Houston Gets Texas' Largest Solar Farm

[editor]

City of Houston and NRG Energy Developing

Largest Solar Farm in Texas

Ten megawatts of clean renewable power online in early 2010

The City of Houston has selected NRG Energy, Inc. (NYSE: NRG) in a competitive bid process to develop, own and operate the largest solar project in Texas to date. The agreement must be approved by the Houston City Council and Mayor in a process expected to begin next week.

Using the latest photovoltaic (PV) technology, the proposed project will have the capacity to generate approximately 10 megawatts (MW) of clean, renewable solar power which would be purchased by the city under a long-term power purchase agreement. Ten megawatts is roughly 6.25% of the City's annual consumption and is equivalent to the energy required to power over 7,000 homes. The EPA currently lists Houston as the country's No. 1 municipal purchaser of renewable energy.

The Solar initiative is consistent with the City's prior renewable purchases and the ongoing weatherization and efficiency efforts that mark the City's commitment to reducing its impact on the environment while continuing to meet its ongoing energy needs. The facility, as proposed, would come online in the second quarter of 2010 and would create approximately 100 jobs during construction. The project would supply the City with both sustainable power and Renewable Energy Credits which would be needed under a number of the environmental initiatives being proposed by Congress.

"The City of Houston has established itself as a leader in green energy projects. That includes both energy efficiency and renewable energy. These are things we all have to think about and plan for as we face the challenges of an uncertain and more costly energy future. Using renewable sources of energy such as solar and wind power means we are conserving energy, saving money and protecting the environment," said Mayor White.

NRG was selected as the generator best able to deliver the facility on time with an innovative solar power project that reduces cost and ensures Houston's energy needs are met. The City will purchase the full 10 MW at a blended cost of 8.2 cents/kilowatt hour. To achieve this blended price, the solar-generated power will be complemented and backed up by NRG's extensive and diverse generation portfolio to economically meet Houston power needs at night and on days when weather conditions do not allow solar generation at maximum capacity. This long-term power purchase agreement provides a fixed price over the life of the agreement for the solar generation, protecting the city from price fluctuations due to natural gas price volatility of the type experienced in the summer of 2008 and following Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

The facility will be developed at NRG's TH Wharton Electrical Generating Station in northwest Houston. By using land an existing NRG site, the solar project can take advantage of available land and existing nearby interconnects to reduce costs.

NRG plans to use PV solar modules manufactured by First Solar, Inc. to turn sunlight directly into electricity. First Solar has been a leader in advanced solar technology since it began commercial production in 2002.

[AtticaFlinch]

Considering our last state congress bricked on the whole "green" power issue, I'm not surprised local government has picked up the slack. It had to happen for this city to continue to enjoy our "king of the mountain" stature when it comes to energy.

[totheskies]

Will this be inside the actual Houston city limits?

[kylejack]

Will this be inside the actual Houston city limits?

I believe so. I found another story that said the TH Warton facility is near Beltway 8 and 249.

[barracuda]

Glad to see this. I wonder if Steve Inskeep knew about Houston being the top municipal purchaser of renewable energy when he essentially called the city out for being energy hogs.

[kylejack]

Texas generates more wind power than any other state. I personally am purchasing my electricity from 100% wind via Dynowatt and the prices are pretty competitive. Not the cheapest possible, but certainly cheaper than Reliant.

[barracuda]

Texas generates more wind power than any other state. I personally am purchasing my electricity from 100% wind via Dynowatt and the prices are pretty competitive. Not the cheapest possible, but certainly cheaper than Reliant.

I have gexa green 100% wind power and pay 10.7 cents/kWh. The price is low enough that I wonder why more people don't switch.

[kylejack]

I have gexa green 100% wind power and pay 10.7 cents/kWh. The price is low enough that I wonder why more people don't switch.

10.6 mwahaha

[gto250us]

There is a lot that is not said in this press release. Such as: How will this deal benefit the average consumer of electricity in Houston? Will this offset only the "City" electric bills? What is the formula for awarding the Renewable Energy Credits? What does the "City" currently pay for power?

Most consumers in Houston who have signed up for renewable power sources such as Gexa Green and Dynowatt still get most of their power from the South Texas Nuke Plant. Your money actually subsidizes the renewable power that is generated and used elsewhere.

[kylejack]

There is a lot that is not said in this press release. Such as: How will this deal benefit the average consumer of electricity in Houston? Will this offset only the "City" electric bills? What is the formula for awarding the Renewable Energy Credits? What does the "City" currently pay for power?

Most consumers in Houston who have signed up for renewable power sources such as Gexa Green and Dynowatt still get most of their power from the South Texas Nuke Plant. Your money actually subsidizes the renewable power that is generated and used elsewhere.

The grid isn't capable of delivering West Texas electricity to Houston's grid? Where can I read up some more on this, because it interests me.

[AtticaFlinch]

The grid isn't capable of delivering West Texas electricity to Houston's grid? Where can I read up some more on this, because it interests me.

It's the first I heard we didn't get power from the Texas power grid. For those who want to know, this image shows all the areas in Texas on the Texas grid. If we aren't getting wind power from West Texas outside the Panhandle, that's news to me.

http://www.greentech...ake-power-5347/

[gto250us]

Here is the story in the NYT. They have different numbers.

Houston has long been the country’s oil and gas capital, but some business executives say it is only a matter of time before it becomes a center for renewable energy as well.

That aspiration may be about to come one step closer.

The lead story in The Houston Chronicle on Thursday reports that NRG Energy, the big wholesale power generation company, may be delivering a considerable amount of solar energy to Houston as soon as next year.

Under a proposal due to be announced in the next several hours, the city would purchase power for its buildings from a new NRG solar energy plant to be completed in July. Its 10-megawatt capacity would be the largest in Texas, and would provide as much as 1.5 percent of the city government’s power needs.

The plant would employ thin-film photovoltaic solar panels.

Issa Dadoush, the director of the city’s General Services Department, was quoted by The Chronicle as saying, “Houston always talks about being the energy capital of the world, but we’d like to see it transformed into the energy conservation and renewable capital.”

The contract still needs to be approved by the City Council. Council members will need to consider the costs of solar energy, which are normally higher than other forms of energy.

But supporters say it is wise to diversify energy sources, noting that electricity prices had spiked in recent years after hurricanes damaged local natural gas production and processing equipment.

[gto250us]

I think you guys are getting confused. Yes, consumers in Houston get their power from the Texas grid. Yes all of the windmills, solar cells that are connected to the grid contribute the power supply. But, the grid in huge and the renewable component in tiny, but getting larger. The point that I made is that those who sign up for "renewable" or "green" plans are plugged into the same grid as their neighbors who are not signed up. They both get the same power. Chances are that the electrons coming into your house were bumped into your house by the nearest powerplant. In Houston that would either be a natural gas powered plant or the ST Nuke.

[kylejack]

I think you guys are getting confused. Yes, consumers in Houston get their power from the Texas grid. Yes all of the windmills, solar cells that are connected to the grid contribute the power supply. But, the grid in huge and the renewable component in tiny, but getting larger. The point that I made is that those who sign up for "renewable" or "green" plans are plugged into the same grid as their neighbors who are not signed up. They both get the same power. Chances are that the electrons coming into your house were bumped into your house by the nearest powerplant. In Houston that would either be a natural gas powered plant or the ST Nuke.

It doesn't matter which specific electron I get, actually. Power is fed into and out of the grid. The wind manufacturers can only sell as many kwh as have been purchased by customers on wind power. Electricity is fungible, so it doesn't matter which juice I am getting. I may technically be getting nuclear electrons or coal-generated or whatever, but I am creating the demand on the wind energy and allowing them to feed more into the grid and get paid for it.

[TheNiche]

Let's try a thought experiment.

Think of a flat plane in the shape of ERCOT. This is an unelectrified power grid. Now think of points that are fairly randomly distributed within the plane from which water is pumped onto the surface of the plain at different rates per unit of time. These points represent power plants. Say that a different color food dye is added to the water spewing forth from each of these points according to a designation that represents the kind of production. In a short period of time, without consumers, you'd have a uniformly-colored flooded-out mess where the dominant colors represent a perponderance of coal, nuclear, and natural gas. But that uniform mix is unrealistic; we don't consume the straight percentages of power from different sources that are available to the grid.

To represent concentrations of consumers, imagine a number of funnel-shaped vortices coming off the plane. Houston and Dallas are massive vortices and suck up very large quantities, while a town like Brenham is barely noticable. The trick is to ensure that enough water is brought forth that the entire grid remains continuously flooded, however it is difficult because the size of the vortices is a variable determined mostly by the time of day and weather conditions and because the source points of water are variously limited by maintenance and (in the case of renewables) by weather.

Most source points for the renewably-color-coded water are along the western portion of the grid, however there are sufficiently large vortices between the source points and Houston that the hydrodynamics of flow across this plane ensure that the vast majority of the volume of that water is going to be captured by vortices closer to where it is brought forth. (I'd hypothesize that the string of population centers along I-35 is probably a pretty hard barrier, too.) Also, if an especially high-volume source point is located somewhere on the plane, the gush of water being put forth will tend to prevent the output of other source points from getting anywhere near it. (Along these lines, I'd hypothesize that Bay City is just about entirely nuclear, while Houston's demand is sufficiently large that nuclear is not the primary energy source).

This thought experiment oversimplifies some issues, but it is pretty close to being accurate. There's a very good reason that so many terms used by electricians are actually borrowed from plumbing. Electrons and water just behave similarly.

The take-away from all this is that buying wind power is mostly just akin to buying carbon offsets. It does affect the calculus, but not in such a way as that the consumer (in Houston) is actually enjoying very much of the genuine product. ...not that it matters, as kylejack aptly points out.

[kylejack]

Let's try a thought experiment.

Think of a flat plane in the shape of ERCOT. This is an unelectrified power grid. Now think of points that are fairly randomly distributed within the plane from which water is pumped onto the surface of the plain at different rates per unit of time. These points represent power plants. Say that a different color food dye is added to the water spewing forth from each of these points according to a designation that represents the kind of production. In a short period of time, without consumers, you'd have a uniformly-colored flooded-out mess where the dominant colors represent a perponderance of coal, nuclear, and natural gas. But that uniform mix is unrealistic; we don't consume the straight percentages of power from different sources that are available to the grid.

To represent concentrations of consumers, imagine a number of funnel-shaped vortices coming off the plane. Houston and Dallas are massive vortices and suck up very large quantities, while a town like Brenham is barely noticable. The trick is to ensure that enough water is brought forth that the entire grid remains continuously flooded, however it is difficult because the size of the vortices is a variable determined mostly by the time of day and weather conditions and because the source points of water are variously limited by maintenance and (in the case of renewables) by weather.

Most source points for the renewably-color-coded water are along the western portion of the grid, however there are sufficiently large vortices between the source points and Houston that the hydrodynamics of flow across this plane ensure that the vast majority of the volume of that water is going to be captured by vortices closer to where it is brought forth. (I'd hypothesize that the string of population centers along I-35 is probably a pretty hard barrier, too.) Also, if an especially high-volume source point is located somewhere on the plane, the gush of water being put forth will tend to prevent the output of other source points from getting anywhere near it. (Along these lines, I'd hypothesize that Bay City is just about entirely nuclear, while Houston's demand is sufficiently large that nuclear is not the primary energy source).

This thought experiment oversimplifies some issues, but it is pretty close to being accurate. There's a very good reason that so many terms used by electricians are actually borrowed from plumbing. Electrons and water just behave similarly.

The take-away from all this is that buying wind power is mostly just akin to buying carbon offsets. It does affect the calculus, but not in such a way as that the consumer (in Houston) is actually enjoying very much of the genuine product. ...not that it matters, as kylejack aptly points out.

I think its not important so much to enjoy genuine product as long as I am not increasing demand on energy generated from coal and etc. and am increasing demand on wind. Clearly I am to some degree increasing coal demand since the grid is not perfect, but hopefully grid upgrades will make the solution more elegant. Anyway, I'm much more hostile to coal and gas generated than I am to nuclear. Nuclear will be a big part of our power future, I'm quite sure.

Also, I think there's probably a lot more fraud going on in carbon offset credits, which are not regulated as tightly as energy or perhaps even hardly at all.

[TheNiche]

I think its not important so much to enjoy genuine product as long as I am not increasing demand on energy generated from coal and etc. and am increasing demand on wind. Clearly I am to some degree increasing coal demand since the grid is not perfect, but hopefully grid upgrades will make the solution more elegant.

Also, I think there's probably a lot more fraud going on in carbon offset credits, which are not regulated as tightly as energy or perhaps even hardly at all.

Everything you just said is right on the money (even though I myself don't really give a rat's patooty about my own CO2 emissions). I'm just trying to illustrate the concept for those that weren't familiar with it.

[musicman]

Texas generates more wind power than any other state. I personally am purchasing my electricity from 100% wind via Dynowatt and the prices are pretty competitive. Not the cheapest possible, but certainly cheaper than Reliant.

from tx electric choice...

Reliant Energy

Reliant PowerTracker ®

Terms of Service | Facts Label

Sign Up | Special Terms

*Offer available only to customers enrolling in this plan online.

Special Terms

9.9¢

Dynowatt

Residential Variable Plan

Terms of Service | Facts Label

Sign Up | Special Terms Special Terms

The variable price shown here is the unit price that will be shown on your first invoice.

10.3¢

[kylejack]

from tx electric choice...

Reliant Energy

Reliant PowerTracker ®

Terms of Service | Facts Label

Sign Up | Special Terms

*Offer available only to customers enrolling in this plan online.

Special Terms

9.9¢

Dynowatt

Residential Variable Plan

Terms of Service | Facts Label

Sign Up | Special Terms Special Terms

The variable price shown here is the unit price that will be shown on your first invoice.

10.3¢

If you want a variable or indexed rate be my guest, but I prefer fixed rate. My budgeting is the same regardless of energy price fluctations and that's how I like it. I'm locked in at 10.6 with 100% renewable energy [well, as much as the grid can provide]. Dynowatt is currently selling the same for 11.1 on a 6 month contract or 12.0 on a 12 month contract (looks like they expect prices to be going up) and Reliant is selling 20% renewable fixed rate for 12.9.