Posted on 04/12/2024 9:18:41 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
About 2 1/2 years ago I wrote a post titled "California plans to kill the residential solar industry." At the time, I had just had solar panels installed on my roof to save money and within months California announced a new plan (Net Metering 3.0) that would have taxed me and anyone else who owned a rooftop solar system for owning the panels. I predicted that if this plan passed, California's rooftop solar industry would fall off a cliff.
The result of Net Metering 3.0 is likely going to be the end of the residential solar industry in California. I have a neighbor who was interested in possibly getting a system after I had mine installed. Like me, he figured that after 10 years he’d break even on the cost and would still get years of free power. But under the new system his break even point would be 18 years or more so now he doesn’t see the point. A lot of other people are going to run the numbers and reach the same conclusion. Solar installers are about to see their orders drop off a cliff which doesn’t make much sense if the goal was to shift people to green energy. Earlier this week, Elon Musk (who owns one of the major solar installers) called the new plan “insane.”
The backlash to the initial plan was strong enough that Net Metering 3.0 was revised but eventually it did pass and went into effect on April 15, 2023. Since then, rooftop solar installations in California have indeed fallen off a cliff. The NY Times wrote about it in January of this year.
California has long championed renewable energy, but a change in the state’s policies last year has led to a sharp decline in the installation of residential rooftop solar in the state.
Thousands of companies — including installers, manufacturers and distributors — are reeling from the new policy, which took effect in April and greatly reduced incentives that had encouraged homeowners to install solar panels. Since the change, sales of rooftop solar installations in California dropped as much as 85 percent in some months of 2023 from a year earlier, according to a report by Ohm Analytics, a research firm that tracks the solar marketplace. Industry groups project that installations in the state will drop more than 40 percent this year and continue to decline through 2028...
Construct Sun, a solar installation company that is based in Reno, Nev., stopped doing business in California after its sales dried up four months after the policy began; executives said the company was now focusing its efforts on Florida, North Carolina and Ohio...
The nation’s largest residential solar company, Sunrun, which is based in San Francisco, cut about 2,000 jobs after California regulators reduced the rooftop incentives.
There is a caveat here which I have to mention. Solar installation was up slightly in 2023 compared to 2022. Supporters of the new policy point to this as proof that the industry is fine. But the truth is that the vast majority of those installs happened in the first three months of 2023 before the policy went into effect. There was a rush of buyers trying to get in on the good rates but since then the entire industry is down sharply.
But that may not be the end of the story. On Wednesday, the California Supreme Court agreed to hear a case about Net Metering 3.0.
The court agreed on Wednesday to hear a challenge to a disastrous decision by the California public utilities commission, or CPUC, to decimate the state’s once-thriving rooftop solar program. The appeal was filed by the Center for Biological Diversity, or CBD, Environmental Working Group and the Protect Our Communities Foundation...
“The Supreme Court’s decision is a ray of hope for rooftop solar at a time when plummeting installations and massive layoffs are wrecking this vital industry and jeopardizing California’s climate goals,” said Roger Lin, a senior attorney at CBD.
We'll have to wait and see what happens but there's still a chance this decision could be reversed or dialed back. More recently, California Democrats have come up with an even worse plan which amounts to an income tax paid to your utility company.
Under the proposal, households will see a fixed rate covering basic electricity services and the utility company’s operating costs on a scale based on their household income.
- Households with annual income from $28,000 – $69,000 would pay $20 a month in Edison territory, $34 a month in SDG&E territory and $30 a month in PG&E territory.
- Households earning from $69,000 – $180,000 would pay $51 a month in Edison and PG&E territories and $73 a month in SDG&E territory.
- Those with incomes above $180,000 would pay $85 a month in Edison territory, $128 a month in SDG&E territory and $92 a month in PG&E territory.
In California Karl Marx is now apparently running the utilities. Those rates aren't based on usage, just on income and this new plan could take effect as soon as this summer. If it goes through I will be paying about $1,000 a year to Southern California Edison even though I literally generate more electricity than I use on an annual basis. It's stuff like this that makes people decide to pack up and leave the state of California for good.
Don’t tell the government anything.
Even if the state supreme court puts the kibosh on this law the question remains whether anybody in the industry is going to want to take the risk of coming back to California.
And what about the consumer? They have to know that the state is going to enact something new if the current law is overturned, because the fundamental problem of the state’s finances hasn’t changed.
how is a utility company informed about a customer’s income?
????????
China makes all the solar panels. So good on Cal for screwing China. Lol!
BTTT
Who knows? Maybe the government spies on everyone, and gives the information to them.
There’s nothing California democrats can’t screw up and then call a stunning success... Absolutely nothing.
If the Supreme Court reverses the decision because people claim their health will be damaged due to less solar means more carbon means Climate Change, then the cure is worse than the disease.
It seems to me if all the solar companies go bankrupt then the 25 year warranties they promised on their installations are worthless. Screwed by another California bait and switch.
What is sad is those rates look really good in comparison to what I pay in Colorado.
It’s a screwy situation, but does show that without being able to sell your excess power back to the grid a home solar system doesn’t make good economic sense. Of course, if they raise the rates high enough, maybe it would.
“how is a utility company informed about a customer’s income? “
there are already income based utility programs. The customer has to provide copies of income slips.
https://www.pge.com/content/dam/pge/docs/account/billing-and-assistance/pipp-income-verification.pdf
They plan to have the state inform them from the tax returns.
And of course that will be done with the utmost respect of privacy.
Utmost.
Just trust Gavin.
Tesla solar panels are made in China, Malaysia, South Korea, and the US.
Supposedly, they will be making their solar roof tiles in Buffalo NY.
“There’s nothing California democrats can’t screw up and then call a stunning success.”
It has been awhile since I read “Atlas Shrugged”, but IIRC the businesses had problems keeping up with the latest rules put in place by the government.
I need to read that book again. Here in Washington state, Governor Inslee and his climate change crap is really starting to impact things. (Gas is $4.60 at Costco). And the rules keep changing, and are unclear.
The latest law will not allow new appliances that use natural gas, and for the electrical and natural gas company to develop ways and to move towards complete carbon free energy. While they don’t call it a ban on natural gas, the wording is such that it is. Some day.
Note, in 11 years, the sale or REGISTRATION of new cars that use fuel will be banned in Washington state! Including LNG, which was once promoted as “green” with a bunch of the city buses and vehicles being switched to LNG not that long ago.
I wonder how soon the People’s Republic of Maryland will pass a similar law? Glad I’m gone from there. & don’t forget Maryland even tax folks on how much rain runs off the roofs of houses and buildings, including churches.
The Admin Law Judge released her report setting a monthly fixed cost charge of $24.15, with CARE households paying $6.
Each customer would also see their kwh price drop .04 to .06 cents. Now mine is .335 cents per kwh.
This is to stimulate customers to get rid of gas appliances and add a battery charger, as well. Since to save $ you need to use more power. Conservation is out.
I thought I read somewhere that solar panels only last 20 years. It doesn’t seem worth the cost to me.
The state income tax people will likely tell them which range a homeowner falls into.
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.