Petaluma approves solar deal without battery backup

Petaluma leaders are moving ahead in their effort to make the city more sustainable, starting with solar panel installation on four of its properties.

The City Council Monday night approved a project led by commercial solar developer Forefront Power to construct large solar arrays on the Petaluma Airport, Community Center, Police Department and Petaluma Swim Center properties.

The solar arrays are to be installed in the parking lots, and will generate slightly over 600 kilowatts, equivalent to the power used by about 100 homes. Installation is expected to be completed this year.

While the projects are expected to save the city $2.2 million over 20 years, they will not be part of a true microgrid with battery storage capabilities, a priority following recent public safety power shutoffs.

ForeFront Power’s rejected energy storage option for the project offered just two hours of backup power, and would reduce the cost savings 63%, or $832,000, over its 20-year contract.

“It’s not what we think of when we talk about microgrids, when we can keep the lights on even when the rest of the grid is out,” said Senior Management Analyst Patrick Carter.

As a result of the limitations and high costs, city staff is turning to other opportunities among city properties to try to build a functioning microgrid. Council members voted to open up the proposal process to install solar arrays capable of needed energy storage for other city properties.

“Regarding all our other options, all our other sites, and all our other ways of improving energy efficiency, I think that’s another step that should be ongoing,” Councilman Kevin McDonnell said.

Sam Zantzinger with ForeFront Power said the company is currently completing microgrid energy backup evaluations for the Police Department and Community Center, should the city want the option for some storage in the future.

Resident Ben Peters, who said he runs solar procurement processes for cities, said there are local companies that are capable of handling future solar projects, at potentially lower costs.

For the time being, the city will still need generators as reliable sources of backup power, which the city is currently in the process of purchasing. However, the focus remains on finding sustainable backup power options, and Mayor Teresa Barrett has warned that diesel and propane generators may soon be limited by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.

Carter said pursuing another solar developer instead of ForeFront Power would cost up to an additional $100,000 and delay installation roughly one year. This presented council with a choice Monday night to either move forward with ForeFront Power despite the lack of storage or punt the project to next year, with the hope of finding a different developer that might offer expanded storage options.

Councilman Dave King said he’s been eager to see a solar project of this scope move forward for over five years, an impatience reiterated by other council members in their support for ForeFront Power’s project.

Mayor Barrett said she feels similar to King in wanting to get the project started sooner rather than later, and underscored that it’s the first step in what will be an ongoing, iterative process.

“This gives us our first entry into this with almost no risk,” Barrett said. “I think that’s what we need to do and I think that’s what people in our community want us to do. But it is a first step.”

The council Monday night also weighed in on whether city staff should switch Petaluma’s electrical service to Sonoma Clean Power’s EverGreen program, deciding to revisit switching over at a later date.

The county program offers cities the option of drawing from 100% renewable energy sources.

Currently, the city is enrolled in the county’s CleanStart program, which is 49% renewable, 42% hydroelectric and 9% undefined. In comparison, EverGreen’s sources are 84% geothermal and 16% solar, yet comes at a cost of an additional $350,000 per year.

Councilman Mike Healy said although the EverGreen program is intriguing to him, he is hesitant over the cost, especially amidst a financial reshuffle and expected sales tax increase measure to bump city revenue.

“I would hit the pause button on that piece right now so we could have a community conversation and potentially be something that we come back and revisit once the voters have spoken in November,” Healy said.

Councilwoman Kathy Miller similarly expressed a desire to move to the EverGreen program in the near future, citing the $350,000 annual cost as a sticking point that warrants further discussion among council and community members.

(Contact Kathryn Palmer at kathryn.palmer@arguscourier.com, on Twitter @KathrynPlmr.)