The utilities are the masterminds behind the smear campaign against rooftop solar
For those who are curious, the three investor-owned utilities – PG&E, SoCal Edison and SDG&E – are behind the pressure and misinformation campaign to kill rooftop solar. The utilities’ campaign against rooftop solar is being waged by a nice-sounding front group called “Affordable Clean Energy for All”. They have a slick website called Fix the Cost Shift. They claim to…
The Solar Tax is Back (and the Solar Cliff, too)
On May 9th, the CPUC formally requested input on three changes they are considering to rooftop solar net metering. Among these changes is a Solar Tax of $300 to $600 per year on average. In other words, the CPUC appears to be pursuing a re-packaged version of their disastrous proposal in December. As we feared, the utilities have so captured…
2022 Rooftop Solar Legislative Candidate Questionnaire Results
Skip to the questionnaire responses What we did In April, we asked candidates who are running for a seat in the California legislature to complete a questionnaire about the candidates’ views on rooftop solar. See the questions we asked. We asked three sets of questions: Stances on specific aspects of rooftop solar policy Stances on CPUC governance and conflicts of…
Webinar replay: Where the fight to defend rooftop solar stands
On April 27th, we held a webinar to outline where the fight to defend rooftop solar stands, what the public can expect next from the CPUC, and what people can do to make their voices heard. Watch the webinar here:
The CPUC went on tour to sell utility propaganda against rooftop solar
Following weeks of silence, the first substantive remarks on rooftop solar have started to trickle out of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). These remarks paint the picture of a government agency unabashedly selling utility propaganda against rooftop solar. They also suggest that the CPUC didn’t actually get the overwhelming message from the public, and is planning to reissue a…
Utility profit grab will cost consumers $120 billion
The utility profit grab to kill rooftop solar will cost California consumers $120 billion and squander 374,000 clean energy jobs over the next thirty years. That’s the conclusion of a new report by Vibrant Clean Energy, led by energy researcher Dr. Christopher Clack. Rooftop solar and batteries reduce the cost of the electrical grid The report found that by making…
The Sneaky Solar Tax lurking in the shadows
In February, thanks to a massive public outcry, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) shelved their proposal to slap consumers with a Solar Tax averaging $700 per year. But since then, the CPUC and Gov. Newsom have been silent on what comes next. It’s possible they are working on other ways to sneak the Solar Tax back to the table….
White Paper: How the utilities use tricky math to vilify rooftop solar
Get the full White Paper: The Utility “Cost Shift” Fallacy: How the utilities use tricky math to vilify rooftop solar Summary Rooftop solar and battery storage helps reduce the cost of the electrical grid, saving all ratepayers money The continued growth of rooftop solar and battery storage is key to a successful clean energy transition that puts the needs of…
Guest post: Response to Utility-Led Arguments Against Against Rooftop Solar
Editor’s Note: Bill Powers is a well-regarded engineer and policy expert. He sits on the Board of Directors of the Protect Our Communities Foundation, a San Diego-based nonprofit conservation group. Solar Rights Alliance invited Mr. Powers to submit this guest post to help clarify the misinformation that utilities and others are spreading through the media. Guest Blog Post: Response to…
Newsom: “We still have work to do”
On Monday January 10th, two reporters asked Governor Newsom where he stood on the CA Public Utilities Commission’s proposal to penalize people for choosing solar energy, and whether the proposal needed to be changed. The Governor’s answer: “We still have work to do…Do I think changes should be made? Yes, I do.” View his full response to the first and the second question. The good…