As Sun Shines on Solar Industry, Power Companies Fret

A picture shows solar panels installed on the roof of a building in Lille on September 9, 2013.
National Journal
Clare Foran
Add to Briefcase
Clare Foran
Oct. 6, 2013, 7:27 a.m.

Com­pared with the cost of fossil-fuel-gen­er­ated elec­tri­city, sol­ar power isn’t cheap. But it’s be­com­ing more af­ford­able thanks to state and fed­er­al sub­sidies and com­pet­it­ive leas­ing and fin­an­cing op­tions. Add to this the fast-drop­ping price of photo­vol­ta­ic pan­els and sol­ar is start­ing to look like an in­creas­ingly cost-ef­fect­ive op­tion for many Amer­ic­ans.

As the tech­no­logy be­comes more wide­spread, however, util­it­ies are fight­ing harder than ever to stop sol­ar in its tracks, and they see reg­u­la­tion levied through state gov­ern­ments as the way to do it.

A main reas­on why sol­ar has be­come in­creas­ingly af­ford­able and a ma­jor thorn in the side of power com­pan­ies is a policy, now in ef­fect in 43 states, called net-meter­ing. Through these sys­tems, cus­tom­ers with sol­ar pan­els can earn cred­its for sur­plus elec­tri­city gen­er­ated dur­ing the day. The cred­its are then sold back to the util­ity and used to off­set the cost of con­ven­tion­al power pro­duc­tion, which sol­ar users must still rely on when the sun is not shin­ing.

Net-meter­ing has func­tioned as a kind of sub­sidy for sol­ar power, and sol­ar ad­voc­ates want the policy to re­main in place. Util­it­ies, however, ar­gue that now that sol­ar has be­come more af­ford­able, these sub­sidies should be scaled back or elim­in­ated al­to­geth­er.

Ac­cord­ing to Richard McMa­hon, vice pres­id­ent for en­ergy sup­ply and fin­ance at the Edis­on Elec­tric In­sti­tute, a trade as­so­ci­ation rep­res­ent­ing all U.S. in­vestor-owned elec­tric com­pan­ies, util­it­ies aren’t en­tirely op­posed to net-meter­ing; they just want a change in terms.

“What we’re con­cerned with primar­ily is the rate at which the util­it­ies are ex­pec­ted to pay for the sur­plus power gen­er­ated by con­sumers us­ing sol­ar pan­els,” he told Na­tion­al Journ­al Daily. “That’s what’s known as the feed-in tar­iff, and these tar­iffs are set much high­er than at mar­ket rates. These sub­sidies were put in place when sol­ar was in its nas­cent stages but now it’s out­grown the need for them.”

In ad­di­tion to press­ing state reg­u­lat­ors to re­vise the rates at which sol­ar users sell back their elec­tri­city to util­it­ies com­pan­ies, EEI is ask­ing state le­gis­lat­ors to raise costs for sol­ar cus­tom­ers. McMa­hon says this is be­cause sol­ar cus­tom­ers aren’t pay­ing their fair share for use of the power grid.

Sol­ar ad­voc­ates, on the oth­er hand, say the sub­sidies are do­ing what they’re sup­posed to do — make sol­ar more af­ford­able — and that they need to be left un­touched.

“Earn­ing a cred­it for the elec­tri­city that feeds back in­to the grid is only fair,” said Will Craven, a spokes­man for the Al­li­ance for Sol­ar Choice, a co­ali­tion of sol­ar fin­an­cing and elec­tri­city com­pan­ies.

“Really what util­it­ies are at­tack­ing right now is the cus­tom­er’s right to use less elec­tri­city,” he said. “When sol­ar was a boutique en­ergy source that was only avail­able to the wealthy, it was something util­it­ies could tol­er­ate. But now that sol­ar costs have come down greatly, they are threatened by us be­cause we rep­res­ent really the first com­pet­i­tion they have ever had.”

So far no ma­jor reg­u­lat­ory changes im­pact­ing net-meter­ing or feed-in tar­iffs on the state level have been en­acted, but util­it­ies across the coun­try are press­ing for change. Lob­by­ing ef­forts are play­ing out in many state cap­it­als, but McMa­hon said that in the fu­ture there could be is­sues re­lat­ing to reg­u­la­tion of sol­ar power and costs borne by util­it­ies that need to be ad­dressed by the Fed­er­al En­ergy Reg­u­lat­ory Com­mis­sion.

What re­mains to be seen now is wheth­er any of the pro­posed changes will go through and how they stand to al­ter the cost equa­tion on sol­ar if they’re suc­cess­ful.

At least one sol­ar ex­pert thinks the im­pact could be dev­ast­at­ing.

“I think it could hurt it pretty badly,” said An­drea Luecke, ex­ec­ut­ive dir­ect­or of the Sol­ar Found­a­tion, a non­profit ded­ic­ated to pro­mot­ing the ex­pan­sion of sol­ar tech­no­logy, when asked how ad­di­tion­al fees levied on cus­tom­ers us­ing sol­ar on a res­id­en­tial scale would im­pact the in­dustry. “Do I think it will kill it? In the short term, yes. We’re not yet at a point where we can com­pete without in­cent­ives or some type of sup­port. If util­it­ies win in this battle and ef­fect­ively shut­ter res­id­en­tial mar­kets, it’s go­ing to have a very dra­mat­ic ef­fect.”

Alex Brown contributed to this article.
What We're Following See More »
INCLUDES NY PROBE INTO MANAFORT
Why Yes, Mueller Is Looking into Trump Businesses
1 hours ago
THE LATEST

In addition to ties between Russia and the Trump campaign, Robert Mueller's team is also "examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe. FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development in New York with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow, and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said. The investigation also has absorbed a money-laundering probe begun by federal prosecutors in New York into Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort."

Source:
FIRST TIME SINCE ITS CREATION
House Reauthorizes DHS
2 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"The House voted Thursday to reauthorize the Department of Homeland Security. The bipartisan measure passed easily by a vote of 386-41, with nine Republicans and 32 Democrats voting in opposition. If the bill makes it through the Senate, it would be the first-ever reauthorization of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) since it was created in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks." Among the provisions it contains is a mandate that the Senate confirm the Secret Service director. It also boosts funding for the Urban Area Security Initiative by $195 million per year.

Source:
OPPONENTS SAY SHE SHOULD RESIGN
AFT’s Weingarten Likens Voucher Support to Segregation
2 hours ago
THE DETAILS

In remarks scheduled to be delivered today at the American Federation of Teachers' summer conference, President Randi Weingarten "likens U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos to a climate-change denier" and "says the Trump administration's school choice plans are secretly intended to starve funding from public schools. She calls taxpayer-funded private school vouchers, tuition tax credits and the like 'only slightly more polite cousins of segregation.'" The pro-voucher Center for Education Reform said teachers should "consider inviting Weingarten’s resignation."

Source:
DESPITE EARLIER CRITICISM
Trump Has Confidence in Sessions
3 hours ago
THE LATEST

"President Trump has confidence in Attorney General Jeff Sessions, despite his criticism of the Justice Department head's decision to recuse himself from the Russia probe, the White House said Thursday. 'Clearly he has confidence in him or he would not be the attorney general,' spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters at an off-camera briefing."

Source:
REPORTEDLY TARGETS LGBT
ACLU Suing Trump Administration for Planned Executive Order
5 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"The American Civil Liberties Union is suing the Trump administration for records on an executive order President Trump reportedly planned to release targeting the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. In a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on Thursday, ACLU claimed the departments of Health and Human Services, Justice, Labor, and Treasury violated the Freedom of Information Act by failing to release the records it requested on the reported draft order."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login