Houses powered by sun have gone mainstream

 

Apr 8 - McClatchy-Tribune Business News Formerly Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News - Bob Keefe The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

The houses that Lennar Corp. is building here look like the tract houses you might find just about anywhere in America.

But there's one major distinction: They'll get power from the sun.

In a crystal-clear sign that solar is finally going mainstream, Miami-based Lennar recently announced that photovoltaic solar energy systems will become standard -- just like carpet or cabinets -- in the more than 2,000 houses it plans to sell in the Sacramento and San Francisco Bay areas over the next few years.

Buyers, sold on the promise that solar electric systems and other energy-efficient features will cut their monthly power bills by as much as 60 percent, are snapping up the houses.

Though Lennar and other homebuilders are struggling elsewhere, Lennar's solar sales are soaring. The company said it sold 31 of the first 39 homes at its first solar community, the Wayfarer development in this northern Sacramento suburb, in less than three months. That was double the company's projections, making Wayfarer its fastest-selling local project.

Lennar plans to build about 650 houses at Wayfarer and surrounding developments, which would make it the nation's biggest solar community. Priced between $467,000 and $700,000, the houses cost about the same as many similar-sized new houses nearby without solar equipment.

"In all my years of doing this, I have never had anything that has created a stir like this," said Lennar division President Jeff Panasiti, who has been building houses for almost two decades.

Along with high energy prices and environmental concerns, what's driving the sudden surge in solar in California are new rebate programs from the state and local governments.

In Roseville, the municipally owned electricity company gives builders almost $8,500 to include solar and other energy-saving features in their new houses. That's cheap, said Roseville Electric program coordinator Mark Riffey, compared to what it costs the utility to buy more power or build new plants to meet demand.

Roseville's program is minuscule compared to the $3.4 billion California Solar Initiative, begun in January. It is designed to eventually offer rebates to just about any Californian who adds solar energy equipment, essentially paying up to 50 percent of a typical $25,000 home installation.

The program will solidify California's already commanding lead as the biggest state for solar.

Wide acceptance But in other states in the Sun Belt and beyond where consumers are just as wary of rising electricity prices and environmental problems, solar is also on the rise.

"Solar on a roof should be as common as a minivan in a cul-de-sac," said Texas state Rep. Garnet Coleman, who recently introduced a bill to create a California-style program.

If Coleman's "Tex Sun" plan becomes law, homeowners could get rebates of $4.50 per watt of solar energy they produce, which would pay most of the $20,000 to $30,000 cost of a typical system. The program would be funded by a fee of about 65 cents per month on an average electric bill.

In Florida, state officials recently launched a $2.5 million rebate program that pays up to $20,000 for solar energy systems and $500 for solar water heaters for the first to apply.

Other states, including North Carolina, Pennsylvania and New York, are currently considering solar incentives.

Georgia is an exception.

While state leaders are pushing programs for biofuels from switchgrass or animal waste, they've generally avoided big programs to promote solar energy, said Dennis Creech, director of the Southface Energy Institute in Atlanta, which promotes renewable energy and "green building" practices.

Incentives important Federal incentives are brightening solar's future, too.

For now, any U.S. homeowner who installs a solar energy system can get a federal tax credit of up to $2,000. Congress is debating extending that program beyond this year.

For solar energy, incentives are the key, at least for now. Without them, solar electric systems are simply unaffordable for most consumers. That's why states with big incentive programs lead the nation in solar usage, and states with no incentives, like Georgia and Ohio, have very little solar.

Of course, anytime taxpayers are asked to subsidize an industry, there are detractors. To fund the California rebate program, an annual fee of $10 to $16 a year is levied on most consumers.

Some opponents say the money could be better spent elsewhere, like researching ways to make traditional commercial power plants more effective.

But proponents point out that nearly every energy source enjoys government subsidies.

And, they add, foreign suppliers or terrorists would find it much harder to disrupt solar power than energy from oil, natural gas or nuclear plants. Nor, they say, does solar bring the environmental disadvantages of fossil fuels.

Consumers themselves are keen on the idea of getting free energy from the sun.

In a recent of survey of Texas consumers by solar industry proponent PV, more than 80 percent of respondents said they would support having the legislature encourage solar power development if it added less than $1 to their monthly electricity bill.

"When I explain to people the value this has, they get it," said Coleman, a Democrat from Houston.

The California Solar Initiative is by far the most ambitious solar program ever in the United States.

Under the program, the state wants to put solar on a million rooftops in 10 years. Backers say that would eliminate the need for as many as six new natural-gas-fired power plants, reduce pollution and protect consumers from price shocks.

It also could jump-start a solar industry that still only contributes less than 1 percent of the nation's energy.

The new demand for solar equipment in California is already sparking expansion at manufacturers that could lead to improved technologies and lower prices.

Shipments of photovoltaic equipment surged 72 percent between 2004 and 2005, and the installed base of solar equipment in the United States surged about 33 percent last year, according to estimates from industry tracker Solarbuzz.

By the time the California program expires in 2017, program managers say, solar power should be a competitive alternative to traditional power sources.

"It's all about economies of scale," said Jim Fenton, director of the Florida Solar Energy Center, which certifies solar equipment and studies and promotes its usage. "When you're making one or two specialty widget items, it costs a fortune. But when you're making things in mass production, costs come down everywhere."

Even without the California program, the price of solar cells has fallen about 85 percent over the past 25 years or so, according to some estimates.

"Right now we're at that threshold where within the next few years I think you'll see the price of electricity out of the wall [from traditional sources] go above the price of photovoltaic," Fenton said.

Ugly racks gone Just as significant as cheaper equipment and government subsidies, though, are improvements that make solar equipment better looking, more reliable and easier to install and use.

The ugly rooftop racks of solar cells have gone the way of the huge dishes that once characterized the satellite TV business. Home builders like Lennar now install unobtrusive solar "tiles" that are actually part of the roof, not something that sits on top of it.

Future installations may be even less noticeable as the tiles grow smaller and more efficient and are designed to blend better with shingles. Some new designs use paper-thin films that can simply be glued onto flat or metal roofs.

Even on the cloudiest of days, today's more efficient solar equipment can still generate electricity.

In prolonged periods of cloudiness, solar homes connected to local electric grids like the ones here simply draw more of their energy power from the local power company. Conversely, during summer months and other times of prolonged sunshine, they add power to the grid.

Through a process called "net metering," homeowners are charged for the public power they use and credited for power they supply to the grid. Unlike older solar equipment, no batteries or complicated inverters are needed to store and manage electricity.

Though California is leading the way, the vast majority of states get enough sunlight to make solar viable, according to the Department of Energy. Most of the Southeast, for example, gets just as much sunlight as Sacramento.

"This has a lot more to do with politics than the amount of sunlight a state gets," said David Hochschild, executive director of PV Now, a solar industry trade group.