek out the best solar PV system for their needs at the best possible price, using Massachusetts rebates and state and federal tax credits. Remember, Massachusetts is one of GetSolar’s top 5 solar states of 2011, as Governor Deval Patrick has pledged to install another 250 megawatts (MW) of solar energy capacity by 2017. As some may recall, the Ispwich last year installed a solar energy system at its Town Hall.

For those just trying to learn about the basics of solar energy, the seminar will also cover the ABCs of how solar technology works to produce energy, how solar can cut consumption, and, of course, how a system can save you money from day one following an installation.

Residents who want to attend should pre-register, as space will be limited. To register or get additional information about the seminar, call 617-332-1870 or send an email to amy.levine@sunlightsolar.com.

The word out of Washington late this week was that senators and the Obama Administration have agreed on a plan to extend the U.S. Treasury Department’s Treasury Grant Program for another year.

As it stands, the program gives a 30 percent cash rebate to commercial developers of renewable energy systems. The program was initially a 30 percent tax credit before the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 turned it in to a cash incentive. The possibility of the program reverting back to a cash incentive on January 1st lit a fire under the leaders of the U.S. clean energy industry, who credit the cash version of the program with jump-starting thousands of clean energy projects throughout the country.

With the economy still not at full strength, these leaders began tirelessly lobbying Congress to extend the  cash grant, saying that many planned projects can’t be built without it because they won’t have sufficient financial backing. Consequently, tens of thousands of renewable energy jobs would be in danger.

As of a month ago, it was unlikely that the lame-duck congress would have enough clout to extend the program. But extensive lobbying by industry leaders like the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) and key house democrats like Montana’s Max Baucus, Iowa’s Tom Harkin and North Dakota’s Kent Conrad pushed congress into action.

While not official, the measure is expected to pass during a vote this coming Monday as part of a revised compromise tax bill. Here are list of energy related measures that are included in the bill, courtesy of Brighter Energy:

• The start-of-construction deadline for the cash grant in lieu of tax credit program, established in Section 1603 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
• The current per-gallon tax credits and outlay payments for ethanol as well as the existing 54 cents per gallon tariff on imported ethanol and related 22.67 cents per gallon tariff on ETBE.
• The dollar-per-gallon production tax credits for biodiesel and for diesel fuel created from biomass, as well as the 10 cents-per-gallon small agri-biodiesel producer credit.
• The credit for manufacturers of energy-efficient residential homes.
• The Section 45M credit for US-based manufacture of energy-efficient clothes washers, dishwashers and refrigerators.

As soon as the vote takes place next Monday, GetSolar will give you the final tally. You can find out more about the benefits the grant extension will bring to the renewable energy industry here.

The solar market in North Carolina is slowly but surely picking up steam, thanks in part to a number of state- and utility-sponsored initiatives. North Carolina homeowners, for instance, may take a state tax credit worth up to 35 percent of installed solar energy system costs, up to $10,500. Add to that the 30-percent tax credit available from the federal government, and the cost of installing solar panels may be considerably reduced.

Beyond tax credits — of which not everyone can take full advantage — there hasn’t been much in the way of cash incentives, like solar rebates, to help spur demand for residential solar power in North Carolina. A new program may help change that — at least for customers of Progress Energy.

Starting January 1, Progress Energy Carolinas will begin offering cash incentives to North Carolina residential customers who purchase and install solar photovoltaic (PV) systems. The initiative, dubbed the SunSense Solar PV program, combines an upfront cash rebate of $1/watt of installed solar capacity with monthly bill credits of 4.5 cents per watt for PV systems installed after the launch date. According to Progress Energy’s website, the incentives

are designed to help offset the cost of installing the systems, reducing the initial investment to enable more residential customers to participate. The ongoing incentive provides customers with additional financial assistance and provides Progress Energy Carolinas with the rights to the renewable energy credits generated by the PV installations.

Interestingly, the solar rebate and on-going bill credits will be available only to customers who own their solar energy system, which presumably would make ineligible any homeowner interested in leasing their solar power system. Systems must be between two and ten kilowatts in size.

Progress, which serves over three million customers in the Carolinas and Florida, has been developing its solar PV incentive programs for quite some time — see this post from June 2009. It’s great to see that the utility will finally launch its residential solar energy rebate in North Carolina.

In 2009, the United States federal government converted a 30 percent tax credit for business owners who power their property with solar energy into a 30 percent treasury grant. What’s the difference? The property owners receive a check reimbursing them for 30 percent of the project’s cost within 60 days of completing the installation rather than waiting to use the tax credit against taxes they owe once a year.

The “Cash is King” approach worked, as it provided a stronger incentive for property owners to invest in such systems. As The New York Times reports, a property owner who installs a 500-kilowatt (KW) photovoltaic (PV) system on a 100,000-square-foot for $2.2 million would receive $660,000 back within that 60-day period. Up to the end of October 2010, the cash incentive had led to 1,118 solar energy installations and helped nearly doubled business investment in solar energy from $3.4 billion to $6.7 billion between 2008 and 2010.

But when the clock strikes midnight on New Year’s Eve, the party is over.

Congress is unlikely to extend the treasury grant option and, accordingly, it will revert back to a tax credit in 2011 and remain that way until 2016. This has left owners of commercial buildings scrambling to begin projects before the new year in order to take advantage of the cash offer. So many projects have sprung up recently that there are simply not enough of some solar energy system supplies to cover everyone’s needs.

Jamie Hahn, managing director of Solis Partners — a New Jersey-based solar project developer — says many manufacturing companies are having trouble keeping up with material demand. Specifically, PV panels and system inverters are on back order. Companies that don’t get to the current supply in time could be forced to wait as long as eight to 12 weeks for new supplies to arrive, far too late to take advantage of the treasury grant.

When the tax credit option returns, solar industry experts expect a sharp decrease in solar business installations. Most of the systems installed after the deadline will be by way of power purchasing agreements (PPAs), but even those are not as enticing as the treasury grant that makes it feasible for companies to outright own the system they install. Under a PPA, the solar installer owns and operates the system, and consequently receives all the tax credit and subsidy perks that come along with it.

Just in time for hockey season, an ice rink in Rockville, Maryland is now home to one of the largest single rooftop solar energy systems in the entire state.

Its brand-new 701-kilowatt system was installed by Standard Solar, a solar installation company serving homes and businesses in Maryland, Washington, D.C., Delaware, Virginia and Pennsylvania. During a dedication event yesterday, Standard Solar unveiled the new system and announced that it will soon go live.

When it does, the Rockville Ice Rink’s new system will produce enough energy to account for 30 percent of the arena’s annual electricity consumption — roughly enough to power 72 average-sized American homes. A large screen monitor inside the arena will enable visitors will be able to see how much energy the system is producing in real time.

Here’s Standard Solar CEO Tony Clifford:

“Having solar energy at the arena is literally a win-win for everyone: the players, the arena managers and the environment. Not only will the system help control electricity costs and reduce carbon emissions, but it will also ensure the rink’s future as a training ground for aspiring hockey stars.”

Thanks to a number of state-sponsored initiatives, hockey players aren’t the only ones who can benefit from installing solar panels in Maryland.

• The state’s Solar Energy Grant Program offers a solar photovoltaic (PV) rebate of $0.50/watt and a $1,500 solar water heating rebate for commercial, residential, non-profit and local government installations.
• Maryland’s fledgling market for renewable energy credits (SRECs), meanwhile, means homeowners and businesses may sell the SRECs associated with their solar energy systems.
• Maryland’s Clean Energy Production Tax Credit offers a production-based tax credit of $0.0085/kilowatt-hour (kWh) to those installing larger PV systems of up to 20 megawatts on commercial, residential, multi-family residential and agricultural properties.

Add the 30 percent federal tax credit to the mix, and you begin to see why the outlook continues to brighten for solar power in Maryland!

Leaders of the U.S. solar industry will have one last shot at convincing the current Congress to extend a key federal solar incentive before a new Republican-controlled congress takes over at the beginning of 2011. Most indications are that the solar grant option — which has for the past two years provided cash grants worth 30 percent of commercial solar energy system costs — will sunset at the end of 2010, as scheduled.

It’s not over ’til the fat lady sings, however. During a lame-duck session of Congress, lawmakers will debate whether to extend the grant. If it’s not renewed, the grant will revert to a tax credit, also worth 30 percent of system costs. Because cash is more valuable than a tax credit — particularly in slow economic times — the solar grant has proved to be a real boon for renewable energy projects and green-jobs creation.

Supporters of the cash incentive say it helped install roughly 1,000 megawatts (MW) of solar-electric capacity in the U.S. this year, and helped generate enough clean energy to power 220,000 average American homes. According to the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), the cash incentive has helped finance over 1,300 renewable energy projects in 41 states.

The incentive is extremely important to the growth of the clean energy industry in the U.S. Cash appeals to lenders and investors who are thinking about funding solar projects, and an extension, makes financings “easier and cheaper,” according to First Solar’s spokesman Alan Bernheimer. In 2010, the U.S. was able to install more than double the amount of  solar capacity installed during 2009 — and triple of what was installed in 2008 — thanks largely to the federal solar grant program. Without the cash incentive, project developers will have to look for investors who want to offset taxable income with tax credits — an approach called “tax equity” financing. In a weak economy — like that of 2008-09 — those investors are few and far between.

Solar energy project finance lawyer Keith Martin believes there’s a 40 percent to 50 percent chance of extending the cash incentive during the lame duck session. If  it is extended — which unfortunately seems unlikely — it will likely be part of a larger bill that will extend  most of the tax cuts implemented by President George W. Bush.

Congress has already begun its session — we’ll be sure to pass along information relative to the incentive program as we learn more.

California, take a good look at the cost structure of the Ivanpah solar energy project, which is to be built over the next three years in the Mojave Desert along the California-Nevada border. Appreciate that BrightSource Energy  — the Oakland, California-based firm that is developing the $2 billion project — was able to secure a guaranteed loan from the federal government and combine it with a 30 percent grant, in order to make the three-project mega-plant happen. Now know this: such a financing structure may never be possible again.

It’s not because lawmakers fail to recognize the benefits of such a plant. Ivanpah, when fully operational, will be able to power 140,000 average American homes each year. It will be, by far, the largest such plant in the the world and, according to the New American, it will more than double the amount of domestically produced commercial solar thermal power. Construction of Ivanpah alone will create 1,000 jobs and, combined with eight other solar thermal projects, will give birth to approximately 8,000 clean energy American jobs.

But the two financial incentives that played a key role in making the Ivanpah project possible will soon expire. The government loan guarantee program will expire next September and the opportunity to receive the 30 percent tax credit in cash form will end this calendar year. And with the two programs unlikely to be extended regardless of which political party takes control on election day, a high-unemployment, cash-starved state like California is unlikely to pick up the tab left behind by the expired incentive programs. Add that to that the fact the electricity from solar thermal plants — which produce energy at 13-17 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh) — is competitively priced but still higher than power generated by natural gas, and you may question how many solar thermal plants will be built in the near future. Consequently, there’s doubt as to whether lenders will back similar endeavors in the future.

Then there’s also the entire wildlife issue, which has some environmentalists so fired up that they’re threatening to sue BrightSource for disturbing the habitat of lizards and tortoises in the area. While it’s unclear whether a lawsuit would be successful in hampering construction, it does force Californians — and Americans in general — to consider the balance between the preservation of local habitats and the creation of clean energy and green jobs.

So you tell us: Do the benefits of clean energy outweigh the cost of relocating species whose habitats are being built over?

Check out other Ivanpah-related stories from GetSolar:

• After Panel Approval, Ivanpah Ready for Public Comment
• Mojave Solar Power Project Scaled Back

Main Street Power in Boulder, Colorado is getting creative when it comes to finding ways to finance solar energy projects in some of the poorest neighborhoods in Denver and Pueblo, Colorado.

The power company is using state renewable energy credits and federal investment tax credits to finance the 33 total projects at schools, correctional facilities and municipal buildings. By installing the solar energy systems in poor areas, Main Street Power will also be able to utilize federal development tax credits.

What Main Street Power is doing is making use of the New Markets Tax Credits for under-served communities. According to the Denver Post, Main Street is calling the project an instance of both renewable energy development and economic development: the new projects will create construction jobs for those who have recently completed solar training programs and, meanwhile, will generate clean power that will reduce utility bills for people who can most benefit from such savings.

The financing program for all 33 projects combined totals $18 million. Each project is expected to account for 20-30 percent of each building’s energy needs. Through 20-year power purchasing agreements (PPAs), Main Street Power will sell the electricity to Denver Public Schools, Pueblo County and the Colorado Department of Corrections. The rates are expected to be lower than that of state utilities.

When it comes to solar hot water, these are The Little Islands That Could. Hawaii’s strong investment in solar water heating technology has given their state the enviable designation of Solar Hot Water Leader within the United States. It’s also made these water heating systems an even more attractive investment. Check out the size of Hawaii’s market compared to other key states:

Source: Solar Energy Industries Association

Consider the fact that Hawaii’s population is a mere 2.5 percent of California’s, and you can see why the 48th 50th state deserves notice.

Hawaii supports solar hot water with a mix of policies:

• An upfront solar hot water rebate of $750 for residential systems ($125/deferred kilowatt-hour for commercial systems)
• A state tax credit of 35 percent
• The broader 30 percent federal tax credit
• A requirement that all new single-family homes come with solar hot water system installed

Let’s look at what this means for a typical residential customer. Say the initial system cost is $7000 (a conservative estimate — Hawaii Energy Efficiency Program estimates the average initial cost is $6,620). After the upfront rebate of $750, your contractor bill would be $6,250. With the 30 percent federal tax credit, your expenditures would total $4,375. Finally, after the state tax credit of 35 percent, your ultimate costs would come to a mere $2,500. Of course, this is assuming that you have the appetite for these tax credits — check with a tax expert to see if this is the case.

According to some of our partner installers in Hawaii, this incentive system would set the solar hot water “break even” point at two years!

As noted above, for a tiny island state with a population just over 1 million, their contribution to, and example for, the solar hot water market is truly commendable. Many of these efforts stem from Hawaii’s lack of traditional energy resources and the corresponding need to import oil and gas. Their Renewable Energy Policy begins by explaining:

The objectives in the area of Alternate and Renewable Energy are to promote commercialization of Hawaii’s sustainable energy resources and technologies to reduce the state’s high dependence on imported oil, increase local economic development, and reduce the potential negative economic impacts of oil price fluctuations.

So there you have it. Strong motivation to implement renewables lead to strong strategy.

If you were thinking of moving to Hawaii and the weather alone didn’t lure you across the Pacific, their energy policy should definitely convince you!

Friedman’s Home Improvement store in Sonoma, California, last fall took advantage of California solar rebates and federal tax credits to make the switch to solar.

The company’s 40,000 square-foot store is now being partly powered by a 234-kilowatt solar photovoltaic (PV) system, according to the North Bay Business Journal. According to Friedman’s Chief Financial Officer David Proctor, the rooftop solar installation is expected to pay for itself by way of monthly energy bill savings in six or seven years.

Friedman’s decided to go with the solar energy system is because it aligns with the growing green business practices of the company — in 2008, the store received certification from Sonoma’s Green Business Program. Federal solar incentives and California rebates helped, too.

Some of the cost of Friedman’s $1.3 million solar installation was alleviated by the federal renewable energy investment tax credit, which is worth 30 percent of total systems costs, after rebates. California, for instance, offers a cash rebate for commercial solar projects. Known as the Expected Performance Based Buydown rebate, the incentive is available to those who own a solar energy system smaller than 50 kilowatts (kW). Once the system is up and running, qualified buyers receive a lump sum rebate that is determined by system’s expected performance.

For those who own a system between 50 kW and 1 megawatt in size, California offers a Performance Based Incentive (PBI) that is paid out in monthly payments for five years, based on the actual energy output of the system.

For their part, Friedman’s managers seem happy with their decision — and are excited to see how things go this summer, when the system will see the longest days of the year for the first time. ”It is wonderful in the summer,” said Proctor, according to the North Bay Journal. “You have maximum solar impact during the max demand time. I have been watching month over month and in April I started to see the shift from less solar impact to more.”