Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Copper Mountain Solar One, a thin film photovoltaic solar facility off U.S. 95 in Boulder City seen Thursday, February 10, 2011.
Sunday, April 3, 2011 | 2:01 a.m.
Brian Sandoval
Roger Tobler
archives
- Boulder City OKs deal for solar power plant (2-22-2011)
- Copper Mountain solar plant to be dedicated Friday (3-18-2011)
- New solar plant coming to Boulder City in $46 million deal (1-12-2011)
- The one unknown about proposed solar field: Cost of energy (12-23-2010)
- Sempra solar plant in Boulder City begins operation (12-2-2010)
- Large solar energy plant to be built near Boulder City (12-14-2010)
- Boulder City burned by failed solar field (10-25-2010)
- Boulder City sends SolBio letter of default for missed $3 million payment (10-13-2010)
- Solar plant in Boulder City gets $2.9 million grant (2-18-2010)
- Boulder City finalizes deal for third solar power plant (6-12-2009)
- Sempra to expand solar power plant near Boulder City (4-15-2009)
- Gibbons dedicates solar plant near Boulder City (1-22-2009)
- Another solar power plant in the works for Boulder City (1-19-2009)
- Solar power plant opens in Boulder City (1-5-2009)
- Solar firms seek land (12-24-2008)
Sun Coverage
Some statistics about Copper Mountain Solar, a 775,000-panel array outside Boulder City that went online last year as the largest photovoltaic solar plant in the United States, might seem surprising.
And not in a good way.
Temporary construction jobs created: 350. Not bad.
Nevadans employed: 262. That’s a good share.
Solar power coming to Nevada: 0. Zip.
Parts manufactured in Nevada: 0. Zilch.
Permanent jobs created: 5. That’s not a typo. State incentives developer Sempra Generation received: $12 million. That’s not a typo, either.
Gov. Brian Sandoval says the public money was well spent. “Every job is a great job,” Sandoval said when asked if the benefits of the project justify the incentives. “It’s the essence of what we are trying to accomplish here ... in terms of diversifying the economy and taking advantage of our renewable energy resources.”
State and federal leaders have homed in on renewable energy as a solution to Nevada’s economic morass. The state has abundant sunshine and land, and solar power companies have taken notice. With businesses fleeing the state and many company owners hesitant to move here, proposals from renewable energy firms with deep pockets and promises of job creation are certainly appealing.
But questions remain about what role government should play in the industry’s development, especially as figures from completed projects come to light. The quandary can be put this way: Is it worth spending tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to create only a handful of permanent jobs?
It’s a question state lawmakers asked in 2009, and answered with new legislation, after concerns about Sempra’s employment numbers surfaced. And although legislators say they feel more confident in the company and the checks-and-balances system created, the authority designated with oversight is proposed for closure.
•••
The federal government gave Sempra Generation about $42 million in tax credits, 30 percent of the price tag for Copper Mountain. The Economic Development Commission said the 48-megawatt project cost $141 million.
State officials provided sales tax abatements for equipment purchases and a 55 percent property tax reduction for 20 years. Those incentives amounted to $12 million. The state gave Sempra an additional $2 million in concessions for El Dorado, an adjacent 10-megawatt solar array.
“Even with the abatements, the state is still netting $27 million over the life of the project,” Sempra spokesman Scott Crider said. “This money would not be available to the state if not for the solar project.”
The cash comes from property and sales taxes Sempra pays at a reduced rate.
Similar incentives are offered to any renewable energy company that commits to a project that generates more than 10 megawatts of energy, enough to power several thousand homes. Firms also must abide by certain hiring and spending requirements to receive tax breaks.
“If they didn’t have the federal or state incentives, they probably couldn’t make these projects work,” Boulder City Mayor Roger Tobler said.
Boulder City profits greatly from Sempra’s projects because it owns the land the panels sit on. It will receive $60 million in lease payments from Sempra’s two existing solar arrays.
But the overall benefit to Nevada is questionable. Even Tobler, a staunch proponent of solar development, acknowledged the incentives are justified only “to a certain degree.”
Although Sempra hired 262 Nevadans to build Copper Mountain Solar (significantly more than the 30 percent local worker share the state requires), only five of those jobs remain.
The panel parts were manufactured by First Solar of Arizona, and that same out-of-town firm served as lead contractor on the project. The power generated at Copper Mountain will be transmitted to California for the next 20 years.
Sempra Generation is a subsidiary of Sempra Energy, which owns two Southern California utilities, natural gas pipelines and storage facilities in North and South America and wind farms in Indiana and Mexico. In 2010, it reported $9 billion in revenue.
Crider said Sempra solicited requests for proposals from panel manufacturers and energy buyers throughout the Southwest, including in Nevada. California utility Pacific Gas & Electric offered a higher price for the power than NV Energy.
California utilities are aggressively pursuing solar power because they must get 33 percent of their energy supply from renewable sources by 2020. (Nevada utilities are required to get 20 percent of their energy from renewables by 2015 and 25 percent by 2025.)
Boulder City’s location and infrastructure make transmission there easy. Boulder City has abundant open land for development and sits close to the grid, a benefit of its proximity to Hoover Dam.
•••
During the 2009 legislative session, Nevada lawmakers revamped the state’s renewable energy policy to make requirements more stringent for developers. They also made incentives more lucrative.
The change occurred after Assemblywoman Marilyn Kirkpatrick, D-North Las Vegas, testified that Sempra’s El Dorado project received a $1.8 million sales tax abatement while hiring only one Nevadan. The other workers came from out of state, she said.
Sempra also provoked the ire of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers for hiring nonunion electricians, who the union insisted were not properly certified to install photovoltaic panels. A Sempra spokesman said at the time he wasn’t aware of and couldn’t respond to those accusations.
The Legislature created the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Authority to decide whether the financial benefits of a renewable energy project outweigh tax incentives offered. The authority reviews companies’ applications, conducts public hearings, and if conditions are met, grants abatements.
But less than two years after the authority was created, a measure is pending in the Legislature to eliminate it and move its duties to the state’s energy office.
To date, only six companies have gone through the authority’s review process, and none has been denied tax breaks (although one project was rejected at the local level), an energy office spokesman said. Nor have any developers been audited to confirm they are abiding by terms of their agreements.
Kirkpatrick said the law requires audits be done every two years, and the projects haven’t existed that long. She said it’s too early to issue a report card on the process.
Sempra applied for abatements before the energy authority was created so the Nevada Economic Development Commission reviewed its proposal. It was not subject to the reporting requirements legislated by the 2009 bill. Although other solar power companies must publicly outline abatements received, worker salaries and number of employees, Sempra does not. Still, Kirkpatrick said she is satisfied with the company’s hiring practices.
Sempra plans to extend its Boulder City solar footprint, and company officials acknowledge they will seek more government subsidies to do so. The Boulder City Council recently approved a Sempra proposal to more than quadruple its solar complex to produce an additional 200 megawatts of power.
Tobler said the new project should create 800 construction jobs, more than most roadway or sewer projects. But it’s unclear how many of those jobs would be permanent. Considering trends seen in other projects, it likely would be a couple dozen at most.
Lawmakers seem to be OK with that number.
Sun reporter Anjeanette Damon contributed to this story.
There's plenty for corporate welfare paid by the people.
But nothing to pay for the welfare of the people.
Is this the one that used El Salvadoran workers? I wonder what kind of donations Sandoval got from these people.
Ed--get your coffee and then take a look at what is going on.
This project did not come to fruition in January of this year. Yo don't put this up in five months. In fact, there is very little Sandoval could have done to move this along. As for donations, the renewable guys have been spreading their money around. Harry received quite a bit this past election cycle.
The state government from top to bottom has been mobilized to promote renewable energy projects at any cost. This push has been from the legislature, as well as the executive branch, for several years. Everyone, Republicans and Democrats alike are on board. No one wants to give the appearance of creating a negative environment for renewable resources.
This article asks some very tough questions about what is going on and who is paying for it and who benefits.
I am not surprise one bit.
You see this exact same numbers with ALL solar projects.
But that is not the problem.
Nevada Energy was FORCED to release how much it was paying for solar power.
It was 2 to 3 times for it pays for other power.
Do we really what our power bills to go up 2 to 3 times?
Do you realize how jobs that bill increase in the price of power would kill? It would seriously damage our economy.
Plus solar is not 24/7. It can never be. Even ones with storage are still not 24/7 and the storage makes the price go beyond the 2 to 3 times rate. That means we have to duplicate reliable 24/7 power systems. Having duplicate systems cost money......YOUR MONEY.
It is time we have a sane energy power.
But I don't see that happening.
Just like they are doing with oil and gas prices, Democrats are intent on destroying our economy with goofy electrial power policies.
We are headed to some really really really bad times.
I doubt the union knows what to do with a solar panel...look at the quality of people they hire for construcion or tradeshows..these people are never trained for those jobs,,look folks, a job is a job, everyone will bitch about something all the time - its never perfect - at least the company came to Nevada!
Another Obama job creator ------- not.
Solar could be so important to the economy of the state, yet projects like this are so misguided. Imagine the economic impact if, instead of a handful of jobs, thousands of Nevadans were were employed doing an equal amount of wattage on residential roofs? 775,000 panels installed would have translated into 30,000+ households with solar power. Result: thousands employed, happy homeowners, no transmission line loss,sales tax revenue, etc. Wake up legislature!
2011 and 2012 will end up being the "I told you so" years of Obama's failed energy plan!
The next big waste of grant money and tax dollars will be the Searchlight Wind Project. Small amount of wind 5 full time jobs and the city will look like crap and most people will move out. That is an economic death sentence!
Good work Delen. Great article, good information for Nevada residents.
Millions for a few permenent jobs that pay alot from our government. Sounds fimiliar. Like the money pit of the monorail. Well, I guess Sandavol is paying off his contributors just like Gibbons did. Will this lower our electric bill for a change? Who wants to ask? Or do we know the answer?
"48-megawatt project cost $141 million."
That's less that $3 a megawatt.
Stick a fork in nuclear at that price. I want more generation just like this. But we need one 100x as large.
Great evaluation. It makes it even clearer that far more jobs for Nevadans would be created if this money was used to install solar panels on house and building rooftops in Las Vegas. And that money would trickle down thru the Las Vegas economy when earned by local employees. Tax breaks to large out of state corporations is money that disappears as fast as a political bribe (hint,hint).
Sgt. Hard Consolidated Mineral Matter: "Just like they are doing with oil and gas prices..." Huh??
Except for an obvious disruption to flow of oil, oil and gas prices rise due to Commodities Futures trading. Deregulation of the financials (who donate heavily to both parties) is largely to blame.
There is a 6,400-acre solar project going in in Amargosa Valley and a smaller field (3,600-acre?) to be built NW of Tonopah. I'm not sure where the electricity will go for either.
Solar does not require the infrastructure and pollution control of nuclear or fossil fuel plants and does not need an extensive, technical workforce. That is what makes it desirable and more cost effective.
I have known this from the outset.
Senator Harry Reid has lied to us that there would be jobs from Solar arrays.
Whereas a typical fossil-fueled power plant generates thousands of megawatts 24/7, you're lucky to get 100 megawatts from a solar array, and then only when the sun is overhead on a cloudless day.
Harry Reid is a congenital liar. He will achieve an energy famine for our destruction.
It is good that the Las Vegas Sun finally tells us the truth about solar arrays for a change, even though it is only for sociological reasons, but not for physical reasons.
@goingbust:
Check your math my friend. 48 Megawatts = 48,000,000 watts. The price is $3 per watt.
This does not include the tax abatement, federal credits, etc nor the cost to provide backup power. The equivalent output is 9.6 megawatts, assuming a capacity factor of 20 percent or about 15 cents per kilowatt hour. That is twice the cost of electricity produced by a modern gas plant that is available to produce 70-80 percent of the time.
Yeah, I meant $3 million a megawatt. Sorry. My point is that nuclear is more expensive, not gas. Notice how I mentioned nuclear and not gas. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_o...
"February 2008 -- For two new AP1000 reactors at its Turkey Point site Florida Power & Light calculated overnight capital cost from $2444 to $3582 per kW, which were grossed up to include cooling towers, site works, land costs, transmission costs and risk management for total costs of $3108 to $4540 per kilowatt. Adding in finance charges increased the overall figures to $5780 to $8071 per kW."
So nuclear is more expensive and then you have the fun meltdown possibilities. Of course nuclear does have benefits: less land use, 24 hour capability.
@goingbust
With your numbers, the plant would cost between $6 and $8 billion. The cost of electricity generated would be about 10-12 cents per kilowatt hour.
A nuclear plant generates electricity about 90 percent of the hours in the year on average. The cost is still 20 percent lower than solar.
I agree with the waste issue.
We forgot to add in the transmission costs for the solar plant.
oops and don't forget the financing costs for the solar plant.
Notice that there are NO QUESTIONS about TAX BREAKS for the Mining Industry??? Ditto for the Casino Industry....
If it's not part of the Good Old Boy network, and the Good Old Boys aren't getting their 20-30% of the action for driving by, there is something bad to be found.
Oh - Brian Sandoval needs to get himself a new picture. This one looks like he rubbed the Brylcreem in down to his eyebrows.
The entire solar project turned into a job creating sham. I worked for a short time on the project more than a year ago.
First was the idea of "retraining workers for new technologies". ABC was all over that. They got hundreds for a short class and and almost another hundred for the book. If the person was unemployed then the government paid the bill.
Next Nevada OSHA made a yearly license each potential worker had to buy for about $30.
So 1500-2000 mostly out of work people took the class and got the license.
The problem was almost all the jobs were about the skill and pay level of a laborer. All the crews would do is bolt panels to racks. It was a very physical job. They were almost full proof as they just plugged in. It was temp work for people in a bind and maybe an ok job for an unskilled person.
As far as a local work force, some were brought in from other states, or more like other countries. They stayed in places like the Railroad Pass. The employer knew they did not qualify for the program. So they were told to say they lived in Nevada at a hotel.
You have the same group of people in Nevada pushing for more government funded training, more tax payer paid projects, utility rate increases to pay for more solar, wanting to create a hall type list of workers, and asking for donations.
Randell S. Hynes seems to be the main person I come across behind this.
His current jobs include Nevada lobbyist, solar instructor, Business Development Director Mojave Power, Marketing Director Nevada Solar Authority, Outreach Director Nevada Solar Initiative, President Solar Forces. That created 6 jobs right there.
His experience listed before being solar directors, instructor, and president was 9 months at Nova Electric and 18 months with another company he owned Envy Solar. During that same time he was also the president and lobbyist of United Taxicab Drivers "The Blue U" for a year and a taxi driver for 7 years.
Because of Randell's self proclaimed Nevadas leader in solar or lobby power he also lists these companies as employers: Nevada Solar Authority, RL Jackas Electric, Sunburst Energy, Absolute Green Technologies.
IMO the guy has 0 trade or construction experience. He has found being a lobbyist under the false intentions of being for the environment, and the worker is perfect for his misfit self.
http://www.linkedin.com/in/randellhynes
Here is the bill with Randall Haynes name at the bottom of page 1.
It says it will create more than 10,000 jobs.
How can that be when the largest solar field in the USA only had a few hundred workers. BTW it was more like 50-100 workers when I was there.
It includes a rate increase of $0.006119.
It says on page 3 the average residential bill would increase $6 for the program, plus a subsequent $4 to maintain NV Energy's lawful rate of return.
http://hipaccess.com/hynes/SB184NSAPropo...
Some of their web sites:
http://solarforces.org/index.aspx
http://hip.hynes.com/index.asp?item=1322...
As a working citizen, it would be nice, if for once, government would initiate an energy policy that favors the "little guy homeowner" by simply providing free solar panels and wind generators to go onto our properties so that we could do our green part for America and state and world, and have a BREAK in the costs of monopolized power!
Please, this is my daily prayer. Thank you!