NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy 

Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.

Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308

Solar For Schools: 

A Case Study in Identifying and 

Implementing Solar 

Photovoltaic (PV) Projects in 

Three California School Districts 

Preprint

Alicen Kandt

To be presented at ASES SOLAR 2011

Raleigh, North Carolina

May 17-21, 2011

Conference Paper

NREL/CP-7A40-50969

April 2011
NOTICE

The submitted manuscript has been offered by an employee of the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC 

(Alliance), a contractor of the US Government under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308. Accordingly, the US 

Government and Alliance retain a nonexclusive royalty-free license to publish or reproduce the published form of 

this contribution, or allow others to do so, for US Government purposes.

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. 

Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, 

express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of 

any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately 

owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, 

trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, 

or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors 

expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof.

Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/bridge

Available for a processing fee to U.S. Department of Energy

and its contractors, in paper, from:

U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Scientific and Technical Information

P.O. Box 62

Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062

phone: 865.576.8401

fax: 865.576.5728

email: mailto:reports@adonis.osti.gov

Available for sale to the public, in paper, from:

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Technical Information Service

5285 Port Royal Road

Springfield, VA 22161

phone: 800.553.6847

fax: 703.605.6900

email: orders@ntis.fedworld.gov

online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/help/ordermethods.aspx

Cover Photos: (left to right) PIX 16416, PIX 17423, PIX 16560, PIX 17613, PIX 17436, PIX 17721

Printed on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 10% post consumer waste.
1 

SOLAR FOR SCHOOLS: A CASE STUDY IN IDENTIFYING AND IMPLEMENTING SOLAR 

PHOTOVOLTAIC (PV) PROJECTS IN THREE CALIFORNIA SCHOOL DISTRICTS

Alicen Kandt

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

1617 Cole Blvd.

Golden, CO 80401

alicen.kandt@nrel.gov

The Department of Energy’s (DOE) Solar America 

Showcase program seeks to accelerate demand for solar 

technologies among key end use market sectors. As part of 

this activity, DOE provides technical assistance through its 

national laboratories to large-scale, high-visibility solar 

installation projects.

ABSTRACT

The Solar Schools Assessment and Implementation Project 

(SSAIP) in the San Francisco Bay Area was selected for a 

2009 DOE Solar America Showcase award. SSAIP was 

formed through the efforts of the nonprofit Sequoia 

Foundation and includes three school districts: Berkeley, 

West Contra Costa, and Oakland Unified School Districts.

This paper summarizes the technical assistance efforts that 

resulted from this technical assistance support. It serves as a 

case study and reference document detailing the steps and 

processes that could be used to successfully identify, fund, 

and implement solar photovoltaics (PV) projects in school 

districts across the country.

Keywords: schools; solar photovoltaics

1. 

School districts across the United States face trying times 

due to decreasing budgets and rising energy costs. Districts 

are required to do more with less. At the same time, schools 

provide a unique opportunity for energy efficiency and 

renewable energy application and education, not only 

through curriculum but also through technology 

deployment. California is an example of a state with 

significant budget deficits and a high potential for solar 

electricity, or photovoltaic (PV), technology deployment.

INTRODUCTION

The Sequoia Foundation is supporting three California 

school districts—Oakland, Berkeley, and West Contra Costa 

Unified School Districts—in the development of Solar 

Master Plans (SMP), documents that are intended to be 

incorporated in the districts’ Facilities Master Plans. The 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) is 

providing technical assistance to these school districts and 

the Sequoia Foundation as part of the DOE’S Solar America 

Showcase program.i

The Solar America Showcase program seeks to accelerate 

demand for solar technologies among key end use market 

sectors. As part of this activity, DOE provides technical 

assistance through its national laboratories to large-scale, 

high-visibility solar installation projects that have the ability 

to impact the market for solar technologies through large 

project size, use of a novel solar technology, and/or use of a 

novel application of a solar technology. Selected showcase 

projects are replicable or have replicable components.

This paper will summarize the technical assistance efforts 

that have resulted from this technical assistance support. It 

will serve as a case study and reference document detailing

the steps and processes that could be used to successfully 

identify, fund, and implement solar PV projects in school 

districts across the country. The goal of the technical 

assistance support was to enable and empower district 

representatives to understand PV technologies and 

opportunities, identify potential financing mechanisms, and 

institutionalize the inclusion of PV in the district master 

planning process.

Technical support included education of district 

stakeholders in the areas of PV technologies and financing 

options, electricity rate analysis to identify the most PVfriendly rates for the districts, building structural 

assessments, and an analysis of technical potential for solar 

PV. The support will culminate in the development of 

comprehensive, district-wide Solar Master Plans.
2 

2. 

The three school districts participating in the SSAIP 

(BUSD, WCCUSD, and OUSD) represent a total enrollment 

of nearly 78,000 pre-K-12 students and an annual budget of 

over $835 million, and occupy nearly 200 school buildings, 

administrative offices, and adult education sites—many of 

which are candidate sites for future solar installations. Each 

of the three districts offers significant opportunities for PV 

installations:

DISTRICTS OVERVIEW

• WCCUSD has a current total enrollment of 30,832 preK-12 students who attend its 53 schools. The district 

maintains over 70 separate facilities. Its current annual 

General Fund budget is approximately $285M.ii

• BUSD has nearly 9,300 students who attend its 20 

schools. It also maintains a number of administrative 

and support facilities, adding to a total of over 100 

buildings in the district.iii

• OUSD has an enrollment of almost 37,000 students in 

91 K-12 schools spread over 5.8 million square footage 

of facilities.

iv

All three school districts are members of the Collaborative 

for High Performance Schools (CHPS) and have passed 

Board Resolutions supporting adherence to the CHPS Best 

Practices and CHPS-Rated Schools requirements in their 

design and construction programs.v

• Increase student performance with betterdesigned and healthier facilities;

The mission of the 

Collaborative for High Performance Schools is to facilitate 

the design, construction, and operation of high performance 

schools. CHPS helps facilitate and inspire change in our 

educational system. The goals of CHPS are to:

• Raise awareness of the impact and advantages of 

high performance schools;

• Provide professionals with better tools to facilitate 

effective design, construction and maintenance of 

high performance schools;

• Increase school energy and resource efficiency; 

and

• Reduce peak electric loads.vi

Public school districts have shown an interest in installing 

PV systems. In 2004, the California Energy Commission 

(CEC) and the California Power Authority created the Solar 

Schools Program. This program was jointly funded by the 

CEC’s Emerging Renewables Program and the Attorney 

General’s Alternative Energy Retrofit Account and provided 

school districts with rebates that were twice the amount 

offered to residential customers.vii The program attracted 

applications from over 60 school districts, but due to 

limitations in funding, only 28 schools received the 

incentives. A total of $4.5 million was awarded, which 

enabled the 28 CA schools to purchase and install solar PV 

systems with an expected generating capacity of 642 

kilowatts (kW).viii

BUSD and WCCUSD have shown their commitment to 

solar PV by installing a total of 237 kW on an elementary 

school and a high school. BUSD and WCCUSD plan to 

install four more systems in the summer of 2011. OUSD has 

small demonstration solar projects on four sites and ongoing 

energy efficiency projects on many of its older facilities, 

identified through energy audits coordinated by Pacific Gas 

and Electric Corporation (PG&E).ix

3. 

OUSD is considering 

the installation of PV at 17 sites over the next 18 months.

Not every school is an appropriate location for siting PV. 

This technology relies on good access to the sun and 

locations with large amounts of shading, or north-facing 

orientations are not practical. Other school-specific 

considerations include the age of the roof, a school’s 

designation as historic or emergency shelter, the size of the 

roof, and the electrical load and associated electric costs of 

the school. School district staff can begin to assess the 

potential for PV at their schools with a basic understanding 

of the technology and these siting considerations.

ENERGY EDUCATION

This component of the technical support was education for 

school district staff. It included training in Energy Star’s 

Portfolio Manager program and in solar mapping software. 

NREL also provided district staff with an overview of PV 

technology options and potential solutions to two common 

issues associated with PV installations at schools—theft and 

vandalism of panels.

3.1 

Cost-effective energy efficiency measures should always be 

considered as the first step in an energy program, and 

energy efficiency should be implemented prior to or at the 

same time as renewable energy technologies. Behavior 

change is also an important component towards achieving 

energy efficient school operations. The least efficient 

schools in our country use three times more energy than the 

best energy performs, and the top-performing Energy Star 

labeled schools cost forty cents per square foot less to 

operate than the average performers.

Energy Star’s Portfolio Manager Program

x

All three districts recognize the importance of implementing 

energy efficiency measures and have initiated a 

benchmarking process for their facilities through Energy 

Star’s K-12 Portfolio Manager Program. Portfolio Manager 

is an interactive energy management tool that allows users 

 
3 

to track and assess energy and water consumption across an 

entire portfolio of buildings. Portfolio Manager can be used 

to set investment priorities, identify under-performing 

buildings, verify efficiency improvements, and receive EPA 

recognition for superior energy performance.xi

NREL staff provided initial support to the districts as they 

began using Portfolio Manager, including setting up a 

Portfolio Manager training and providing guidance as the 

districts began to use this software tool.

3.2 

3.2.1 

Solar Technology Overview

District representatives requested training in identifying 

opportunities for PV technologies on their facilities. NREL 

staff compiled and presented an overview of PV 

technologies, siting considerations, and web-based solar 

mapping tools, including NREL’s In My Backyard 

(IMBY).

Training

xii A solar PV mapping tool visually represents a 

specific site and calculates PV system size and projected 

electricity production.xiii

IMBY:

• Estimates the electricity that can be produced with a PV 

array or wind turbine at a home, business, or school.

• Uses a map-based interface to allow the user to choose 

the exact location of to place the PV array or wind 

turbine.

This training was an effort to inform district representatives 

about the considerations for siting PV and to enable them to 

begin to identify appropriate locations on their own.

3.2.2 

NREL developed a brief report for district representatives 

that details the commercially available and emerging PV 

technologies; associated efficiencies, costs, and benefits; 

maintenance requirements; and other siting considerations. 

It includes single and multi-crystalline and thin-film 

technologies, as well as more recent applications such as 

building-integrated PV (BIPV), solar inks, and concentrated 

PV (CPV).

Technology Overview

PV arrays convert sunlight to electricity without moving 

parts and without producing fuel wastes, air pollution, or 

greenhouse gases (GHG) during operation. They require 

very little maintenance and make no noise. Arrays can be 

mounted on all types of buildings and structures. PV direct 

current (DC) output can be conditioned into grid-quality 

alternating current (AC) electricity or used to charge 

batteries.

Traditional “mono-crystalline” solar cells are made from 

silicon, are usually flat-plate, and are generally the most 

efficient. “Multi-crystalline” are a similar technology but 

are slightly less efficient. Efficiencies for crystalline panels 

range from 13 to 19 percent.xiv A third type called “thinfilm” solar cells are made from amorphous silicon or 

nonsilicon materials such as cadmium telluride. Thin-film 

solar cells use layers of semiconductor materials only a few 

micrometers thick. Efficiencies for thin-film panels range 

from four to 12 percent.xv

Third-generation solar cells are being made from variety of 

new materials besides silicon, including solar inks using 

conventional printing press technologies, solar dyes, and 

conductive plastics. They are technically attractive because 

they are made of low-cost materials. Manufacturing these 

cells could be significantly less expensive than older solidstate cell designs. However, the efficiency expects to be a 

lot lower than the typical thin-film. A very promising new 

technology option is concentrating PV, or CPV. This tubular 

technology uses concentrators to focus direct solar radiation 

onto PV cells. Some of these currently available 

technologies reach efficiencies up to 29%.

Because of their flexibility, thinfilm solar cells can be integrated into building materials 

(called Building Integrated PV or BIPV) such as rooftop 

shingles and tiles, standing seam metal roofs, or building 

facades.

xvi

Most PV systems currently being installed are in flat-plate 

configurations, which are typically made from modules that 

hold about 40 cells. Many solar panels combined together to 

create one system is called a solar array. For large electric 

utility or industrial applications, hundreds of solar arrays are 

interconnected to form a large utility-scale PV system.

xviii

xvii

These systems are generally ‘fixed’ in a single position, but 

can be mounted on structures that ‘track’ or tilt toward the 

sun on a seasonal basis or on structures that roll east to west 

over the course of a day.

The cost of PV-generated electricity has dropped 15- to 20-

fold in the last 40 years, and panels typically last 20 years or 

longer.xix Grid-connected PV systems currently sell for 

about $5/Wp to $8/Wp (20¢/kWh to 32¢/kWh), including 

support structures and power conditioning equipment. Costs 

reported for PV projects are changing (decreasing) rapidly, 

so a local solar installer may be the best source of cost 

information. Operation and maintenance costs are reported 

at $0.008/kWh produced, or at 0.17% of capital cost without 

tracking and 0.35% with tracking.xx

The amount of electricity that a system produces depends on 

the system type and orientation and the available solar 

resource. The solar resource is the amount of the sun’s 

energy reaching the earth’s surface, which varies across the 

United States. A higher solar resource means that more of 

 
4 

the sun’s energy is reaching the surface, which is optimal 

for PV system performance. Resources are highest in the 

Southwest, and fairly high throughout the western states, 

Texas, and Florida.

The document also includes an overview of PV monitoring 

equipment. Monitoring of PV systems can be essential for 

reliable functioning and maximum yield of a system. It can 

also be a valuable tool for community outreach and 

education. Especially in a school, displays of PV output and 

performance can be highly educational.

Monitoring can be as simple as reading values locally on an 

LCD display on the inverter such as produced AC power, 

daily kWh and cumulative kWh. For sophisticated 

monitoring and control purposes, environmental data—such 

as module temperature, ambient temperature, solar 

radiation, and wind speed—can be monitored. Remote 

control and monitoring can be performed by various remote 

connections, which can also send alerts and system 

messages. Data can be stored in inverters memory or in 

external data loggers for further system analysis.

The report also details possible solutions to potential 

barriers that districts sometimes face when PV systems are 

installed on schools—vandalism and theft. Some solutions 

are technical:

• Installing keyed fasteners at intermodule and end 

clamps. These fasteners use a unique pattern, which 

regular wrenches and screwdrivers are useless against. 

It’s the same concept used for expensive automobile 

wheel fasteners. The installer or owner keeps the key 

needed to unfasten the hardware. A fastener costs about 

$2–$5.

• Install a reliable security camera system. Post signage 

around the perimeter of the system alerting of the 

security systems in place.

• Engrave each system component with school name to 

make it harder for vandals to resell them.

Some solutions are process- or maintenance-based:

• Check fences and gates for damage. Make repairs and 

keep gates locked.

• Cut back weeds and other vegetation around the 

campus to reduce fire risk and hiding places.

• Keep surrounded areas clean. Loose rocks that can be 

used by vandals should be removed.

• Check all lighting on campus. Replace all burned-out 

bulbs. Install lighting in currently dark areas. Consider 

installing motion sensor lights.

• Add or increase nightly patrols of campus, especially 

during the summer months when the weather is warmer 

and the days are longer.

Some solutions are education-focused:

• Get the community involved. Encourage the 

community to be concerned and watch for vandalism 

and theft.

• Add warnings about potential hazard and electric 

shocks from the system.

• Educate the staff and students on the consequences of 

vandalism and create a sense of ownership of the solar 

photovoltaic system.

4. 

Solar mapping analyses can be used to inform decision 

makers about the availability of promising land or roof areas 

for PV, quantify that available space, and calculate potential 

PV capacity and electrical production. PV costs and 

electricity cost savings are also sometimes calculated.

SOLAR MAPPING

4.1 

SunPower Corporation provided aerial mapping estimates of 

solar potential for two districts and is currently completing 

the mapping assessment for the third district.

SunPower Corporation’s Analysis

xxi

These results are a high-level, first-cut attempt to quantify 

the potential for PV installations on these schools. It is a 

good way to identify potential sites and to begin to prioritize 

those for which a more detailed, on-site analysis of 

feasibility should be conducted.

 This 

mapping estimate used an aerial snapshot of each school and 

employed a calculation methodology to determine the 

potential for PV installations at each location. Ideal 

locations for PV were manually selected such to avoid areas 

that appeared to be shaded based on the aerial imagery. The 

analysis did not take into account roof age or structural 

integrity.

The analyses for BUSD and WCCUSD have been 

completed; the analysis for OUSD is currently underway. 

SunPower is also currently updating the analyses for BUSD 

and WCCUSD.

The SunPower analysis for BUSD was completed in 

December 2009 and assumed:

• PG&E Electric Rate A6 yielding year 1 solar savings = 

$0.223/kWh;

• Incentives at California Solar Initiative (CSI) Tier 6 = 

$0.26/kWh;xxii

• A total cost per Wp installed = $5.75;

• Year one electric yield = 1,350 kWh per kWp; and

• Size and location of systems will vary significantly 

after design completion.
5 

The SunPower analysis found a total potential PV capacity 

of 1,880 kWp at 11 schools in the BUSD. It estimated that 

on an annual basis these systems would produce 

approximately 2,500,000 kWh and save $565,000 in 

avoided electricity costs. 

The SunPower analysis for WCCUSD was completed in 

May of 2010, and it assumed:

• PG&E Electric Rate A6 yielding year 1 solar savings = 

$0.19/kWh;

• Incentive at CSI Tier 7 = $.19/kWh;xxiii

• A total cost per Wp installed = $5.75;

• Year one electric yield = 1,350 kWh per kWp; and

• Size and location of systems will vary significantly 

after design completion.

This analysis found a total potential PV capacity of 7,251 

kWp at 42 schools in the WCCUSD. It estimated that on an 

annual basis these systems would produce approximately 

9,700,000 kWh and save $1.8 million in avoided electricity 

costs. 

4.2 

NREL, expanding on SunPower’s initial assessment, is 

working to take into account additional factors for 

identifying promising sites for PV feasibility. 

Considerations of roof age, structural integrity, electricity 

use, and costs, combined with the district’s input, will result 

in a listing of schools from most promising to least for PV 

installation. 

NREL’s Analysis

4.2.1 

Based on findings from the SunPower and NREL analyses 

and district preferences, each district selected five of the 

most promising locations to receive structural assessments. 

The purpose of the structural evaluations was to rapidly 

assess if the existing framing can support a PV array and 

determine if there are potential structural deficiencies that 

may preclude the addition of a PV array. The evaluations 

were based on an in-house review of the available “as-built” 

drawings furnished by school districts; no site visit has been 

performed as part of this phase of the work.

Structural Assessments

4.2.2 

Based on findings from SunPower’s solar mapping 

analyses, NREL’s solar mapping analyses, and the structural 

assessments, and taking into account other considerations 

such as roof age, electricity use and costs, and the district’s 

input, NREL will generate a listing of schools, from the 

most promising to least, for PV installation for each district. 

This listing, which will form the foundation of a Solar 

Master Plan for each district, will serve as either a standalone document or be integrated with five- or ten-year 

Facilities Master Plans. By institutionalizing planning for 

PV installations into traditionally accepted and commonly 

used construction planning mechanisms, such as Facilities 

Master Plans, districts will likely have greater success in 

planning for and implementing PV.

Solar Master Plans

5.

It can be difficult, especially in today’s budget climate, for 

districts to procure funding for energy efficiency and 

renewable energy (EERE) projects. There are a variety of 

financing mechanisms for EERE technologies that can be 

employed by districts. As part of this project, a financing 

guide was developed; this guide provides an overview of 

financial options, a variety of templates, signed project 

documents, and other reference materials that school 

districts can review as they pursue their own respective solar 

electricity generation projects.

FINANCING OPTIONS 

The document is divided into three sections:

• Section I: Provides an introduction to financing PV on 

schools, including consideration of energy efficiency, 

roof viability and classroom impact.

• Section II: Discusses a direct ownership option, where 

the solar project is procured through a design-build 

contract. Here the school finances the project’s 

purchase price with 100% debt financing which may 

include either traditional tax-exempt municipal bonds 

or taxable bonds that provide a form of federal subsidy; 

namely, Build America Bonds, Clean Renewable 

Energy Bonds, Qualified Energy Conservation Bonds, 

Qualified School Conservation Bonds, and Qualified 

Zone Academy Bonds.

• Section III: Focuses on the third party finance model, 

including Power Purchase Agreements and Energy 

Services Performance Contracts, with a brief 

description of New Markets Tax Credits and examples.

Case studies are incorporated into the document when 

relevant and available. The reference section of this report 

includes a number of pertinent documents related to 

financing solar installations on public schools and other 

public facilities. This document will serve as a resource for 

district representatives, and it is specifically crafted for 

schools. 
6 

6. 

Compensation for commercial net-metered PV systems is 

dictated primarily by the utility rate structure under which 

the PV system and building operates. Electric utility tariffs 

across the United States consist of many different rate 

components, all of which have an impact on PV system 

economics. Identifying the effects of rate structures on 

system economics can help individuals and entities make 

informed choices on available rate structures in order to 

maximize their investment returns.

RATE ANALYSIS

xxiv

An abundance of utility rate structures exist for school 

districts and these options can be confusing to understand. 

Advantages, disadvantages and other implications of each 

rate structure are sometimes hard to identify. As school 

districts implement energy efficiency measures and 

renewable energy technologies, the school’s electric load 

will be reduced (assuming no changes in operations such as 

additional students or operating hours). It is important, and 

complex, to consider the interactions on rate structure and 

total electricity costs of a reduced load, and school districts 

should be examining which rate structure each school is on 

and working to identify which structure is most beneficial 

(i.e., most cost-effective) to the school. This is especially 

important to consider when installing PV systems, as some 

rate structures are more economically favorable than others.

As part of this project, NREL conducted a utility rate 

analysis comparing the value of PV electric generation for 

different rate structures.

6.1. 

The Berkeley High School case study explores the impacts 

of various applicable retail rate structures on the value of 

electricity generated from a potential rooftop PV system. 

The analysis uses NREL’s System Advisor Model (SAM) 

and the OpenEI Online Utility Rate Database.

Berkeley High School Case Study

xxv,xxvi

First, the economic value of PV was examined under six 

applicable PG&E electric rate structures. The rates are: A-6, 

A-1 TOU, A-1, A-10, A-10 TOU, and E-19. The PV values, 

expressed in $/kWh, under each of the six applicable rates 

are shown below in 

Inputs 

included measured building electrical load data, simulated 

solar data (using measured meteorological data from the 

same time period and location as the building load data), 

retail rate structures, and any applicable incentives. SAM 

used these inputs and other user specified parameters to 

evaluate system economics under each utility rate and PV 

penetration scenario. PV penetration is the percent of the 

building’s annual electric load that is met by the PV system. 

The results allow us to understand under which scenarios a 

PV system becomes economical.

Fig. 1. Certain rates (E-19, A-10, A-10 

TOU) yield values that vary with PV penetration. This is 

because these rates have demand charges, while the others 

do not.

Fig. 1: Value of PV generation for Berkeley High School.

Next, the value of PV generation was calculated by 

comparing the building’s electricity cost with and without 

the PV system. The difference yields the PV value, which 

can be divided by total PV kWh generation to get a $/kWh 

number. This method of calculating PV value is very useful 

when evaluating each rate independently. However, when 

comparing multiple rates, it is more useful to evaluate the 

net PV value. This compares the building’s electricity cost 

without the PV system always using the least expensive 

rate(s) and the building’s electricity cost with PV under the 

rate in question. The difference yields the net PV value. The 

data in Fig. 2 shows that rate E-19 is the most economical 

rate until a 35% PV penetration, after which rate A-6 

becomes the most economical.

Fig. 2: Net value of PV generation for Berkeley High 

School.
7 

PV value alone may not provide enough information for 

decision makers to understand what impacts they can expect 

on their electricity bill. To understand bill impacts, the cost 

of the PV system must be subtracted from the value it 

provides. If the PV value is greater than the cost, then the 

system yields a net electricity bill savings. The data below 

illustrates how Berkeley High School’s bill savings varies 

with PV penetration and cost, based on using the most 

economic rate(s). In this situation, the least expensive rates 

are E-19, up to 35% penetration, and A-6 for 35% 

penetration and beyond.

PV systems that are $3/Watt (W) or below will always 

result in a positive bill savings, while systems $5/W and 

above results in a net loss. These values can vary depending 

on how the system is financed and the availability of 

incentives. This is graphically represented in Fig. 3. 

Fig. 3: System cost and electricity bill savings.

7. 

Schools present a unique opportunity for energy efficiency 

implementation as well as renewable energy deployment. 

They tend to have high and very consistent electricity loads 

with corresponding high utility bills. They also often have 

large land or roof areas for which to site PV technologies. 

Installing energy efficient or PV technologies on a school 

and incorporating these systems into curriculum is an 

effective, hands-on way to educate students about these 

important technologies.

CONCLUSION

This paper summarized the technical assistance efforts that 

were a result of the Solar America Showcase award. 

Information contained in this report can serve as a case 

study and reference document detailing the steps and 

processes that could be used to successfully identify, fund, 

and implement solar PV projects in school districts across 

the country. The goal of the technical assistance support was 

to enable and empower district representatives to understand

PV technologies and opportunities, identify potential 

financing mechanisms, and institutionalize the inclusion of 

PV in the district master planning process.

Technical support included education of district 

stakeholders in the areas of PV technologies and financing 

options, electricity rate analysis to identify the most PVfriendly rates for the districts, building structural 

assessments, and an analysis of technical potential for solar 

PV. The support will culminate in the development of 

comprehensive, district-wide Solar Master Plans.

As school districts are currently faced with budget 

uncertainties in parallel with energy reduction and 

renewable energy use goals, districts can integrate PV 

installations into the planning process through education, 

planning, and preparation for PV implementation.

One method for institutionalizing this process is to develop 

Solar Master Plans. These enable school districts to phase in 

solar projects over time, either by using voter-approved 

construction bonds or by taking advantage of financing 

(either low-cost or third-party). In some instances the PV 

system can even be used to generate revenue.

8. 

This work was made possible by the Solar America 

Communities program of the Solar Energy Technologies 

Program at DOE. The author wishes to thank Sean Ong of 

NREL for conducting the rate analysis, Kosol 

Kiatreungwattana of NREL for compiling the technology 

overview, Jason Coughlin of NREL for compiling the 

financing guide, Tom Kelly of KyotoUSA for 

organizational and leadership support of this project, and 

BUSD, OUSD, and WCCUSD district staff for their efforts 

to support PV installations in their districts. 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy 

under Contract No. DE-AC36-08-GO28308 with the 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

 

i

http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/news/progress_alerts.cfm/pa_i

d=165

ii Kelly, T. (2009). SSAIP Project Application for Solar 

America Showcase Award.

iii Jones, L., Berkeley School District, via email March 2, 

2011

iv Monterrosa, C.E., Coordinator of Facilities Planning and 

Management, Oakland Unified School District, via email 

March 2, 2011

v http://www.chps.net/dev/Drupal/node

vi http://www.chps.net/dev/Drupal/node
8 

 

vii http://www.consumerenergycenter.org/school/solarschool.html

viiiviii http://www.consumerenergycenter.org/school/solarschool.html

ix Kelly, T. (2009). SSAIP Project Application for Solar 

America Showcase Award.

x

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=k12_schools.bus_

schoolsk12

xihttp://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=k12_schools.bus_

schoolsk12

xii http://www.nrel.gov/eis/imby/ xiii Dean et al. 

http://solaramericacommunities.energy.gov/pdfs/Analysisof-Web-Based-Solar-Photovoltaic-Mapping-Tools.pdf

xivhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/webinar_082609

_introre.pdf

xv http://www1.eere.energy.gov/solar/pdfs/47854.pdf

xvi http://www.nrel.gov/pv/pdfs/43208.pdf

xvii http://www.nrel.gov/learning/re_photovoltaics.html

xviii DOD RE Replication Pilot ESPC xix Guey-Lee, L. Forces Behind Wind Power. February 

2001. Wind cost and performance data. 

http://www.natrona.net/development/Packets/pc20060613/V

C06-0013%20Chevron%20CUP/ EIA%20wind%201.pdf. 

Accessed September 11, 2009.

xx Mortensen, J. Factors Associated with Photovoltaic 

System Costs. NREL/TP 620.29649. June 2001; p. 3. xxi http://us.sunpowercorp.com/ xxii At the time of the SunPower analysis for BUSD, the CSI 

incentive was at Tier 6: 

http://www.gosolarcalifornia.ca.gov/csi/rebates.php

xxiii At the time of the SunPower analysis for WCCUSD, the 

CSI incentive was at Tier 7: 

http://www.gosolarcalifornia.ca.gov/csi/rebates.php

xxiv Ong, S., et al. (2010). The Impacts of Commercial 

Electric Utility Rate Structure Elements on the Economics 

of Photovoltaic Systems. NREL/TP-6A2-46782. 

http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy10osti/46782.pdf

xxv https://www.nrel.gov/analysis/sam/

xxvi http://en.openei.org/wiki/Gateway:Utilities
F1147-E(10/2008) 

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved

OMB No. 0704-0188

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, 

gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this 

collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Executive Services and Communications Directorate (0704-0188). Respondents 

should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a 

currently valid OMB control number.

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION.

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

April 2011

2. REPORT TYPE

Conference Paper

3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

 

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Solar for Schools: A Case Study in Identifying and Implementing 

Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Projects in Three California School Districts: 

Preprint

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

DE-AC36-08GO28308

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S)

A. Kandt

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

NREL/CP-7A40-50969

5e. TASK NUMBER

PVC9.93J1

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

1617 Cole Blvd.

Golden, CO 80401-3393

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

REPORT NUMBER

NREL/CP-7A40-50969

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)

NREL

11. SPONSORING/MONITORING

AGENCY REPORT NUMBER

12. DISTRIBUTION AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

National Technical Information Service

U.S. Department of Commerce

5285 Port Royal Road

Springfield, VA 22161

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 Words)

The Department of Energy's (DOE) Solar America Showcase program seeks to accelerate demand for solar 

technologies among key end use market sectors. As part of this activity the DOE provides Technical Assistance 

through its national laboratories to large-scale, high-visibility solar installation projects. The Solar Schools 

Assessment and Implementation Project (SSAIP) in the San Francisco Bay area was selected for a 2009 DOE Solar 

American Showcase award. SSAIP was formed through the efforts of the nonprofit Sequoia Foundation and includes 

three school districts: Berkeley, West Contra Costa, and Oakland Unified School Districts. This paper summarizes 

the technical assistance efforts that resulted from this technical assistance support. It serves as a case study and 

reference document detailing the steps and processes that could be used to successfully identify, fund, and 

implement solar PV projects in school districts across the country.

15. SUBJECT TERMS

schools; solar photovoltaics; PV

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION 

OF ABSTRACT

UL

18. NUMBER 

OF PAGES

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

a. REPORT

Unclassified

b. ABSTRACT

Unclassified

c. THIS PAGE

Unclassified 19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code)

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8/98)

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18