December 19, 2024 Breaking News, Latest News, and Videos

Will State Regulators Kill Rooftop Solar?

By Tom Elias, Columnist

If California’s often misguided utility regulators wanted to prove they are determined to favor privately owned electric companies over almost any other interest, they could not do better than with new rules they now propose to inflict on people with rooftop solar panels.

To understand this ongoing dispute, take a look at how utilities like Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric profit most from solar.

When photovoltaic solar panels are installed atop roofs, parking lots and in backyards, the local electric company makes no money under the current rules, known as “net energy metering,” or NEM. Homeowners, parking lot owners and others with panels use the energy they need, then send the rest to the general grid and get paid minor sums for it.

Without rooftop solar, which requires no new transmission lines to reach its end users, the private utilities must buy power from vast solar thermal farms in the California deserts, transporting the energy on lines that cost billions of dollars to erect. Without some form of solar, the utilities cannot meet state renewable energy quotas.

Every cent the utilities spend on new transmission lines comes from consumers, but the companies are guaranteed to profit by more than 10 percent each year on all they spend for such capital investments.

So the utilities have a strong interest in putting the clamps on rooftop solar. Did the PUC know before making its new rule proposal that within days, the federal government would OK building two new solar thermal farms deep in the Mojave Desert?

It was the often-misguided Democratic Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez of San Diego who first tried to stifle rooftop solar, carrying a 2020 bill with rules very like what’s now before the PUC, due for a vote Jan. 27 in San Francisco.

Gonzalez, who also wrote the ill-advised AB5 that has wrecked the livelihoods of many freelance professionals and others, proposed ending the current guarantee to solar homeowners that rules will remain stable for at least 20 years after systems go in. She wanted the PUC to set new monthly fees for solar owners connected to the grid – about 97 percent of rooftop solar owners.

Her bill died quickly. But the newly termed out PUC Commissioner Martha Guzman-Aceves, a former United Farm Workers lawyer, picked up on it with today’s proposal, which goes beyond even what Gonzalez proposed.

It would impose a monthly fee of approximately $50 to $70 on each rooftop owner and reduce what home solar owners get for their excess power, among other items.

That’s just what the utilities want. They pretend this will save non rooftop solar owners money, but never mention their baked-in profits from new transmission lines, money that’s included in electric rates. Meanwhile, millions of consumers can already get solar power from publicly owned Community Choice Aggregations in places like Butte, Sonoma, Marin, San Francisco, Ventura and Los Angeles counties. These outfits provide energy cheaper than the utilities while renting space on the companies’ transmission lines to bring power to their customers.

So it’s no wonder the utilities like the proposed new rules, with their disincentives to installing new rooftop panels. Said Southern California Edison when the plan got preliminary approval, “(This is) a meaningful step (to) reduce the financial burden on non-solar customers who have subsidized net energy metering…”

That’s the kind of half-truth California’s utilities often spout. In this case, needed new transmission lines will ensure a large net benefit to the companies at customer expense.

Right now, there is every likelihood the PUC will rubber stamp the new rules, no matter what it hears during the current public comment period, when anyone can speak or write their piece to the commissioners.

But by Jan. 27, the PUC will have two new members, giving at least some hope this will suffer the same fate as the Gonzalez bill of 2020.

Odds are the PUC will OK this proposal, just as it does most items its staff presents. That would be yet another contribution to the long tradition of state and federal regulators favoring the big companies over their customers.

Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, “The Burzynski Breakthrough, The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It” is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, visit www.californiafocus.net

<>Related Posts

Six-Bed Estate on Sunset Boulevard Hits Market at $5.8M

December 16, 2024

December 16, 2024

Amenities Include a Home Theater, a Gym, and a Sauna on the Lower Level A contemporary estate boasting six bedrooms...

SM.a.r.t. Column: Preserving Santa Monica

December 15, 2024

December 15, 2024

Since Giving Tuesday I’m sure you have been bombarded with appeals from countless organizations, local, national, or even international that...

Breaking News: Mandatory Evacuations Ordered at Midnight as Franklin Fire Threatens Malibu

December 10, 2024

December 10, 2024

Rapidly Growing Blaze Fueled by Santa Ana Winds Threatens Homes Near Pepperdine UPDATE: Zuma Beach Disaster Information Center is now...

Los Angeles Rents Among Nation’s Highest but Surprisingly Not the Most Expensive

December 8, 2024

December 8, 2024

Santa Monica, Los Angeles, and Irvine Are Part of the Top Ten As of December 2024, California’s rental market remains...

SM.a.r.t Column: Climbing The Vertical Learning Curve

December 8, 2024

December 8, 2024

The city is facing a financial crisis, the roots of which stretch back decades but have been made worse by...

Santa Monica Launches Microgrants for Cannabis Equity Discussions

December 5, 2024

December 5, 2024

The Microgrants Can Be Used to Cover Expenses Such as Childcare, Food, Interpretation Services, or Hiring a Notetaker Santa Monica...

Feedback Sought for Santa Monica’s Height Limits for Fences, Walls, and Hedges in Multifamily Zones

December 4, 2024

December 4, 2024

A Draft of the Proposed Ordinance, Along With a Summary of Community Feedback, Will Be Presented to the Planning Commission...

Santa Monica Considers Eight-Story Builder’s Remedy Project on 20th Street

December 3, 2024

December 3, 2024

The Proposed Project Will Feature 50 Residential Units, Including 10 Affordable Units, Alongside a 40-Room Hotel and Ground-Floor Retail Space...

33-Unit Santa Monica Apartment Complex Listed for $23M

November 28, 2024

November 28, 2024

The Property Offered at Approximately $576 per Square Foot A multifamily apartment complex located at 537 San Vicente Boulevard has...

SM.a.r.t Column: It’s Time To Inspect Balconies

November 24, 2024

November 24, 2024

About nine years ago, a fifth-floor balcony in a Berkeley apartment building collapsed, tragically killing several students gathered on it...

Santa Monica Place’s Value Falls by Nearly 60%: Report

November 20, 2024

November 20, 2024

Retail Vacancies Have Compounded the Mall’s Struggles Santa Monica Place, a high-profile shopping destination in Santa Monica, continues to face...

S.M.a.r.t Column: Your City is Broke

November 18, 2024

November 18, 2024

On December 10, the new City council will be seated fresh from their dominant win in the recent elections. There...

Brooke Shields’ Former Palisades Estate Listed for $8.65M: Report

November 12, 2024

November 12, 2024

Built in 1982, the Three-Story, Chalet-Style Home Spans 5,345 Square Feet and Sits on a 0.43-Acre Lot The former Pacific...

SM.a.r.t Column: Moving Ahead to the Future

November 10, 2024

November 10, 2024

As we write this, the election results are still trickling in. We’ll leave the deep analysis to others, but the...

Architectural Review Board Considers Eight-Story Mixed-Use Project on Wilshire

November 6, 2024

November 6, 2024

The Development Will Include Studio, One-, and Two-Bedroom Units, 13 of Which Will Be Reserved as Affordable Housing A proposed...