It's a pilot program for the City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU) -- the first year is capped at 4 megawatts and meant for medium-sized commercial rooftops with a minimum size of 50 kilowatts per installation. The FIT is applicable to solar only, although other renewable energy sources could be considered later on. The city will pay $0.14 per kilowatt-hour for 20-year contracts.

Palo Alto is arguably the heart of Silicon Valley, home to dozens of venture capital firms and thousands of new companies armed with a startup and innovation culture fueled by its immediate neighbor, Stanford University. The city itself has about 26,000 electric meters and a peak load of approximately 180 megawatts.

The program limits itself to medium and large commercial solar rooftops in the interest of keeping workload issues to a minimum in the early stages of this endeavor.

The $0.14 per kilowatt-hour figure was based on the city's avoided cost. Here's the calculation:

• $0.070 for energy
• $0.034 green premium
• $0.006 local capacity value, essentially avoided distribution grid costs
• $0.019 avoided transmission access charges (TAC), an amount paid in California for every kilowatt-hour that is delivered from the transmission grid.
• $0.006 avoided transmission losses
• Total: $0.1355 per kilowatt-hour

 

So, the $0.14 per kilowatt-hour FIT price includes a $0.0045 premium and was agreed upon as a number that would attract developer interest. The cost of a fully subscribed program would be $29,000 per year; the city council estimates that the cost to the utility customer would be $0.01 per month. At this scale and modest cost, the city gains experience with the permitting, interconnection, metering, and billing process while developers gain experience in working with Palo Alto. (Note that Gainesville, Florida's FIT price was in the $0.26 to $0.32 range, which is good for developers, but perhaps not so good for municipalities.)

Craig Lewis, the Director of the Clean Coalition, a distributed generation advocacy group, attended the February 7 Palo Alto City Council meeting and commented that he saw this as "a good program, because it is constrained and not open to residential rooftops." He added, "It delivers the trifecta of being cost-effective, timely, and environmentally sustainable, and the pilot program is designed for success by avoiding pitfalls like dealing with tax complications of residential-level projects." 

Jon Abendschein, Palo Alto's Resource Planner believes that $0.14 per kilowatt-hour is a price that will attract developers to the program.

Detractors of feed-in tariffs have claimed that the prices can never be set at a proper rate and that auction mechanisms are a more equitable solution. Others have argued that having no subsidy at all is the right solution. In the meantime, Palo Alto will likely have a FIT in place come March 5.

California has become a global epicenter for electric vehicle technology, pulling in the most EV venture capital in the world in the first half of 2011, according to a report released Tuesday night by Next 10.

Total investment in California EV technology by venture firms hit $467 million in the first half of this year, according to the report, called Powering Innovation: California is Leading the Shift to Electric Vehicles from R&D to Early Adoption. That equated to 69 percent of all EV-related investment in the world and 74 percent in the United States.

“California is fast becoming the world’s advanced car capital—our entrepreneurs, savvy consumers, research institutions and our market-driving policies are creating a perfect storm for continued growth,” said F. Noel Perry, businessman and founder of Next 10, a nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization.

The report, which tracks indicators to assess the health of the EV market in California, also found that California earned 80 percent, or $840 million, of total U.S. and 60 percent of total global VC investment in EV-related sectors.

That marks a 712 percent increase since 2006, and Silicon Valley has been at the center of the action, according to the report.

“There was about $350 million invested in Silicon Valley EV research in 2010,” said Tracey Grose, lead author of the report and Vice President of Collaborative Economics.

Grose pointed to a number of companies in Palo Alto that together have helped California attain its leadership position, including Tesla Motors, Better Place, and Efficient Drive Trains, Inc. These businesses make up just part of the favorable environment in Silicon Valley.

“We know there are some interesting companies coming from there, there are world-class research facilities there, and venture capital is very convenient there,” she said.

In addition to being a magnet for venture capital, California has also become a national and global patent leader in EV technology, tying Michigan by generating 300 patents between 2008-2010, according to the report.

Battery technology comprised 86 percent of California’s EV patents, and, strikingly, job growth in the industry grew four percent in the state while the rest of California’s economy shrank seven percent between January 2009 and 2010.

Along with Los Angeles, Silicon Valley is a major hub for those jobs. The two cities comprised 47 percent of all EV employment in the state, according to the report.

“California is capturing the full spectrum of value related to the EV industry from cradle to market,” said Grose, “The overall growth rate in California’s EV market today is a clear indicator for strong future growth—even in manufacturing.” 

Indeed, EV manufacturing in California grow at 51 percent during the 2009-2010 economic downturn, according to the report.

Furthermore, the state, and Palo Alto in particular, leads the nation in charging stations, with 609 statewide. Palo Alto has made strides this year by taking a series of steps to prepare the city for the coming surge in EV ownership, including bringing new stations online and planning a new rate structure for electricity buyers.

In addition to Tesla motors, which showed off its new Model S in October, Fisker Automotive is doing a brisk business in Palo Alto. The automaker opened a dealership less than a mile from Tesla Headquarters.

Palo Alto's environmentalists remain at odds over the future of local composting, but the leaders of the two sides in the heated dispute agreed on one thing Monday night -- the language in the ballot measure seeking to settle the dilemma is misleading and should be changed.

The measure, which will appear on the November ballot, asks the voters if the city should undedicate a 10-acre section of Byxbee Park, in the Palo Alto Baylands, to enable the construction of a facility that would process local food waste and yard trimmings and produce energy. The proposal has split the City Council and the city's green community, with some advocating building the plant and keeping composting local and others arguing that Byxbee Park parkland should remain exactly that.

The council Monday night officially placed the measure on the November ballot but only after council members and leaders of the two green camps wrangled about the wording of the ballot measure.

The approved language reads, "Shall ten acres of existing parkland in Byxbee Park be undedicated for the exclusive purpose of building a processing facility for yard trimmings, food waste and other organic materials?"

Both sides found flaws with this wording. Those sympathetic to the waste-to-energy plant, including councilmen Larry Klein and Pat Burt, proposed specifying in the ballot that the parkland in question is "undeveloped." Former Mayor Peter Drekmeier, a leading proponent of the new anaerobic-digestion facility, said the proposed language is "misleading" because it fails to make clear that the land is at the site of a former landfill and, as such, is far from pristine. Klein agreed.

"Parkland does conjure up the image of fields and baseball diamonds, so I think some additional words are necessary," Klein said. "'Undeveloped' conveys a clearer idea that this isn't an active park at present time."

Those seeking to protect the parkland and ship local yard trimmings elsewhere, including Mayor Sid Espinosa, Councilwoman Karen Holman and Councilman Greg Schmid, sought to strike the word "exclusive" from the question. They proposed deleting the word after former Councilwoman Emily Renzel argued that the word falsely suggests that the parkland would not be undedicated unless the proposed plant were to be built.

"The reality is that if the measure passes, the land will be undedicated," Renzel said. "It's not conditional. There's no automatic reversion (if the plant doesn't get built)."

In the end, neither side could muster the needed five votes to change the wording, leaving the ballot language unchanged. But Monday night's discussion highlighted the deep split in the community and among the council on the issue -- a split that hasn't narrowed at all despite a glut of information that the city has released on the topic over the past year.

The future of composting became a hot-button issue about two years ago when the city began planning for the closure of the landfill at Byxbee Park. The landfill, which includes a composting facility, closed last week, prompting a debate about what to do with local yard trimmings and food waste. Under the current plan, local yard trimmings would be shipped to the Z-Best station in Gilroy while food waste would go to Sunnyvale.

In what likely foreshadowed the tenor of campaigning on the issue this fall, council members Monday accused one another of injecting politics into the ballot language. Klein and Burt both suggested that opponents of the new facility are proposing to strike "exclusive" from the ballot measure only because they want to appease the conservationists. Holman countered that the same charge could be leveled against the other side and its proposal to add the word "undeveloped."

"Both motions on the floor could be subjected to the same charge," Holman said.

The compost initiative is one of two that voters will be asked to consider on Nov. 8. Residents will also vote on whether the city should eliminate a provision in the City Charter requiring labor disputes between the city and its public-safety unions to go to binding arbitration.

The Home Energy Report, a new service from City of Palo Alto Utilities, ranks residents' home-energy usage against their neighbors.

The city hopes it will encourage people to be aware of their energy consumption and make their homes more efficient.

The double-sided report compares the account-holder's gas and electric energy consumption to usage at 99 nearby homes of similar size. It ranks the account holder's energy efficiency using a scale of one to 100 (one being the most efficient), and suggests ways utility-users can improve their performance.

"A lot of people don't know how their energy use compares to their neighbors. Once you have that information, then you can decide whether or not you want to do something about it," Joyce Kinnear, marketing manager at Palo Alto Utilities, said.

Approved by the City Council in May and financed by stimulus funds, the personalized Home Energy Report will be distributed to around 20,000 participating account holders, who will receive it with their bill every two months. Such reports, offered by 27 utilities across the country, compare properties' metered energy use based on approximate square footage according to county records and the kind of heating used, if that information is available.

Palo Alto's composting advocates cheered in the City Hall lobby early Tuesday morning after the City Council voted for an approximately $250,000 study of a potential new facility in the Baylands that would convert waste into energy.

After more than four hours of debate stretching well past midnight, the somewhat torn council voted 5-4, with Vice Mayor Sid Espinosa and council members Karen Holman, Greg Schmid and Yiaway Yeh dissenting, to examine the economic and environmental implications of an anaerobic-digestion facility that would turn compost, food waste and sewer sludge into energy.

From the same article:

On Monday night, the council heard from both sides of the debate, though most spoke in favor of the new facility. A coalition of more than 300 environmentalists, including Walt Hays, David Coale and former Mayor Peter Drekmeier, had lobbied the council to fund the feasibility study.

Drekmeier estimated that the waste-to-energy facility could bring the city $1 million in revenues every year, along with additional funds the city could bring in in tipping fees for hauling local waste.

The median price of Bay Area homes rose drastically over the past year.  Palo Alto once again shows a strong demand for houses – multiple offers are not uncommon today.  An especially high number of multiple offers are seen on sales in the under $1.5M price range, where inventory is relatively low and the highest number of buyers are competing for houses.  Here are just two examples of recent local market activity:

•  A house in the Barron Park area listed at $1.2M was sold with 18 offers at $1.375M with a full-cash, non-contingent offer and closed escrow in less than 14 days.
• A 100+ year fixer-upper in Professorville was listed at $1.125M and sold at a much higher price with 11 offers in less than a week.

 

We are quickly approaching the spring selling season.  As of end of March, there were 44 pending sales in Palo Alto.  If this is any indicator of things to come, we will see an increase in market activity with first-time buyers still driving the market.  South Palo Alto accounted for 13 out of 27 Palo Alto March sales.  Out of these 13 houses sold in South Palo Alto, 10 went at higher than asking price.

Article also contains year-over-year March and month-over-month data. Palo Alto median price is about 17% from March 2009. Looking forward to spring selling season!

When home prices, mortgage applications to buy homes and consumer confidence are ALL pointing upward, even the perpetual doomsayers on Wall Street have to admit: Housing in the U.S. looks like it's on a very positive track.

And that's where we are right now. The latest monthly Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller home price index came in higher last week. Prices were up in 12 of the 20 major markets that Case Shiller monitors.

On a year-over-year basis, prices gained nine percent in San Francisco, six percent in San Diego, about four percent in metropolitan Dallas, Washington DC and Los Angeles, 2.6 percent in Denver and one and a half percent in Boston.

We see positive trend developing here in Palo Alto too. March median price is up 17% comparing with 2009 and month over month trend is also positive. Multiple offers are becoming common again. One of the home we know about was sold with 18 offers.

Palo Alto High sophomore swimming standout Jasmine Tosky made some serious waves during the Columbus Grand Prix that finished its three-day run on Saturday in Columbus, Ohio. Tosky won three events and placed in the top four of four others.

The talented Tosky capped her performance on Saturday night by winning the 100-meter free in the long course meet in a sizzling 55.60. She came back to set a pool record of 2:10.69, the 10th-fastest in the world this season, while winning the 200 fly. Tosky ran down Dagny Knutson in the back half before opening up a sizable lead.

Maddie Schaefer, who is a teammate of Tosky on Palo Alto Stanford Aquatics, was fifth in the 100 free (56.50).

On Friday, Tosky was third in the 400 IM in 4:46.96 and fourth in the 50 free in 26.27. Schaefer was third in the 50 free (26.06) and 10th in the 100 bck (1:04.84). Palo Alto High junior Sarah Liang was 11th in the 200 breast in 2:46.62 and 19th in the 400 IM.

On Thursday's opening night, Tosky won the women's 100-meter butterfly in 1:00.13 to qualify for the Summer Nationals. She also finished third in the 200 free (2:00.85) and took third in the 200 IM (2:17.08) while showing she's a serious candidate for future national and international meets.

Congratulations on outstanding performance!!!

Palo Alto may ask Stanford University to help the city build a new police building, fund new shuttle programs and fix up local roadways before it allows the school to vastly expand its hospital facilities, a new staff report shows.

These subsidies are among the items Palo Alto officials hope to persuade Stanford to provide as part of the "development agreement" the university needs to sign with the city before it can proceed with Project Renewal, its $3.5 billion effort to rebuild its hospitals.

The City Council Finance Committee is scheduled to discuss the status of negotiations at its Tuesday night meeting.

Stanford's proposal includes the demolition and replacement of the current Stanford Hospital and Clinics complex; renovation and expansion of the Lucile Packard Children's Hospital; new medical offices near Hoover Pavilion; and improvements to the School of Medicine. Altogether, the project would add about 1.3 million square feet of development to Palo Alto, making it one of the most ambitious developments in the city's history.