The California State Assembly has approved a bill that would force individuals purchasing properties with solar projects into new net billing scenarios, which would likely reduce compensation for their energy exports. Assembly Bill 942 is now heading to the California State Senate.
If enacted, AB 942 would require that properties with renewable energy projects, like solar arrays, be transferred from their existing net-metering contracts into NEM 3.0 in an attempt to resolve the “cost-shift” of utility expenses onto non-solar electric customers. If passed by the Senate and signed by the governor, this would take effect starting on January 1, 2026.
“Throughout the process, Assemblymembers commented how they heard more opposition to AB 942 than any other bill this session,” said Brad Heavner, executive director of the California Solar & Storage Association (CALSSA) in a press release. “That opposition will only grow louder when AB 942 moves to the Senate and Californians continue to make their voices heard against a bill that would undermine property rights, reduce home values, and jeopardize the state’s clean energy future.”
NEM 3.0 altered compensation rates for energy exports in excess of an individual’s electricity consumption — calculating compensation based on avoided energy costs at certain times of day. This shift in net billing reduced compensation by up to 75% compared to previous net metering scenarios.
AB 942 was introduced by Assemblymember Lisa Calderon (D) in February. Initially, the proposed bill would have reduced net billing contract terms from 20 to 10 years. Calderon formerly worked as a government affairs director for Edison International, a electrical utility company.
While the bill states that rooftop solar has played a crucial role in moving toward the state’s clean energy goals, it also states that California subsidies for rooftop solar have created “a significant shortfall for covering the fixed costs of the electrical grid, and nonsolar ratepayers make up the difference.” CALSSA denies the claim that solar has harmed the grid, and points to utility spending as the culprit.
“The utility story that solar customers are all wealthy and save too much money is also false,” Heavner said. “Solar is predominantly adopted by working class customers seeking to stabilize theri energy costs and support California’s clean energy goals.”
This bill is just insane, we strongly reject AB 942, SMUD makes money on our overage, we purchase at more than 19 cents a kwh (summer rate) and when we settle our overages annually SMUD buys back the overage at 5.5 cents a kwh. They can resell our overage that was purchased at such a cheap price and make a profit or upgrade their operation, etc,,,, CAN YOU SAY CLASS ACTION LAW SUIT??
I will fight to kill AB942. Where is our Guv? Preening for 28 run for POTUS? Don’t get too slick Newom…it’s visible and people don’t like that. YOU kill this bill if it gets to your desk.
Foisting, NEM 3.0 across the board “when homes are sold” is failing a long term contractural agreement between the original home owner of a 20-25 year PPA to a “new PPA” for the next owner of the property and system. The CPUC needs to be taken to task for this mess. The IOU electric utilities are enjoying “avoided costs” of not having to buy property, the components of the solar PV system and some installations the Energy Storage System. These utilities do not have to file CEQA paperwork, defend a project in court, get rights of ways, which are already in place or “maintain the system”. California’s IOU electric utilities want “Net Billing” where the excess energy pushed back on the grid is credited at the wholesale energy rate, then abrogate this over night with TOU rate spiking without taking into account the private distributed energy provider also has a “amortization period” and actual ROI. The IOU utilities get to “amortize” their assets, why don’t (I) get to amortize MY energy generation asset some value above wholesale energy rates? Sounding like the CPUC, IOU electric utilities are running an energy racket that falls under the RICO statute, time for the DOJ to investigate.
This is an egregious betrayal of 2 million solar customers. The “cost shift” is a lie based on incorrect assumptions and calculations. Rooftop solar actually saved all ratepayers in the three IOUs $1.49 billion in 2024 alone. The electricity rooftop solar has delivered to all customers has prevented the need for the utilities to build new power plants. Building new power plants is how utilities make a guaranteed profit. 2024 delivered over $2.5 billion profit to PG&E alone.
Blaming rooftop solar is misguided.
Aren’t utility companies already making profits in the billions the last 2 years? Ask PGE. Also, ask states such as New Mexico, Arizona and others why their electric rates are cheaper than California users and they are using the ‘excess’ energy exported from CA. Shouldn’t CA utility payers be given cheaper rates since CA is making money off of excess energy exported……..not the states buying it??? Quite frankly, utility company shortages, repairs, bonuses, etc are being paid by regular everyday middle class CA utility users who cant qualify for any type of subsidies whether it be solar or discounted rates. This is truly CRIMINAL
Kathy K Fevereiro: ” Also, ask states such as New Mexico, Arizona and others why their electric rates are cheaper than California users and they are using the ‘excess’ energy exported from CA. Shouldn’t CA utility payers be given cheaper rates since CA is making money off of excess energy exported……..”
It has more to do with the intrinsic operations of eletric utilities with their centralized generation “on demand” and requirement to handle capacity with fueled generation facilities in warm standby or one step up emergency standby mode of operation. Bottom line electric utilities to meet variable capacity demands pay extra on the generation spot market to keep fueled generation warm or hot standby even (if) the grid doesn’t demand these plants going online across the grid. WE all pay for standby mode, whether we use it or not. The second tranche in California, because, there are pockets of high content solar PV during the day that famous “duck curve” pushes electricity supply higher than demand AND as such one does one of two things, “curtail, shutdown” solar PV and wind farm turbines and rely on spot market contracts from out of State or (pay) another State per MWh of exported energy to help keep the grid stable. So, when folks applaud solar PV generation creating a negative cost per MWh generation, this forces curtailment and use of variable fueled generation imported at a premium. California has pretty much proven, the State NEEDS some 60GWh distributed energy storage to ride through demand peaks on any given day, (usually in the summer months). Cal-Iso is in charge of “spinning capacity” and has tracked energy during any given day as $1,000-$2,000/MWh spot market to -$15/MWh during the solar PV/wind generation duck curve.
What does the residential bundled electricity user DO? “Find the money”, pay it forward and put solar PV and smart BESS in your home now and step back from the soap opera of IOU electric utilities O&M, generation and distribution practices, the mention of PG&E is dividends over O&M for decades that creates the mess the PG&E grid is in today and electricity costs from $0.25/kWh up to TOU rates at $0.53/kWh. At the utility scale that’s $250/MWh to $530/MWh at any given time of any given day.
AB 942 is an abomination. To punish those of us who made a significant investment in our homes in order to control our energy costs while helping our environment is deplorable and should not be allowed to pass.
There are a large number of senior citizens on fixed incomes living in our modest community who made their investments to protect themselves from the vagaries of the utility providers who are behind this bill.
Rest assured that I will actively work to remove from office any politician who promotes AB 942.