My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2018-03-27_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2018
>
2018-03-27_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/26/2018 11:43:02 AM
Creation date
4/26/2018 11:42:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
3/27/2018
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
the City to sign up for Community Solar Garden shares at 120 percent of that <br />average annual consumption. The City has about 3,400,000 kWh annually. <br />Member Seigler inquired what size solar installation would be required for <br />3,400,000 kWh. <br />Mr. Weir responded it would be about a 2.5 megawatt system. The benefit is in the <br />savings to the City, not the size of the solar garden. <br />Mr. Culver clarified they would only be able to put about 700 kWh on the rooftop, <br />but they could subscribe to any other community solar garden system in the <br />surrounding area up to 3.4 megawatts. <br />Member Seigler stated if they had 100 percent of their electricity that was allocated <br />towards solar, the savings would be $17,000 the first year. <br />Mr. Weir confirmed this and noted the credits no longer fluctuate with Xcel and <br />will increase at 2.3 percent each year. The PPA rate is what is paid back to the <br />developer. IPS offers to escalate at two percent each year and the savings grow <br />slowly over time. <br />Member Seigler inquired if they would ever own anything and what would happen <br />if a storm wiped out the system. <br />Mr. Weir noted the City would not own any of it and there is no risk to the City. It <br />is not on their property and they are just a subscriber to a community solar garden. <br />They are trying to get a developer to offer the City a PPA for using the City's <br />rooftop. It could be a win-win situation. <br />He highlighted the rooftop option with the added lease payment benefit to the City. <br />The roof lease payments begin at $10,000 annually and go up slowly over time. <br />The City needs to evaluate the risk and parameters and determine if the added value <br />is worth the risk of having the panels on the roof. <br />Mr. Culver stated they will continue to look at the cost -risk to it. They would be <br />getting an annual lease payment and the major roof maintenance would come one <br />time during the 25 years. If it costs $6,000 to manage the solar panels during the <br />roof maintenance, this will affect their savings. There is risk, and the risk of losing <br />money goes down the further into it they get. <br />Member Seigler commented they could buy into the community solar garden and <br />put solar panels on the roof after that. <br />Chair Cihacek noted they would already have their energy needs met with the 120 <br />percent solar. The lowest risk option would be to lease the space and then put a <br />system up. <br />Page 8 of 16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.