Hundreds of people took to the streets in Los Angeles and San Francisco today to call on California Gov. Gavin Newsom to keep rooftop solar growing in the state. Ralliers are calling on Gov. Newsom to direct the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to revisit a preliminary decision made in December that drastically cuts the state’s solar energy incentive program.
Photo courtesy CALSSA
Environment America Research & Policy Center’s President Wendy Wendlandt spoke at the event in Los Angeles and the group’s State Director Laura Deehan spoke at the San Francisco rally.
“We’re in the middle of a climate emergency,” Wendlandt said. “The last thing we need to do is make rooftop solar more expensive.”
Under CPUC’s preliminary proposal, California solar customers would be charged a new monthly fixed rate of $57 on average. That total would be the highest solar penalty in the country. In other states where this sort of tax was imposed, the rate of new solar installations plummeted. For example, when Nevada instituted a similar penalty, the solar adoption rate dropped by 47%. When a better policy was reinstated, the rate came back up.
California regulators have calculated that to get to 100% clean energy as required by state law, California needs at least 28 GW of customer-sited solar by 2045. That’s nearly three-times as much rooftop solar as the state has installed as of 2022.
“Rooftop solar panels are California’s quickest route to cleaner air, healthier communities and less climate pollution,” Deehan said. “We need as many as we can get. More than ever, we need Gov. Newsom to stand up and make sure that California continues our shining leadership as a rooftop solar state.”
The commission can hold a final vote on the future of net metering as soon as Jan. 27, following a 30-day public comment period on the proposed decision. If this proposal is adopted, changes would go into effect this spring.
Support for the rallies was shared across social media.
Rallying at the PUBLIC utility commission to fix NEM3.0 and save solar jobs and a clean energy future @californiapuc @CalEnergy pic.twitter.com/ZAX6IQaRX3
— Anne Hoskins (@Aehoskins) January 13, 2022
Our view from the Save Our Solar Jobs Rally today in San Francisco! #SaveSolar @CALSSA_org pic.twitter.com/9HdCYc7hUv
— The Interstate Renewable Energy Council (IREC) (@IRECUSA) January 13, 2022
Solar power is local power. We’re outside the @californiapuc, rallying to #SaveSolar. pic.twitter.com/rT5GQk0gvw
— California Solar & Storage Association (@CALSSA_org) January 13, 2022
Wouldn’t a more FAIR tax (assuming the power grid must, in fact, be maintained) be like Property Taxes, where EVERYONE shares EQUALLY in the tax (assuming that EVERYONE is connected to the grid)?
WHY is this proposed tax based on the amount of Solar installed?
That sure seems to fly in the face of the stated goal (of increasing the amount of rooftop solar systems installed).
Pacific Gas and Electric has been lobbying for years to make solar less affordable for residential customers and therefore less likely to be installed and compete with their monopoly. There was a time when the California State Public Utilities Commission who regulates public utilities, would have never given P.G and E. the time of day over this preposterous proposal but the lines are now blurred and it appears that the two are in bed.
P.G and E. argues that they pay too much for net metering but that is only because they are a public utility that is privately owned. Their continuous payment of dividends to their stock holders is evidence of their short-sightedness and their lack of investment and maintenance of their infrastructure. It’s not a coincidence that many of California’s wildfires have been caused by faulty P.G. and E. power transmission equipment. And now P.G. and E. wants to pay for the lost revenue on the backs of residential solar power owners. This is a draconian and regressive measure that will harm California not only consumers but make California’s goal of reduced dependence on fossil fuels a pipe dream.
I think it’d be more accurate to say “thousands” not hundreds, btw. There were definitely at least two thousand and likely three thousand at the combined events!
“The commission can hold a final vote on the future of net metering as soon as Jan. 27, following a 30-day public comment period on the proposed decision. If this proposal is adopted, changes would go into effect this spring.”
This is what I’ve found to be true in the “public” sector, this is true how cities and county board of directors do “business”. There are public postings of ruling changes, projects, tax increases and such that the population ignores for the most part until the rules go into effect then there’s “outrage”. IF you can find this ruling on the CPUC site and follow it, you will see most of the filings for and against this ruling will be the utilities, environmental groups, law firms for the utilities making “legalese” claims just in case they choose to sue later. Very few of the comments are from the (citizens) these rule changes effect. This time around the people need to weigh in on this onerous rule change and there needs to be thousands of residential rate payers saying NO to the CPUC, not hundreds waving signs. IF nothing else, the ratepayers should demand the electric utility pay them the equivalent of this connection fee each month of that “average” $57 dollars, in a right of way lease fee each month so the utility can service their (property) with electricity.