Community solar is the fastest growing segment of the solar industry, allowing customers who cannot install solar panels at their homes to subscribe to offsite solar arrays. The community solar market is expected to grow significantly in coming years as many states have mandated minimum amounts of community solar capacity that utilities must develop. True Green could leverage its experience developing attractive solar deals to become a turnkey provider of community solar projects. Partnering with other companies would help True Green with customer acquisition and management. Emerging models like community choice aggregators and microgrids also present opportunities to apply the community solar model.

1. The Community Solar
Opportunity for TGC
August 2015
Asher Talerman
Summer Associate

2. Community Solar’s Expansion
 Fastest growing segment of solar industry
 115 MW currently installed
 E2016 ~500MW
 2020, annual 500 MW opportunity
 Compound annual growth of 59%
 An untapped market: 50-75% of utility customers without a suitable roof
 Easier applicability to low-income households, renters, lower FICO scores
 Overall trend – users don’t want to own an asset; rather rent/share
 Uber, Airbnb …
 Residential Solar more of a threat to utilities, Community Solar more of an opportunity for
their involvement
 Leverage access to customers and low cost of capital

3. Utilities Shifting Priorities?
 Over the next 5 years, relationship b/w rate-payer, utility, developer much more
dynamic than before
 Legislation forcing utilities’ hand (Recent examples):
 Minnesota’s RPS set at 30% renewables with 1.5% specifically for solar by 2025
 Colorado’s “Community Solar Gardens Act” – CPUC compliance plan for utilities, XCEL
Energy particularly
 Some acting individually: Tuscon Electric Power
 Customers buy specific output from utility owned system, 10 yr fixed contract
 No framework for 3rd party developers to sell community solar in AZ
 Still pushing back – particularly vs. Net-metering rates (NEM) including Virtual NEM
 Across the board TOU rates (CA) will benefit value added of solar DG

4. Major Players
 Clean Energy Collective
 creates a special-purpose entity to manage each community-funded solar project
 Large presence in Massachusetts in addition to MN and CO.
 SunShare
 Partnership with NRG, big in both Minnesota and Colorado
 Soveren Solar
 Exclusively Vermont projects
 SolarCity
 Partnership with Sunrise Energy Ventures in Minnesota, 100 1 MW projects around Minneapolis – St. Paul
 Arista Power
 NY State based Solar Gardens, involved in NYSERDA MicroGrid opportunities
 Geromino Energy
 Minnesota Utility-scale developer, involved in Wind farms as well
 Ecoplexus
 Numerous Colorado Community Solar Gardens

5. Different State Programs
 Utilities can own facility directly and include rate-base for solar generation
 Alternatively, buy power through PPA and present that generation as opt-in to ratepayers
 California, Colorado, Massachusetts, Minnesota all mandate utilities to set up Community Solar specific
programs
 California
 SB 43 Mandates 600 MW of Community Solar interconnected by July 1st, 2016
 Public Utilities Commission yet to make final ruling on mandate’s structure for utility – developer relationship
 Massachusetts
 Full SREC-II credit, robust Virtual NEM program
 However, cap on NEM capacity
 Colorado
 XCEL Energy to purchase solar garden energy to fill portion of RPS (20-40%)
 RECs belong to subscriber as well
 Minnesota
 5 MW cap on Community Solar Gardens
 XCEL Energy purchases power in much the same way as Colorado (fill RPS requirement, RECs)
 Many more applications to interconnect projects than program capacity since Dec. 2014 (oversupply)
 743 MW pipeline – worth looking into despite heavy number of applications

6. True Green’s Entry and Value
 Community Solar different from classic “Utility Scale” through customer choice
aspect
 Private DG owners have experience managing attractive, low cost deals, delivering
savings
 Utilities not built for this type of service
 True Green offers:
 Lower tech. + operational risk
 Reduced upfront capital cost
 Willingness to develop effective projects smaller than IOU’s will do themselves
 Efficient monetization of tax credits
 Turnkey provider alternative
 Not only own and operate system, but design program, acquire customers, bear risk
 Popular with cooperatives
 Not so much with IOU’s (taken out of revenue stream)

7. Vital Partnerships
 Challenge in Community Solar is customer identification and outreach to excite about the concept
 Providing an intimate experience to track their share of solar production
 Biggest risk is undersold program supply
 Larger program / site, harder to sell out
 TGC won’t be managing massive customer account portfolio
 Outsourcing:
 Customer acquisition and continuing management
 Subscription administration, turnover management
 Software specific for Community Solar account management
 Tendril
 Marketed at Utilities, but platform for acquisition, lead qualification and account management applies to
turnkey developer too
 CEC’s RemoteMeter
 production tracking and integration, on-bill crediting, customer contracts, and overall program management
 LGCY Power (Residential reseller of SunEdison panels)

8. Pricing + Crediting Basics
 Customer charged for subscribed share of solar generation
 Usually pay for a certain number of kW of larger system and/or the resulting production
 Receives credit on utility bill for offset grid resources
 I.e., the utility’s pre-existing power that was not utilized
 How to value the credit?
1. NEM: full retail rate (not sustainable)
2. Disaggregated: customer pays for T&D
3. VoS: Value of Solar – debate, studies, legislation to find true VoS ongoing
4. FiT Rate (where applicable

9. CCA: Community Choice Aggregator
 Alternative utility model cropping up in CA
 Utility controls power lines, charges of T&D, but –
 Control over power choices shifts to CCA entity
 Local control over power mix
 Marin County Energy offering:
1. 50% Renewable
2. 100% Renewable
3. 100% Local Solar
 Trying to bring down local solar price – more community solar DG
 Different counties + municipalities can join up in same CCA
 Program consolidation = lower cost offerings

11. MicroGrids
 Hurricane Sandy  states investing in resiliency programs
 Microgrids powered by community solar
 NY, CT, NJ, MA, MD
 NYSERDA offering “prize money” for feasibility assessments, engineering
designs for grids in designated areas
 Many in NYC area and Long Island
 Ex: ConEd replacing $1Billion investment in Brooklyn substation upgrades with
likewise investment into “independently operated DG”
 NY Utilities are banned from owning DG systems.
 Microgrids, Community Solar, CHP bundled into single opportunity type …

12. Summary
 Global consumer markets are growing more accustomed to a “share” economy
 No reason to think electricity services will not or cannot go in the same direction
 Community Solar is the fastest growing segment of U.S. Solar Industry
 Accesses a huge swath of otherwise untapped residential market
 California, Colorado, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York are where 3rd party
opportunities will be in upcoming years
 True Green offers experience and platform to develop effective systems and
deliver true savings to rate-payers
 Customer interaction will require partnerships
 CCAs (Community Choice Aggregators) and MicroGrids present alternative
opportunities to develop projects on the Community Solar Model