A fight over solar power: Capitalism and money vs. environmentalism and consumers

When money is at stake, deceptive propaganda, lies and smears is the go-to tactic for capitalists. Consumers get slaughtered in the crossfire because they have few or no big guns on their side, so they stand there with sticks and rocks while the opponents use more effective weaponry. In other words it is business as usual. This is about a huge fight over solar panels on rooftops here in California. Tens of billions of dollars are at stake. California skies have gone black with lobbyists carrying briefcases from capitalists on both sides parachuting in from squadrons of massive aircraft transports. 

A batch of lobbyists parachuting in to

fight for the cash

Getting another load of lobbyists ready for transport to 

do battle in California for huge piles of cash 

The New York Times lays out the battle lines and describes what’s at stake:

California has led the nation in setting ambitious climate change goals and policies. But the state’s progress is threatened by a nasty fight between rival camps in the energy industry that both consider themselves proponents of renewable energy.

The dispute is about who will get to build the green energy economy — utilities or smaller companies that install solar panels and batteries at homes — and reap billions of dollars in profits from those investments. At stake is whether the state can reach its goal of 100 percent clean energy by 2045.

For years, the rooftop solar business was ascendant in California, growing as much as 62 percent a year. That angered utilities and their labor unions, which long controlled the production, sale and distribution of electricity, and they lobbied state leaders to rein in the rooftop solar business — an effort that is on the cusp of success.

In addition to having about 12 percent of the U.S. population, California is widely considered a leader in energy and climate policy. Its decisions matter far beyond its territory because other states and the federal government often copy them.

The California Public Utilities Commission [CPUC] plans to vote in the next few weeks to reduce the growth of solar energy in the state, which has added more of it than any other. The commission has proposed slashing the incentives homeowners receive to install rooftop solar systems. Officials argue that the changes would help reduce utility bills for lower-income residents about $10 a month by forcing rooftop solar users to pay higher fees to support the electric grid.

The proposal would force California to rely more on large power installations, including solar and wind farms, and long-distance transmission lines operated by utilities like Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison. Every watt of electricity not produced on the rooftop of a home will be produced and transmitted by a utility or wholesale power companies.

“You can understand why utilities don’t like distributive resources,” said David Feldman, a senior energy analyst at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, using an industry term for small energy systems. “The more electricity they sell, the more money they make.”

Some energy experts say utilities would not be able to produce or buy enough renewable energy to replace what would be lost from the decline in rooftop solar panels — which supplied 9 percent of the state’s electricity in 2020, more than nuclear and coal put together. California would need to set aside about a quarter of its land for renewable energy to meet its climate goals without expanding rooftop solar, said Mark Z. Jacobson, a professor of civil and environmental energy at Stanford. As a result, utilities would have to turn to natural gas and other fossil fuels.

People who install solar panels on their roofs or property are still connected to the electrical grid, but they receive credit on their bills for power they produce beyond what they use [Consumers are proposed to get paid a paltry ~$0.04/KWh for excess energy their solar produces and the utility then sells it at market rates, ~$0.31/KWh here in San Diego (national average is ~0.11/KWh) -- a bad deal for consumers, but a freaking gold mine to the utility]. California’s proposal would cut the value of those credits, which are roughly equivalent to retail electricity rates, by about 87 percent. In addition, the measure would impose a new monthly fee on solar homeowners — about $56 for the typical rooftop system [about $672/year]. 

The monthly cost of solar and electricity for homeowners with an average rooftop system who are served by PG&E, the state’s largest utility, would jump to $215, from $133, according to the California Solar and Storage Association.

An intense campaign is underway to sway regulators. Rooftop solar companies, homeowners and activists on one side and utilities and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers on the other are lobbying Gov. Gavin Newsom to intervene. While the commission is independent of Mr. Newsom, he wields enormous influence. The governor recently told reporters that the regulators should change their proposal but didn’t specify how [Newsome is scared -- he’s between a capitalist-campaign contribution 

rock (special interest and rich people free speech) and a consumer-environmental hard place].

The electrical workers union, which did not respond to requests for comment [not surprisingly], is playing a central role. It represents linemen, electricians and other utility employees, who usually earn more than the mostly nonunion workers who install rooftop systems. Many union members, an important constituency for Democrats, fear being left behind in the transition to green energy. 

Californians carry the10th highest tax burden in the US, is one of the most heavily regulated states, and consumers here pay high utility costs. Adding a fee, proposed by the CPUC at $8/month/KWh of solar panels on roofs, would add another ~$600 in utility fees adds to the average consumer’s electric utility bills. For context, California utilities are usually solidly profitable -- 10.2% for our local SDG&E. For every dollar California utilities spend building electric or gas infrastructure, they are allowed to charge customers an additional ~10 cents in profits for their shareholders. 

Tax burden data

Source: WalletHub

Question: Which side are you on, the greedy company capitalists and their non-union labor or the greedy utility capitalists and their protected by law labor union, or the consumers and the environment (which are not represented in the arguments between the two elephants, but both elephants argue they are on the side of consumers and the environment), or no side because this is just too complicated and it makes your brain hurt?