Clicky

New Austin solar farm will raise electricity bills

webberville solar farm New Austin solar farm will raise electricity bills

Is it as green as it seems? This new solar farm outside Austin will cost $250 million and raise power rates.

AUSTIN, TEXAS – On KXAN TV’s noon news broadcast, an attractive female reporter performed an attractive on-camera standup, heralding the start up of the new Webberville solar farm. The PR team at Austin Energy couldn’t of done it any better. It was straight out of their well crafted press release.

In fact, many media organizations are gaga over the new 380 acre solar farm. The 127,000 photovoltaic solar modules make it one of the largest solar projects in the country. Clean, renewable energy for all is the promise. Austin is leading the way.

Utopian city officials like Mayor Lee Leffingwell were more than eager to poise the project as an example of sterling leadership.

“The Webberville Solar Project exemplifies Austin’s leadership and investment in a clean energy future,” said Leffingwell.

austin energy press con New Austin solar farm will raise electricity bills

Webberville Solar Project dedication ceremony. Austin's political heroes thank themselves for raising your utility bill.

But wait. Austin, we have a problem. The project will cost Austin $250 million. The current lifespan of photovoltaic solar panels is 15-20 years at best.

And the truth is there is no savings here for the city or consumers. In fact, utility bills for Austinites will rise because of this project. The total cost of the project will saddle the city with $10 million annual payments for the next 25 years and Austin Energy is tacking on an extra 60 cents a month to everyone’s bill to pay for it. And keep in mind, this is on top of Austin Energy’s planned rate increase that will add an additional $16 to the average power bill. Ouch!

And to top it off, many of Austin’s middle and low income residents are already struggling to keep the lights on with Austin Energy’s current rates. It seems like the city’s emphasis should be on finding ways to lower energy costs, instead of diving headfirst into tremendously expensive and unproven technologies like solar.

But at least it’ll provide green and clean power right? It’s coming from the sun after all?

What Austin Energy and the Mayor Leffingwell won’t tell the public or simply don’t know is that producing solar panels is a very dirty and environmentally unfriendly business. It’s an extremely energy-intensive process and it’s far from a zero emission technology.

Photovoltaic solar panels are constructed in much the same way silicon computer chips are made. Raw materials like quartz sand have to be mined for silicon cells and metal ore for thin film cells. Then these materials have to be treated with hazardous chemicals for the purification, crystallization and wafering processes.

Then they have to be manufactured into solar cells and assembled into modules. All these processes produce air pollution and heavy metal emissions, and they consume enormous amounts of energy, which brings about more air pollution, heavy metal emissions and also greenhouse gases.

Won’t it produce jobs at least?

No. As we learned with the Obama Administration’s Solyndra scandal, the U.S. can not manufacture solar panels as cheaply as China can. That’s why Solyndra folded like a house of cards.

In five years, the US Energy Information Administration estimates that the cost of solar PV energy will be about $211 per megawatt-hour, compared to $63 for power plants fueled by natural gas. That means it is over three times as expensive.

Most of us would agree that cutting pollution emissions and reducing our dependence on imported oil are laudable goals. But the single-minded focus by Austin Energy on solar and wind power may prove to be a very costly mistake for Austin residents.

If Austin is going to continue to grow and produce jobs for its citizens, it’s going to need to be able to provide reliable and cheap energy. High energy costs will undoubtedly kill the golden goose.

Perhaps less tax dollars and subsidies should be risked on unproven and expensive so-called “green” technologies are more emphasis placed on energy efficiency. That’s where real energy savings can be realized.

And it wouldn’t cost anyone a dime.

About Jack Hambrick

Publisher and Editor-in-Chief, The Digital Texan
Jack is Editor-in-Chief at The Digital Texan and writes about news, gossip and lifestyles in Austin. He's a former television reporter with KPRC TV Houston, WFTV TV Orlando, WFOR TV Miami, and WSFL TV /Sun-Sentinel Fort Lauderdale.
Google+
Email

  • M_weldon83

    Some comments on the factual content and tone of this article.  It seems to be an argument against renewable resource generation in favor of what?  For what ultimate goal?

    Reliability:
        “ lifespan of photovoltaic solar panels is 15-20 years”.  This is not correct.  The typical solar panel warranty from any manufacturer is currently 25 years (producing 80% of initial rated power) and is an area of competition among suppliers.  See the warranty notice for the panels used in this AE project:  http://www.trinasolar.com/us/.  
         There are crystalline solar panels which are as old as 50 years and still producing.  It is likely that these panels can produce at over 50% of current rated capacity for over 40-50 years.

     Cost – $ and environment
           Don’t compare solar against current generation sources whose capital plant costs are already sunk.  What is the cost and environmental impact of the next new source of electric power?  None is free of environmental footprint, but wind and solar are far superior in this regard.  In terms of cost, the least expensive sources available to Austin Energy are wind, DG solar (distributed generation, where individual home or commercial site property owners voluntarily contribute to the system cost), natural gas and utility scale solar and likely in that order.  The last coastal wind PPA (power purchase agreement) is for delivered power only at 4 cents/kwh – remarkable!
          Solar power simply has the most predictable cost over a project’s life time.  Simply as a fuel hedge solar should command a premium in terms of value.  Austin Energy has spent more on natural gas hedging (think placing a big insurance bet with Goldman Sachs and being grateful to have lost the money because it means you aren’t losing your shirt a high gas price spike) than on all of its solar and energy efficiency rebate programs.  These past and future expenditures say more about the volumes of natural gas AE consumes and past price volatility than it does about the value of the renewable and energy savings programs.
        I would be love to see a guarantee from any gas or coal supplier regarding the price of fuel in 25 years and to indemnify general citizenry and land owners against ground water pollution.  Instead the gas producers recently sought and received an exception from the clean water act (do a web search on the “Halliburton Loophole”) so instead of offering any kind of performance guarantee, this industry actually sought an exception from future responsibility for any damages it might cause – despite having demonstrated capability to comply.

           Some might have noticed that White Stallion (the last attempt at a new coal plant in TX) was denied a water use permit by the LCRA due to water concerns.  It would have become the 3rd largest hard water commitment on the Colorado River after the city of Austin and the coastal nuclear power plant.  This conflict will become more common for all thermal generation sources. 

           Austin Energy must evaluate every generation option whenever it is considering capacity additions.  Each source has its pros and cons but solar must be reconsidered at every instance because it is becoming more attractive every year and it brings with it less uncertainty and negative impact.

  • Pedro

    Most panels are manufactured with a 25 year warranty…estimated lifespan of 40-50 years.

    Energy demand is increasing every year….simple supply and demand…thus increase in kwh’s.

    Whether people like it or not China producing panels actually stimulates the silicon exports here in the U.S. thus creating/keeping jobs. Solyndra was projected to fail and be in bankruptcy before they got tax payer dollars…

    Do some more research before writing such a one sided article, big solar has some negative arguments but overall it one of the cleanest most predictable renewable sources on the planet. In my opinion the .163 cent per kwh PPA rate is way too high. 

  • 1pablo

    Kyocera was the first company in the industry to successfully mass-produce multicrystalline silicon solar cells. Evidence of the long-term quality and reliability of our modules can be found in a 43kW solar power generating system that we installed in 1984 on our research center which is still generating electricity at an extremely high level compared to its original power output. KYOCERA solar modules are a reliable, virtually maintenance-free power supply designed to convert sunlight into electricity at the highest possible efficiency. KYOCERA began researching photovoltaic’s in 1975 and has installed thousands of systems throughout the world since 1978.

    KYOCERA has perfected its new surface treatment technology and is introducing it on a new line of modules named d.Blue, for its dark blue color.
     
    The newly developed treatment method processes multi-crystalline silicon cells in order to produce a surface texture that minimizes surface reflectance and maximizes output. The result is a maximum conversion efficiency of 15 %, one of the highest conversion efficiencies in the polycrystalline module industry.
     
    d.Blue is ideal for installation on all types of buildings, from residential to large scale commercial systems. The stylish dark blue cells, combined with black module frames, allow the modules to blend in with the buildings architecture while producing energy at exceptional efficiencies.

    I hope this information helps. The only maintenance you may need if any is to cut the trees so they won’t shed the panels, but that’s only if you have tall trees. Today Kyocera is producing the PV panels in San Diego and the inverters are made in Arizona. The efficiency is better and the reliability is great. Germany has 50% of the PV solar panel market in the world and with only 3.5 hours average of sun per day.  You might wonder why are we not number 1 with over 7 hours? Is it because of guys like Digital Texan not wanting to do their homework??

  • URKiddinMee

    Wait till a Texas sized tornado winds its way through THIS installation.  Ask us from Foat Wuth!