« The Role of FiTs in California | Main | The Risks of Going Big »

29 September 2009



Dear Mr. Harris:

Not sure exactly what code you have cracked, but can you explain why you have decided to use Unisolar laminates? Obviously, it is not because of their low installed cost or the quality of the product. Why then? Was UPC somehow stuck with some rotting inventory (after all, they owned a big chunk of SIT and chaired the Board)? Let us know.

Oh, by the way, have you looked at the performance of the 12MW GM/Opel Zaragoza gem? No? Invertors fail on a weekly basis (and some stay down for a month), according to the remote monitoring system. The system as a whole is underperforming, of course, even in its first year (before the serious degradation kicks in). And, of course, you are familiar with the fire on the rooftop of the Long Beach Convention Center in February 2008.

So, can you explain how you cracked the code? Because your colleagues at Clairvoyant (aka DEERS) thought to have cracked it too, but seem to have changed their mind (if the Oerlikon news is to be believed).


Arno Harris

Hi, ECD Fan:

Thanks for your comment. By "cracking the code", I was referring to the business model the project demonstrates that enables us to do rooftop solar efficiently in large volumes. Ultimately it is that innovation which will enable the industry to tap the solar potential of large commercial and industrial rooftops.

Per your question, there is no connection between our UPC transaction and our decision to work with ECD on the Spanish project. We work with a variety of suppliers and select specific technologies based on the appropriateness of the "fit" with each project's requirements.

We invest in our projects based on financial return. The cost of the ECD solution and its risks were thoroughly evaluated as part of the financing process. ECD provides a warranty on the product and the project's performance.

Regards, Arno

The comments to this entry are closed.