California Public Utilities Fee Crushes Group Photo voltaic With Newest Monopolistic Play

Join day by day information updates from CleanTechnica on e mail. Or observe us on Google Information!

California has seen large development throughout its solar energy sector — utility-scale photo voltaic, business photo voltaic, and residential photo voltaic have all boomed prior to now decade plus. Nevertheless, the utilities have been on a mission to squeeze out the little guys (distributed photo voltaic vitality) for years, and after attaining fairly a hit on the residential facet with Internet Metering 3.0, they’ve moved on to limiting development of neighborhood photo voltaic — by way of their primarily captured regulatory fee, the California Public Utilities Fee (CPUC).

Final week, the CPUC “voted to approve its proposed determination that crushes any likelihood of a scalable neighborhood photo voltaic program succeeding in California,” the Photo voltaic Vitality Industries Affiliation (SEIA) writes.

“At this time the CPUC is doing the bidding of monopoly utilities to dam a practical neighborhood photo voltaic program in California. This determination successfully shuts out the overwhelming majority of low-income Californians, renters, and others that may’t set up photo voltaic immediately on their properties from taking part within the clear vitality financial system,” Stephanie Doyle, California State Affairs Director for SEIA, acknowledged.

“At this time’s vote ignores calls from the photo voltaic trade, environmental justice organizations, buyer advocates, and labor teams to create a workable program. It additionally places into query the standing of federal Photo voltaic for All funding, which is solely devoted to increasing photo voltaic accessibility. It is a surprising determination from a Fee that’s charged with defending ratepayers and conserving electrical energy payments reasonably priced.

I famous above that California has seen large development throughout the solar energy sector. Nevertheless, it has truly not been a pacesetter locally photo voltaic realm. It has put in simply 163 MW of neighborhood photo voltaic, far lower than the two,000 MW put in in New York and even the 1,100 MW put in in little previous Massachusetts. California had an opportunity to lastly catch up and make vital progress on neighborhood photo voltaic with a current vote from the CPUC, however they determined as an alternative to incorporate strict necessities that may restrict new initiatives and development, requiring, for instance, that the prices not exceed the prices of electrical energy the utility may get from one other supply. That takes away the potential for much less prosperous residents of condo buildings to take part within the photo voltaic vitality revolution, as smaller-scale photo voltaic is just not as low cost as utility-scale photo voltaic or wind solely taking era prices into consideration (and ignoring transmission and grid infrastructure prices).

Let’s rewind a bit, although. “The Group Renewable Vitality Act (AB 2316) was sponsored by the Coalition for Group Photo voltaic Entry (CCSA), and supported by the Photo voltaic Industries Vitality Affiliation, GRID Options, Vote Photo voltaic, the Sierra Membership, and extra. Nevertheless, the CPUC opposed the invoice,” pv journal writes. “The CPUC asserted in its proposed determination that the Internet Worth Billing Tariff (NVBT) outlined within the Group Renewable Vitality Act “conflicts with federal regulation and doesn’t meet the necessities” of the invoice, which CCSA has famous is misguided.

“In feedback filed in March by CCSA, it characterised the unique proposed determination as misguided and misinformed, and decided it won’t end result within the growth of neighborhood photo voltaic initiatives as envisioned by the legislature with the enactment of AB 2316.

“Now the CPUC has revised its proposed determination and in it concedes that it wants steering as to what a profitable neighborhood photo voltaic program appears to be like like.”

Because it has been permitted by the CPUC, this system depends on subsidies from the EPA’s Photo voltaic for All program. Whereas, advocates need it to depend on the non-public market with a purpose to make it sustainable and extra fruitful.

Additionally, this system is missing varied vital particulars and steering — “the revised proposed determination offers no particulars similar to a way for dispersing exterior funding to the initiatives and taking part prospects, reporting necessities, the method for taking part, eligible tariffs, price restoration mechanisms, and extra.”

It sounds just like the CPUC was pressured to maneuver ahead with one thing, however then gave it a half-hearted try with varied flaws that might cripple California neighborhood photo voltaic in its crib.

“The CPUC’s determination primarily advantages the monetary pursuits of utilities and doesn’t assist the State’s local weather objectives or the purpose of decreasing electrical payments for low-income Californians, which was the aim of AB 2316,” says Aaron Halimi, founder and president of Renewable Properties.

“It’s additionally additional proof that California’s utilities are doing every little thing they’ll to stifle distributed vitality era with a purpose to tighten their grip on the state’s electrical energy grid. The vote solidifies California’s place close to the underside of neighborhood photo voltaic markets nationwide, ceding management to different states to actually democratize photo voltaic vitality and fulfill nationwide vitality fairness objectives,” provides Coalition for Group Photo voltaic Entry (CCSA).

Total, the photo voltaic trade may be very sad with how California has been continuing (i.e., going backward) on solar energy currently. “The CPUC’s current collection of selections threatens to unravel California’s clear vitality progress,” SEIA writes. “It’s previous time for Governor Newsom and state leaders to reign within the fee earlier than it inflicts extra injury on prospects and the state’s clear vitality financial system.” It’s laborious to argue in any other case.