California and the war on rooftop solar

About ten years ago, we had 22 solar panels installed on the roof of our St. Louis house. Half the cost was paid by Ameren, the electric utility, and we got a 30% tax rebate on the balance. But even with reversible metering, we hadn’t made back our cost when we sold the house two years ago. At that time, ours was among only about a half-dozen homes in our neighborhood with rooftop solar. Here in Rumford RI, there are at least twice as many.

California seems like a state ideally situated to exploit rooftop solar, but the Democratic governor of CA is fighting on the side of utilities to curb distributed power generation in the state, which the utilities claim is eating into their profits. Of course, they don’t admit that.

“Consider California’s residential solar program (its “net-metering”), which the governor has all but dismantled. Believe it or not, in December 2022, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) voted 5-0 to slash incentives for residents to place more solar power on their homes. Part of the boilerplate justification offered by the CPUC, Newsom, and the state’s utility companies was that payments to individuals whose houses produce such power were simply too high and badly impacted poor communities that had to deal with those rate increases. They’ve called this alleged problem a “cost-shift” from the wealthy to the poor. It matters not at all that the CPUC, which oversees consumer electric rates, has continually approved rate increases over the years. Solar was now to blame.

“It’s true that property owners do place those solar power panels on their roofs. What is not true is that solar only benefits the well-to-do. A 2022 study by Lawrence Berkeley Labs showed that 60% of all solar users in California then were actually low- to middle-income residents. In addition, claiming that residential solar power is significantly responsible for driving the state’s electricity rates up just isn’t true either. Those rates have largely risen because of the eternal desire of California’s utility companies to turn a profit.”

On my bike rides out to west St. Louis County, I saw a couple of McMansions with rooftop solar, but most of the houses our neighborhood there and in Rumford look like middle-class homes. So why is the utility pointing the finger at rooftop solar? Is it really the cause of rate increases?

“Here’s an example of how those rates work and why they’ve gone up. Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E), whose downed power lines have been responsible for an estimated 30 major wildfires in California over the past six overheating years, was forced to pay $13.9 billion in settlement money for the damage done. The company has also been found guilty of 84 felony counts of involuntary manslaughter for deaths in the devastating 2018 Camp Fire in Butte County. In response to those horrific blazes and the damages they inflicted, the company claims it must now spend more than $5.9 billion to bury its aging infrastructure to avoid future wildfires in our tinder-box of a world. Watchdog groups suggest that it’s those investments that are raising electric bills across the state, not newly installed solar power.”

On the contrary, rooftop solar *saves* money for rate payers:

“A recent Colorado-based Vibrant Clean Energy analysis confirmed the savings rooftop solar provides to ratepayers. Their report estimated that, by 2050, rooftop panels would save California ratepayers $120 billion. That would also save energy companies from spending far more money on the grid (but, of course, that’s the only way they turn a profit).

“What our model finds is that when you account for the costs associated with distribution grid infrastructure, distributed energy resources can produce a pathway that is lower cost for all ratepayers and emits fewer greenhouse gas emissions,” said Dr. Christopher Clack of Vibrant Clean Energy. “Our study shows this is true even as California looks to electrify other energy sectors like transportation.”

Here in Rhode Island, we’ve elected not to get rooftop solar. For one thing, our roof is screened by tall trees. For another, we’ve contracted with a regional solar farm utility for renewable energy. And solar farming doesn’t mean cutting down trees. Back in St. Louis, the company that installed our solar also installed rooftop solar on campus buildings at U. Missouri-St. Louis and Saint Louis University. There are plenty of big box stores, warehouses, municipal buildings and parking lots in California for CP&E to install solar to increase its profits and defend its business model against distributed power without degrading the environment. 

Sadly, California isn’t the only state attacking rooftop solar. Residential solar programs in Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Nevada, and North Carolina are also being targeted for roll-backs to preserve the current fossil fuel-based electrical generation business model. 

https://www.juancole.com/2024/08/california-newsoms-rooftop.html