Abstract
The American southwest has among the best solar resources in the world. For this reason, the solar industry monitors the progress of solar energy development there closely. Yet, meaningful adoption has been slow, particularly in the state with the richest resource, Arizona. This article reports on the results of internet surveys and personal interviews to explain why this is true. We focused on identifying industry-perceived barriers to solar adoption. We asked three questions: (1) Which industry factors slow the speed of adoption of solar energy in Arizona? (2) Are there unmet workforce needs that slow adoption in Arizona? (3) Which policy incentives are needed to accelerate solar development? We identified a need for the following steps: establish financial security for projects with newly created and targeted statutory instruments, develop standardized college-level solar curriculum to train a local workforce, and provide conspicuous government support and supportive policy commitments that are sustainable. A systematic and integrated effort with government, industry, educational, and public representation is needed to make solar energy a significant contributor to the future economic vitality of the state, thereby helping to advance such adoption in other places with similar opportunities for solar energy development.
1. Introduction
One of the most abundant energy resources in the American Southwest is sunshine. In places such as Palm Springs, Phoenix, and Tucson, the attraction of this sunshine has been for seasonal tourism. Once reliable and affordable air conditioning became available, however, everything changed and the population of the area boomed (Oi Citation1996). Since then, Arizona's climate in particular has fueled endless speculation that the state would one day be the national trendsetter for solar energy development. It has not happened, but there are several signs that the contribution of solar energy might soon match the rhetoric that has long touted its potential. The goal of this article is to explain why solar energy has been diffused less effectively in Arizona and to provide strategies to reverse the trend.
Various reports have put the commercial development potential of solar in Arizona as 2.5 GW, almost three times that of California (Arizona Department of Commerce, 2007). Just the roof space on residential buildings in the state could support 7.5 GW, ignoring economics. There is the perception, then, that the commercial development of solar power in Arizona is moving toward its touted potential (Kurtz et al. Citation2004; Hoffmann Citation2006), but progress has been slow. For example, there has been notable success in several less-endowed countries such as Germany and Japan. In other countries with more successful solar power markets, the history of that country's renewable energy market and the politics surrounding these alternative sources dictate the structure of solar energy deployment. This development chasm has resulted from the many differences between Arizona and these other countries, particularly the success of the European feed-in tariffs (Scheer 2007). This tariff, combined with events such as the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear accidents and the increasingly negative public image of coal mining, is among the factors that distinguish European and American solar growth (Laird and Stefes Citation2009).
1.2. General barriers to renewable energy adoption in the USA
Understanding the diffusion – and more importantly, the barriers – to renewable energy adoption is a critical issue for policy makers and companies operating in the industry. Recent research into the slow progress of renewable energies in the United States has revealed various factors that inhibit the adoption of these new technologies by US consumers. Among these, one of the most frequently noted hesitancies of the public concerns the perceived cost disadvantage renewables have to tradition fossil and nuclear fuels (Allen et al. Citation2002; Haas et al. Citation2008; Sovacool Citation2008; Sovacool Citation2009a). Although it is the opinion of experts that the “transmission cost” (Allen et al. Citation2002) associated with moving away from traditional power sources could be recovered in time, the American public is either unaware, uninformed or apathetic to this information (Sovacool Citation2009a). This phenomenon of rejection is speculated to be part of a larger conglomerate of social, cultural, and behavioral barriers that currently represent a huge impediment to US adoption of sustainable energy sources (Wustenhagen et al. Citation2007; Sovacool Citation2008; Sovacool Citation2009b). For instance, Sovacool (Citation2009b) presents the case for resistance to changing energy sources as being based in the public's perception, understanding, and requirements of energy. In his research, Sovacool found that the relative dissonance between where and how electrical energy is generated and the way it is presented to consumers facilitates a mentality of clean, efficient energy hardly worth upgrading. It has also been hypothesized that misunderstandings about the danger associated with renewable energy sources have limited success (Laird and Stefes Citation2009).
In addition to barriers rooted in societal behaviors and expectations, it is clear that certain institutional, political, and legislative processes continue to bar full viability of sustainable energy sources (Haas Citation2008; Sovacool Citation2008). In particular, regulatory laws, a lengthy approval process, and specific equipment and resource requirements often associated with green energy sources are shown to serve as blockades against a smooth transition (Alderfer Citation2001).
The delayed diffusion of solar power in the United States is also subject to general market trends, especially consumer resistance to innovative products. Consumer resistance is generally thought to be a contributing factor to inhibited product diffusion when said innovative products conflict with consumers' beliefs or habits (Garcia et al. Citation2007). Changing a society from one fueled by traditional means to one powered by renewable energy sources such as solar energy will require changes in the ways individuals think about energy and energy needs. Thus, despite evidence that the public supports the ideology behind renewable energy sources (Farhar Citation1994), it should come as no surprise that sectors of the market have met solar power technologies with hesitation. Fragmentation among providers of solar power might also be detrimental to the market. As such, horizontal cooperation and competition with other industry-wide players would be beneficial to all those within that industry (Garcia et al. Citation2007).
2. The Arizona solar context
There is still a sense that Arizona will soon be narrowing the gap in solar energy adoption (Arizona Goes Solar 2010; Arizona Solar Center 2010). The Arizona Corporation Commission, for instance, has established “Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS),” which requires regulated utilities to generate approximately 15% of their electricity from renewable energy by 2025, including 4.5% from distributed sources (Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) 2008). Reaching the 15% threshold will require 4000 MW of additional renewable energy generation. Moreover, the Arizona RPS is making a difference. For a 4 kW residential system, the commercial, unsubsidized price for such an installation is about $25,000. This cost goes down in response to various incentives and subsidies, where about $12,500 of the cost is reimbursed by utility rebates, the direct result of the RPS. In addition, there is $1000 in state tax relief and about $2000 from a similar federal program. Payback for such a system, after rebates, is between 9 and 12 years.
The Arizona legislature has also helped by providing a full property tax exemption for property owners with solar systems, as well as legal protection for homeowners who wish to install solar modules even when they face prohibitions from Home Owners’ Associations (Arizona Revised Statute (ARS) 2010). Without the RPS, it would take more than twice as long. Thus, the RPS has been the key factor in the installation of most of the 4000–5000 solar units that have been made in the state, both for photovoltaic and hot water heating systems. Furthermore, there is a steady decline in the cost associated with setting up solar modules. Just between the years 2000 and 2005, the price of setting up solar cells dropped approximately 20%, largely due to the increasing experience companies have with constructing these modules (Moore et al. Citation2005). In addition, with market opportunities in Arizona and particularly California, several of the largest solar companies have moved in, including First Solar, BP Solar International, Kyocera, and Suntech Power, with more than three dozen solar projects of varying size having been proposed for the state, a potential commitment that would have a total capital cost of several billion dollars. In addition to Arizona, electricity will be sold to California for their consumption.
As a whole, however, Arizona’s solar energy adoption has been slower than might be expected, given the plentiful sunshine there. Part of the explanation for this results from the higher incentives in the leading solar states – California and New Jersey – but there are other reasons as well. For example, it simultaneously suffers from its low per capita income and largely conservative political climate. It might also be suffering due to fragmentation and disagreement in policy-making machinery (Scheer, 2007). Arizona's RPS is low compared with California, which requires 33% by 2020, excluding credit for the existing large hydroelectric capacity. Notably, there are also workforce gaps that inhibit adoption. A well-trained workforce was identified as a necessary condition to grow the solar energy industry (Arizona Department of Commerce 2007). Other barriers to renewable energy adoption include ongoing challenges to the RPS (Randazzo Citation2010), relatively low rates for conventional power, and an existing conservative political climate (Sarzynski Citation2009). Characterizing the barriers to solar energy adoption is a crucial issue for policy makers and solar companies operating in the industry, and Arizona is a particularly interesting context for this type of research.
Below we describe the results of a study that elicited perceptions from the local solar industry about the factors inhibiting its growth. Focusing on the supply side parties within the solar industry, we asked three questions: (1) Which industry factors slow the speed of adoption of solar energy in Arizona? (2) Are there unmet workforce needs that slow adoption in Arizona? (3) Which policy incentives are needed to accelerate solar development? Our purpose was to uncover why solar energy development is so slow in Arizona and to identify strategies that can reverse this trend.
3. Methods
We wanted to examine the perceptions of solar industry members doing business in Arizona. We chose this emphasis because the supply side is on the front lines of any wave of future development. Those in the solar industry will be most sensitive to what is missing and the required remedies. We collected two forms of data. First, we conducted formal interviews of the larger companies. Second, we administered an online survey. Those targeted for the personal interviews and online survey included CEOs, owners and presidents, engineers, directors and business managers, and human resources and training managers. These individuals were well informed and knowledgeable regarding the current state of the solar industry as well as future trends and needs.
We identified over 150 firms that claimed some level of solar energy expertise operating in the state. A pre-survey letter was distributed to all these to identify a willingness to participate in our study. We found that several companies on our initial list had gone out of business and some were only participating in solar energy in a marginal way. These were deleted from the pool, yielding a net of 134 solar energy companies. Of this number, 92 companies agreed that they were appropriate candidates for the study and agreed to participate. Three reminders were sent out after the first online mailing in the spring of 2010. Of the 92 local relevant companies, 76 responded, yielding a response rate of 83%.
We collaborated with industry members and university faculty to design a survey instrument with items to answer the three research questions. To answer the first research question concerning specific industry factors that inhibit solar adoption, we used a 5-point Likert Scale (strongly agree = 5 and strongly disagree = 1) to tabulate their responses. Participants were asked questions about possible legal barriers such as incompatible codes and regulations, and Homes Owners’ Association rules. To answer the second research question regarding workforce needs, we asked questions about gaps in education and training, again on a 5-point Likert Scale (as above). To answer the third question, we asked industry members about incentives such as feed-in tariffs, and full net metering.
Personal interviews were conducted with 20 members of the solar community. Those selected for interviews represented the several groups selected for the survey. Through the course of the interviews, we raised questions that would reveal participants’ perceptions concerning challenges to growth and necessary changes in the solar energy industry that would help move the solar energy sector to the next level of market penetration. The personal interviews utilized a standardized semi-structured approach in which open-ended questions were presented to participants in a predetermined order. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded. The survey also provided a comment box where industry members could write perceived challenges to the industry. Codes derived from interview and survey comment data were created to reduce a vast amount of information into manageable chunks for analysis.
Qualitative data analysis included a three-step process: data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing and verification (Miles and Huberman Citation1994). Data-reduction helped to sort, focus, and condense excerpts that allowed the researcher to organize the data to develop conclusions. Data were reduced and transformed through such means as selection, summary, and paraphrasing. Data display was the second major activity during which the researcher reviewed the reduced data and displayed it in a compressed way so that conclusions could be drawn. Excerpts served as our supportive evidence for categories, themes, and assertions concerning industry costs, workforce development, and policy incentives. Conclusion drawing and verification was the final analytical activity for the researchers.
Initially, when sending out the survey announcement to the solar energy industry, we asked company contacts to recommend someone who would be able to answer several questions about supply side needs. We stated that the opinions of their company were crucial to the research questions. As a result, a majority (65%) of the responses came from company owners, presidents, and CEOs. If we consider the length of the comments they wrote and the time they invested in answering several pages of questions, we can infer that this key group of stakeholders perceived the importance of such a needs assessment in Arizona and responded personally. The presidents, owners, and CEO's, the majority of respondents (65%) were followed by engineers (11%), directors/managers or those involved in business development (10%), human resources or hiring managers (10%), and training managers (4%). The findings in this study and statements, particularly those of solar energy CEO's and presidents, reveal participant attitudes and perceptions. This survey research highlights outlooks from industry members and key stakeholders.
4. Results
4.1. Direction of the industry
Our research revealed that in Arizona, the majority of solar-electric companies focus on photovoltaics (). This could be partially explained because PVs are easily scalable, modular, and simpler to install and maintain than Concentrating Solar Power (CSP), in spite of their reputation for being more costly. One could also speculate that there is little or no CSP research or instruction currently in the state. It is likely this might be remedied in the future as the CSP market in the state continues to grow. The following results highlight findings from the majority of solar energy industry members operating in the state currently focusing on photovoltaics.
Table 1. Frequency of product specialization offered by each company (76 companies).
Our initial goal was to identify the vision respondents held for the future of solar energy development in Arizona. Overall, respondents were optimistic. One of the advantages they identified was the comparatively static costs of electricity from solar energy as compared with conventional energy development. They were neutral on whether an increase in the use of renewable energy was going to drive up the cost of electricity; thus, they envisioned a bright future of solar energy in the state in part because they expect the price for electricity from conventional sources will rise faster than the cost of renewables (see ). The authors recognize that this might not always be the true in all locations and for all rate categories, but it is commonly considered to be likely.
Table 2. Future direction of the solar energy industry.
Among industry members, there is also a strong perceived relationship between lowering costs of solar energy and a rising share of solar energy in the future. However, they were not naïve about the difficulties of reaching toward a higher solar energy penetration, as 63.2% “Strongly Agreed” and 21.1% “Agreed” that there would be challenges in the future.
4.2. Speed of adoption
To answer the first research question concerning specific industry factors that inhibit solar adoption, participants were asked questions about possible legal barriers such as incompatible codes and regulations and Homes Owners’ Association rules. describes perceived attitudes on stimulating the solar energy industry in Arizona. Respondents tied speed of adoption to costs, indicating that “potential solar adopters need a faster payback” (the breakeven point where the solar energy generated and sold back to the utility companies equals the cost of the solar equipment). While accurate calculation of such payback periods can be complex, the average consumer simply looks at the reduced energy bill and calculates how long it will be before he or she can recoup the out-of-pocked expense of the solar installation. This response had the strongest agreement (76.2%) among those responding, with a mean score of 4.07.
Table 3. Speed of adoption.
We found correlations between responses to key survey items, where an “r” statistic between 0.1 and 0.3 is small; between 0.30 to 0.50 is medium; and between 0.50 and 1.0 is large (Cohen Citation1988). Scores on “Potential solar adopters need a faster payback” were correlated with scores on “HOAs need to adopt more flexible standards,” (r = 0.32, p = 0.005). In other words, as scores on faster payback increased, so did scores on HOA standards. This suggests that there may be a positive relationship between industry members’ perceptions about HOA standards and perceptions about homeowners recouping their investment. Note that correlation does not imply causality but simply a positive statistical relation. A strong correlation also existed between scores on “codes, regulations and laws are slowing adoption” and scores on “the bottleneck is in the legislature,” (r = 0.56, p < 0.001). Similarly, scores on “codes, regulations, and laws are slowing adoption” were correlated with scores on “HOAs need to adopt more flexible standards,” (r = 0.51, p < 0.001). However, the survey results minimized objections based on aesthetics. The phrase “solar devices are unattractive” had the least perceived effect on the speed of solar energy adoption.
4.3. Workforce development
To answer the second question regarding unmet workforce needs, respondents were asked whether there were current shortages of potential employees and whether their new employees had specific solar energy experience or training when they were hired. Workforce development attracted attention from both survey and interview participants, and responses indicated that there are shortages in potential solar energy employees. Survey data suggested a lack of access to adequately trained solar professionals and also indicated that workforce education is a critical need in the state. Most industry members captured in the survey data (56%) agreed that there are workforce shortages with engineering knowledge associated with solar technologies. They also indicated that the majority of those hired lacked specific solar energy training and experience. Thus, new employees are expected to acquire solar expertise with on-the-job training ().
Table 4. Workforce needs.
Industry respondents indicated that non-technical skills and project management are at least as valuable as solar training. Solar companies welcome capabilities in written communication, teaming, oral communication, and multi-disciplinary problem-solving. Solar basics, power electronics, and solar energy project economics and finance were highly valued, whereas semi-conductor theory had less value ().
Table 5. Solar energy coursework needed.
The ideal candidate would hold a diverse skill set. That is, he or she would have a basic understanding of engineering principles, effective oral and written communication skills, and interdisciplinary teaming ability. The preferred majors in the technology areas of solar energy design would include a degree in electrical engineering or a degree in mechanical engineering (Pasqualetti and Haag 2011). Solar energy respondents more frequently stated that an ideal candidate would have schooling in economics and project financing, business knowledge, and AutoCAD training. The focus would be on how projects are financed and knowledge of return on investment. Many indicated that internships and cooperative education would be beneficial in a solar energy engineering curriculum.
4.4. Incentives and needed strategies: growing the industry
A staple question about solar energy in Arizona is what needs to be done to grow the industry. addresses this topic with regard to incentives. Several potential changes that are perceived as helping to progress the solar energy industry in Arizona were presented in the 5-point Likert scale. Most of the incentives and strategies were perceived as needed for solar adoption. In fact the majority of respondents (59.2%) “strongly agreed” that stronger leadership is needed from the elected officials (M = 4.50). Almost one-half (48%) strongly agreed that “full net-metering” (M = 4.20) was necessary and over one-third perceived that “higher portfolio standard requirements” (M = 4.0) and “feed-in tariffs” were strong incentives. Stronger leadership from elected officials was strongly correlated with higher portfolio requirements (r = 0.53, p < 0.0001) and with increased feed in tariffs, (r = 0.50, p < 0.0001). In addition, stronger leadership was moderately correlated with full net metering, r = 0.33 (p < 0.0001).
Table 6. Incentives and needed strategies for adoption.
5. Barriers to diffusion and renewable energy adoption in Arizona
The industry comments and survey results helped us to better understand the diffusion – and more importantly, the barriers – to renewable energy adoption in the state. These are critical issues for policy makers and businesses operating in the industry. Solar adoption in Arizona was tied to three topics: (1) cost/financial development, (2) workforce education; and (3) policy development. Lower costs, financial planning, and workforce development were seen as critical elements but current challenges by those who participated in this research. Policy remarks focused on high levels of government, with particular concern about continuity of policy as power shifts between parties. Many expressed concern that solar subsidies are often discussed but rarely followed by action. Respondents were concerned about sustainability once the incentives were gone.
Respondents indicated that industry challenges included rising energy costs, competition, and rapidly changing market conditions due to regulatory and policy changes that impact solar and all renewable energy industries. Industry perceived that diminishing costs are aligned with increasing market share for solar energy. This means that solar energy economics are improving, despite uneven subsidies between solar energy and conventional energy resources. This would argue for maintaining current incentives for solar energy, allowing it to establish economies of scale that will drive down unit costs. The slow rate of adoption of solar energy in Arizona was explained when respondents tied speed of adoption to costs, noting that potential solar adopters need a faster payback than is currently available, a gap that will continue to narrow as economics for solar improve.
Another area that impacted adoption was the set of codes, regulations, and laws that run counter to industry progress. In addition, data showed a strong correlation between scores on “codes, regulations, and laws are slowing adoption” and scores on “HOAs need to adopt more flexible standards.” Part of this problem was addressed in June 2007, when Gov. Janet Napolitano signed into law Senate Bill 1254 prohibiting HOAs from restricting the installation of solar energy devices. However, the threat of legal fees incurred to protect this right continues to produce impediments to more robust installations. Some homeowners have gone to court and the law was upheld. Gradually, the HOA barrier is expected to weaken as a result of these court tests, but it is expected to be a slow process. Industry members also perceive that the bottleneck is in the legislature.
Regarding workforce development, industry responses indicated that there are shortages in potential solar energy employees and that workforce education is a critical unmet need in the state. Industry members agreed that the majority of those hired lacked specific solar energy training or experience. They are seeking employees with a combination of basic solar knowledge and a diverse set of less-technical training in policy, sustainability, economics, business, and the capacity to communicate effectively within an interdisciplinary context. Additional training would be acquired on the job, and any further specialized expertise would be acquired on a consultative basis.
Participant responses revealed apprehension toward future policy, in that it could unravel any future potential growth for the solar industry. Some stated that the industry, in general, has been dependent upon policies and incentives, which placed the industry in a precarious position. Due to this dependency, many suggested that once the federal and state tax credits are removed, solar energy may not be as affordable and solar engineers will not be in as high demand (which impacts education and workforce development). Scores on stronger leadership from elected officials were correlated with scores on higher portfolio requirements and with increased feed in tariffs and full net metering. This means that the current policy Arizona has in place needs to be revisited; leadership most likely matters; all aspects favoring solar energy need to rise together for an integrated approach; and education of legislators and the public will be critical.
6. Conclusions and discussion
The intent of the surveys reported in this article was to inform the speculation that continues to exist about the best course of action to bring solar energy development to levels of meaningful contribution. Rather than speculate on what is needed, as has been common, we were interested in identifying, with a high level of confidence, the barriers the industry itself perceives need to be addressed. Industry members were predictably adept at articulating challenges, and they also provided insight into future strategies that would facilitate growth. Specifically, their recommendations were driven by three themes: (1) improved business models and financial security; (2) workforce education and training; and (3) flexible and site-specific policy.
Many mentioned that the financial sector could dramatically improve the industry's prospects by giving potential customers lending options that are not currently available, although they did not indicate what those options might be. Presumably, new lending approaches will need to be devised. The industry will need, in the near future, to have greater access to sources of capital if they are to reduce their reliance on subsidies and maintain self-sustaining growth. Cost reduction, reliability, and longevity improvements aligned with financial stability will facilitate growth and sustainability.
While more favorable policies are important, some of the policies that would prove more favorable to greater development of solar energy must engage the political process. This can be a long, difficult, and tedious undertaking, as was demonstrated by the many years of hearings that were required to gain passage of the Renewable Energy Standard by the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC). Other policies are driven more at the corporate level, as when utilities such as Arizona Public Service and Salt River Project elect to provide subsidies for solar energy. In truth, of course, such subsidies were mandated by the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC), thus the long deliberative political process.
Industry members also noted that insufficient access to a trained workforce and a lack of solar training will lead to shortages in installation and manufacturing, which in turn will slow growth in the industry. The majority of participants noted that skills in the workforce appropriate to solar energy are not adapting as quickly as the industry. The importance of both these recommendations is slowly being recognized. For example, Arizona is currently considering adding a feed-in tariff and raising the renewable energy standard above its current 15%. As for training, in early 2011, one state university initiated an interdisciplinary Professional Science Master's degree program in solar energy. It focuses on workforce training that includes the integration of engineering sciences with the local natural and social environment.
In general, when participants were asked to discuss challenges to the industry and to identify the critical next steps to move the industry forward, the majority mentioned two to three overlapping issues simultaneously, noting that this was a complex issue that required a coordinated, integrated approach. For example, industry respondents indicated that many of the key players in the solar industry (e.g. manufacturers, integrators, and developers) fail to understand the finer points of how solar technology is installed and works in actual application. They stated that the vast majority of systems today are subprime in performance, reliability, robustness and longevity, and that growth in the industry will require an integrated effort that includes education, training and policy. Many respondents also emphasized that a key step toward a stronger solar future will be the need to shift from a policy-driven market to a competitive-based market industry.
The trend of policy subsidies was seen as a double-edged sword: it may provide short-term rewards and even improve current costs and finances; but when subsidies are removed, this industry “dependence” could reduce or eliminate financial viability in the future. Because of this risk of over-reliance on policy, respondents suggested that once the federal and state tax credits are removed, solar energy may not be as affordable and solar engineers will not continue to be in high demand. As a strategy to counter this effect and facilitate sustainability, participants noted that industry needs to take the lead and further develop financial plans to create more security and stability in the future.
Recommendations
Based on our survey of local solar industry business leaders, Arizona needs to take the following steps: (1) create financial security for projects with newly created and targeted statutory instruments; (2) develop a standardized and targeted, college-level solar curriculum that trains workers locally; and (3) improve visible government support, yet with an eye to phasing them out over the years. In taking these steps, the state must establish supportive policy commitments that will be sustained with changes in governing, presumably at the statutory level. Perhaps most of all, however, Arizona needs a systematic and integrated effort, one that will include government, industry, education, and public representation with a clear mandate to make solar energy a significant contributor to the future economic well-being of the state.
If solar energy is to contribute to a sustainable energy future, we must accelerate its development by all means possible. We already have various incentives and government funding, but these have been tentative without the full commitment to solar energy that a shift from fossil fuels will require. Currently, at the same time that we provide some help to solar, we continue to pour massive subsidies into fossil and nuclear energy. We will need to take more assertive action to facilitate the adoption of an energy source that has all the attributes needed for a viable future: clean, water free, and ubiquitous. One action that should be paramount is to be more systematic in our approach. Our purpose in this article was to take a step in that direction by increasing our understanding of what the solar industry itself believes would move things along in Arizona, arguably the state with the best solar resource. Given public awareness of Arizona's solar resource, a stronger solar future there will perhaps help stimulate similar progress both in the United States and abroad.
References
- Alderfer , R , Starrs , B and Starrs , T J . 2001 . Making connections: case studies of interconnection barriers and their impact on distributed power projects. National Renewable Ebergy Laboratory Report NREL/SR-200-2805. Golden, CO: NREL
- Allen , A . 2002 . The legal impediments to distributed generation . Energy Law J , 23 : 505 – 523 .
- Arizona Department of Commerce (US) . Arizona electric roadmap study [Internet] , Burlington , MA : Navigant Consulting . 2007 Jan [cited 2011 May 15]. Available from: http://www.azcommerce.com/doclib/energy/az_solar_electric_roadmap_study_full_report.pdf
- Arizona Goes Solar [Internet]. c2010–2011 . Arizona Goes Solar [Internet] , Phoenix , AZ : Arizona Corporation Commission . [cited 2010 June 15]. Available from: http://www.arizonagoessolar.org/
- Arizona Solar Center. [Internet] . c1999–2011 . Arizona Solar Center. [Internet] , Scottsdale , AZ : Arizona Solar Energy Association . [cited 2010 Sept 10]. Available from: http://www.azsolarcenter.org/
- Arizona Revised Statute (ARS) . Restrictions on installation or use of solar energy devices invalid; exception [Internet] , Phoenix , AZ : AZ State Legislature; Fifth legislature first session . [cited 2010 June 1]. Available from: http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/33/00439.htm&Title=33&DocType=ARS
- Cohen , J . 1988 . Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences , 2nd ed. , New York, NY : Routledge Academic .
- Farhar , B C . 1994 . Trends in US public perceptions and preferences on energy and environmental policy . Annu Rev Energ Environ , 19 : 211 – 239 .
- Garcia , R , Bardhi , F and Friedrich , C . 2007 . Overcoming consumer resistance to innovation . MIT Sloan Manage Rev , 48 ( 4 ) : 82 – 88 .
- Haas , R , Meyer , N , Held , A , Finon , D , Lorenzoni , A and Nishio , K . 2008 . Promoting electricity from renewable energy sources – lessons learned from the EU, U.S. and Japan . Renewable Energy , 5 : 0 – 48 .
- Hoffmann , W . 2006 . PV solar electricity industry: market growth and perspective . Solar Energy Mater Solar Cells , 90 ( 18–19 ) : 3285 – 3311 .
- Kurtz , S , Lewandowski , A and Hayden , H . 2004 . Recent progress for concentrating photovoltaic power systems . World renewable energy congress VII and expo . Aug 29–Sept 3 2004 , Denver, CO .
- Laird , F N and Stefes , C . 2009 . The diverging paths of German and United States policies for renewable energy: sources of difference . Energy Policy , 37 ( 7 ) : 2619 – 2629 .
- Miles , M B and Huberman , A M . 1994 . Qualitative data analysis , 2nd ed. , Thousand Oak , CA : Sage .
- Moore , L , Post , H , Hayden , H , Canda , S and Narang , D . 2005 . Photovoltaic power plant experience at Arizona Public Service: a 5-year assessment . Progr PV , 14 ( 4 ) : 353 – 363 .
- Oi , W Y . 1996 . “ The welfare implications of invention ” . In editors. The economics of new goods , Edited by: Bresnahan , T F and Gordon , R J . 109 – 142 . Chicago , IL : University of Chicago Press .
- Pasqualetti , M and Haag , S . 2011 . A solar economy in the American southwest: critical next steps . Energy Policy , 3 ( 2 ) : 887 – 893 .
- Randazzo , R . 2010 . Arizona solar tax credit clarified by IRS letter. AZ Central [Internet] , Phoenix , AZ : The Arizona Republic . [cited 2010 Jan 24]; [about three screens]. Available from: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/business/articles/2010/07/05/20100705arizona-solar-tax-credit-irs-letter.html
- Sarzynski , A . 2009 . State policy experimentation with financial incentives for solar energy , Washington, DC : George Washington Institute of Public Policy .
- H . 2007 . Energy autonomy: the economic, social and technological case for renewable energy , London : Earthscan .
- Sovacool , B K . 2008 . The dirty energy dilemma: what's blocking clean power in the United States , Westport, CT : Praeger .
- Sovacool , B K . 2009a . Rejecting renewables: the socio-technical impediments to renewable electricity in the United States . Energy Policy , 37 ( 11 ) : 4500 – 4513 .
- Sovacool , B K . 2009b . The cultural barriers to renewable energy in the United States . Technol Soc , 31 ( 4 ) : 365 – 373 .
- Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) . Arizona renewable energy standard summary [Internet] , Cambridge , MA : Union of Concerned Scientists; 2008 . [cited 2010 Jun 10]; [10 pages]. Available from: http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/clean_energy/arizona.pdf
- Wustenhagen , R , Wolsink , M and Burer , M . 2007 . Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: an introduction to the concept . Energy Policy , 35 : 2683 – 2691 .