• 3 hours Russia, Saudis Team Up To Boost Fracking Tech
  • 9 hours Conflicting News Spurs Doubt On Aramco IPO
  • 10 hours Exxon Starts Production At New Refinery In Texas
  • 11 hours Iraq Asks BP To Redevelop Kirkuk Oil Fields
  • 1 day Oil Prices Rise After U.S. API Reports Strong Crude Inventory Draw
  • 1 day Oil Gains Spur Growth In Canada’s Oil Cities
  • 1 day China To Take 5% Of Rosneft’s Output In New Deal
  • 1 day UAE Oil Giant Seeks Partnership For Possible IPO
  • 1 day Planting Trees Could Cut Emissions As Much As Quitting Oil
  • 1 day VW Fails To Secure Critical Commodity For EVs
  • 1 day Enbridge Pipeline Expansion Finally Approved
  • 1 day Iraqi Forces Seize Control Of North Oil Co Fields In Kirkuk
  • 1 day OPEC Oil Deal Compliance Falls To 86%
  • 2 days U.S. Oil Production To Increase in November As Rig Count Falls
  • 2 days Gazprom Neft Unhappy With OPEC-Russia Production Cut Deal
  • 2 days Disputed Venezuelan Vote Could Lead To More Sanctions, Clashes
  • 2 days EU Urges U.S. Congress To Protect Iran Nuclear Deal
  • 2 days Oil Rig Explosion In Louisiana Leaves 7 Injured, 1 Still Missing
  • 2 days Aramco Says No Plans To Shelve IPO
  • 5 days Trump Passes Iran Nuclear Deal Back to Congress
  • 5 days Texas Shutters More Coal-Fired Plants
  • 5 days Oil Trading Firm Expects Unprecedented U.S. Crude Exports
  • 5 days UK’s FCA Met With Aramco Prior To Proposing Listing Rule Change
  • 5 days Chevron Quits Australian Deepwater Oil Exploration
  • 6 days Europe Braces For End Of Iran Nuclear Deal
  • 6 days Renewable Energy Startup Powering Native American Protest Camp
  • 6 days Husky Energy Set To Restart Pipeline
  • 6 days Russia, Morocco Sign String Of Energy And Military Deals
  • 6 days Norway Looks To Cut Some Of Its Generous Tax Breaks For EVs
  • 6 days China Set To Continue Crude Oil Buying Spree, IEA Says
  • 6 days India Needs Help To Boost Oil Production
  • 6 days Shell Buys One Of Europe’s Largest EV Charging Networks
  • 6 days Oil Throwback: BP Is Bringing Back The Amoco Brand
  • 6 days Libyan Oil Output Covers 25% Of 2017 Budget Needs
  • 6 days District Judge Rules Dakota Access Can Continue Operating
  • 7 days Surprise Oil Inventory Build Shocks Markets
  • 7 days France’s Biggest Listed Bank To Stop Funding Shale, Oil Sands Projects
  • 7 days Syria’s Kurds Aim To Control Oil-Rich Areas
  • 7 days Chinese Teapots Create $5B JV To Compete With State Firms
  • 7 days Oil M&A Deals Set To Rise
Richard Branson To Invest In Elon Musk’s Hyperloop One

Richard Branson To Invest In Elon Musk’s Hyperloop One

Britain’s Virgin Group boss has…

New Tech Could Turn Seaweed Into Biofuel

New Tech Could Turn Seaweed Into Biofuel

Scientists discovered an unlikely abundant…

Solar Industry Gets A Victory In California

The solar power industry is welcoming California’s decision to continue its program of allowing homes and businesses with rooftop solar panels to sell excess energy back to their local utilities at the full retail rate. The only hitch: These customers face new fees to join the state’s electricity grid and as much as $10 each month to stay in the program.

The California Public Utilities Commission, in a three-to-two vote on Thursday, approved the new and renewed guidelines for what’s called “net metering,” which will continue providing incentives for home and business owners to install rooftop solar panels, which will mean even more business for the solar industry, making their products more attractive by helping lower the prices for the hardware.

New solar-power customers will also be charged a one-time fee of $150 for connecting to the grid and as much as $10 per month to remain in the program. Existing customers won’t be charged the fees. And even with the fees, the falling prices for solar equipment will offset the new costs imposed by the state, according to Bernadette Del Chiaro, the executive director of the California Solar Energy Industries Association. “At the end of the day, going solar in California will remain a very good economic investment,” Del Chiaro said.

Related: Weak Economy Could Stifle Oil Price Rally

In the run-up to Thursday’s decision, the solar industry strongly opposed a footnote in the guidelines that would have required solar owners to pay an electricity transmission charge as their share of the cost of maintaining the grid.

The industry complained that would have doubled the fees that solar owners would have had to pay, canceling out their savings from using solar energy. A majority of the commission agreed and, the day before the vote, the panel eliminated that fee.

But that doesn’t make it fair, said two commission members, Mike Florio and Catherine J.K. Sandoval, who voted against the new guidelines. Florio said that without the extra fees, solar-equipped home and business owners wouldn’t be paying their rightful share to support California’s electrical grid.

Related: Oil Prices in 2016 Will Be Determined By These 6 Factors

Besides, Florio said, the big winner here wouldn’t necessarily be solar power users. “All of us are pro solar,” Florio said, but added, “I don’t think these benefits are going to accrue to solar customers, they’re going to accrue to solar vendors.”

California has practiced net metering for the past two decades, Buying and installing rooftop solar panels once was seen as prohibitively expensive, but as with many novel technologies, the more it was adopted on the retail level, the quicker its cost fell, to the financial benefit of the solar power industry.

Three of the state’s largest utilities – Southern California Edison, San Diego Gas & Electric and Pacific Gas & Electric – had urged to commission to equalize the financial burden of solar and non-solar customers by increasing the fees charged to those who rely on solar energy.

Related: Do Canadians Want To Stay In The Oil Business?

For example, Southern California Edison had argued that under the current arrangement, the average solar customer has a monthly electric bill of about $82. Under the commission’s decision, that would increase to $91. The utilities had argued for an increase to $103 per month.

Michael R. Picker, the president of the commission, voted with commissioners Liane M. Randolph and Carla J. Peterman against the utilities’ position. Picker called the decision “a big step, but it’s only one of many” to help California keep converting to renewable energy.

“This has been a very difficult task, to find the right balance,” Picker said. “There’s a shift in the way we use electricity. … [The decision] also forces the utility to come to grips with the technology challenges.”

By Andy Tully of Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:



Join the discussion | Back to homepage

Leave a comment
  • Joe on February 01 2016 said:
    The greed of the investor owned utilities knows no bounds. The fact of the matter is there making a Ton A money off of those who invest in solar for their homes by only giving you a small fraction of what they should for the energy you produce and provide to the grid. These greedy utilities then resell what you produce and pocket the difference – – – now they want to stick it to you by giving you a $10 monthly fee. This is totally unacceptable and it shameful . There is no doubt these investor own utilities do not want solar – – your only hope is to get totally off the grid and told him to stick it.

Leave a comment

Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News