[Federal Register: December 8, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 236)]
[Notices]
[Page 74477-74479]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr08de08-39]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Request for Information for Photovoltaic Community Project:
Fielded Photovoltaic Systems and Components Data
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Request for Information (DE-PS36-09GO39002).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) today gives notice of a Request
for Information (RFI) to invite comment on approaches to address the
need for consistently-collected reliability data of fielded
photovoltaic systems, data analysis to deduce methods for assessing
reliability and to improve accelerated aging tests to create predictive
models, improvement in existing tests, more information on best
practices for reliability and accelerated aging tests, and assessing
the nature and frequency of safety-related issues (arcing, building
integration aspects, and ground faults) and their relationship with
long-term performance. It is clear that the foundation to address these
needs is a database consisting of photovoltaic system and component
reliability, as well as performance data, which are collected in a
consistent manner. In addition to the database, it is necessary for DOE
to collaborate with the national laboratories and others to evaluate
the data, develop new or modified tests, assess safety, evaluate system
and component interactions, and develop predictive models.
DOE is issuing this RFI for information and feedback from the PV
community stakeholders. These include, but are not limited to, system
operators and integrators, utilities, project planners, financial
planners, manufacturers, third-party data-aggregation companies,
universities, testing facilities, and other interested parties.
See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document, which
provides further detail and comments requested.
DATES: Written comments must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on
December 17, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Send all responses to this RFI to PV.CommunityRFI@go.doe.gov
in Microsoft Word format.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions regarding the content of the
RFI must be submitted through the
[[Page 74478]]
``Submit Question'' feature in the DOE Industry Interactive Procurement
System (IIPS) at http://e-center.doe.gov. Locate the RFI by going to
http://e-center.doe.gov/, click on ``Browse Opportunities,'' and scroll
down to view DOE Financial Assistance Opportunities (Viewing
``Opportunities by Date Posted'' is recommended). Click on the ``Browse
Financial Asst.'' button, and then click on the folder next to
``November 2008.'' Locate and click on Announcement No. RFI DE-PS36-
09GO39002, Request for Information (RFI): PV Community Project. Click
on the ``Submit Question'' button. Enter required information. You will
receive an electronic notification when your question has been
answered. Please contact the IIPS Help Desk at 1-800-683-0751 (select
Option 1) or at helpdesk@pr.doe.gov for questions regarding the
operation of IIPS.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A major emphasis of the Department of Energy
Solar Energy Technology Program (SETP) is achieving cost
competitiveness and broad commercialization of solar electric
technologies in the United States. The SETP is focusing primarily on
two areas: (1) Research and development (R&D) on photovoltaic (PV)
component and system designs, including low-cost approaches for
manufacturing them; and (2) technology acceptance activities that
address marketplace barriers and offer the opportunity for market
expansion. Key elements in the market transformation are the ability to
evaluate the performance and reliability of solar products and systems.
As noted in the SETP Multi-Year Program Plan \1\, system
integrators, project planners, and the financial community need more
rigorous data about overall system performance. System reliability,
including service life prediction, is also essential for investment
decisions. Manufacturers are also seeking techniques for quantifying
the performance and reliability of their products and systems. During
the Second Accelerated Aging Workshop (April 1-2, 2008) \2\ specific
needs were identified. These inter-related needs include the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ SETP Multi-Year Program Plan 2008-2012; http://
www1.eere.energy.gov/solar/pdfs/solar_program_mypp_2008-2012.pdf.
\2\ Proceedings reported in ``Accelerated Aging Testing and
Reliability in Photovoltaics Workshop II Summary Report'' are found
at: http://www.eere.energy.gov/solar/solar_america/pdfs/
accelerated_aging_report_2008.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistently-collected reliability data of fielded
systems;
Data analysis to deduce methods for assessing reliability
and to improve accelerated aging tests to create predictive models;
Improve existing tests and provide more information on
best practices for reliability and accelerated aging tests;
Assessment of the nature and frequency of safety-related
issues (arcing, building integration aspects, and ground faults) and
their relationship with long-term performance.
Based upon these insights, there is a clear need for data to
accomplish the following:
1. Document degradation rates for PV systems and components
deployed in different climates/configurations:
--With the recent advances and the proliferation of module
manufacturers, information is needed to (1) update understanding of
degradation and failure rates; (2) link degradation to use
environments, and (3) define specialized, feasible measurement
approaches to the degradation rates for emerging technologies.
--Minimal data is available on degradation and failure rates for other
PV system components, such as inverters, wiring, trackers, etc.
2. Document failures observed for PV systems and system components
deployed in different climates/ configurations:
--Documented, consistent data about system/component performance,
maintenance events, and the related cost will establish an
understanding about deployed systems or components. System components
would include all elements of the system.
3. Define ``use conditions'':
--Data may support further categorization of PV system or system
component degradation according to ``use conditions,'' which may differ
from the climate zones defined in existing standards such as IEC 60721.
4. Establish technical basis for testing methods and codes and
standards.
--Data collected from fielded systems by a consistent method may
improve understanding of use conditions for systems and/or components.
--Consistent data can support the development of appropriate codes and
standards for the industry.
Proposed Strategy
The intent of this RFI is to invite comment on approaches to
address the needs described above. The foundation to address these
needs is a database consisting of photovoltaic system and component
reliability data, as well as performance data, which are collected in a
consistent manner. In addition to a database, it is necessary for DOE
to collaborate with national laboratories and others to evaluate the
data, develop new or modified tests, assess safety, evaluate system and
component interactions, and develop predictive models. The following
describes a possible approach.
Other ideas are encouraged.
Proposed Topic
Consistently collect performance and reliability data about fielded
systems and their components, in a range of locales over an extended
period of time. Large and small systems would be of interest.
To develop or verify predictive performance and
reliability models to better understand system and component
interactions in collaboration with the national laboratories and
others;
To evaluate module degradation and failure rates of
fielded modules in a range of use conditions in collaboration with the
national laboratories and others.
Proposed Tasks To Accomplish This Topic Are:
Task 1: System Selection: Systems must be fielded and commercially
available. Small-scale systems based on prototypes would be optional. A
range of technologies, system sizes, and diverse locales are required.
It is also desirable that system owners and site operators will be
willing to provide access to research teams to permit on-site
measurements. It may be desirable to swap out components for detailed
laboratory characterization. In these cases, arrangements for spare
components would be necessary to minimize impacts on system operation.
Task 2: Data Monitoring: Use standardized methods for all sites to
collect information about system and component performance,
reliability, and maintenance.
Task 3: Database: Establish and maintain database.
Task 4: Data Analysis and Reporting. Conduct data review, and
periodic consolidation, analysis and reporting of the findings,
recommendations and next steps.
Approach
Three alternative approaches have been identified.
Alternative 1: Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) (for Grants or
Cooperative Agreements)
DOE could issue a competitive FOA for applications, with Applicants
providing access to their deployed
[[Page 74479]]
systems and components to collect performance, reliability, and
maintenance data according to established protocols. Such a FOA may
involve system integrators, operators, or others offering access to
systems, possibly a third party for data collection and aggregation,
and collaboration with the national laboratories and others for
testing, and the national laboratories for data analysis and storage,
all accomplished in a consistent, coordinated project.
Alternative 2: Non-Competitive Collaborative R&D
The national labs could negotiate individual, non-competitive
arrangements with selected participants (companies, test labs, and/or
universities) regarding the relative roles and commitments of the
various parties to achieve the stated objectives. Negotiations would be
on a case-by-case basis, with the national laboratories in the lead
coordinating role, based upon their planned work for the DOE SETP in
their Annual Operating Plans.
Alternative 3: DOE/SETP Acquisition
A DOE acquisition process could be used to acquire access to PV
systems for the purpose of installing data collection equipment,
collecting system performance, reliability, and maintenance data, and
monitoring the system. An acquisition could include services to
implement the data collection. Data could be collected by a site
custodian, a third party, a national laboratory team, or a combination
of options.
In all cases the data collected would be analyzed to establish
capabilities by a national laboratory team, in which DOE has already
invested. Opportunities would exist for additional collaboration with
other testing facilities to participate in achieving the common goals.
Results would be made public in a summary form that would not be
identifiable by system or manufacturer. Participants in the project
would be given the summary information, along with their particular
system/component data. This would offer them the benefit of knowing how
their specific use condition compares with others under a particular
set of criteria. Those not in the program will have access to the
summary public information.
Request for Information Guidelines
Respondents are asked to specifically comment on the above proposed
strategy, and the questions below. Respondents are free to comment on
the general concept, potential benefits or obstacles, the overall
merits of this idea, other alternatives, and the relative priority of
this activity.
DOE will evaluate responses to this RFI to determine the best
approach to move forward. If a FOA or an acquisition process is
warranted, DOE would formulate the content based on these comments and
program needs. DOE may determine that a FOA or an acquisition process
is NOT needed, and that companies will make individual arrangements
with the national laboratories.
Questions
(1) Motivation: Would industry be willing to participate in such a
program and what would participants expect or require? In addition to
the benefits mentioned, are there other useful financial and/or project
outcomes?
(2) Requirements: Are there any special requirements or
considerations an entity must have in order to participate?
(3) Needs: Are the stated needs appropriate? Is the list complete,
or are there additional needs? What additional needs could be addressed
by a consistent performance and reliability database? How long should
the data collection project last, e.g., 1 year, 5 years, other?
(4) Priorities: Are there other priorities instead of, or in
addition to, those identified? How would they be ranked?
(5) Data: What are specific suggestions about what data is needed?
A continuous data stream consolidated into specific intervals is
envisioned. Is this appropriate? Suggestions about the data collection
instrumentation and methodology are welcomed.
(6) Topic: Is the topic appropriate? Are there other topics that
should be included and why?
(7) Tasks: Are the tasks appropriate? Are there other tasks that
should be included and why?
(8) Critical Milestones: What critical milestones are recommended
to measure the success of this effort and why?
(9) Approach: Of the Alternatives to implement this effort, is
there one that would be the most useful? Are there other, more
expedient approaches to achieving the objectives? Please describe.
(10) Confidentiality: DOE has procedures for maintaining data
confidentiality, and creating a firewall so the data is not subject to
the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Is this essential? Are there
specific concerns that could be addressed on an individual basis?
(11) Costs: What would be the estimated costs of the different
alternatives?
DOE will not pay for information provided under this Request for
Information (RFI), and there is no guarantee that a project will be
supported as a result of this RFI. This RFI is not accepting
applications for financial assistance or financial incentives. Response
to the RFI will not be viewed as a binding commitment for the
respondent to develop or pursue the project or ideas discussed. DOE may
also decide at a later date to issue Funding Opportunity Announcements
(FOAs), based on consideration of the input received from this RFI.
Respondents are requested to provide the following information in
their submission of comments in response to this RFI.
Company/institutional name, Company/institutional contact.
Address, phone number, e-mail address.
Type of business or institution.
Responses should be limited to 5 pages. However, more than one
response is allowed. Please identify your answers by responding to a
specific question or topic if possible. We welcome other comments as
well. Identifying the comment with the item it refers to will
facilitate aggregating all the responses. Any information obtained as a
result of this RFI is intended to be used by the Government on a non-
attribution basis for program planning and procurement strategy
development. Information or data that is restricted in any way or
limited for use by the government is not solicited and will not be
considered. Please do not respond with any information you deem
proprietary or confidential.
The Department will not respond to those who submit comments, and/
or give any feedback on any decision made based on the comments
received, as there is potential for a future Funding Opportunity
relative to this subject, informed by the total comments received.
The Department thanks you for your assistance and comments.
Issued in Golden, CO, on November 21, 2008.
Matthew A. Barron,
Acting Assistant Manager, OAFA, DOE-Golden Field Office.
[FR Doc. E8-28938 Filed 12-5-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P