IS THE SUN SETTING ON CALIFORNIA’S SOLAR ROOFTOPS?

Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain’t going away. ~ Elvis Presley 

California has long been the sunniest place in America. Californians have installed solar photovoltaic (PV) panels on 1.3 million of their homes, the largest number of rooftop installations of any state. Hawaii is also sunny, duh; its solar installations are numero uno on a per capita basis. But the Aloha State’s total solar installations represent just 7.4% of California’s.

The Golden State’s solar rooftop expansion began in 2006, when then-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law the million solar roof’s initiative. It has been impressively-successful in reducing the state’s production of fossil-fueled greenhouse gases (GHG). But the sun may be dimming soon for solar roofs, just like this picture shows.  

A setting sun for California’s solar rooftops?

In addition to being sunny, California is also one of the most committed states in rectifying economic inequity. One of the latest efforts involves municipalities branching out to plant more trees in “underprivileged” and “low-resource” areas to mitigate inequitable, “racist housing policies.”

Colossal Los Angeles and much-smaller Richmond are but two California cities that have initiated vigorous tree-planting programs that will eventually spread natural shade and coolness across more urban neighborhoods. These are great, greening efforts that will take a long time to produce significant shade.

But there’s no stopping in California with just saplings to alleviate inequity. Nope, in the name of inequity relief, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) soon may significantly cloud the state’s bright efforts that reduce nasty environmental emissions via residential rooftop solar arrays.

How could this be? If it happens, you can thank short-sighted equityists within the CPUC staff and maybe the Commission itself, as well as the state’s private utilities. The utilities have always been dismayed about rooftop solar electricity generation they don’t own and earn no money from.

These solar critics are short-sighted because they see solar’s current NEM (net energy metering) protocols only from the cost side (what customers pay), allegedly harming low-income non-solar rate-payers. The critics entirely dismiss the actual substantial benefits that solar provides communities.

The CPUC will soon decide whether to diminish significantly the incentives for homeowners to install solar. Why? Because the CPUC staff as well as privately-owned electric utilities believe non-solar, low-income electricity customers pay disproportionately more under current California rules than owners of rooftop solar systems. That’s not equitable and thus must go.

I am not a disinterested party to these considerations. We installed solar PV (and thermal) panels on our roof 12 years ago. It’s a modest 2.8kW array (there’s no need for AC cooling here in fog city) that now has probably just paid for our initial investment due to California’s time-of-use NEM mechanism that reduced our electricity bills.

I am very interested in having the PUC recognize that solar NEM’s benefits transcend direct dollars and cents advantages. A principal benefit of solar generation is reduction in GHG emissions that aids everyone, no matter what their income and whether or not they’re a solar customer.

Does the PUC wish now to create disincentives in the name of equality for solar’s continued ascendency? If the CPUC accedes to the utilities’ cynical support of “solar equity,” it will require increased use of natural-gas powered generation. Dirtier kWh will be produced to the benefit of the utilities, with subsequent harm to all.

California’s solar industry is the nation’s largest. It directly provides about 65,000 jobs and produces more energy than nuclear and coal combined in the state.[1] Last year solar rooftops delivered 9% of California’s total electric production, the largest of any renewable resource.

Governor Gavin Newsom has embraced both a renewable energy goal of procuring 50% of retail sales from renewables by 2030 (it’s 33% now), and of reaching 100% renewable energy production by 2045. These goals depend on continued growth in solar rooftop energy production. Neither objective will be achieved if the PUC reduces solar incentives.

The governor’s July 2021 report, California’s Electricity System of the Future states, “solar and wind build rates need to nearly triple” in order to achieve his 2045 100% renewable energy production goal. Solar will never triple production if the CPUC changes its solar NEM rates, as planned.

The CPUC’s proposed plan will shred by over 75% how much residents would get paid for electricity generated from their rooftop panels. In addition, it proposes sharp increases, about $60/month, in grid-access charges for a typical solar customer.

In effect, the plan virtually eliminates the monetary incentives that have continued to support more homeowners’ investing in solar. These investments often require paying thousands of dollars up front to install rooftop PV panels.

So far, Gov. Newsom has shirked his duty to strongly and publicly support continued solar incentives like NEM.

Perhaps he’s scared of upsetting the utilities and the IBEW, the principal electric utility union who’s prominently in favor of reducing rooftop solar incentives. The union wants to cash in on lucrative PV panel installation jobs by the utilities that they don’t enjoy now. Maybe the governor also doesn’t really believe in the environmental goals he’s previously stated were vital.

Do Gov. Newsom and the CPUC want to re-monopolize California’s largest utilities at the expense of environmental degradation to gain a sliver more equality? So far, it seems so.

I recommend he have at least one private conversation with CPUC decision-makers encouraging them to relieve some underprivileged customers’ issues without darkening solar’s clear environmental benefits. The benefits he’s counting on to meet his popular environmental goals. Maybe the CPUC could extend these customers’ baseline (low-cost) consumption block to provide relief, or at the very least, adopt a far less extreme reduction in rooftop installations’ incentives.

The Commission might welcome such informal communication because it’s not batting at full strength now. The new CPUC President has been in her job for only 20 workdays and one of the five Commissioner chairs remains vacant.

In any event, the sun must continue to shine on California’s ever-growing solar rooftops for all our sakes.

 

---

[1] Speaking of impending environmental challenges, California’s last operating nuclear power station, PG&E’s Diablo Canyon, will begin to shut down late next year. Nuclear, including Diablo Canyon, has many faults and it produces no GHGs.