Kristen Ardani

U.S. Photovoltaic Prices and Cost Breakdowns. Q1 2015 Benchmarks for Residential, Commercial, and Utility-Scale Systems

The price of photovoltaic (PV) systems in the United States (i.e., the cost to the system owner) has continued to decline across all major market sectors. This report provides a Q1 2015 update regarding the prices of residential, commercial, and utility scale PV systems, based on an objective methodology that closely approximates the book value of a PV system. Several cases are benchmarked to represent common variations in business models, labor rates, and system architecture choice. We estimate a weighted-average cash purchase price of

U.S. Solar Photovoltaic System Cost Benchmark: Q1 2016

3.09/W for residential scale rooftop systems,

Industry Perspectives on Advanced Inverters for U.S. Solar Photovoltaic Systems. Grid Benefits, Deployment Challenges, and Emerging Solutions

2.15/W for commercial scale rooftop systems,

Quantifying non-hardware balance of system costs for photovoltaic installations in the United States using a combined annual expenditure-labor hour productivity approach

1.77/W for utility scale systems with fixed mounting structures, and

Preliminary non-hardware (“soft”) cost-reduction Roadmap for residential and small commercial solar photovoltaics, 2013-2020

1.91/W for utility scale systems using single-axis trackers. All systems are modeled assuming standard-efficiency, polycrystalline-silicon PV modules, and further assume installation within the United States.

What's driving the price of PV?

NREL has been modeling U.S. photovoltaic (PV) system costs since 2009. This report benchmarks costs of U.S. solar PV for residential, commercial, and utility-scale systems built in the first quarter of 2016 (Q1 2016). Our methodology includes bottom-up accounting for all system and project-development costs incurred when installing residential, commercial, and utility-scale systems, and it models the capital costs for such systems.

Decreasing Soft Costs for Solar Photovoltaics by Improving the Interconnection Process. A Case Study of Pacific Gas and Electric

To clarify current utility strategies and other considerations related to advanced inverter deployment, we interviewed 20 representatives from 11 leading organizations closely involved with advanced inverter pilot testing, protocols, and implementation. Included were representatives from seven utilities, a regional transmission operator, an inverter manufacturer, a leading solar developer, and a consortium for grid codes and standards. Interview data represent geographically the advanced inverter activities identified in SEPAs prior survey results--most interviewed utilities serve California, Arizona, and Hawaii, though we also interviewed others from the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and Southeast.

Benchmarking Non-Hardware Balance of System (Soft) Costs for U.S. Photovoltaic Systems Using a Data-Driven Analysis from PV Installer Survey Results

This paper presents results from the first U.S. based data collection effort to quantify non-hardware, business process costs for PV systems at the residential and commercial scales, using a bottom-up approach. Annual expenditure and labor hour productivity data are analyzed to benchmark business process costs in the specific areas of: (1) customer acquisition; (2) permitting, inspection, and interconnection; (3) installer labor costs associated with third party financing; and (4) installation labor. Annual cost and labor hour data were collected from 87 installers. After eliminating outliers, the survey sample consists of 75 installers, representing approximately 13% and 4% of 2010 added PV installations at the residential and commercial scales, respectively. Results indicate that business process costs benchmarked in this analysis (including assumed permitting fees) total

NREL U.S. Solar Photovoltaic System Cost Benchmark Q1 2016 Report

1.52/W1 for residential systems (ranging from

Installed Cost Benchmarks and Deployment Barriers for Residential Solar Photovoltaics with Energy Storage: Q1 2016

0.66/W to