All posts by BaileyA

Uncategorized

Advocacy group “TURNs” its back on ratepayers

The Utility Reform Network (TURN) claims to be an organization that “holds utilities accountable by demanding fair rates, cleaner energy, and strong customer protections,” but it has recently been cozying up to monopoly utilities.  

Over the past several months, Matt Freedman, the staff attorney for TURN, has made public remarks that strongly contradict the mission of the organization.  He has sided with utilities in their fight against rooftop solar energy and spread messages that mirror the propaganda that utilities have been using to spook ratepayers and maintain their monopolistic position in the power industry.  It’s no surprise that Arizona Power Service (APS) used Freedman’s statements in its campaign against rooftop solar.

Most recently, APS used the synergy with Freedman to feature one of his comments in an anti-net metering ad in the Phoenix Business Journal.

*

*

photo PBJAdTURN_zps7d5b7b76.png

The ads demonstrate that Freedman’s “TURN” toward the utility is not just limited to California. It appears both the California investor-owned utilities and APS have TURN in their (deep) pockets.

At a time when two thirds of California home solar installations now occur in low and median income neighborhoods, such a position indicates clear disregard for ratepayers of all incomes who want to save money by generating solar power from their roofs.  

Freedman has come out publicly against net metering on multiple occasions.    Recently in E&E Publishing’s ClimateWire, he advocated for a “scaling back” of the program.  His comments not only ignore the reality that rooftop solar is on the rise in low and median income communities, but also contradict public opinion.  For example, a recent poll conducted among Latino voters in Southern California shows that 80% of Latinos in the region think state legislators should make increasing rooftop solar a priority.  A full 70% of the poll respondents support net metering.

According to Antonio Gonzalez, president of the American Latino political research institute WVCI, “Latinos are making choices about their preferences of energy sources and those choices are clearly Green and rooted in not only public health concerns but excitement about the job potential that rooftop solar growth provides.”

TURN has chosen to abandon the concerns of the ratepayers it is supposedly protecting, and instead align with monopoly utilities.  The organization has shown its willingness to sacrifice the public health, employment and economic benefits that of clean energy to stay cozy with investor-owned utilities and help those monopolies hold on to their profits.  

Environment

Solar Divide – First Solar Attacks its Own Industry

You might assume that the solar energy industry represents one united group, working together in harmony towards a renewable energy future.  It’s a beautiful thought, but evidently this is not the case.  Within the solar industry there is conflict arising between rooftop solar and large scale solar developers — namely First Solar — which sees rooftop as a threat to its future success.

James Hughes, the CEO of First Solar, a solar panel manufacturer and PV power plant developer based in Tempe Arizona, has come out publicly against net metering.  Despite the fact that studies show distributed solar provides $34 million in annual benefits to all Arizona Public Service ratepayers, Hughes makes false claims that net metering is a subsidy “funded by all other utility customers who must pay proportionately more in rates.”  He uses false information to make a direct attack on his own industry.

You might ask why First Solar has such strong opposition to the success of rooftop solar.  The answer to that question can be found in the company’s 2012 Annual Report, in which it identifies rooftop solar as an obstacle that is likely to get in the way of the execution of its Long-Term Strategic Plan.  The rooftop solar market is not part of First Solar’s business strategy, and the company admits that it will “have a material adverse effect on our business.”

You might assume that the solar energy industry represents one united group, working together in harmony towards a renewable energy future.  It’s a beautiful thought, but evidently this is not the case.  Within the solar industry there is conflict arising between rooftop solar and large scale solar developers — namely First Solar — which sees rooftop as a threat to its future success.

James Hughes, the CEO of First Solar, a solar panel manufacturer and PV power plant developer based in Tempe Arizona, has come out publicly against net metering.  Despite the fact that studies show distributed solar provides $34 million in annual benefits to all Arizona Public Service ratepayers, Hughes makes false claims that net metering is a subsidy “funded by all other utility customers who must pay proportionately more in rates.”  He uses false information to make a direct attack on his own industry.

You might ask why First Solar has such strong opposition to the success of rooftop solar.  The answer to that question can be found in the company’s 2012 Annual Report, in which it identifies rooftop solar as an obstacle that is likely to get in the way of the execution of its Long-Term Strategic Plan.  The rooftop solar market is not part of First Solar’s business strategy, and the company admits that it will “have a material adverse effect on our business.”

In order to protect itself from the perceived threat of rooftop solar, First Solar is filing comments against net metering in states like Arizona and Nevada where a significant portion of its large-scale project portfolio is located, and where the preservation of net metering policies is up for evaluation.  Nevada is the site of two of the company’s large scale projects, which means the utility in that state is a major customer for First Solar. Comments filed in Nevada by First Solar advocate for thwarting the growth of their own industry by attacking residential solar.  Similarly, First Solar filed comments with the Arizona Corporation Commission on September 18, 2013, in which it claims that the spike in rooftop PV growth has led to a financial burden on ratepayers and utilities.  As I mentioned above, studies show this is not true at all.

Rooftop solar’s popularity among ratepayers and utilities does not come exclusively from the fact that it is a renewable source of energy.  In addition to societal benefits, it is also a form of distributed generation – which means that it is energy produced close to where it is used. In areas where the grid is constrained and electricity demand is on the rise, utilities have the potential to save millions by avoiding the costs of paying for new power lines and purchasing more electricity. Utility scale solar just cannot compete with that.

Environment

The Passage of AB 327: Part of a Trend?

What do potatoes, surfing, and Mardi Gras have in common?  They represent states where leadership has made decisions demonstrating a strong commitment to rooftop solar.  Over the past several months, the states of Idaho, California, and Louisiana have served as battlegrounds where the rooftop solar industry and its advocates have successfully defeated monopoly utility attempts to limit or eliminate net metering. In all three states where the battles have been waged, utility regulators and legislators’ decisions have led to the preservation of net metering. Net metering is the cornerstone solar policy that gives rooftop solar customers full retail credit for the excess energy they put back on the grid.  So far the score stands at 3-0, with solar in the lead.

What do potatoes, surfing, and Mardi Gras have in common?  They represent states where leadership has made decisions demonstrating a strong commitment to rooftop solar.  Over the past several months, the states of Idaho, California, and Louisiana have served as battlegrounds where the rooftop solar industry and its advocates have successfully defeated monopoly utility attempts to limit or eliminate net metering. In all three states where the battles have been waged, utility regulators and legislators’ decisions have led to the preservation of net metering. Net metering is the cornerstone solar policy that gives rooftop solar customers full retail credit for the excess energy they put back on the grid.  So far the score stands at 3-0, with solar in the lead.

Policies like net metering, along with innovative financing options and the fact that the cost of solar energy has dropped dramatically, has led to tremendous growth in rooftop solar installations over the past decade.  This growth has come unwelcomed by utilities that see the trend as a threat to their revenue and growth.

Utilities are attempting to hinder the progress of rooftop solar by pushing legislation that limits or eliminates existing net metering policies.  Utilities want to do away with net metering because they are dependent on a centralized, monopoly model that is being threatened by the emergence of rooftop solar and other forms of distributed generation.

While the rooftop solar industry has three victories under its belt, the war is not yet over.  Net metering battles continue to crop up across the US, but the solar industry has history and public opinion on its side. It’s been said that utilities are like the typewriter lobby resisting modern computers.  Plus, consumers want the freedom, predictability, and cost savings of rooftop solar.  In a recent poll from Arizona, about 67 percent of respondents said solar is the energy source they want to encourage most.

About AB 327

As explained in a Vote Solar press release: AB 327 is “a net metering and rate reform bill that contains a number of strong provisions for distributed solar. AB 327 ensures that one of California’s most important solar consumer rights, net metering, will stay in place until at least 2016 instead of being suspended as soon as next year. It also gives the California Public Utilities Commission authority to remove caps on participation in the program altogether for the first time in California history. These changes chart the way forward toward long-term solar industry sustainability, and will help hundreds of thousands of homes, schools and businesses go solar and lower their electricity bills.”

Environment

A BIG Win for Solar in California

The future of solar energy in the state of California just got a little brighter.  Thanks to the recent passage of Assembly Bill 327 — a piece of legislation supported by solar advocacy groups and big investor owned utilities alike — rooftop solar will be accessible to more California residents.

The future of solar energy in the state of California just got a little brighter.  Thanks to the recent passage of Assembly Bill 327 — a piece of legislation supported by solar advocacy groups and big investor owned utilities alike — rooftop solar will be accessible to more California residents.

When it comes to energy legislation, investor owned utilities (IOUs) such as PG&E and Southern California Edison are not very often on the same side of the fence as solar advocacy groups like The Alliance for Solar Choice (TASC) and the Vote Solar Initiative (VSI).  However, thanks to the leadership and successful collaborative efforts of California Gov. Jerry Brown, AB 327 has brought the IOUs and solar advocates together.

Since AB 327 lifts the ceiling on percentage of California’s energy generation that must come from renewable sources and brings stability and certainty to state’s solar net metering program, it supports the objectives of solar advocacy groups.  Net metering gives solar customers full retail credit for the excess energy they put back on the grid.  AB 327 removes the suspension on net metering that would have gone into effect at the end of this year and paves the way for completely uncapped net metering.  

The fact that the bill also includes provisions that give the California Public Utilities Commission new considerations for rate reform makes it attractive to IOUs.

Before the passage of AB 327, the future of net metering was uncertain.   This uncertainty threatened continued growth, especially the notable growth that the industry has seen in lower and middle income communities in recent years.  According to John Stanton, co-Chair of TASC and VP of Policy and Electricity Markets for Solar City, “Passage of this legislation means more Californians will now have access to cleaner, cheaper and better energy.”  Greater stability that the continuation of the program provides in the solar market also equates to more jobs in the state.

Next stop for AB 327: the Governor’s desk.