1. GRID Alternatives Solar for Low-Income Families California case study STANLEY GRESCHNER Director – SASH Program Phone: (510) 731-1322 E-mail: stan@gridalternatives.org

2. Organization Background Non-profit 501(c)(3) organization CA licensed C-10 electrical contractor Program Administrator of California’s Single-family Affordable Solar Homes (SASH) Rebate Program GRID Alternatives Volunteer-based installation model

3. SASH Program A Comprehensive Low-Income Solar Program Higher incentives than general market CSI Program Energy Efficiency Workforce Development Volunteers and Community Engagement GRID Alternatives

4. SASH Program Budget $108M; runs through 2015 7 rebate levels: $4.75 – $7.00/W; free 1kW system Installed Capacity: 14-16 MW (5000-6000 systems) Income: <80% AMI or <50% AMI for free system Resale restricted affordable housing GRID Alternatives

5. Why Solar for Low-Income Families Economic High energy costs Significant savings Proportionally greater economic benefit Environmental Justice Power plants often sited in low-income communities High rates of asthma Jobs Engages low-income communities in emerging sector Helps Develop a Sustainable Solar Industry Moves the industry beyond the “initial adopter” phase; Solar is not only for wealthy individuals GRID Alternatives

6. A Successful Low-Income Solar Program Financial Commitment: Dedicated budget Differential incentive/rebate Dedicated Partners: Program development (what we’re doing today) Accessing communities and customers Marketing, Outreach, and Oversight GRID Alternatives

7. A Successful Low-Income Solar Program **Think Beyond MW** Long term vision: What infrastructure is left in place to continue serving this unique market segment Comprehensive Program: Integrate with other low-income energy programs Workforce development, community engagement GRID Alternatives

8. A Successful Low-Income Solar Program Clearly defined eligibility requirements: Define low-income: federal poverty level vs. area median income (AMI) Affordable housing, qualified census tracts, EZ/EC, Targeted Employment Areas, etc. Homeowners vs. renters Be as inclusive as possible GRID Alternatives

9. The Challenges Long term return on investment not a motivator, low-income families need day one positive cash flow General distrust or skepticism of new/complex programs Poor ‘front-end’ economics (electricity rate, small systems, no tax liability) Financial strain and foreclosure climate make loans challenging Multi-lingual, multi-cultural marketing Consumer Protection GRID Alternatives

10. Some Questions to Consider What type of housing do low-income residents have (multi/single, own/rent)? Is there an upfront cost to participate and what is the ROI? How to protect participants and maximize their benefits Are there city funds that can be leveraged to supplement the utility ratepayer funded program (CDBG, EE, home rehab, etc.) If the market segment is narrow (i.e. affordable housing), who is responsible for marketing, outreach, and oversight? GRID Alternatives

11. THANK YOU Stanley Greschner stan@gridalternatives.org Tel: (510) 731-1322 GRID Alternatives 1171 Ocean Ave, Suite 200 Oakland, CA 94608 www.gridalternatives.org