Posted on 01/12/2022 10:18:30 AM PST by Vendome
Elon Musk has attacked a draft plan under consideration in California that critics say disincentivizes the use of rooftop solar panels.
The Tesla founder was responding to changes proposed by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to the state's Net Energy Metering (NEM) program.
Under the program, the estimated 1.3 million homeowners and businesses in the Golden State who have installed rooftop solar panels can sell back surplus energy to the grid and receive credit on their bills.
But last month the CPUC released a proposal calling for a number of changes, one of which is how much customers are paid when they send power back to the grid, giving them the lower "actual avoided cost" instead.
Also there would be a "grid participation charge" of $8 per kilowatt on the solar systems of residential customers, adding up to $48 per month for customers of one provider, San Diego Gas & Electric, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported.
Bizarre anti-environment move by govt of California https://t.co/1OwdBNWbxT
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 12, 2022
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
This is anti-consumer...
This is anti-business....
This is anti-common sense.
Imagine is ATT were allowed to do this back in the 80's?
There would have been even fewer competition and innovation
Is this retro active? I’m consulting with sunrun for a new install, and the guy says if I sign before this takes effect I’m good and it doesn’t effect me. Anyone know?
If people want rooftop solar, and are willing to pay for it themselves, I’m all for it. If one cares about encouraging renewables, why make people pay for the privilege? Really, California has lost the plot.
Interesting in that, IIRC, California law says all new construction must have solar.
This is so right. I live in the wealthier part of San Jose and I know for a fact that the friends and neighbors who have installed solar panels (especially the higher end Tesla ones) do not need the federal and state subsidies and rebates. But they're there so they'd be silly not to accept them. The classic example of welfare for the rich.
We chickened out.
We were planning to go solar, but following the NEM 2 vs NEM 3 discussions, it looked like they might retroactively add a charge for connection and possibly reduce the grandfathering in timeframe from 20 to 15 years.
Ended up canceling even after getting the permit. Supposedly if you are actually up and running before it takes effect you *might* be OK, but all it would take is a month’s delay in permitting to blow that.
IF I recall correctly Sunrun basically leases your roof, so if it turns to crap, you might be protected in the contract and they take the loss; depends on the exact wording.
Since with my small house, even in the most optimal circumstances it was 7.5 years until break-even I bailed.
Good luck! Let me know!
Yep
Worse than that...it’s bait and switch! Public hearing today at 3PM local.
To look at it differently, you can believe that retail prices will drop significantly, if the subsidy ends.
Paying people for the privilege incentivizes a reduction on demand of the electric infrastructure that has no realistic way of keeping up with demand or growth.
PGE is the one being given an incentive in this instant and will continue to rob the citizens of California...
Yes
What behaviors liberal government considers positive and encourages with tax money today
Become the problem behaviors liberal government punishes with new taxes tomorrow
All those suckers who bought those panels are now going to start paying more and more and more. Just like the electric cars about to get charged by the mile.
CA taxes everything on an ever-increasing scale. So glad I’m out of there.
Do the power companies issue 1099s for the power purchased from consumers?
Actually, there should be hefty fees associated with solar because of the environmental impact of disposal.
One big con job...Wait till they get 80 million EV's on the roads and then they'll tell everyone they will be subjected to rationing electricity, charging will only be allowed during certain days and times, depending on the temperatures, etc etc..
could see this coming for miles and miles
This is actually sane. (surprise for CA)
The utilities has to pay for the net (cost a lot to build an maintain) as well as the distribution.
I am not sure about Ca, but here in AZ that was already implemented. Basically homeowners used to get paid retail for the power they delivered to the utility. Now they get paid wholesale - just like the power plants do.
Basically just reduced the subsidies for the solar.
Should be done.
It was OK in the beginning, when there were few installations, now, utilities cannot afford to subsidize these people any more. .
Human: You bit me.
Snake: You knew what I was from the get-go.
Eh. It was a given that no financial losses would be tolerated for the power companies.
Many rooftop solar installations have no local battery. They simply drive power back into the grid during daylight hours with a proportional "backward spin" of the local meter being the "economic battery". The government and utilities want to shortchange these solar energy investors from making a return on their investment. Frankly, if it is legislated into being a poor ROI (will it cease to function before the money saved exceeds the cost of acquisition/cost of operation), that amounts to a "taking" without compensation. Bring on the attorneys. Remove the panels and sell for salvage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.