1、BerkeleyLabEMP Utility-Scale Solar 2019 Edition http:/utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov Utility-Scale Solar Empirical Trends in Project Technology, Cost, Performance, and PPA Pricing in the United States 2019 Edition Mark Bolinger, Joachim Seel, Dana Robson Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory December 201

2、9 This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department of Energys Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) under Solar Energy Technologies Office (SETO) Agreement Number 34158 and Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. BerkeleyLabEMP Utility-Scale Solar 2019 Edition http:/utilit

3、yscalesolar.lbl.gov Presentation Outline 1. Solar deployment trends (and utility-scales relative contribution) 8. Future outlook 2 Key findings from analysis of the data samples (first for PV, then for CSP): 2.Project design, technology, and location 3.Installed project prices 4.Operation and mainte

4、nance (O c-Si modules led thin-film 7 PV project population: 690 projects totaling 24,586 MWACContinued dominance of tracking projects (69% of newly installed capacity) relative to fixed-tilt projects (31%). Thin-film projects are nearly exclusively using tracking now. c-Si modules continue their cl

5、ear lead (72% of newly installed capacity) relative to thin-film modules (28%). Hanwha had the highest market share among c-Si modules in our sample, followed by Jinko, and Canadian Solar. First Solar provided 85% of all thin-film modules in 2018, the remainder supplied by Solar Frontier. BerkeleyLa

6、bEMP Utility-Scale Solar 2019 Edition http:/utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov Florida is the new national leader in utility-scale solar growth 8 PV project population: 690 projects totaling 24,586 MWAC The Southeast is the new growth engine of the US utility-scale solar market. It is led by Florida, now the

7、 largest annual market at 1010 MWACor 25% of national additions. Established player North Carolina added 472 MWAC. For the first time since 2011, California is not the state with the most capacity growth (981 MWAC). But it still accounts for 40% of the cumulative installed capacity of the country. T

8、exas continues its solar growth with another year of 650 MWACand is the state with the third-most additions in 2018. The Southwest only added 160 MWACin 2018, and was surpassed by new installations in the Northwest (181 MWAC). BerkeleyLabEMP Utility-Scale Solar 2019 Edition http:/utilityscalesolar.l

9、bl.gov Floridas growth was driven by the regulated utilities FPL and TECO, which added many fixed-tilt projects ( ). California only completed 10 projects, but these were large (up to 252 MWAC) and added a respectable 981 MW. Northwestern additions in 2018 were predominantly tracking projects ( ). I

10、n 2018, storage ( ) was added to already existing (3) and new (4) PV projects. 6 of these were built in high penetration/transmission-constrained regions in HI, CA, AZ and TX, while the 7this in relative newcomer state MN. 4 new states added their first utility-scale PV projects: Connecticut, Vermon

11、t, Washington and Wyoming. 9 Florida is the new national leader in utility-scale solar growth BerkeleyLabEMP Utility-Scale Solar 2019 Edition http:/utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov Utility-Scale Solar has become a growing source of electricity in all regions of the United States 10 Utility-Scale PV is now

12、well-represented throughout the nation with the exception of Midwestern states in the “wind belt.” Fixed-tilt projects (in particular c-Si ) have been built in lower-insolation regions, primarily along the east coast. Tracking projects ( ) started out in the Southwest but have increasingly spread th

13、roughout the country, north to Washington, Idaho, and Minnesota, and northeast to Virginia. BerkeleyLabEMP Utility-Scale Solar 2019 Edition http:/utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov Utility-Scale Solar is increasingly built at lower-insolation sites 11 The median solar resource (measured in long-term global h

14、orizontal irradiance GHI) at new project sites has decreased since 2013 as the market expands to less- sunny states but stabilized in 2018. Fixed-tilt PV is increasingly relegated to lower-insolation sites (note the decline in its 80th percentile), while tracking PV is pushing into those same areas

15、(note the decline in its 20th percentile). Exceptions are fixed-tilt installations in either windy regions (Florida) or on brown- fields / landfill sites. All else equal, the buildout of lower-GHI sites will dampen sample-wide capacity factors (reported later). BerkeleyLabEMP Utility-Scale Solar 201

16、9 Edition http:/utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov The median inverter loading ratio (ILR) continued to climb, especially for fixed-tilt projects 12 As module prices have fallen (faster than inverter prices), developers have oversized the DC array capacity relative to the AC inverter capacity to enhance reve

17、nue and reduce output variability. The median inverter loading ratio (ILR or DC:AC ratio) increased to 1.33 in 2018, though considerable variation remains (ranging from 1.14 to 1.59). Fixed-tilt PV has more to gain from a higher ILR than does tracking PV, and 2018 showed a new record lead for fixed-

18、tilt installations (1.41 vs. 1.31 - driven by high ILR projects in Florida, CT, and MD). All else equal, a higher ILR should boost capacity factors (reported later). BerkeleyLabEMP Utility-Scale Solar 2019 Edition http:/utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov Median installed price of PV has fallen by nearly 70%

19、since 2010, to $1.6/WAC($1.2/WDC) in 2018 13 PV price sample: 641 projects totaling 22,886 MWAC The lowest 20th percentile of project prices fell from $1.7/WAC($1.3/WDC) in 2017 to $1.3/WAC($0.9/WDC) in 2018. The lowest projects among the 60 data points in 2018 was $1.0/WAC ($0.7/WDC). Historical pr

20、icing sample is robust (99% of installed capacity through 2017). 2018 data covers 64% of new projects or 62% of new capacity. This sample is backward-looking and does not reflect the price of projects built in 2019/2020. BerkeleyLabEMP Utility-Scale Solar 2019 Edition http:/utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov

21、 Pricing distributions have narrowed and continuously moved towards lower prices over the last 7 years 14 Both medians and modes have continued to fall (i.e., shift towards the left) each year. Share of relatively high-cost systems decreases steadily each year while share of low-cost systems increas

22、es. Price spread is the smallest in 2018, pointing to a reduction in underlying heterogeneity of prices across all installed projects. PV price sample: 641 projects totaling 22,886 MWAC BerkeleyLabEMP Utility-Scale Solar 2019 Edition http:/utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov Within our sample, projects with t

23、rackers now have lower average upfront costs than fixed-tilt projects 15 PV price sample: 640 projects totaling 22,880 MWAC Through 2016, projects with tracking were regularly more expensive (though by varying amounts) than fixed-tilt projects in our sample on average. But in both 2017 and 2018, thi

24、s historical relationship seemingly reversed, with average pricing in 2018 at $1.7/WAC ($1.3/WDC) for fixed-tilt projects vs. $1.6/WAC($1.2/WDC) for tracking projects. This apparent reversal may be driven by challenging construction environments for fixed-tilt projects (e.g., high wind loads, sensit

25、ive brown-field sites) as well as sampling issues. However, for any individual project, using trackers still likely has a higher CapEx than mounting at a fixed-tilt. Trackers can sustain some amount of higher upfront costs because they deliver more generation. BerkeleyLabEMP Utility-Scale Solar 2019

26、 Edition http:/utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov Within our 2018 sample, large projects enjoy a 30% cost advantage over smaller projects 16 PV price sample for 2018: 60 projects totaling 2,499 MWAC Differences in project size could potentially explain pricing variation we focus only on 2018 for this analysi

27、s. Median price for the first and second size bin (5-50MWAC) is larger than for third and fourth size bin (50-200MWAC) - $1.74/WACvs. $1.32/WAC. In $/WDCterms cost decline is even more obvious over first three bins: $1.42/WDCfor 5-20MW $1.21/WDCfor 20-50MW $1.04/WDCfor 50-100MW BerkeleyLabEMP Utilit

28、y-Scale Solar 2019 Edition http:/utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov Project prices vary by region, newcomers have lower prices 17 Price differences could be driven in part by technology ubiquity; other factors may include labor costs and share of union labor, land costs, terrain, soil conditions, snow and wi

29、nd loads, and balance of supply and demand. The Northeast, Northwest and Southwest seem to be priced above the national median, while the Midwest, Southeast and Texas appear to be lower priced. Sample size outside of Southeast is very limited (Hawaii and California are excluded due to few observatio

30、ns), so these rankings should be viewed with some caution. Note: The regions are defined in the earlier slides with a map of the United States PV price sample for 2018: 60 projects totaling 2,499 MWAC BerkeleyLabEMP Utility-Scale Solar 2019 Edition http:/utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov Bottom-up models es

31、timate lower prices than all-in cost reports 18 LBNLs top-down estimates reflect a mix of union and non-union labor and span a wide range of project sizes and prices ($0.7-$2.3/WDC). The median of our fixed-tilt price sample is higher than other price estimates, whereas the median of our tracking pr

32、ice sample falls within the range of other estimates. Some of the price delta may be due to differences in the defined system boundaries and time horizon (e.g. under construction vs. operation date). For example, GTM (Wood Mackenzie) represents only turnkey EPC costs and excludes interconnection, an

33、d transmission costs, as well as developer overhead, fees, and profit margins. Note: Prices are presented in $/WDCto enable comparison with estimates by NREL, BNEF, and GTM PV price sample for 2018: 60 projects totaling 2,499 MWAC BerkeleyLabEMP Utility-Scale Solar 2019 Edition http:/utilityscalesol

34、ar.lbl.gov Operation and Maintenance (O&M) costs broaden in range 19 11 utilities report solar O&M costs for projects with 1 full operational year by 2018 and a mix of technologies (tracking vs. fixed tilt, module type). Average O&M costs for the cumulative set of PV plants have declined from about

35、$32/kWAC-year (or $20/MWh) in 2011 to about $18/kWAC-year ($10.6/MWh) in 2018. Overall cost range among utilities has spread relative to earlier years as our sample has grown in 2018, perhaps reflecting different reporting practices by utilities. O&M Cost sample: 48 projects totaling 919 MWAC Cost S

36、cope (per guidelines for FERC Form 1): Includes supervision and engineering, maintenance, rents, and training Excludes payments for property taxes, insurance, land royalties, performance bonds, various administrative and other fees, and overhead BerkeleyLabEMP Utility-Scale Solar 2019 Edition http:/

37、utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov 25.0% average sample-wide PV net capacity factor (cumulative), but with large project-level range from 12.1%-34.8% 20 Project-level variation in PV capacity factor driven by: Solar Resource (GHI): Strongest solar resource quartile has a 9 percentage point higher capacity fa

38、ctor than lowest resource quartile Tracking: Adds 2-5 percentage points to capacity factor on average, depending on solar resource quartile Inverter Loading Ratio (ILR): Highest ILR quartiles have on average 3 percentage point higher capacity factors than lowest ILR quartiles 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 3

39、0% 35% 40% 1 ILR 2 ILR 3 ILR 4 ILR 441234 Fixed-TiltTrackingFixed-TiltTrackingFixed-TiltTrackingFixed-TiltTracking 1st Quartile Solar Resource2nd Quartile Solar Resource3rd Quartile Solar Resource4th Quartile Solar Resource Cumulative Net AC Capacity Factor Median Individual Pr

40、oject 32 projects, 369 MW 12 projects, 139 MW 19 projects, 326 MW 8 projects, 122 MW 9 projects, 124 MW 7 projects, 151 MW 11 projects, 367 MW 22 projects, 858 MW 20 projects, 478 MW 14 projects, 622 MW 31 projects, 808 MW 4 projects, 96 MW 5 projects, 855 MW 26 projects, 903 MW 43 projects, 2,336 M

41、W 13 projects, 634 MW 12 projects, 684 MW 24 projects, 242 MW 6 projects, 152 MW 26 projects, 732 MW 6 projects, 153 MW 41 projects, 1,843 MW 28 projects, 1,514 MW 24 projects, 523 MW 3 projects, 336 MW 3 projects, 626 MW 12 projects, 160 MW 29 projects, 1,374 MW 6 projects, 973 MW 20 projects, 601

42、MW Sample includes 550 projects totaling 20.0GWACthatcame online from 2007-2017 ILR QuartileILR QuartileILR QuartileILR QuartileILR QuartileILR QuartileILR QuartileILR Quartile 25 projects, 649 MW 9 projects, 275 MW BerkeleyLabEMP Utility-Scale Solar 2019 Edition http:/utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov Trac

43、king boosts net-capacity factors by up to 5% in high-insolation regions 21 PV Performance sample: 550 projects totaling 20,024 MWAC Not surprisingly, capacity factors are highest in California and the Southwest, and lowest in the Northeast and Midwest. Although sample size is small in some regions,

44、the greater benefit of tracking in the high-insolation regions is evident, as are the greater number of tracking projects in those regions. Note: The regions are defined in the earlier slides with a map of the United States 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% NortheastMidwestSoutheastTexasNorthwestHawaiiSouth

45、westCalifornia Average Cumulative Net AC Capacity Factor Fixed-Tilt Tracking 37 projects, 351 MW 1 project, 6 MW 17 projects, 242 MW 17 projects, 243 MW 2 projects, 44 MW 24 projects, 1,166 MW 72 projects, 1,912 MW 16 projects, 1,319 MW 4 projects, 43 MW 1 project, 28 MW 35 projects, 2,566 MW 140 pr

46、ojects, 6,041 MW 92 projects, 3,479 MW 21 projects, 407 MW 70 projects, 2,169 MW 1 project, 10 MW BerkeleyLabEMP Utility-Scale Solar 2019 Edition http:/utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov Since 2013, competing drivers have gradually reduced average capacity factors by project vintage 22 Recent flat-to-declini

47、ng trend is not necessarily negative, but rather a sign of a market that is expanding geographically into less-sunny regions (as indicated by changes to GHI, portrayed both numerically and via shading intensity) Average capacity factors increased from 2010- to 2013-vintage projects due to an increas

48、e in: ILR (from 1.17 to 1.28) tracking (from 14% to 55%) average site-level GHI (from 4.97 to 5.32 kWh/m2/day) But trends in tracking and GHI were at odds from 2013- to 2016-vintage projects, resulting in capacity factor stagnation (on average) 2017-vintage projects match 2016- vintage on both ILR a

49、nd tracking, but GHI has declined further, resulting in a 2 percentage point drop in average capacity factor (from 25.6% down to 23.6%) 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 2010 7 0.14 2011 31 0.45 2012 37 0.89 2013 47 1.71 2014 52 2.78 2015 83 2.76 2016 155 7.56 2017 126 3.57 2018 Cumulative Mean Net AC Capacity Factor ILR: 1.17 Tracking: 14% GHI: 4.97 ILR: 1.23 Tracking: 49% GHI: 5.13 ILR: 1.18 Tracking: 52% GHI: 5.13 ILR: 1.28 Tracking: 55% GHI: 5.32 ILR: 1.29 Tracking: 63% GHI: 5.21 ILR: 1.32 Tracking: 75% GHI: 4.96 ILR: 1.30 Tr