Upload
ophelia-neal
View
212
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
GRID Alternatives
Solar for Low-Income FamiliesCalifornia case study
STANLEY GRESCHNERDirector – SASH Program
Phone: (510) 731-1322E-mail: [email protected]
Organization Background
• Non-profit 501(c)(3) organization• CA licensed C-10 electrical contractor• Program Administrator of California’s Single-
family Affordable Solar Homes (SASH) Rebate Program
GRID Alternatives
• Volunteer-based installation model
SASH ProgramA Comprehensive Low-Income Solar Program
• Higher incentives than general market CSI Program
• Energy Efficiency • Workforce Development• Volunteers and Community Engagement
GRID Alternatives
SASH Program• Budget $108M; runs through 2015• 7 rebate levels: $4.75 – $7.00/W; free 1kW
system• Installed Capacity: 14-16 MW (5000-6000
systems)• Income: <80% AMI or <50% AMI for free
system• Resale restricted affordable housing
GRID Alternatives
Why Solar for Low-Income FamiliesEconomic
• High energy costs• Significant savings• Proportionally greater economic benefit
Environmental Justice• Power plants often sited in low-income communities• High rates of asthma
Jobs • Engages low-income communities in emerging sector
Helps Develop a Sustainable Solar Industry • Moves the industry beyond the “initial adopter” phase; Solar is
not only for wealthy individuals
GRID Alternatives
A Successful Low-Income Solar Program
Financial Commitment:• Dedicated budget• Differential incentive/rebate
Dedicated Partners:• Program development (what we’re doing
today)• Accessing communities and customers• Marketing, Outreach, and Oversight
GRID Alternatives
A Successful Low-Income Solar Program
**Think Beyond MW**Long term vision:
• What infrastructure is left in place to continue serving this unique market segment
Comprehensive Program:• Integrate with other low-income energy
programs• Workforce development, community
engagement
GRID Alternatives
A Successful Low-Income Solar Program
Clearly defined eligibility requirements:• Define low-income: federal poverty level
vs. area median income (AMI)• Affordable housing, qualified census
tracts, EZ/EC, Targeted Employment Areas, etc.
• Homeowners vs. renters• Be as inclusive as possible
GRID Alternatives
The Challenges• Long term return on investment not a motivator, low-income
families need day one positive cash flow
• General distrust or skepticism of new/complex programs
• Poor ‘front-end’ economics (electricity rate, small systems, no tax liability)
• Financial strain and foreclosure climate make loans challenging
• Multi-lingual, multi-cultural marketing
• Consumer Protection
GRID Alternatives
Some Questions to Consider
• What type of housing do low-income residents have (multi/single, own/rent)?
• Is there an upfront cost to participate and what is the ROI?
• How to protect participants and maximize their benefits
• Are there city funds that can be leveraged to supplement the utility ratepayer funded program (CDBG, EE, home rehab, etc.)
• If the market segment is narrow (i.e. affordable housing), who is responsible for marketing, outreach, and oversight?
GRID Alternatives
GRID Alternatives
THANK YOU
Stanley [email protected]: (510) 731-1322
GRID Alternatives1171 Ocean Ave, Suite 200 Oakland, CA 94608www.gridalternatives.org