FEB 11

We've been covering the ups and downs of Duke Energy's $50 million solar rooftop project and ultimately it seems that there are just too many holes to keep it afloat. Now New Jersey's largest utility company has proposed a similar plan, except on a much larger scale.

New Jersey's PSE&G has come up with a $773 million, 120-MW project that would install solar panels on its own properties, utility poles and public schools. The project alone would put the state 7 percent closer to their goal of getting 22.5 percent of their energy from renewables by 2020.

Where it gets tricky, is how the project will be paid for. PSE&G will pay to install the panels, but it will pass the cost on to its customers through a $.10 per month charge in the first year and then $.35 per month in 2013. While the extra charge seems perfectly reasonable for adding renewable energy, this is where Duke Energy's plan was stopped by regulators. PSE&G still has to get approval from the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities before moving forward, so we'll soon see if this will be an issue.

In a lot of ways, New Jersey's plan may be more viable than Duke's North Carolina plan. PSE&G will install the panels on public places or unusable land, where Duke planned to rent private rooftops from homeowners to install panels. Also, PSE&G is splitting it's project up into four parts, depending on where the panels would be installed (one part is utility poles, another schools, etc). This way each part on its own has a better chance of making it past the drawing board than one huge, overwhelming utility project. And New Jersey has shown itself to be renewable energy-friendly, with large offshore wind farm and wave power projects in the works.

I hope that everything works out with this plan. A 120-MW solar project that meets a good chunk of a state's energy demand is exactly the type of utility initiative that should be taking place all over the country.

via Greentech Media

Image via PSE&G

Comments (2)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Utility poles? Uh oh!
written by Steve Bergman, February 11, 2009

Prediction: Local residents, long used to the extant ugly poles and extant ugly wires, will suddenly begin to object to the "Ugly Solar Panels". Living in the ugly-billboard-infested mid-west, I've listened in shocked horror as our local hicks have gone on about our "ugly wind turbines". Never mind that its a 90 mile drive from where I live to see a single one.

Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Kerinia Cusick, March 18, 2009

It would be interesting to do an analysis of the rate structure of this program($.10 per month charge in the first year and then $.35 per month in 2013) versus the SREC prices the utilities have to pay (up to $711/MWh in 2009) to comply with NJ's solar program. I wonder how they compare?

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment