California simply slashed rooftop solar incentives. Now what? – Los Angeles Times


California sharply diminished incentive funds for rooftop solar power Thursday, taking a sledgehammer to a program that helped 1.5 million houses and companies put solar panels on their roofs and made the state a frontrunner in combating the local weather disaster.

The unanimous vote by the state’s Public Utilities Commission to scale back funds to solar clients for the electrical energy they generate comes after a decade of controversy over this system. Critics say it has resulted in increased electrical payments for households that don’t have rooftop solar panels, together with low-income households that may’t afford them.

Solar installers and clear energy activists name that argument flawed, saying the know-how’s advantages — together with much less air air pollution in low-income communities, and safety in opposition to utility power shutoffs — far outweigh its prices.

But the commissioners rejected their protests, arguing the motivation program wants to alter to maintain up with the instances.

They identified that California more and more has extra solar power than it wants through the afternoon — a stark distinction to scorching summer season evenings when the state has typically discovered itself quick on power. They mentioned the revamped incentive program they accredited Thursday will encourage extra individuals to put in batteries that may financial institution clear power for these scorching evenings.

“California is poised to unlock the next phase of our ambitious climate change agenda, and this decision is part of that,” Commission President Alice Reynolds mentioned. “We’re building a powerhouse of clean energy storage for grid use in the evening.”

The redesigned subsidy program accredited by the fee will take impact in April — giving householders and business companies that wish to set up solar beneath extra favorable phrases 4 months to lock within the present incentives.

Homes and companies that have already got solar gained’t see their funds go down. And nothing will change for Los Angeles Department of Water and Power clients who determine to go solar. The choice impacts solely the charges paid for solar power by the state’s three massive monopoly utility firms: Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric.


Record warmth. Raging fires. What are the options?

Get Boiling Point, our e-newsletter about local weather change, the setting and constructing a extra sustainable California.

Enter electronic mail deal with

Sign Me Up

You might sometimes obtain promotional content material from the Los Angeles Times.

Those firms spent years urging state officers to scale back rooftop solar incentives — as did client watchdogs and a handful of environmental teams, which agreed with the utilities that non-solar households have been compelled to pay increased payments on account of the motivation program often called web metering.

On the opposite aspect of the talk have been the solar business and a whole lot of environmental and group teams. They succeeded in pressuring Gov. Gavin Newsom to dam an earlier Public Utilities Commission proposal that was even harsher to rooftop solar, arguing that it was incompatible with the state’s efforts to reverse the worsening wildfires, droughts and warmth waves of world warming.

But local weather activists nonetheless noticed the plan adopted Thursday as damaging — solely this time, they couldn’t get traction with Newsom.

Gavin Newsom speaks after being sworn in as California governor in 2019.

(Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)

Dozens of solar business supporters provided public remark earlier than the fee’s 5-0 vote, slamming the company for siding with the utilities — and at instances suggesting Newsom, who appointed 4 of the 5 commissioners, was responsible.

Those solar supporters included the Rev. Daniel Tamm, a deacon who spoke on behalf of the Bishop’s Commission on Climate Change, an initiative of the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles. He mentioned officers needs to be working to make rooftop solar “as widely available as possible for all Californians, not crippling it in the economic interests of a few.”

“As faith leaders, our concerns are justice, compassion and the common good. This proposal represents none of that,” he mentioned.

The utility business wasn’t happy by Thursday’s vote, both, arguing that the fee ought to have diminished solar incentives much more. Kathy Fairbanks, a spokesperson for the Affordable Clean Energy for All marketing campaign — which is funded by Edison, PG&E and SDG&E — described the vote as “a missed opportunity that will prolong the harm to low-income Californians and renters.”

“The current solar subsidy program forces low-income families, renters, seniors and anyone who doesn’t have rooftop solar to bankroll wealthier Californians’ solar systems,” she mentioned in an emailed assertion.

Newsom’s workplace declined to remark, outdoors of a short reference in a information launch noting that the Public Utilities Commission had accredited “a new solar policy that will make our grid more reliable and accelerate energy independence.”

So with the long-anticipated vote now within the rearview mirror, what occurs subsequent?

Here are six key questions as California’s rooftop solar business enters a brand new period — and because the planet retains warming.

Will fewer individuals set up solar?

The rooftop solar business has seen nonstop progress within the Golden State for greater than a decade. Through the tip of October, nearly 13,500 megawatts had been put in throughout California — six instances as a lot energy-generating capability because the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant, the state’s single largest supply of electrical energy.

That progress has been fueled by web metering, which compensates solar-powered houses and companies for the energy they contribute to the bigger power grid at instances of day once they generate greater than they eat. Until now, Edison, PG&E and SDG&E have been required to pay them at retail electrical energy charges — the identical charges they pay for power from the grid.

Under Thursday’s choice, fee charges will range by the point of day and the time of 12 months — however on common, they’ll be a lot decrease.

Solar business officers have warned of a market crash that would see smaller set up firms — which make up the majority of the business — wrestle to outlive.

Solar workers rally in downtown Los Angeles against an earlier Public Utilities Commission proposal to slash net metering.

Solar staff rally in downtown Los Angeles in opposition to an earlier Public Utilities Commission proposal to slash web metering incentives.

(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

Part of the issue, they are saying, is that it’s going to take clients too a few years to make again their substantial upfront funding in solar panels. For Edison and PG&E clients, the Public Utilities Commission has estimated a “payback period” of 9 years beneath the brand new guidelines — far too lengthy for a lot of households to attend for financial savings, critics say.

“They’re thinking about this as if the whole world is wealthy consumers with money to burn, instead of catering to middle- and low-income communities so we can fricking save this planet,” mentioned Bernadette Del Chiaro, govt director of the California Solar & Storage Assn., an business commerce group.

Supporters of the brand new incentive program anticipate the solar business to reply by discovering methods to decrease costs, which have stayed comparatively flat for the previous couple of years. They additionally predict the economics of solar will look higher than the fee projected — an thought the commissioners themselves endorsed Thursday, suggesting their nine-year payback calculation was conservative.

At least some degree of installations is assured, as a result of California requires most newly constructed houses to incorporate rooftop solar.

Will extra individuals set up batteries?

The Public Utilities Commission positive hopes so. Several commissioners mentioned they supported the choice to make sure that extra solar is banked for the evenings, when the state at the moment depends on polluting gas-fired power crops to maintain the lights on.

“We are making this change because of our commitment to addressing climate change,” Commissioner John Reynolds mentioned. “If ratepayers are going to subsidize rooftop solar, it must do more to address climate change and meet grid needs.”

Although solar incentive funds might be decrease throughout most instances of the day, they’ll be increased within the night — particularly summer season evenings when California has flirted with power shortages as rising temperatures drive up the demand for air con.

For houses and companies that may retailer solar power in batteries through the day and disperse it at evening — serving to the state keep away from rolling blackouts with out cranking up these polluting gasoline crops — the monetary side of rooftop solar will look rather a lot higher.

“This a vast improvement on the status quo,” mentioned Matt Baker, who was appointed by Newsom this 12 months to steer the Public Advocates Office, an unbiased arm of the utilities fee. “For solar going forward, it is targeting exactly what we need to target, which is how do we get solar and battery adoption up to levels like Hawaii has.”

Just 14% of Californians who put in solar during the last 12 months additionally added batteries, which may deliver the upfront funding to about $30,000. The solar business has been working for a number of years to pivot to solar-plus-storage, however installers say they want extra time to deliver battery prices down and to make the monetary case for energy storage to customers.

Support our journalism

Your assist helps us ship the information that issues most. Subscribe to the Los Angeles Times.

Sunrun, the nation’s prime rooftop solar installer, is prone to have a better time adjusting than most. But the San Francisco-based firm nonetheless foresees challenges, arguing that the utilities fee ought to have lowered fee charges extra steadily.

“The more time you give the industry to get ready, respond, go into action, the more likely it is that we’re not all looking back a year from now talking about how [we] slowed down the clean energy transition,” mentioned Mary Powell, Sunrun’s chief govt.

Will electrical energy charges go down?

Probably not.

Rates have been rising quick and are anticipated to maintain doing so. For PG&E clients, as an illustration, base charges for many clients have risen roughly 50% during the last 5 years, based on knowledge compiled by the Utility Reform Network, a client advocacy group. PG&E just lately requested one other enhance that may end in month-to-month electrical payments no less than 20% increased by 2026.

Those worth shocks have been pushed by utility investments to scale back wildfire ignitions, improve getting old infrastructure and change fossil fuels with cleaner energy — investments that earn utility shareholders a assured revenue of roughly 10% for each greenback spent.

The Camp Fire, which was ignited by PG&E power infrastructure, burns in 2018.

The Camp Fire, which was ignited by PG&E power infrastructure, burns in 2018.

(Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times)

But critics of web metering say this system has contributed to increased energy payments, saddling ratepayers with a $4.6-billion annual subsidy for solar-powered houses and companies. Reducing the subsidy will restrict additional price hikes to an extent, they are saying.

And the much less electrical energy charges rise, the extra possible it’s that thousands and thousands of Californians will change their gasoline furnaces and boilers with electrical warmth pumps, and their gasoline automobiles with electrical autos — key applied sciences for decreasing local weather air pollution.

The fee’s proposal “better aligns signals and incentives across the board,” mentioned Mohit Chhabra, a senior scientist on the Natural Resources Defense Council, one of many few environmental teams that supported Thursday’s choice.

Other local weather activists dismiss the concept that web metering causes increased energy payments, saying state officers underestimate the advantages that rooftop solar brings to all ratepayers — together with much less want for utilities to construct costly long-distance power strains.

How will low-income houses be affected?

Almost everybody concerned within the web metering debate thinks it needs to be simpler and cheaper for low-income households to put in solar panels and batteries. But how a lot the brand new fee system will assist them is a matter of fierce debate.

Under the brand new solar guidelines, low-income houses enrolled in sponsored price packages will obtain increased funds for solar power they export to the grid — as will all houses in deprived communities and on tribal lands, a last-minute change accredited by the utilities fee. But environmental justice activists say these increased funds are nonetheless a lot too low.

“It’s not enough to really expand low-income customer access,” mentioned Katie Ramsey, an legal professional with the Sierra Club. “The goals they’re stating are good, but the implementation is really risky — particularly the fact that the export values drop so sharply.”

The fee’s choice additionally refers to an anticipated $900 million in new upfront incentive funds for rooftop solar and battery programs, with two-thirds of that cash put aside for low-income houses. But state lawmakers nonetheless must allocate these funds subsequent 12 months — and with a attainable recession on the horizon, solar supporters aren’t positive the cash will materialize.

Federal knowledge present that 12% of California solar adopters in 2021 had incomes under $50,000, and a further 28% had incomes between $50,000 and $100,000. Renewable energy advocates might be watching to see whether or not these numbers rise. They’ll even be seeking to state officers to do extra to deliver solar power to the roughly 45% of Golden State residents who lease their houses.

But as for web metering? The program’s critics insist that it’s executed extra hurt than good for low-income households.

“It’s just an upside-down Robin Hood thing going on,” mentioned Pedro Pizarro, chief govt of Edison International, the mother or father firm of Southern California Edison. “It’s just such a massive transfer of wealth, and it’s getting bigger.”

Will California construct extra giant solar farms?

Westlands Solar Park in California's San Joaquin Valley.

Westlands Solar Park in California’s San Joaquin Valley.

(Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times)

Not all renewable energy is created equal — no less than not within the eyes of some environmentalists.

The fewer solar panels are put in on residential rooftops, warehouses and parking heaps, the extra giant solar farms, wind generators and long-distance transmission strains could also be wanted — an enormous concern for conservation teams who say that infrastructure can injury delicate ecosystems and hurt at-risk creatures reminiscent of desert tortoises and bighorn sheep.

“We need to leverage renewable energy options with the least impact on pristine and functioning ecosystems,” Susy Boyd, public coverage coordinator for the Mojave Desert Land Trust, informed the Public Utilities Commission on Thursday.

Some specialists warning that there’s not essentially a 1-1 ratio between much less solar on rooftops and extra within the desert, contemplating the large quantities of infrastructure that California might want to attain 90% clear electrical energy by 2035 and 100% by 2045, as required by state legislation. They additionally be aware that power from giant solar farms is often cheaper attributable to economies of scale.

More building of huge solar farms — and power strains to serve these solar farms — might additionally profit one other constituency: organized labor. Union staff employed by solar builders and utilities are a strong power, and so they’ve pushed state officers to advertise large-scale clear energy infrastructure on the expense of rooftop solar jobs, that are sometimes non-union.

“We need to raise the level and quality of jobs throughout the economy,” mentioned Marc Joseph, an legal professional representing the Coalition of California Utility Employees. “We shouldn’t have people who are on the fringe struggling, holding on desperately to try to be in the middle class, when we could otherwise have them be comfortably in the middle class.”

What does this imply for the local weather battle?

Rooftop solar is only one piece of the puzzle in the case of phasing out fossil fuels. Offshore wind generators, geothermal crops, nuclear reactors, energy effectivity, inexperienced hydrogen, electrical automobiles, electrical warmth pumps — some mixture of those methods and extra will nearly definitely be wanted to refashion economies at the moment underpinned by coal, oil and pure gasoline.

But rooftop solar is among the most seen local weather options in neighborhoods throughout the nation — and a wildly profitable one, with falling prices spurring rising installations.

And California is seen as a worldwide local weather chief. If rooftop solar installations fall right here, and state officers don’t step in to arrest the decline, different states could possibly be extra prone to comply with the identical path.

Rooftop solar “has added jobs, brought new investment and created greater resiliency for the grid and for emergencies. There’s a reason Los Angeles is the No. 1 solar city,” mentioned Mary Leslie, president of the Los Angeles Business Council.


Your information to our clear energy future

Get our Boiling Point e-newsletter for the newest on the power sector, water wars and extra — and what they imply for California.

Enter electronic mail deal with

Sign Me Up

You might sometimes obtain promotional content material from the Los Angeles Times.

On the opposite hand, if policymakers can’t get electrical charges beneath management, different states and nations might determine that following California’s lead on electrical autos — together with a ban on the sale of most new gasoline automobiles by 2035 — isn’t sensible.

“We should be aiming for a world where you can have 50% of customers with rooftop solar, and it won’t increase electricity rates for everybody else,” mentioned Matthew Freedman, an legal professional on the San Francisco-based Utility Reform Network.

The debate didn’t finish with Thursday’s choice.

In a separate regulatory continuing, the Public Utilities Commission is contemplating a broader restructuring of electrical energy charges in an effort to maintain prices down, keep away from blackouts and proceed decreasing local weather air pollution. That continuing might end in new month-to-month fees for solar-powered houses — and most different utility clients.

The solely certainty: Thursday’s vote wasn’t the final onerous local weather choice California officers should make.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here