By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent What Happened: Yesterday, I promised you more information on why pending legislation in Connecticut that would eliminate net metering would be a disaster for the solar industry.

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent What Happened: Yesterday, I promised you more information on why pending legislation in Connecticut that would eliminate net metering would be a disaster for the solar industry.

Yesterday, we dealt with the idea of "simultaneous consumption" argument (a compensation scheme so complicated you need an accounting degree to figure it out). Today, we'll deal with the idea that solar consumerss are utilities.

The worst part of it is, the legislative session ends next Wednesday, so there's little time to scuttle this monstrosity (fire up your phones and get dialing is what I am saying).

[caption id="attachment_9684" align="aligncenter" width="1280"] The level of awful in the Connecticut solar bill that is careening drunkenly toward passage as the session comes to an end is breathtaking in scope and stupidity.[/caption] SolarWakeup’s View:  Yeah, the genius just keeps coming from what I've decided to dub the "Connecticut catastrophe," which in case you aren't aware is Senate Bill (SB) 9, a bill hellbent on destroying the solar industry in the state once and for all. For today's lesson in bad solar ideas, let's discuss the...SPECIAL idea that because solar consumers are generating electricity, they should be considered regulated utilities. Yep. That's a thing supposedly "serious legislators" are discussing. At issue here is something called the "average cost" calculation, which is how utilities set their rates. SB 9 wants to make the Connecticut catastrophe worse by lumping all solar generators - including residential installations - in with other massive electricity producers like utilities. The problem, of course, is that this puts an unreasonable burden on solar consumers to keep up with the reporting procedures and other regulatory hoops through which utilities must jump (I should say must RIGHTLY jump, given that their profit is guaranteed by the state). Subjecting solar consumers to the same regulations as the utilities destroys the entire underlying rationale for homeowners to install solar arrays. As The Alliance for Solar Choice writes,

Pursuing an “average cost” approach instead of the standard value-based approach will undervalue solar energy, reduce consumer choice and jeopardize the viability of residential solar businesses. This may cause some residential solar businesses to shut down, particularly smaller, local solar companies with costs that are above-average. This backwards approach could particularly impact low-income and middle class residents who rely upon no-money-down financing options to go solar. Most solar customers in Connecticut are below the median income level thanks to these financing options, which the new tariff could threaten.

Had enough yet? Wait until you see what this Connecticut catastrophe does to the community solar side of the business. I can't urge you strongly enough to get on the phones and tell Connecticut legislators not to destroy the state's solar industry by passing this bill. No, seriously. Do it now. You only have six days left to stop this Connecticut catastrophe from moving forward. More: How To Screw Up Solar With One Horrid Bill (Connecticut Edition) Here's this asinine bill: [pdf-embedder url="http://www.solarwakeup.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/SB-9.pdf" title="SB 9"]

NEM Under Attack In CT. Over the next few days, CT solar advocates will have to fight for the future of solar in Connecticut. This is your reminder that democrats can be just as influenced by utilities as republican legislators. Regulated power companies will control as many State Capitals as they can, which is also a stark reminder to SEIA that bringing utilities onto the membership rolls at SEIA is a very bad idea. The idea in CT is to replace NEM with something more like a feed in tariff. All production would flow to the grid and be repurchased by the solar owner. This is a terrible idea, not needed and just an attempt to reduce the value of solar. Step up and beat this thing back solar!

Forget 2017, What’s Coming Up. As I was manning the microphone in Minneapolis talking about growth in the midwest around community solar, some of you were in San Diego talking about growth in solar. Next time, just come with me to Minnesota and you would have seen it first hand. As expected, community solar is a large growth space in our industry and many states are looking at launching new programs around this. I also expect residential to make big strides, if the NEM fights go in the right direction, due to the homeowner’s continued desires to have solar and more states are making the economics look good.

The Money Play In Politics. The headline is more fun than the story. Solar companies give money to republicans and democrats. If you heard what Mulvaney said last week, money in politics means access to the legislators. If you are looking for administrative help to site a project, move an approval along, etc, then you are sometimes better served to make a few campaign donations. Republicans are also in charge of the House and Senate which means that’s a part of the donating strategy. This is a bit of a to do about nothing.

Dominion Is Losing Its Focus. The Virginia utility, which is interested in buying the troubled South Carolina utility, is out with his power plan going forward. And instead of a ton of solar and storage, it continues the trend of monopolies looking for giant rate base that requires ratepayers to hedge fuel costs for the utility. Will Vote Solar and others fight these projects when they’re requested?

Mercedes Stays Mobile. Mercedes, which I spoke to in an episode of SolarWakeup Live! a few months ago, is leaving home energy storage. The idea was to create a channel for batteries after they are used in the cars. The price declines and technological differences mean that batteries will simply be made for both segments.

SEIA DG Vice Chairs. In the effort of full information. Good solar folks Ed Merrick and Deep Patel are also candidates for the position. All the best to everyone that steps up and helps lead our industry.

Opinion

News

 

Have a great day!
Yann

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent What Happened: So Reuters reported this morning that solar companies are setting large piles of cash on fire in their parking lots...oh, I'm sorry, I misspoke. They're actually funding Republicans. Wait, maybe I was right in the first place.

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent What Happened: So Reuters reported this morning that solar companies are setting large piles of cash on fire in their parking lots...oh, I'm sorry, I misspoke. They're actually funding Republicans. Wait, maybe I was right in the first place.

OK, I'm not a political naif. I know you have to give money to both sides to get things done, especially when the party that doesn't support you is in power.

But seriously, solar industry? How many times do you have to get sand kicked in your face before you realize that being nice to the anti-solar side isn't going to get you anywhere?

SolarWakeup’s View:  It has long been a pet peeve of mine that the solar industry seems hellbent on playing nice with politicians who, given the opportunity, would completely destroy the solar industry on a heartbeat's notice. After all, it's not state legislatures led by Democrats that are trying to gut net metering and other pro-solar policies around the country. And while it's true solar is a popular issue among the voters, anyone who thinks voters get to weigh in on what these politicians are voting on doesn't understand democracy (small "d") in the United States in 2018. Which is why Reuters' report that the solar industry has decided to provide more money to Republicans than Democrats this cycle just makes my head want to explode. Here are the details:

Overall, political action committees representing solar and wind companies have donated nearly $400,000 to candidates and PACs in the 2018 election cycle, including $247,000 to Republicans, $139,300 to Democrats, and $7,500 to independents, according to the Reuters analysis. That marks a record. During the 2016 presidential elections, the first cycle during which the clean energy industry gave more to the GOP than to Democrats, Republicans received just over half of the combined $695,470 in political contributions from major wind and solar PACs.

To which I scream (startling the dog in the process): "WHY?" Look, I'm no political naif. I've been steeped in politics since the age of 6, when I supposedly wanted to vote for my "Uncle Carty" for president (my Uncle Carty - a nickname - was not running for president, but a former peanut farmer named Jimmy CARTER was). I've been heavily involved in politics ever since, up to and including local politics. I've watched the sausage get made, and I do not have a weak stomach. But in politics as in business, I'm all about return on investment, and outside of an ITC extension in 2015 (and we can debate how much of that was the result of fawning over Republicans at some other date), what has this "investment" gotten us? Wouldn't it make far more sense to invest in politicians who might actually SUPPORT our priorities instead of merely NOT ACTIVELY OPPOSING them? For reals - it's time for us to get our priorities in order and support those who support us wholeheartedly without reservation. Otherwise, you're just throwing good money after bad. More: Clean energy sector swings Republican with U.S. campaign donations

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent What Happened: The swath of destruction the Connecticut legislature is about to cut through the solar industry with their latest bill to replace net metering is breathtaking and stupefying to behold.

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent What Happened: The swath of destruction the Connecticut legislature is about to cut through the solar industry with their latest bill to replace net metering is breathtaking and stupefying to behold.

The absurdity of the legislation is so mindblowing I'm going to have to take more than one piece to do it justice, but it includes the illusory cost-shift, a buy-all, sell-all scheme, an arbitrary commercial solar cap....oh, yeah. This legislation is a beaut.

The worst part of it is, the legislative session ends next Wednesday, so there's little time to scuttle this monstrosity (fire up your phones and get dialing is what I am saying).

[caption id="attachment_9684" align="aligncenter" width="1280"] The level of awful in the Connecticut solar bill that is careening drunkenly toward passage as the session comes to an end is breathtaking in scope and stupidity.[/caption] SolarWakeup’s View:  Connecticut Senate Bill (SB 9) is the perfect distillation of everything that solar opponents use when they're trying to destroy solar industries in various states. For today's lesson in bad solar ideas, let's just start with the legislature's decision to eliminate net metering. As introduced, SB 9 moved solar power from net metering to a “sell all, buy all” system, meaning that homeowners with solar on their rooftops wouldn’t be allowed to use the electricity they produce themselves. Instead, they would have to sell all their electricity to the utility at a lower, wholesale rate. Then the homeowners would be required to buy all their electricity back from the utility at the higher retail rate. Solar advocates in the state say this is akin to having the utilities seize the solar panels from customers’ roofs and charging them for the privilege. This is, seriously, one of my favorite anti-solar policies because, DID YOU READ IT? They want solar consumers to sell their power to the utility so it can be sold back to them at a higher rate. Somewhere, Bernie Madoff is smacking his forehead and saying, "Why didn't I think of that?" Pushback against this idiotic scheme has led solar opponents to say, "OK, fine. We won't violate your property rights that way. Here's another scheme, though, that we think you'll LOVE!" The replacement is called "simultaneous consumption," which means that every kilowatt-hour solar consumers produce will be credited immediately, and then the public service commission will choose what the utilities will pay them for their excess production. 'Cause, you know, that's fair. As The Alliance for Solar Choice (TASC) argues,

Its uncertainty would jeopardize the financibility of systems, which will disproportionately impact low-income customers who depend upon it. It also disadvantages working people who cannot change when they use electricity.

And that's just the beginning of what's wrong with this bill. Just you wait - if you think it can't get any worse, wait until you see my next article. I can't urge you strongly enough to get on the phones and tell Connecticut legislators not to destroy the state's solar industry by passing this bill. No, seriously. Do it now. You only have seven days left to stop this monstrosity. More: Here's this asinine bill: [pdf-embedder url="http://www.solarwakeup.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/SB-9.pdf" title="SB 9"]