Net Energy Metering has been giving solar users reverse credit for the excess generation they put on the grid for the use of other customers.
Paying the solar owner full rate for that energy costs the utility next to nothing, as they pay nothing to generate it, and the ultimate users of that energy pay the utility full rate for it.
That’s not a “subsidy” by any definition.
Florida here.
I see it as the utility grid is a battery I pay for every month. Cost some of us almost $40 a month in utility account fees.
The sun makes me 50 kw in the day, while my house uses only 15 kw in the daytime. The other 35 kw I use and pull back at night from the grid.
I don’t see an issue with this, do others ?
I think an engineer and that department’s accountant would disagree.
How does the utility get paid, much less make a profit on the capital and operating costs involved, if they move other people’s power around for free? I could see a slight premium over wholesale, but retail or even close to it, not ‘sustainable’. XD
Please carefully read that statement you just wrote. You'll see how absurd it really is. It 'costs' them the full retail rate of electricity for each 'banked' kilowatt you 'sell' them because they are subtracting the full retail rate from your bill. People without solar panels have to pay more to cover for that loss.