CALIFORNIA
FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: FRIDAY, JUNE 4, 2021, OR THEREAFTER
BY THOMAS D. ELIAS
“THIS BILL
COULD KILL ROOFTOP SOLAR”
If
politicians wanted to kill rooftop solar energy production in California, they
could not find a better vehicle than a proposed new law known as Assembly Bill
1139.
This is a
brainchild of Democratic Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez of San Diego, previously
best known for authoring AB 5, another destructive bill she pushed into law in
2019 only to see her legislative colleagues a year later rescind many of its
onerous provisions. AB 5 was despised especially by folks it was supposed to
help.
The newest
Gonzalez project is – like AB 5 – a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Where AB 5
originally required companies using contract workers to convert them to regular
employees who could then be unionized, AB 1139 purports to stabilize conditions
for California residents installing solar panels atop their homes.
AB 5
caused or threatened to cause an end to the jobs of thousands of Californians,
from freelance writers to court reporters to musicians. Similarly, AB 1139
would likely stifle rooftop solar installations around the state, home to about
half of all such projects nationally.
Here are
four things AB 1139 would do in the name of bettering home-based solar power:
n It would end the state’s
current policy of requiring electric utilities to ensure that “customer-sited
generation continues to grow sustainably.” That’s a massive change in state
policy. It would concentrate all renewable energy efforts in the hands of big
utilities including California’s largest utility, which has been convicted of
corporate crimes as serious as manslaughter.
n It would end the current guarantee
to homeowners who install solar that net metering will remain stable for 20
years after systems go in. This means the price homeowners get for excess
energy they contribute to the general electric grid will drop.
n And it calls on the
scandal-ridden state Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to create new net
metering rules within two years to set payments to solar owners for excess
power at the level currently paid for wholesale power. That, say solar
advocates, would cut payments to homeowners who install solar by about 80
percent.
This is a utility company pipe dream come
to life, something for which the electric providers have spent years lobbying
the PUC.
Essentially, AB 1139 disincentivizes homeowners who might
otherwise want to install solar panels, the cost of which has dropped by about
70 percent over the last 10 years.
The unanswered question here is why Gonzalez would sponsor
this bill, which has already passed one Assembly committee and is now headed to
another which Gonzalez chairs, where passage is allegedly greased.
Questions repeatedly submitted to her office have gone
unanswered.
The reality is that this bill helps no one but profit-driven
privately-owned monopoly utilities, like the multiply-convicted Pacific Gas
& Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas &
Electric.
For the state’s overall commitment to reach 100 percent
reliance on renewable energy by midcentury would not change. If home-produced
power levels off or is reduced, pressure will increase pressure to expand or
build more huge solar-thermal electricity farms in the state’s vast desert
areas, says Jennifer Tanner of a group called the Indivisible California Green
Team.
The utilities won’t build most of these plants, but they
would construct added transmission lines to bring the new power from the desert
to their grids.
Building more hundreds of miles of transmission facilities
atop what already exists would cost many billions of dollars. Do it and
utilities would reap billions in added income over at least 20 years because
they are guaranteed a fixed rate of return – often about 14 percent per year–
on investments in new facilities.
This inevitably leads to higher rates for consumers, who will
also provide – through their monthly bills – money to repay with interest any
loans the utilities take for adding transmission capacity.
One reason some advocates of the massive solar thermal
facilities give for de-emphasizing rooftop solar, as AB 1139 definitely would –
is the claim that only the wealthy can afford it. But today’s lower prices for
solar panels mean see 43 percent of new installations done by lower- and
middle-income homeowners.
All of which makes this one of the most anti-consumer,
anti-homeowner and anti-green proposals ever seen in Sacramento.
-30-
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
No comments:
Post a Comment