To the Editor:

It is good to see that Princeton is moving forward with deploying solar panels for clean power production [“Municipality Moves Ahead on Solar Energy,” Town Topics, Sept. 28, page one]: every kilowatt hour generated by these panels means one kilowatt hour less is generated from burning fracked natural gas and mountain top removal coal.

However, it is equally important that the municipality capture the maximum revenue from these projects, funds which can in turn be invested in additional equipment that reduces or eliminates fossil fuel consumption, for example, geocoupled heat pumps, EV chargers, or battery-powered cars. While for homeowners, direct ownership rather than leasing or a power purchase agreement (PPA) for a rooftop solar array is overwhelmingly preferred, the municipality may not be willing or able to take this step.

In this case, the approach used by Princeton University should be considered. In 2011 the University signed an eight-year zero-money-down agreement with a private developer to build a 5.2 megawatt solar array on land covered by dredging spoils from Lake Carnegie. The array was paid for by sales of SRECs (Solar Renewable Energy Certificates, one certificate created for each 1,000 kWh generated by the array) and electricity to the University: all of the risk was assumed by the developer. After eight years the University will take possession of the array and will receive free electricity as well as ownership of the SRECs (which it pledged to retire rather than sell).

The University array used the highest efficiency solar cells available and solar tracking for 80 percent of the panels. This maximized array power output but increased costs, and thus payback time and risk, substantially. A conventional array such as that being built at the Sewer Authority would cost substantially less and would need perhaps a five to six year contract. After this period the benefit to the Sewer Authority would be about four to five times what it will now realize from a conventional PPA.

At the time the contract was signed University spokespeople expressed the hope that their agreement would be used as a model for other risk-averse organizations. Unfortunately this has not happened.

In addition, it should be remembered that SRECs are paid for by a surcharge on all utility customers, including those in cities such as Newark that cannot take advantage of the program. We all have an obligation to see that these incentive payments are as effective as possible in reducing fossil fuel consumption.

Alfred Cavallo

Western Way