Laserfiche WebLink
Figure 1. Senario 4 CCA Build-Out <br /> 1800 _...... _. _ _ <br /> 1600 _._..__._........_............._................_...._.._.___..... _ _ <br /> 71400 _.._............. _.......... .........__._............_._._..._.__. _ <br /> •Small Solar(in county) <br /> (<3MW) <br /> 1200 _...........__............._............. — <br /> 1000 <br /> •Large Solar(in county) <br /> u 800 <br /> 3 600 <br /> •: solar <br /> Large 2 400 - <br /> wnd <br /> 200 <br /> n GO 01 O N M et u1 t0 r` a0 01 O <br /> N N N N N N N N N N M <br /> O O O O O O O O O O O O O O <br /> N N N N N N N N N Ni N N N N <br /> Figure 2 shows the difference on the deployment of the in-county solar generation under <br /> Scenarios 2 and 4. Under Scenario 2 the capacity installed increases on average of 15 MW per <br /> year up to 180 MW, one-fifth the rate of capacity addition under Scenario 4. Furthermore, under <br /> Scenario 4 we assumed a higher fraction of the in-county renewable was met using the small- <br /> scale solar. Under Scenario 2, the ratio of small local solar and large local solar is 2:5, while <br /> under Scenario 4 the ratio is 1:1. <br /> Figure 2. Local Capacity Installed for Scenario 2 and Scenario 4 <br /> 1,000 <br /> 900 <br /> ■Small Solar <br /> 800 <br /> 3 700 <br /> ■Large Solar <br /> 2 600 <br /> ai <br /> 500 <br /> co <br /> • 400 <br /> u 300 <br /> 200 <br /> 100 <br /> U <br /> Scen.2 Scen.4 Scen. 2 Scen.4 Scen.2 Scen.4 <br /> 2020 2025 2030 <br /> 3 <br />