Ok...so I'll admit that I only considered all of the open space on top of the big box stores recently, but Solar Power and large expanses of concrete roofing on said stores have both existed for years and years....I'm ecstatic that they're paneling them, but this seems like a no-brainer.

1 megawatt per week

Hopefully the pace will improve and the project be expanded beyond the five years envisioned.

Still, a very good project start.

Kudos where due.

YEA!!! It's about time already existing structures are used for solar farms instead of large expanses of open land!!!!!!!!

Wow, that is a great idea! Every Costco, Walmart and Sam's Club could use it!

So could smaller stores like grocery stores and department stores!

It's only a matter of time before we see the rights to our rooftops being sold off much like mineral and oil rights for land currently are.

Yep, go back and check the deed to your property... you only own the surface... or rather lease it from the banks and the government.

If they put a couple solar panels on each Starbucks, they could power the whole US.

The WholeFoods Market by me had erected a steel structure over their store and had it solar paneled, but I wonder why they didn't apply it to the entire strip mall. Maybe the roof isn't structurally strong enough to support the weight of the panels + equipment?

This is great, but as I write this my father is cutting the sparse growth of weeds in our yard. I estimate that he will ride around on the lawnmower for about an hour and a half, then when he comes in the house he will give us a "whew". On the counter there is a coffee maker that he wants to wash. He turns on the water, not thinking of the drought we are in, the water will run while he gets a rag from across the kitchen. He will wet the rag, wipe the counters the fridge then he will dismantle the coffee maker and wash it under the water that is still running. So at this point the water has been running say five minutes. after dinner the water usually runs about twenty minutes. I have mentioned the drought, the response "you just think there is a drought". my point. no matter what environmentally minded people do there are ten people out there who dont care, dont understand or a just hardheaded and have to do something even if it ruins the environment.

Best idea ever. As long as we must endure big box stores they might as well do something useful. They (solar panels) have the added benefit of actually shading the roof as well.

"If they put a couple solar panels on each Starbucks, they could power the whole US."

If only it were so easy.

Look into the installations that have been made, not a single one that I have seen even meets the stores power needs, much less generates excess power to power something else.

Large stores consume a large amount of power in lighting, heating/cooling, and refrigeration for food.

We would probably have to build a covered parking out of solar panels just to power the store by itself.

Seriously now, what's with this "megawatt per week" nonsense? Watts are a measure of the rate of energy production. Watt-hours are a measure of energy.

Does it have a capacity of one megawatt? Or does it produce one megawatt-hour per week? "Megawatt per week" is meaningless, and one megawatt-hour over a week is not very much.

Please double check the use of "watts"l every time I come onto Treehugger, I see articles getting it wrong. I do research in alternative energy, and nothing bugs me more than confusion about the difference between power and energy. Watts are a measure of energy generation rate (power), not energy.

They can do even better: they should build shaded car ports, and top them with solar panels. That way, the cars get shade in the hot summer sun, and they get extra solar power generating area.

Also, they shouldn't simply use the conventional 12% efficiency panels; they should use the sun tracking 40% efficiency panels. Using the higher efficiency panels should swiftly pay for itself in southern California.

I'm talking about these: http://www.soliant-energy.com/

It's an even bigger win than most people realize.

In the southwest most of the peak power use is air conditioning and solar panels make peak power exactly when it's needed. Plus, the energy that they capture is the energy that was making the building hot to begin with.

That said, I'd require it on all *new* roofs with solar exposure in the southwest because retrofits are much more expensive.

Nevermind my earlier comment. I see that they're going to install one megawatt's worth of capacity per week, not generate one megawatt per week.

They should also cover their wide open parking lots with solar panels.

This is a great plan and I am glad its finally coming to Southern California. There are literally an endless supply of the commercial buildings in the area. One thing that I am anxious to hear about is if Edison will begin to install these systems on newer buildings. It seems that a never-ending cycle of construction of commercial buildings will always occur in the area. Why not take advantage of that?

I've been talking about this for years! I'm so glad to finally see someone do this. We've had solar power on home roofs for years, and these huge flat expanses are largely unused.

The other great thing is that these are already distributed in densely populated areas, so getting power to the users is easy (not to mention the huge power usage right underneath the panels).

ALSO, I would think it would reduce the heat island effect since some of the energy is converted to electricity. Someone else mentioned my other pet idea, which is putting solar above the parking, keeping you dry on rainy days, and double using the space. And, again, it puts the power near the users to keep distribution simple.

Seems to be a much better idea than the proposed wind power project for the SoCal area. Much more efficient use of resources, and it eliminates the need for a lot of ugly new power towers.

Berkana,

I imagine that the problems with tracking systems outweigh the advantage. For one, some if not most of the locations they are talking about are in places that suffer from haze conditions, which diffuses the sunlight, greatly reducing the efficiency of concentrating solar modules. Second, they require more maintenance than non mechanical systems, which is more expensive if distributed on rooftops than if centralized. Third, the structures are heavier and stand higher off the roof which implies higher wind loading and more stress on roofs that were not designed for such.

i glad to production of natural sources product power is superb protraction to global warming

I have a measurement question. Is this 250MW system able to produce the same amount of energy as a 250MW fossil fuel plant or is it roughly half as there is only 12 hours of sunlight on average per day?