Solar

Subscribe to Solar via RSS

Thousands of solar industry participants gathered in Chicago for the Solar Power International expo in Chicago, Illinois on October 21-24 to discuss the state of the solar industry. Participatnts included banks, investors, developers and equipment suppliers, and also several Stoel Rives attorneys.

Many themes emerged during the week-long event, and a common thread running through these…

On August 28, 2013, the U.S. Army Engineering & Support Center in Huntsville, Alabama, acting in conjunction with the Army Energy Initiatives Task Force (“EITF”), issued a second round of awards under the multi-award task order contract for renewable and alternative energy that hit the streets last summer (Solicitation Number W912DY-11-R-0036, the “MATOC”). The number of awards is somewhat surprising, however, given the Army’s early-stated desire to qualify as many applicants as possible in each technology category. In total, there were 114 proposals submitted for the solar technology segment of the MATOC, but only twenty-two (22) Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (“ID/IQ”) contracts were issued yesterday. Thus, the Army rejected more than 80% of the applicants. Of the awards the Army did make, only six (6) were to small businesses (as defined in the solicitation). Continue Reading Army Pre-Qualifies Solar Developers Under MATOC

The Long Island Power Authority (LIPA) recently announced its Clean Solar Initiative Feed-In Tariff-II (FIT-II), a feed-in tariff program for solar projects between 100 kW and 2 MW in size and located in LIPA’s service territory. FIT-II is currently open for public comment, and will be effective only upon formal approval by the LIPA Board of Trustees.

FIT-II is capped at 100 MW, and follows the first version of the Clean Solar Initiative Feed-In Tariff (FIT-I). Unlike FIT-I, projects will not be selected for participation in FIT-II on a first-come, first-served basis. Instead, all applications submitted within the application period will be evaluated; those that pass a preliminary screening process of technical and administrative review will be eligible for further consideration under a Clearing Price Auction mechanism.Continue Reading Long Island Power Authority Announces New And Expanded Clean Solar Initiative Feed-In Tariff Program

This just in from my colleague Elaine Albrich:

Oregon’s House Bill 2820 provides a much-needed clarification of the Energy Facility Siting Council’s ("EFSC’s") jurisdiction over the siting of solar photovoltaic (PV) power generation facilities.  Prior to the passage of HB 2820, the definition of “energy facility” provided two hooks for EFSC to assert jurisdiction…

See my colleague Wayne Rosenbaum‘s recent post on the question of how failed solar panels could be treated under federal and California waste laws:

Recently the New York Times published an article highlighting the high rate of solar panel failures well before their expected life times.  While the article focused on the question of product liability, it raises another question.  How does the law, particularly waste laws, define a solar panel that is no longer fit for its original intended use or purpose?

Under current federal and California law, the manufacturer of a non-functioning solar panel does not have an obligation to take back panels at the end of life as it does under the EU WEEE Directive.  However, it is likely that this will change as the US PV market matures and more arrays approach end of life or fail.  Panel manufactures are encouraged to monitor this issue and potentially to participate in contingency planning or rulemaking. 

 

Regarding the disposal of defective panels, once an entity takes title to the panel it becomes the owner of that panel. This includes lenders who take title through foreclosure.   As such, the owner becomes responsible for the panel’s proper handling and disposal.  This requirement raises the question:  Once the owner takes possession what will it do with the panel or its components at the end of their useful life?

 Continue Reading Failed Solar Cell Could Be Hazardous to More Than the Owner’s Bottom Line