Print 49 comment(s) - last by NaperJ.. on Aug 6 at 12:48 PM

They're trying to slow the adoption of solar energy through lawmakers

Utility companies around the U.S. fear that solar companies and renewable energy incentives will replace traditional electricity.

According to a report from The New York Times, utility companies view rooftop solar energy as a threat to their traditional business model of providing electricity maintaining the grid.

In fact, some utilities have said that they should've fought the solar "disrupt" and are currently working to push back against government incentives for the renewable energy. 

The utility companies' worries may seem a little ridiculous at present, considering rooftop solar energy alone accounts for less than a quarter of 1 percent of the nation’s power generation. 

However, incentives around the country aim to expand the use of solar power in a big way. For instance, California has a system called net metering, which pays both commercial and residential customers for their excess renewable energy that they sell back to utilities. California pays customers very well through this credit system because the payments are bound to daytime retail rates that customers pay for electricity -- such as utility costs to maintain the grid. 

NYT reports that from 2010 to 2012, the amount of solar installed each year has increased by 160 percent.

At present, 43 states, the District of Columbia and four territories offer incentives for renewable energy in some form or another. 

Solar proponents add that solar customers deserve payment and incentives for their efforts because making more power closer to where it is used (when resold to local utility companies) can alleviate stress on the grid -- making it reliable. It also helps utilities by relieving them from having to build infrastructure and sizable generators. 

However, utility companies feel differently. Their argument is that solar customers, at some point, may stop paying for electricity, which means they also stop paying for the grid. This shifts the costs to other non-solar customers. 

According to California's three major utility companies, they could lose as much as $1.4 billion in annual revenue to solar customers when the state's subsidy program fills up to full capacity. This means that about 7.6 million non-soalr customers would have to make up for that, paying as much as $185 per year each. 

This leads to something utility companies call the "death spiral." This refers to the costs being shifted to non-solar customers, and because of this burden, they switch to solar-powered rooftops -- making utility companies' troubles even worse. 

For that reason, utilities have requested that lawmakers limit those who can participate in such programs, including net metering. 

Some utility companies are adding rooftop solar to their services, such as Dominion in Virginia. But not all are willing to adapt, and while solar still only amounts to a small percentage of power generation in the U.S., it seems utilities are looking to prevent the renewable energy emergence from spreading. 

Source: The New York Times

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Survival of the Fittest
By marvdmartian on 8/1/2013 9:22:09 AM , Rating: 1
Not the (modern) American way. Easier to throw money at sketchy politicians, who will vote against adoption of whatever it is you don't want adopted. Highest bidder wins!!

Personally, rooftop solar wouldn't pay off for me, as I'm in an area where we can pick & choose our providers, and get electricity at a much better rate than we might otherwise. While "old school" companies, like TXU or Reliant will sell electricity at higher rates (usually to people with more credit problems), like ~$0.13/KWh, I've gone with a company that charges me $0.09/KWh, with that rate locked in for 24 months.
Comparitively speaking, the quotes I received for solar leases (or outright purchases) for my house, which has a good southern exposure roof top, came out to the same monthly payment as I'm currently averaging with my electric (summer and winter) and natural gas (winter) bills. The ONLY thing that I'd likely get for a benefit, from installing solar, would be a warm, fuzzy feeling.

RE: Survival of the Fittest
By Spuke on 8/1/2013 6:51:09 PM , Rating: 1
Solar for our house doesn't make sense for us either as our usage is fairly low and our bill maxes out at $120 a month in July/August. The rest of the year it's under $100 and as low as $50 (cheap for CA). Looking at wind power and an electric furnace to rid ourselves of the $300-$400 a month in propane costs in the late fall/winter.

"If you can find a PS3 anywhere in North America that's been on shelves for more than five minutes, I'll give you 1,200 bucks for it." -- SCEA President Jack Tretton

Latest Headlines

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Yahoo Hacked - Change Your Passwords and Security Info ASAP!
September 23, 2016, 5:45 AM
A is for Apples
September 23, 2016, 5:32 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki