Comments on: SEIA trashes Gainesville Solar Feed-in Tariff

By: Jeff

Jeff — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 20:50:34 +0000

I don’t think we should be questioning Mr. Murphy’s credibility or his motive – the fact is, he is right. Speaking as a subsidizing rate payer, I don’t appreciate the fact that I am paying $.32/kwh for electricity to line the pockets from outside Florida instead of supporting local investors on local projects.

By: Daniel Rudeson

Daniel Rudeson — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 07:56:26 +0000

Mr. Murphy,

Your credibility is highly questionable. I have noticed that you have posted on every website related to the Gainesville feed-in-tariff program. You seem to have some personal vendetta against the municipal utility.

All one has to do is google Gainesville feed in tariff and Kevin Murphy to see my point.

D.R.

By: Tom Jacobs

Tom Jacobs — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 07:41:03 +0000

Kevin,

You sound like a disgruntled bidder to me. What is your real beef?

By: Top 10 GUNTHER Portfolio Photovoltaic Posts of 2009 | GUNTHER Portfolio

Top 10 GUNTHER Portfolio Photovoltaic Posts of 2009 | GUNTHER Portfolio — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 21:06:07 +0000

[...] SEIA trashes Gainesville Solar Feed-in Tariff was set into motion by my tweet from the PV Industry Forum. How does the SEIA spell FiT (Feed-in [...]

By: Navigant Consulting’s Bearish 2009 Photovoltaic Backcast | GUNTHER Portfolio

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 07:21:37 +0000

[...] to a fault. After all, Ms. Mints’ questions were instrumental in drawing out Rhone Resch for the SEIA trashes Gainesville Solar Feed-in Tariff [...]

By: Kevin Murphy

Kevin Murphy — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 18:39:20 +0000

Joe, Todd and Scott- While I respect everything you are expressing regarding “first adopter” syndrome for GRU. The fact is Ed Regan and his staff met with experts who I know personally who advised them to implement revisions BEFORE they started accepting applications prematurely. (If you recall, the majority of the first year’s capacity was reserved prior to the official launch date) Despite having been advised by experts, Ed, in particular, adamantly opposed any revisions as it would, “make it too complicated”. When it was clear no headway would be made with GRU, the same advisers approached every commissioner and the Mayor and guess what? They refused to change anything. The Mayor said, ” We are just going to let it work itself out”. Excuse me, ma’am? That means you expect the local industry to suffer to figure out what you already know, the program is broken.

There should be no excuses offered for GRU’s lack of performance. They are using ratepayer money to line the pockets of inept investors from NY, Georgia and Florida. Meanwhile, ratepayers who had intended to go solar are left in the dust. Dont make excuses for incompetence. There is plenty of that in this Country already. If we start excusing such behavior ir will only spread like a disease.

On a final note, besides a lot of hot air, nothing substantial has resulted from this FIT. You have a bunch of wannabes, not established firms, with hypothetical systems reserved. There are no big projects being built right now. Granted some projects are currently tied in with the FIT, but these were jobs that were already going to be built. Let’s not pretend the FIT has done anything for job growth or renewable development in Gainesville.. In one week in California, more solar is installed that has been since Gainesville launched this program 8 months ago.

By: Joe Solar

Joe Solar — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 17:07:04 +0000

The first FIT program in the US was destined for criticism, problems, and revisions. That is just the American way. It has been problematic, but I do not think the word failure should be associated with it. Bottom line is that in 10 years, Gainesville should have 40 MW of solar. That is a lot for a town of our size. When criticizing GRU, keep in mind what we were asking Gainesville and GRU to do. This is something new to the US and it is a program with so many variables and accounting implications that most of the “little guys” can not make it work. I have been working with this program for over a year and I have tried to convince a lot people to get involved. Financing anything right now is difficult, let alone a new program that lasts 20 years with no track record (for the FiT I mean). I have tried to get financing, but banks are just not lending. I have tried to get people involved, but they waited to see what happened and they missed the boat (reservations are now being taken for 2015), but that is not GRUs fault.

I agree 100% that the application process could have been handled better, but I highly doubt ego has anything to do with it. I would argue that the Execs that made these decisions were more worried about legal issues and job security rather than ego. They were warned of the outsourcing of installations and mega corps getting involved. But with no one else offering a FiT, of course, the big companies were going to pounce on Gainesville and there is little we can do to stop that. If the FiT becomes statewide or nationwide, many of these applications will be pulled and the locals will again be able to get involved.

We were at least able to make sure that each installation was done by qualified installers so that the systems perform as expected and at least the program will be a success on that level. I think it is great that Gville is leading the charge on this. Without it, solar would not be happening at the rate it is.

By: Todd Rainsberger, PhD

Todd Rainsberger, PhD — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 00:38:16 +0000

I find it odd (the nicest word that seems applicable) that people are condeming a program before it has had a chance to succeed or fail. As someone involved in the Gainesville FiT, it takes time to line up projects, time to create legal agreements necessary to operate a solar system for 20 years, and time to obtain financing. Financial institutions do not loan millions of dollars easily. GRU has made great efforts to make the process simple, fair, and open.

Sure pioneers get the arrows, but it’s unfair to condemn a project before it has a chance to prove itself.

By: Scott Davies

Scott Davies — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 13:28:11 +0000

Kevin is correct up to a point. I have been personaly involved with how the FIT went down in Gainesville. The worst part of it is that with the poor system of reviewing applications, over eighty percent of the monies will now be going to California and New York, the ratepayers (mostly residential) who actually pay for the policy are locked out for years to come, the local solar installers have been bypassed for the most part and the biggest chunk of the queque is reserved by a company that has never installed a system ever!
I would say it is more inexperience with a new policy than ego though that is certainly a factor with all things human and as per GRU. However, do not give up hope for the Gainesville FIT yet. A number of us here are dedicated to “fixing the FIT”. I do hope that the mayor and city commission will recognize the seriousness of what has happened to the FIT “underneath the hype” and GRU will review and correct it’s method of application acceptance as well as some of it’s caps to reflect the greater purpose of helping our community as was originally presented to the city commission and the people of Gainesville.

By: Kevin Murphy

Kevin Murphy — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 21:21:09 +0000

I agree with SEIA. I have first hand knowledge that the GRU managed program is one of the worst ever seen. The structure is deplorable but the Chief, Ed Regan, was too busy holding press conferences and basking in the glow of his new title, “Father of the Feed in Tariff” to notice. Few of the systems reserved will ever be built. GRU is a fine example of how NOT to administer a FIT program! The guys who have the majority of the money tied up have never installed a system in their lives, let alone megawatt scale systems. Give me a break! This could have been a success but has been a colossal failure as a result of ego issues with the executives at GRU