CBA_report

1
Final Report with Findings and Calculations for:
Cost Benefit Analysis for Energy Efficiency
FINAL
Prepared for:
Cities of South Bay
Prepared by:
20285 South Western Avenue
Suite 100
Torrance, California 90501
August 2015

2
Table of Contents
Introduction ......................................................................................................................
Methodology......................................................................................................................
Incentives and Calculations..............................................................................................
Photovoltaic System ......................................................................................................
Solar Thermal System ........................................................................................................
Geothermal .......................................................................................................................
Wave/Tidal Power..............................................................................................................
Energy Storage..................................................................................................................
Summary of Incentives.......................................................................................................
Appendices.........................................................................................................................
Appendix A. Federal Incentives ...........................................................................................
Appendix B. State Incentives ..............................................................................................

3
INTRODUCTION
This report documents the findings and calculations to help guiding a CAP – Climate Action Plan
development for the cities of South Bay, and the strategies for the eventual employment of
renewable and/or efficient energy sources for the cities. The research includes the cost benefit
analysis based on the research on each technology and the respective studies and economic
models available, also includes the listing of programs and incentives currently available from
the government to residential, commercial, industrial, non-profit and government buildings use,
focused on the following technologies:
- Solar PV and Solar Thermal;
- Geothermal;
- Tidal/ Wave power;
- Energy Storage
To calculate the cost benefit analysis for each source of energy, the SAM (System Advisor
Model), a model developed by NREL, research on feasibility studies of some case studies in the
U.S, and consulting equipment suppliers, were the tools to get the findings and calculations for
this report.
The financial outputs targeted were those used to measure the investment efficiency, such as
the IRR (internal Rate of Return), the Payback, and the Levelized COE, which is a specific
metric for the cost of electricity produced by a generator, calculated by accounting for all of a
system’s expected lifetime costs.
In order to obtain those measures the inputs were based on real cases or inputs by default in
the models

4
METHODOLOGY
Research and Calculations
The research was based on official sources such as the CEC – California Energy Commission,
the CPUC – California Public Utilities Commission, the U.S Department of Energy, organizations
funded or supported by the government (DSIRE, find-solar); or academic researches by
renowned universities.
Solar PV/ Solar Thermal/ Geothermal
The calculations for solar and geothermal was based on the computer model SAM – System
Advisor Model, developed by NREL – National Renewable Energy Laboratory in collaboration
with Sandia National Laboratories in 2005. Since the first public release, over 35,000 people
representing manufacturers, project developers, academic researchers, and policy makers have
downloaded the software. Project developers use SAM to evaluate different system
configurations to maximize earnings from electricity sales while policy makers and designers use
the model to experiment with different incentive structures.
SAM represents the cost and performance of renewable energy projects. The models require
input data to describe the performance characteristics of physical equipment in the system and
project costs. SAM includes several libraries of performance data and coefficients that describe
the characteristics of system components such as photovoltaic modules and inverters, parabolic
trough receivers and collectors, wind turbines, and biopower combustion systems. For those
components, you simply choose an option from a list, and SAM applies values from the library
to the input variables. SAM can automatically download data and populate input variable values
from the following online databases:
• OpenEI U.S. Utility Rate Database for retail electricity rate structures for U.S. utilities
• NREL Solar Prospector for solar resource data and ambient weather conditions.
For the remaining input variables, it is possible either use the default value or change its value.
Some examples of input variables are:
• Installation costs including equipment purchases, labor, engineering and other project costs,
land costs, and operation and maintenance costs.
• Numbers of modules and inverters, tracking type, derating factors for photovoltaic systems.
• Collector and receiver type, solar multiple, storage capacity, power block capacity for
parabolic trough systems.
• Analysis period, real discount rate, inflation rate, tax rates, internal rate of return target or
power purchase price for utility financing models.
• Building load and time-of-use retail rates for commercial and residential financing models.
• Tax and cash incentive amounts and rates.

5
Figure 1. Initial SAM screen. Inputs must be complete for each criteria either using the default data or
using the own data for weather conditions, system size, costs and incentives, electricity rates
Another source used to estimate the cost benefit for Solar PV technology was at
http://www.solar-estimate.org/index.php, an organization that provides a solar calculator to
help households to estimate their costs and find contractors to install Solar PV, Solar Thermal
and Wind energy systems.
In this website it is provided a report that rank the best investments based upon available
incentives, utility rates, and solar (or wind) resources at that location.
They use the Profit Index (PI) as a measure of investment efficiency. If PI is 1, every dollar
invested returns a dollar. If greater than 1, the investment returns more than a dollar for each
dollar invested. If less than 1, the investment may not return the full value of the investment
over the assumed system life.
Also the Internal Rate of Return (IRR) is measured for the investment efficiency. It is defined
as the interest rate that causes the project net present value (NPV) to equal zero, and is
equivalent to the yield to maturity of a bond. The internal rate of return (IRR) on an
investment or potential investment is the annualized effective compounded rate of return that
can be earned on the invested capital.
Lastly, another index is the Payback, the most commonly used measure of the security of a
proposed investment, defined as the length of time until one gets one`s money back. Payback
is the moment when the cumulative cash in-flows exceed the total of all cash out-flows.

6
Wave/ Tidal Power
For the wave/ tidal power our research was based on the studies conducted by the California
Energy Commission - the Report “California Ocean Wave Energy Assessment” prepared by
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) in 2007 for the Public Interest Energy Research –
PIER, a program from California Energy Commission
The cost benefit analysis for Tidal/ Wave power, the source for the research was based upon
studies conducted by Universities in California and case studies, such as the tidal power plant in
San Francisco. For this case the source was the feasibility study concluded in 2009 by URS and
available at http://sfwater.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1624
Energy Storage
In order to analyze the cost benefit for energy storage, the source used was the simulations
provided by a tool developed by EPRI – Electric Power Research Institute, a non-profit institute
based in Palo Alto-CA. They developed an innovative methodology for quantifying the value of
grid energy storage opportunities, the EPRI Energy Storage Valuation Tool (ESVT)- a software
that enables preliminary economic analysis prior to more resource-intensive analytical efforts.
The report available at http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/705DFEA1-9A22-4BFA-889B-
A717CD5801C4/0/EPRI_Presentation.pdf describes applications of the methodology and tool to
analyze a range of energy storage cases, including different uses, technologies, locations, and
future electricity market scenarios. The analyses were performed to inform stakeholders of the
California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) regulatory proceeding investigating the cost-
effectiveness of energy storage. These scenarios covered three different general use cases,
including transmission-connected bulk energy storage, short-duration energy storage to provide
ancillary services, and distribution-connected energy storage located at a utility substation.

7
INCENTIVES AND CALCULATIONS
Photovoltaic System
The cost of a Photovoltaic System depends on the system size, equipment options (panels and
inverters), permitting costs, and labor costs. Prices vary depending on other factors as well,
such as whether your home is new, where the system is installed on your premise, the PV
manufacturer, and other variables such as the weather, location, incentives available.
According Go Solar California, a program that joins effort of the California Energy Commission
and the California Public Utilities Commission, the total average cost of an installed residential
PV system under the California Solar Initiative is $8.70 per Watt (including installation, as of
January 2011). That translates to about $34,800 for a four-kilowatt system, the average size of
a residential installation. Because of the declining rebates in the California solar programs, the
sooner installing a system, the better the incentive and rebate will be. Still as an example,
according the website, a south-facing three-kilowatt system installed at a 30-degree angle on a
single-family home with a utility bill of $180 per month in San Francisco would cost a customer
an estimated $19,282 with a payback period of 12 years
http://www.gosolarcalifornia.ca.gov/solar_basics/pricing_financing.php
Simulating at the SAM – System Advisor Model, the installation of a PV System for a residential
use considering a typical family of 4 consuming nearly 13,000 kwh/year, among others
assumptions described below, the following results for NPV and Payback are the following:
SAM (SYSTEM ADVISOR MODEL)
Assumptions Energy saved
(kWh/year)
Annual Cost
without PV ($)
Annual
Cost with
PV ($)
Net savings
with system
($)
NPV
($)
Payback
period
(years)
Net
capital
cost ($)
Equit
y ($)
Debt
($)
Photovoltaic
Residential
Weather Location
Los
Angeles
6,217 973 194 779 4,348 11,7 12,747 0 12,747
System Capacity 4 kWac
Energy Usage
(family of 4; 2
stories
12,910kW
h/year
Loan term 25 years
Loan rate 5%/year
Federal income
tax rate
30%/year
State tax rate 7%/year
Incentive:
Investment Tax
Credit (Federal)
30%
Electricity Rates
residential
(SCE)

8
In order to compare the results, we can see at the table below, the payback and another
numbers such as the Profit Index and IRR of some structures in California where PV systems
were installed, according http://www.solar-estimate.org/index.php :
Utility
1st Year
Utility
Savings
PV Size
Profit
Index IRR Payback
Installed
Cost
(assumed)
Installation
Incentives
Total
Incentives
Electric
($/kWh)
Moreno Valley City $1,628 3.53 kW 4.34 25.00% 5.34 years $17,650 $9,831 $9,831 $0.17
City of Riverside $1,531 3.53 kW 4.07 23.60% 5.59 years $17,650 $9,831 $9,831 $0.16
City of Glendale $1,436 3.16 kW 3.9 22.70% 5.78 years $15,800 $8,139 $8,139 $0.15
City of Lodi $1,723 3.89 kW 3.89 22.70% 5.79 years $19,450 $10,235 $10,235 $0.18
City of Gridley $1,723 3.92 kW 3.65 21.40% 6.07 years $19,600 $9,800 $9,800 $0.18
City of Lompoc $1,531 3.78 kW 3.6 21.20% 6.13 years $18,900 $10,080 $10,080 $0.16
City of Pasadena $1,436 3.16 kW 3.52 20.70% 6.26 years $15,800 $7,298 $7,298 $0.15
City of Burbank
Water and Power
$1,436 3.16 kW 3.51 20.70% 6.26 years $15,800 $7,288 $7,288 $0.15
City of Anaheim $1,339 3.85 kW 3.39 20.10% 6.39 years $19,250 $11,111 $11,111 $0.14
LADWP (City of Los
Angeles) $1,339 3.60 kW 2.65 16.00% 7.72 years $18,000 $7,583 $7,583 $0.14
City of Azusa $1,244 3.16 kW 3.23 19.20% 6.65 years $15,800 $7,826 $7,826 $0.13
City of Corona DWP $1,531 3.53 kW 3.21 19.10% 6.69 years $17,650 $7,755 $7,755 $0.16
Southern California
Water Co
$1,973 3.80 kW 3.1 18.40% 6.92 years $19,000 $5,700 $5,700 $0.21
City of Colton $1,628 3.16 kW 3.08 18.30% 6.96 years $15,800 $4,740 $4,740 $0.17
City of Banning $1,818 3.53 kW 3.08 18.30% 6.96 years $17,650 $5,295 $5,295 $0.19
City of Shasta Lake $1,339 4.06 kW 2.75 16.60% 7.47 years $20,300 $10,309 $10,309 $0.14
San Diego Gas &
Electric Co
$1,723 3.85 kW 2.66 16.00% 7.75 years $19,250 $5,775 $5,775 $0.18
City of Alameda $1,244 3.81 kW 2.65 16.00% 7.69 years $19,050 $9,419 $9,419 $0.13
City of Needles $1,052 3.78 kW 2.64 16.00% 7.66 years $18,900 $10,803 $10,803 $0.11
City of Roseville $1,436 3.88 kW 2.51 15.20% 8.06 years $19,400 $7,584 $7,584 $0.15
City of Biggs $1,628 3.92 kW 2.46 14.90% 8.21 years $19,600 $5,880 $5,880 $0.17
City of Ukiah $1,244 4.07 kW 2.32 14.10% 8.51 years $20,350 $9,368 $9,368 $0.13
Pacific Gas &
Electric Co
$1,436 3.81 kW 2.3 14.00% 8.62 years $19,050 $6,152 $6,152 $0.15
City of Healdsburg $1,339 4.03 kW 2.26 13.70% 8.72 years $20,150 $7,957 $7,957 $0.14
City of Palo Alto $1,244 3.91 kW 2.23 13.60% 8.77 years $19,550 $8,133 $8,133 $0.13

9
Southern California
Edison Co
$1,339 3.80 kW 2.16 13.20% 9.02 years $19,000 $6,252 $6,252 $0.14
City of Santa Clara
(Silicon Valley
Power)
$957 3.91 kW 2.11 12.90% 9.05 years $19,550 $10,401 $10,401 $0.10
CA: Solar Electric (PV) Investments by Utility - http://www.solar-estimate.org/index.php
Solar Thermal System
According the U.S Department of Energy, on average, when installed a solar water heater, the
water heating bills should drop 50%–80%. Also, because the sun is free, future fuel shortages
and price hikes are avoided. In case of building a new home or refinancing, the economics are
even more attractive. Including the price of a solar water heater in a new 30-year mortgage
usually amounts to between $13 and $20 per month. The federal income tax deduction for
mortgage interest attributable to the solar system reduces that by about $3–$5 per month. So if
the fuel savings are more than $15 per month, the solar investment is profitable immediately
(energy.gov/energysaver/articles/estimating-cost-and-energy-efficiency-solar-water-heater )
To estimate the annual operating cost of a solar water heating system, you need the following:
- The system's solar energy factor (SEF) - The solar energy factor is defined as the energy
delivered by the system divided by the electrical or gas energy put into the system. The higher
the number, the more energy efficient. Solar energy factors range from 1.0 to 11.
Systems with solar energy factors of 2 or 3 are the most common.
(http://energy.gov/energysaver/articles/estimating-cost-and-energy-efficiency-solar-water-
heater)
- The auxiliary tank fuel type (gas or electric) and costs (your local utility can provide current
rates).
Simulating in the SAM – System Advisor Model, the installation of a Solar Water Heating System
for a residential use considering a typical family of 4, with a consumption of nearly 13,000
With a gas auxiliary tank system With an electric auxiliary tank system
*Fuel Cost ($/therm) SEF *Electricity Cost (kWh) SEF
1,26 3 0,20 3
365 0,4105 365 12,03 (kWh/day)
365×0.4105÷SEF×Fuel Cost (therm)
365×12.03kWh/day÷SEF×Electricity Cost
(kWh)
Estimated annual
cost of operation ($) US$356,74 US$292,73

10
kwh/year - that corresponds to 73,000 kg/year of hot water draw, among the others
assumptions described below, the following results for NPV and Payback are the following:
Geothermal
According the U.S Department of Energy, depending on factors such as climate, soil conditions,
the system features you choose, and available financing and incentives, you may recoup your
initial investment in two to ten years through lower utility bills. And -- when included in a
mortgage -- your investment in a GHP will produce a positive cash flow from the beginning. For
example, if the extra $3,500 cost of the GHP will add $30 per month to each mortgage
payment, the energy cost savings will easily exceed that added mortgage amount over the
course of each year.
The biggest benefit of GHPs is that they use 25% to 50% less electricity than conventional
heating or cooling systems. This translates into a GHP using one unit of electricity to move
three units of heat from the earth. According to the EPA, geothermal heat pumps can reduce
energy consumption -- and corresponding emissions -- up to 44% compared with air-source
heat pumps and up to 72% compared with electric resistance heating with standard air-
conditioning equipment. (http://energy.gov/energysaver/articles/choosing-and-installing-geothermal-
heat-pumps )
Assumptions
Energy saved
(kWh/year)
Annual
Cost
without
PV ($)
Annual
Cost with
PV ($)
Net savings
with system
($)
NPV
($)
Payback
period
(years)
Net
capital
cost ($)
Equity
($)
Debt
($)
Solar Water
Residential
Weather Location Los Angeles
2.526 3.981 3.199 782 1.617 10,4 8.060 1.612 6.448
System Capacity
(hot water draw)
73,000kg/year
Energy Usage
(family of 4; 2
stories
12,910kWh/year
Loan term 20 years
Loan rate 7%/year
Federal income tax
rate
28%/year
Incentive:
Investment Tax
Credit (Federal)
30%
Electricity Rates residential (SCE)

11
At the SAM – System Advisor Model, it is possible to simulate the installation of a geothermal
power plant for the utility, but not in a small scale for a residential use – single family of 4 – as
the solar systems.
In this case, when simulating the installation of a Geothermal (Hydrotermal) System for the
Utility considering by default a power plant of 15,000 kW and the installation of 3 wells, among
the others assumptions described below, the following results for NPV and IRR, in this case, are
the following:
About the geothermal energy for residential use, the cost benefit analysis was based on
research among equipment suppliers. Geothermal Genius was the organization that provides
the numbers, costs and payback based on a case study, the installation of a heat pump model,
5 ton Geothermal System with vertical loop field in a home of 3,500 sqft size, located outside of
Philadelphia, PA, in 2009. The installation costs at that time were $26,000, with operational
costs of $512 per year, which reflected annual savings of $2,820. The payback was calculated
6.5 years. http://www.geothermalgenius.org/thinking-of-buying/geothermal-installation-by-the-
numbers-in-pennsylvania.html
Assumptions
Energy
production
(kWh/year)
Installed
Costs per
capacity
($/kW)
O&M Costs
by
generation
($/MWh)
NPV ($)
IRR
(%)
Net capital
cost ($)
Equity ($) Debt ($)
Geothermal
(Hydrotermal)
- Utility
Location Los Angeles
151.435.664 3.590 3 5.191.232 11 60.697.008 28.286.626 32.410.382
Total Resource
Potential 210 MW
Resource
Temperature 200 'C
Resource Depth 2000 m
Plant
configuration
15000kW
3 wells
Total Capital Cost US$41.525.292
Total Installed
Cost US$53.847.920
Indirect Costs US$10.246.366
Loan term 18 years
Loan rate 7%
Federal income
tax rate
35%/year
Incentive:
Investment Tax
Credit (Federal)
30%

12
Wave/ Tidal Power
According the Report “California Ocean Wave Energy Assessment”, California has over 1200 km
of coastline, and the combined average annual deep water wave power flux is over 37,000
megawatts (MW) of which an upper limit of about 20% could be converted into electricity. This
is sufficient for about 23% of California’s current electricity consumption. However, economics,
environmental impacts, land-use and grid interconnection constraints will likely impose further
limits to how much of the resource can be extracted. Although technology is still at a relatively
immature stage, economic projections indicate that wave power could become cost-competitive
over the long-term.
The table below shows the cost performance and economic comparisons for 2 commercial plant
deployed off the coast in San Francisco (Cost in $2004):

13
Over 40% of the cost of electricity produced by an offshore wave energy plant is borne by the
annual O&M and the 10-year refit cost. This is mainly an attribute of the early stage of
technology development. As technology matures and reliability increases such cost will get
lower. In addition, insurance cost for such emerging technology is higher than comparable
onshore projects. O&M costs for modern wind farms makes an impact on the cost of electricity
of less than 1 cent/kWh. If O&M on offshore wave power farms was equally low in cost, it
would have a significant impact on the cost of electricity from such plants. Various companies
have proposed the use of specialized servicing vessels and other operational measures that
could significantly reduce these costs.
A second impact on cost of electricity is the scale of a wave power plant. It is clear that fewer
units will produce electricity at higher cost. Infrastructure and grid interconnection cost are
oftentimes fixed cost that can be shared in larger projects over a larger number of devices, but
have a significant impact on energy cost for smaller projects.
Looking through the Feasibility Study conducted in 2009 for the installation of Tidal Power Plant
in San Francisco, we can compare the evolution of the economy for this technology when
comparing to studies conducted in 2004:
Case Study - San Francisco
Single Turbine 12 Turbine Farm
Yearly energy output 3400 MWh 40 GWh
Equivalent Houses 1.201 12.294
Equivalent Carbon 1516 tonnes CO2/year 18286 tonnes CO2/year
Approximate Cost US$ 5 Million US$ 46.8 Million
Payback Period 10.7 years 9.4 years
Equating the power production with estimated cost yields the cost of power in cents per kW-hour (¢/kWh).
Making mid-range and conservative estimates for uncertainties, including power conditioning and O&M
costs, yields total cost of wave energy in the range of 17 to 22 ¢/kWh. This is more expensive than wind
power (range of 7 to 8.5 ¢/kWh), not including a 2.5 ¢/kWh tax credit) and conventional hydrocarbons
(range of 10 to 12 ¢/kWh), but is comparable with the cost of producing solar photovoltaic power before
solar tax credits and other incentives are applied.
Source: Feasibility Study 2009
http://sfwater.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1624
Energy Storage
Energy Storage technologies do not generate electricity but can deliver stored electricity to the
electric grid or an end-user. They are used to support the integration of renewable generation
and to improve power quality by correcting voltage sags, flickers, and surges, or to correct for
frequency imbalances. Storage devices are also used as uninterruptible power supplies (UPS) by
supplying electricity during short utility outages. These energy devices can be located at or near

14
the point of use, so they are included in the distributed energy resources category. When
coupled with Demand Response technologies, Energy Storage can achieve peak load reductions
at the same performance with enhanced system response at lower system cost. Energy Storage
and Demand Response are two aspects of the Smart Grid research within PIER's Energy
Technology Systems Integration Research Area.
(http://www.energy.ca.gov/research/integration/storage.html )
The U.S energy Department listed the following categories of energy storage:
Battery
Utilities typically use batteries to provide an uninterruptible supply of electricity to power substation switchgear
and to start backup power systems. Batteries also increase power quality and reliability for residential,
commercial, and industrial customers by providing backup during power outages. However, there is an
interest to go beyond these applications by performing load leveling and peak shaving with new battery
systems. Although lead-acid is currently the standard battery type used in energy storage applications,
sodium-sulfur and lithium-ion batteries are nearing commercial readiness for future utility applications.
Flow Batteries
Flow batteries differ from conventional rechargeable batteries in one significant way: the power and energy
ratings of a flow battery are independent of each other. This is made possible by the separation of the
electrolyte and the battery stack. A flow battery, on the other hand, stores and releases energy by means of a
reversible electrochemical reaction between two electrolyte solutions. There are four leading flow battery
technologies: Polysulfide Bromide (PSB), Vanadium Redox (VRB), Zinc Bromine (ZnBr), and Hydrogen
Bromine (H-Br) batteries.
Flywheels
A flywheel is an electromechanical device that couples a motor generator with a rotating mass to store energy
for short durations. During a power outage, voltage sag, or other disturbance the motor/generator provides
power.
Superconducting
Magnetic Energy
Storage (SMES)
Superconducting magnetic energy storage systems store energy in the field of a large magnetic coil with
direct current flowing. It can be converted back to AC electric current as needed. Low temperature SMES
cooled by liquid helium is commercially available. High temperature SMES cooled by liquid nitrogen is still in
the development stage and may become a viable commercial energy storage source in the future. SMES
systems are large and generally used for short durations, such as utility switching events.
Supercapacitor
Supercapacitors (also known as ultracapacitors) are DC energy sources and must be interfaced to the electric
grid with a static power conditioner. A supercapacitor provides power during short duration interruptions and
voltage sags. Also, by combining a supercapacitor with a battery-based uninterruptible power supply system,
the life of the batteries can be extended. Small supercapacitors are commercially available to extend battery
life in electronic equipment, but large supercapacitors are still in development and may soon become a viable
component of the energy storage field.
Compressed Air
Energy Storage
Compressed air energy storage uses pressurized air as an energy storage medium. An electric motor-driven
compressor is used to pressurize the storage reservoir using off-peak energy and air is released from the
reservoir through a turbine during on-peak hours to produce energy. The turbine can also be fired with natural
gas or distillate fuel. Ideal locations for large compressed air energy storage reservoirs are empty aquifers,
abandoned conventional hard rock mines, and abandoned hydraulically mined salt caverns.
Pumped Hydro Energy
Storage (PHES)
Pumped Hydro Energy Storage (PHES) is the largest-capacity form of grid energy storage. PHES involves
storing energy in the form of water pumped from a lower elevation reservoir to a higher elevation reservoir by
using pumps running on abundant low-cost, off-peak electric power. During periods of high electrical demand
or less available power, the stored water is released through turbines to produce electric power to meet
demand. Despite some energy losses during this process, the overall system increases available power and
revenue by selling more electricity during periods of peak demand, when electricity prices are highest.

15
Looking at the Report Cost-Effectiveness of Energy Storage in California - Application of
the EPRI Energy Storage Valuation Tool to Inform the California Public Utility Commission
Proceeding R. 10-12-007, of June 2013, we can see the benefit to cost ratio for some scenarios
of energy storage.
The methodology created by the EPRI – Electric Power Research Institute, the EPRI Energy
Storage Valuation Tool (ESVT) for quantifying the value of grid energy storage opportunities,
that simulated scenarios covering three different general use cases, including transmission-
connected bulk energy storage, short-duration energy storage to provide ancillary services, and
distribution-connected energy storage located at a utility substation, provided results of using a
number of technical and economic outputs and summarized in terms of lifetime net present
value and breakeven capital cost of energy storage. Under the assumptions provided by the
CPUC, the majority of cases returned benefit-to-cost ratios of greater than one, and the
majority of cases returned breakeven capital cost of energy storage ranging from $1,000 to
$4,000/kW installed. These results represent an early phase of energy storage valuation
analysis, quantifying the direct costs and benefits over the lifetime of the energy storage
system.( http://eetd.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/lbl-eetd_1-17-2014_final.pdf)
Summary results from the analyses are provided below in two forms: benefit-to-cost (B/C) ratio
and breakeven capital cost. B/C ratio is the net present value (NPV) of all direct, quantifiable
benefits divided by the NPV of the direct, quantifiable costs of a defined energy storage system
providing specific grid services over its lifetime. Breakeven capital cost is the estimated upfront
capital cost of a storage system with certain defined performance characteristics, which would
result in a B/C ratio of 1, or breakeven net present value
Scenario 1: Bulk Energy Storage System
The bulk storage (peaker substitution) use case involves the comparison of energy storage to a
gas-fired peaker generation unit. This use case considers energy storage that provides grid
services that the peaker generation would have access to, including system capacity, energy
sales (time-shift/arbitrage for storage), frequency regulation, spinning reserve, and non-
spinning reserve. For this use case, the energy storage systems investigated were all 50
megawatts (MW) or larger in size.
Base Case Inputs:
- Year 2020
- 50MW, 2hr (battery)
- CapEx = $1056/kW, $528/kWh
- 1 Batt Replacement @ $250/kWh
- 11.5% discount rate
- 83% RT Efficiency
- Energy & A/S prices escalated 3%/yr from CAISO 2011
• Benefit/Cost Ratio = 1.17
• Breakeven Capital Cost: $842/kWh ($1684/kW) in 2013 inflation adjusted dollars

16
Fig. 2 – Cost Benefit for Scenario 1
Scenario 2: Ancillary Services - Fast Frequency Regulation Only
The frequency regulation use case assumes specialized usage of a large battery, flywheel, or
other short-duration energy storage technology, to provide frequency regulation service to the
CAISO system. Due to the potential for fast and accurate response and ramping capability of
energy storage, these systems may generate an enhanced value compared to fossil generators,
3-3 which is expected to be monetizable in the CAISO market as a performance payment,
resulting from FERC 755’s frequency regulation pay-for-performance ruling.
Base Case Inputs:
- Year 2020
- 20MW, 0,25hr (battery)
- CapEx = $3112/kW, $778/kWh
- 1 Batt Replacement @ $250/kWh
- 7yrs depreciation term

17
• Breakeven Capital Cost: $1678/kWh ($6712/kWh) in 2013 inflation adjusted dollars
Scenario 3: Distribution Storage at Substation
The distribution energy storage at substation use case assumes a similar usage of the energy
storage system to the bulk storage use case, but with the added grid service of a distribution
investment deferral. It assumes that the storage is located on the low voltage side of a
substation transformer or line that requires an expensive upgrade triggered by slow load growth
and infrequent peaks, which can be offset by the energy storage system for a few years. The
use case assumes that the storage is also earning value by participating in the capacity and
day-ahead energy and ancillary services markets. Due to regulatory issues raised previously, it
may not be possible to monetize this use case currently, but the analysis intends to
demonstrate the first-order technical potential for energy storage cost-effectiveness.

18
Base Case Inputs:
- Year 2015
- 1MW, 4hr (battery)
- CapEx = $2000/kW, $500/kWh
- 11.5% discount rate
- 83% RT Efficiency Energy & A/S prices escalated 3%/yr from CAISO 2011
- $279/kW upgrade cost
- 2% load growth rate
• Breakeven Capital Cost: $866/kWh ($3464/kW)

19
Summary of Incentives
A research was conducted on the official basis to find the state and federal incentives and
programs for loans available for the installation of renewable energy, according listed below:
Federal Incentive
Program Description Benefit
Residential
Renewable Energy
Tax Credit (IRS
Form 5695)
Established by The Energy Policy Act of 2005, the federal tax credit for
residential energy property initially applied to solar-electric systems, solar
water heating systems and fuel cells. The Energy Improvement and
Extension Act of 2008 extended the tax credit to small wind-energy systems
and geothermal heat pumps, effective January 1, 2008. Other key revisions
included an eight-year extension of the credit to December 31, 2016; the
ability to take the credit against the alternative minimum tax; and the
removal of the $2,000 credit limit for solar-electric systems beginning in
2009. The credit was further enhanced in February 2009 by The American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which removed the maximum
credit amount for all eligible technologies (except fuel cells) placed in
service after 2008.
A taxpayer may claim a credit of
30% of qualified expenditures for a
system that serves a dwelling unit
located in the United States that is
owned and used as a residence by
the taxpayer.
Existing homes and new
construction qualify. Must be your
principal residence. Rental homes
and second homes do not qualify.
State Incentive
Program Description Benefit
CSI - Solar PV
(Existing
Buildings)
The California Solar Initiative provides cash back for solar energy
systems for existing* homes, as well as existing and new commercial,
industrial, government, non-profit, and agricultural properties – within the
service territories of the three above-listed IOUs. The CSI has a budget
of $2,167 million over 10 years, and the goal is to reach 1,940
megawatts (MW) of installed solar capacity by 2016. This goal includes
1,750 MW from the general market (GM) CSI program, which provides
incentives for photovoltaic (PV) and other solar electric generating
technologies. The goal also includes 190 MW from the two low-income
residential incentive programs, the Multifamily Affordable Solar Housing
(MASH) Program and the Single-family Affordable Solar Homes (SASH)
Program.
Performance Based Incentives (PBI) is
a flat cents-per-kWh payment for all
output from a solar energy system over
its initial five years of operation.
Expected Performance Based
Buydown (EPBB) incentives are paid
based on verified solar energy system
characteristics such as location, system
size, shading, and orientation. The
amount of the EPBB or PBI incentive
depends on which incentive payment
levels will be reduced automatically
over the duration of the CSI Program in
10 steps, based on the volume of MW
of solar reservations issued by each
Program Administrator.(CSI Step table
in the Appendix B)
CSI - Solar PV
(New Homes)
The California Energy Commission's New Solar Homes Partnership
(NSHP) is part of the comprehensive statewide solar program, known as
the California Solar Initiative. The NSHP provides financial incentives
and other support to home builders, encouraging the construction of
new, energy efficient solar homes that save homeowners money on
their electric bills and protect the environment.
Only new residential construction
projects qualify for NSHP incentives. It
is required that projects meet minimum
energy efficiency levels, and applicants
are encouraged to achieve energy
efficiency levels substantially greater
than the current legal standard. The
incentive vary depending on the system
capacity and the category of the project
(see Appendix B)

20
CSI-Thermal -
California State
The CSI-Thermal Program offers cash rebates of up to $4,366 on solar
water heating systems for single-family residential customers.
Multifamily and Commercial properties qualify for rebates of up to
$800,000 on solar water heating systems and eligible solar pool heating
systems qualify for rebates of up to $500,000.
Rebates vary depending on the type of
solar water heating system, location,
shading and other design factors. A
typical homeowner with a solar water
heating system displacing natural gas
can expect a rebate of about $3,500 at
the initial incentive level. Eligible low-
income natural gas customers may
qualify for higher incentives under the
Low Income Program – See Appendix
B
Loans and Programs
PROGRAM SUMMARY APPLICABILITY
Property
Assessed Clean
Energy (PACE)
Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) - California has enacted PACE
enabling legislation and there are a number of operational PACE programs,
such as CaliforniaFIRST and others in development. Solar customers likewise
may have the option to finance their solar systems through their local
governments. Local governments can create property tax finance districts to
issue loans for energy efficiency and renewable energy such as solar PV
systems. PACE allows local governments to provide low-cost, 20-year loans to
eligible property owners seeking to install these technologies. The solar
customer then pays more on the annual property tax bill to repay the loan. The
loans are permanently fixed to real property, so that residents need not worry
about their system's break-even point and can pass the loan payments on to
subsequent buyers of the property.

Energy-Efficient
Mortgages
Homeowners can take advantage of energy efficient mortgages (EEM) to either
finance energy efficiency improvements to existing homes, including renewable
energy technologies, or to increase their home buying power with the purchase
of a new energy efficient home. The U.S. federal government supports these
loans by insuring them through Federal Housing Authority (FHA) or Veterans
Affairs (VA) programs. This allows borrowers who might otherwise be denied
loans to pursue energy efficiency, and it secures lenders against loan default.
$8,000, maximum loan limits can be exceeded by the energy improvements
being financed.
Solar - Passive, Solar Water
Heat, Solar Space Heat, Solar
Photovoltaics, Daylighting
(Residential)
Power Purchase
Agreements
Power Purchase Agreements - Under a "PPA," a third party owns and maintains
the customer solar system, selling the kilowatt-hours back to the customer.
Thus, customers who opt for a solar PPAtypically have low capital costs and pay
only for the electricity their solar systems generate. Both SolarTech and the
Rahus Institute offer helpful guides and additional information on solar PPAs.

NET ENERGY
METERING (NEM)
Customers who install renewable energy facilities (1 MW or less) to serve all or
a portion of onsite electricity needs are eligible for the net metering program.
NEM allows a customer-generator to receive a financial credit for power
generated by their onsite system and fed back to the utility. The credit is used
to offset the customer's electricity bill. After 12-month cycle, customer may opt to
roll over credit indefinitely or to receive payment for credit at a rate equal to the
12-month average spot market price for the hours of 7 am to 5 pm for the year in
which the surplus power was generated. (If customer makes no affirmative
decision, credit is granted to utility with no compensation for customer.)
Geothermal Electric, Solar
Thermal Electric, Solar
Photovoltaics, Wind (All),
Biomass, Municipal Solid Waste,
Fuel Cells using Non-Renewable
Fuels, Landfill Gas, Tidal, Wave,
Ocean Thermal, Wind (Small),
Hydroelectric (Small), Anaerobic
Digestion, Fuel Cells using
Renewable Fuels

21
Self-Generation
Incentive
Program (SGIP)
Offers incentives to customers who produce electricity with wind turbines, fuel
cells, various forms of combined heat and power (CHP) and advanced energy
storage. For 2014, the incentive payments range from $0.46/W - $1.83/W
depending on the type of system. Retail electric and gas customers of San
Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E), Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), Southern
California Edison (SCE) or Southern California Gas (SoCal Gas) are eligible for
the SGIP. Beginning in May 2012, all technologies previously eligible for the
expired Emerging Renewables Program are now eligible for the SGIP program.
Originally set to expire at the end of 2011, SB 412 of 2009 extended the
expiration date to January 1, 2016, and SB 861 of 2015 further extended the
expiration date to January 1, 2021.
Systems less than 30 kW will receive their full incentive upfront. Systems with a
capacity of 30 kilowatts (kW) or greater will receive half the incentive upfront,
and the the other half will be paid over the following five years based on the
actual performance. The following technologies will receive the corresponding
upfront incentive (or half of this figure if the system is 30 kW or larger). There is
no minimum or maximum eligible system size, although the incentive payment is
capped at 3 MW. Further, the first megawatt (MW) in capacity will receive 100%
of the calculated incentive, the second MW will receive 50% of the calculated
incentive, and the third MW will receive 25% of the calculated incentive.
Applicants must pay a minimum of 40% of eligible project costs. Projects using
the Federal Investment Tax Credit (ITC) must pay 40% of the eligible project
costs after the ITC is subtracted from the project costs (i.e., the SGIP credit is
limited to 30% of project costs).
Customers who produce
electricity with wind turbines, fuel
cells, various forms of combined
heat and power (CHP) and
advanced energy storage
U.S. Department
of Energy Loan
Programs Office
(DE-SOL-
0006303)
The Loan Programs Office (LPO) has issued the Advanced Fossil Energy
Projects Solicitation, which makes up to $8 billion in loan guarantees available
to support innovative, advanced fossil energy projects in the U.S. that reduce,
avoid, or sequester greenhouse gases. Eligible projects can utilize any fossil
fuel and may come from across the spectrum of production and use, including
resource development, energy generation, and end use
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ge
othermal/current_opportunities.h
tml
FORGE
Funding Number:
DE-FOA-0001091
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy (EERE) intends to issue, on behalf of the Geothermal
Technologies Office, DE-FOA-0000890, a Funding Opportunity Announcement
(FOA) entitled "Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy
(FORGE)."
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ge
othermal/financial_opps_detail.h
tml?sol_id=754
Corporate Tax
Credit -
Commercial,
Industrial,
Investor-Owned
Utility,
Cooperative
Utilities,
Agricultural
The federal business energy investment tax credit available under 26 USC § 48
was expanded significantly by the Energy Improvement and Extension Act of
2008 (H.R. 1424), enacted in October 2008. This law extended the duration --
by eight years -- of the existing credits for solar energy, fuel cells and
microturbines; increased the credit amount for fuel cells; established new credits
for small wind-energy systems, geothermal heat pumps, and combined heat and
power (CHP) systems; allowed utilities to use the credits; and allowed taxpayers
to take the credit against the alternative minimum tax (AMT), subject to certain
limitations. The credit was further expanded by the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009, enacted in February 2009.
Solar Water Heat, Solar Space
Heat, Geothermal Electric, Solar
Thermal Electric, Solar Thermal
Process Heat, Solar
Photovoltaics, Wind (All),
Geothermal Heat Pumps,
Municipal Solid Waste,
Combined Heat & Power, Fuel
Cells using Non-Renewable
Fuels, Tidal, Wind (Small),
Geothermal Direct-Use, Fuel
Cells using Renewable Fuels,
microturbine
Clean renewable
energy bonds
(CREBs)
Clean renewable energy bonds (CREBs) may be used by certain entities --
primarily in the public sector -- to finance renewable energy projects. The list of
qualifying technologies is generally the same as that used for the federal
renewable energy production tax credit (PTC). CREBs may be issued by electric
cooperatives, government entities (states, cities, counties, territories, Indian
tribal governments or any political subdivision thereof), and by certain lenders.
The bondholder receives federal tax credits in lieu of a portion of the traditional
bond interest, resulting in a lower effective interest rate for the borrower.* The
issuer remains responsible for repaying the principal on the bond.
Geothermal Electric, Solar
Thermal Electric, Solar
photovoltaics, Wind (All),
biomass, hydroelectric,
Municipal Solid Waste, Landfill
gas, Tidal, Wave, Ocean
Thermal, Anaerobic digestion

22
Fannie Mae
Green Initiative
The Fannie Mae Green Initiative provides owners of multifamily properties
(rental or cooperative properties with 5 or more units) with valuable green
financing solutions and tools to make smart energy- and water-saving property
improvements. Its green financing programs include Green Rewards, Green
Preservation Plus, and the Green Building Certification Pricing Break, all of
which are eligible for a 10 basis points (0.1%) reduction in the all-in interest rate.
Over the life of a 10-year $10 million loan, that could result in a savings of
$95,000 or more in interest. All Fannie Mae green loans are securitized as
Green Mortgage Backed Securities (Green MBS). - note: Up to 10 basis points
lower than standard interest rate.
Clothes Washers, Dishwasher,
Dehumidifiers, Water Heaters,
Lighting, Furnaces, Boilers, Heat
pumps, Air conditioners,
Caulking/Weather-stripping,
Duct/Air sealing, Building
Insulation, Windows, Roofs,
Comprehensive
Measures/Whole Building,
Custom/Others pending
approval, Insulation, Tankless
Water Heater
Green Rewards
The Green Rewards product feature, launched in 2015, provides up to an
additional 5% of loan proceeds by including up to 50% of projected energy and
water savings in the loan underwriting. Conventional and affordable multifamily
properties including cooperatives, seniors, military, and student housing
properties are eligible for the this product feature. The properties may be located
anywhere in US, and must be able to project a 20% minimum consumption
savings in energy and/or water to qualify for a Green Rewards loan. The
selected property upgrades must be completed within 12 months of loan closing.
Green
Preservation Plus
The Green Preservation Plus program, launched in 2011, provides additional
loan proceeds to Multifamily Affordable Housing (MAH) properties by allowing
up to an 85% Loan-to-Value (LTV), lower Debt-Service-Credit-Ratio (DSCR) up
to 5 basis points lower than standard rates, and access to property’s equity
amount equal to investments in efficiency. Energy- and water-saving
improvements must equal at least 5% of the original mortgage loan amount.
Green Building
Certification
The Green Building Certification Pricing Break provides the 10 basis point
pricing break to any acquisition or refinance loan on a conventional or affordable
property that has a current, eligible Green Building Certification.

23
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Cost Benefit Analysis – SAM (System Advisory Model)
Energy types
in SAM
SAM inputs Input example Output Value
Solar
(Photovoltaic)
Residential
1. location and resource
2. Module, temperature correction
3. inverter
4. system design: string configuration,
tracking and orientation( fixed, 1-axis,
2-axis)
5. shading and snow
6. losses
7. life time(degradation rate)
8. battery storage
9. system costs (direct capital cost,
indirect capital cost, operation and
maintenance cost)
10. financial parameters
11. incentives
12. electricity rates
13. electricity load
1, Los Angeles Intl arpt Annual energy 6,217 kWh
2, module: SPR-210-BLK-U Inverter:
SB4000US 240V
Capacity factor 18%
3, Nameplate capacity: 3.875kwdc
Tracking&Orientation: Fixed
First year kWhAC/kWDC 1,605 kWh/kW
4, Life time( degradation rate): 0.5%per year Performance ratio 0.79
5, Loan term: 25years Loan rate: 5%per year Battery efficiency 0.00%
6, Federal income tax rate: 30% state income
tax rate: 7%
Levelized COE
(nominal)
9.08 ¢/kWh
7, Investment tax credit: federal 30% state
25%
Levelized COE (real) 7.18 ¢/kWh
8, Electric load: 6019kwh per year Electricity cost without
system
$973
Electricity cost with
system
$194
Net savings with system $779
Net present value $4,348
Payback period 11.7 years
Net capital cost $12,747
Equity $0
Debt $12,747

24
Energy types in
SAM
Solar (Photovoltaic)
Commercial
1, location and resource
2, Module, temperature correction
3, inverter
4, system design: string
configuration, tracking and
orientation( fixed, 1-axis, 2-axis)
5, shading and snow
6, losses
7, life time(degradation rate)
8, battery storage
9, system costs (direct capital cost,
maintenance cost)
10, financial parameters
11, incentives
12, electricity rates
13, electricity load
1, Los Angeles Intl arpt Annual energy 324,248 kWh
2, module: SPR-210-BLK-U Inverter:
ST36 (240) 240V
Capacity factor 18,5%
System Size: 200 kWdc
Tracking&Orientation: Fixed
First year kWhAC/kWDC 1,623 kWh/kW
4, Life time( degradation rate):
0.5%per year
Performance ratio 0.79
5, Loan term: 25years Loan rate:
7.5%per year
Battery efficiency No battery
6, Federal income tax rate: 28%
state income tax rate:7%
Levelized COE (nominal) 7.56 ¢/kWh
7, Investment tax credit: federal 30%
state 0%
8, Electric load: 7,646,295 kwh/year Electricity cost without
system
$1,188,008.00
system
$1,138,912.00
Net savings with system $49,097.00
Net present value $162,954
Payback period 8.9 years
Equity $0
Debt $508,966

25
Energy types in SAM SAM inputs Input example Output Value
Solar (Thermal)
Residential
1, location and resource
2, Module, temperature correction
3, inverter
4, system design: string configuration,
tracking and orientation( fixed, 1-axis,
2-axis)
5, shading and snow
6, losses
7, life time(degradation rate)
8, battery storage
9, system costs (direct capital cost,
maintenance cost)
11, incentives
12, electricity rates
13, electricity load
1. Los Angeles Intl arpt (weather
location)
Annual energy Saved 2,526 kWh
2. Energy usage (family of 4; 2 stories):
12,910kWh/year
Capacity factor 8,4%
3. Difuse Sky Model:Isotropic
Irradiance:Beam and Difuse
Levelized COE
(nominal)
33.55 ¢/kWh
4. System Capacity (hot water draw):
73,000kg/year
5. Life time( degradation rate): 0.5%per
year
Electricity cost without
system
$3,981
6. Loan term: 20 years Loan rate: 7%/
year
system
$3,199
7. Federal income tax rate: 28% state
income tax rate: 7%
Net savings with
system
$782
8. Investment tax credit: federal 30% Net present value $1,671
9. Electric load: 9,352 kwh/year Payback period 10,8
Equity $1,612
Debt $6,448

26
Energy types in
SAM
Geothermal
(Hydrothermal) for
the Utility
1, Ambient conditions
2, geothermal resource (reservoir
characterization, reservoir
parameters)
3, plant and equipment( plant
configuration, pump parameters)
4, power block
5, system costs
7, time of delivery factors
8, incentives
9, depreciation
1. Weather Location: Los Angeles Intl arpt First Year Energy 135,403,856 kWh
2. Resource: Hydrothermal Capacity Factor 79.40%
3. Total potential: 210MW / Temp 200C PPA price (Year 1) 9.31 ¢/kWh
4. Plant Configuration: 15,000kW / 3 wells PPA price escalation 1.00%
5, Loan term: 18 years Loan rate: 7%per
year
Levelized PPA price
(nominal)
10.11 ¢/kWh
6, Federal income tax rate: 35% state
income tax rate:7%
Levelized COE
(nominal)
9.54 ¢/kWh
0%
Net present value $7,585,762
Internal rate of return
(IRR)
11%
Year IRR is achieved 20
Net capital cost $73,048,976
Equity $34,354,316
Size of debt $38,694,664

27
Energy types in
SAM
Geothermal
(Enhanced System)
for the Utility
1, Ambient conditions
2, geothermal resource (reservoir
characterization, reservoir
parameters)
3, plant and equipment( plant
configuration, pump parameters)
4, power block
5, system costs
7, time of delivery factors
8, incentives
9, depreciation
1. Weather Location: Los Angeles Intl arpt t First Year Energy 151,435,664 kWh
2. Resource: Enhanced Geothermal System
(EGS)
Capacity Factor 101.00%
3. Total potential: 210MW / Temp 200C PPA price (Year 1) 7.42 ¢/kWh
4. Plant Configuration: 15,000kW / 3 wells PPA price escalation 1.00%
5, Loan term: 18 years Loan rate: 7%per
year
Levelized PPA price
(nominal)
8.03 ¢/kWh
6, Federal income tax rate: 35% state
income tax rate:7%
Levelized COE
(nominal)
7.68 ¢/kWh
0%
Net present value $5,191,232
Internal rate of return
(IRR)
11%
Year IRR is achieved 20
Net capital cost $60,697,008
Equity $28,286,626
Size of debt $32,410,382

28
Appendix B. Cost Benefit Analysis – Other models
Energy source Supplier Input example Output Value
Geothermal Residential
(Case Study
Pensylvannia)
Location: Pensylvannia Installation Costs $26,000
Geothermal Genius (Joshua Kresge) Year of installation: 2009 Federal Tax Credit 30%
jkresge@geothermalgenius.org Home Size: 3,500 sqft Annual Savings $2,820
http://www.geothermalgenius.or
g/thinking-of-buying/geothermal-
installation-by-the-numbers-in-
pennsylvania.html
Family of 4 people
Annual operating
costs
$512
System Size: 5 ton vertical loop field Payback 6.5 years
Model: Heat Pump Installation
Federal Incentive: 30%
Previous source of heating: Propane
Energy Rate PA 2009: $0,12/kWh
Energy source Case Study Input example Output Value
Wind Power
Feasibility Study 2009 -
Single turbine Off coast San
Francisco
System Size: 3400 MWh Installation Costs $5 Million
Equivalent houses: 1,201 O&M costs Range of 17 to 22 ¢/kWh
Equivalent Carbon: 1516 tonnes CO2/yr Payback 10.7 years
Feasibility Study 2009 -
12 turbine farm Off coast
San Francisco
System Size: 40 GWh Installation Costs $46.8 Million
Equivalent houses: 12,294 O&M costs Range of 17 to 22 ¢/kWh
Equivalent Carbon: 18286 tonnes CO2/yr Payback 9.4 years
OPD Pelamis San Francisco
Wave Power Density: 21 kW/m Installation Costs $279 Million
Project Life: 20 years O&M costs $13M
Levelized COE 11.2 cents kWh
Wave Power Density: 21 kW/m Installation Costs $251 Million

29
Energetech OWC San
Francisco
Project Life: 20 years O&M costs $10.6M
Levelized COE $9.8 cents/kWh
Appendix C. Federal Incentive

Figure 2. Federal Incentive available for homeowners to get tax rebates - http://energy.gov/savings/residential-renewable-energy-tax-credit

30
Appendix D. State Incentive

Figure 3. State Incentive available for utilities customers - residential, commercial, government and non-profit -
http://gosolarcalifornia.ca.gov/about/index.php

31

Appendix D. State Incentive (continuing)

Figure 4. State Incentive available for utilities customers - new residential - http://gosolarcalifornia.ca.gov/about/index.php

32
Appendix D. State Incentive (continuing)

Figure 5. State Incentive available for utilities customers - residential and commercial - http://gosolarcalifornia.ca.gov/about/index.php

CBA_report

More Related Content

What's hot (9)

Viewers also liked (8)

Similar to CBA_report (20)

More from Huijian Tian (9)

CBA_report