Let the sun shine?

At last Monday's Board of Ed meeting, a Ridgewood resident presented a proposal for installing solar panels on several school buildings. The resident owns a solar company, Verterra. Basically, the plan would be for the company to install panels on seven schools -- those that have ideal building locations, roof conditions, etc. The schools with feasible set-ups are: Travell, Orchard, Hawes, RHS, BF Middle School, Somerville and GW Middle School. You'll notice that these are basically the schools with the most flat roof area. Other buildings are not on the list because their roofs are too sloped (Willard, Ed Center) or their roofs are older and are slated for replacement in the next 3-5 years (Ridge, Glen).

The basic proposal is that Verterra installs the panels on the roofs. Verterra owns the panels and is responsible for all installation, upkeep, repair, cleaning, etc. Verterra then sells the power generated by the panels to the school district, at a rate that is lower than we pay to PSE&G.

Why don't we just install panels ourselves and generate our own power? The cost to install solar panels is expensive. Recent estimates have shown that it would take 15 years or so for the panels to pay for themselves -- and then they could need to be replaced or at least updated, at additional cost. It's true that the government --both state and federal -- have incentive plans for solar, but those plans' benefits are in tax credits. If you're a school district -- we don't pay federal or state tax -- then the subsidies and tax credits wouldn't do us any good. Instead, a company like Verterra gets the tax credits, is able to sell us power at a more attractive rate, and still makes their own profit.

How much money could the school district save? Not that much. Approx. $25,000 to $50,000 per year. That's not nothing, but it's not a tremendous savings. You don't undertake a project like this solely for the financial savings. But there are other benefits -- doing the right thing for the planet, being good "green" citizens, modeling eco-smart behavior for our students, as well as creating learning opportunities for kids. Through a web-based "dashboard" or kiosks in the schools, Verterra is able to provide functionality that would let students monitor the panels in real-time, to see how much power is being generated, and use real data from our system to learn about energy. That's a neat benefit as well.

The proposal is being evaluated by the administration and Board. More info to come.

Solar power on the agenda tonight.

I forgot to mention in my previous post regarding tonight's agenda, that the Board will be hearing a presentation about a solar power program for our schools. We've been discussing the plan in the Facilities Committee for several months, so I'm looking forward to a conversation with the full Board and with the public. Stay tuned...

A good investment?

I saw an article in the Record last week about Teaneck installing solar panels on some of its municipal buildings. I find it astonishing that this project is moving forward in this economy. Here's the interesting math from the article: the solar panels will cost a total of $615,000 to install. And the annual cost savings will be $9,200. So the panels will have paid for themselves in just over 66 years. (Will those panels even still be there in 66 years? I highly doubt it!)

Yes, yes, Teaneck also says it plans to sell energy credits back to public utilities, to generate income. This is pretty speculative. They think they'll be able to generate $30,000 a year, but there are no guarantees of that. But let's give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they can realize $39,200 per year in either income or savings. That still means over 15 years to pay for the solar panels, which probably will need to be replaced before then!

I bring this up because occasionally someone will ask why the Ridgewood schools aren't looking into solar panels at our schools. Actually, the Facilities Committee has looked into it and, as Teaneck has proven, the return on investment is ridiculously low. Our district has focused, instead, on energy conservation. Thanks to programs like our relationship with Energy for America, which monitors our buildings and regulates boilers for maximum efficiency, the district has reduced energy usage by 30% over the past 10 years or so. I think that makes a lot more sense than spending cash (which we don't have, by the way) for minimal savings.