California’s rooftop solar program is a target of debate involving the state’s wealth gap and the large number of residents who cannot afford to install rooftop solar panels and benefit from incentives, according to www.politico.com. For years, the state has faced similar concerns about electric vehicle rebates going to wealthy Tesla drivers.
The issue especially has taken hold during a recession that has disproportionately affected low-income communities. However, some solar advocates worry the resulting changes to the incentive program known as “net metering” could go too far or inspire similar rollbacks in other states with ambitious climate goals.
State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), one of the solar industry’s biggest advocates in the legislature, said reducing rewards would be “very damaging to solar in California” and “will send a loud message to the rest of the country that California is not fully committed to a clean energy future.”
Companies such as Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric have made equity arguments for years and now are being supported by concerned environmental groups. They argue as solar becomes more common, low- and middle-income residents must pay a higher share of costs to maintain utilities’ poles and wires for everyone’s benefit, including solar owners.
Paying owners of rooftop solar panels for the excess energy they feed back into the grid has led to more than 1 million homes in the state with solar panels. Customer-owned solar still is key to the state’s climate agenda of tripling solar capacity by its 2045 deadline to help eliminate carbon emissions from the electricity supply.
However, the state’s net metering policy has been criticized for payments that are too high, forcing utilities to raise rates to compensate for lost revenue.
State Sen. Steve Bradford (D-Gardena), who used to work for utility Southern California Edison and chairs the California Legislative Black Caucus, said net metering should be eliminated: “It was an incentive for early adopters of solar, and now we have a program that’s approaching 20 years. I think it’s proven its self-worth, and now it’s time to do away with it.”
Many consumer advocates, environmentalists and solar groups agree the benefits should be reduced over time. California’s electricity rates are among the highest in the U.S., and the state has millions living in poverty.
State regulators studying the program have signaled they are open to changes. An initial decision could be made by October.
Additionally, utilities’ proposals regarding how much the payments should be cut and whether regulators should allow utilities to charge solar owners monthly fees are being debated.
