Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Renewable Energy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
GoSolar SF credited with local installations and jobs; officials weigh Clean Power SF options
Summary
SFPUC and Department of the Environment staff highlighted GoSolar SF results—about $19.4 million paid, roughly 2,500 installations and ~8.1 MW installed—and discussed Clean Power SF/CCA feasibility work being advanced with LAFCO and supervisors to scale renewable procurement and pursue 100% renewable goals.
Barbara Hale, assistant general manager for POWER at the SFPUC, and Cal Broomhead from the Department of the Environment summarized city renewable and efficiency efforts and the policy choices before elected officials.
Hale described GoSolar SF as a municipal incentive and workforce program established in 2008 that has paid roughly $19.4 million in incentives and supported more than 2,500 installations (about 8.1 megawatts of installed capacity). The program includes a workforce component intended to hire disadvantaged San Franciscans and a low‑income solar support element. Hale said the SFPUC is dedicating capital plan funds to expand municipal and customer solar and energy-efficiency projects.
Cal Broomhead and other staff framed rooftop solar and efficiency as important but insufficient alone to meet the city's 100% renewable electricity goal: Broomhead said saturating roofs in San Francisco would yield around 7% of the city's electric load by his estimate and that even with aggressive efficiency measures rooftop and in‑city brownfields would likely place the city in the low teens without importing renewable power.
The conversation pivoted to Clean Power SF (a community-choice aggregation approach) and recent LAFCO work. Jeremy Pollack, reading a statement from Supervisor John Avalos, urged preservation of Clean Power SF planning funds and noted the Shell contract had been terminated; he recommended either joining an existing CCA (Marin Clean Energy) or launching an in-house program, with a target to launch a CCA by July 1, 2018 if policymakers authorize it. Jason Fried (LAFCO) said LAFCO's early analysis indicates a modest CCA could contribute $600,000–$1.1 million annually to the power enterprise and enable access to additional state funds for energy efficiency in residential markets.
Commissioners and staff discussed the tradeoffs between on‑bill or PACE financing, rooftop limits imposed by distribution feeders, microgrids and storage for islanding neighborhoods, and the need for more data access to optimize marketing and program targeting. Barbara Hale said the SFPUC is standing ready to support policymakers once a path for CCA or wholesale purchases is decided.
Why it matters: policy decisions about Clean Power SF/CCA and use of PUC-owned lands and resources could determine the scale and pace of local renewable development, affect Hetch Hetchy management and have budgetary and workforce implications.
Next steps: LAFCO feasibility work will continue; the PUC and Environment Department will coordinate on financing options, workforce planning, and further analysis of rooftop and ground-mounted opportunities.
