The California Air Resources Council has identified a rooftop solar panel as the key to California’s carbon neutrality, but the proposed law reduces the cost of rooftop solar power in the state.

Regulators of the California Air Resources Council (CARB) have published Fr. comprehensive report outlining the state’s path to carbon neutrality, and chief among the recommendations was support for solar energy, particularly solar energy on rooftops. However, regulators from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) are developing policies that should reduce the cost of solar energy on rooftops in the state.

The California solar roofing industry represents more than 1.4 million homes, small businesses and other facilities with photovoltaic batteries. The state accounts for 50% of rooftop solar installations in the United States, and of the 230,000 people employed in the solar industry, as many as 68,000 jobs are supported by the state’s rooftop solar business.

Based on California’s clean energy goals, it is necessary to install up to 28.5 GW of rooftop solar energy by 2045, according to The California environment. Had all this power been installed on land, it would have required 148,000 acres to maintain it, which is about half the size of Los Angeles.

However, the current policy being developed in the state, namely Net Energy Measurement Policy (NEM) 3.0, should reduce the cost of solar energy in the state. The original NEM 3.0 offering, supported Three major investors in California utilities considered it a disaster for those who supported the construction of solar energy on the roof in the state. The proposal was postponed for a couple of months after thousands of Californians took to the streets to protest the decisionwhich was referred to as the “sun tax”.

Now NEM 3.0 is there revised, and the policy still seems to include plans to reduce the cost of solar energy on rooftops, in stark contrast to CARB’s recommendations for clean air. The revised NEM reduces the importance of homeowners’ over-generation of solar resources by using a “sliding track” for four years to bring net measurements to a “reasonable cost” for utilities, which is a fraction of what utilities charge for electricity.

He also introduced “necessary fees” that will add $ 0.05 per kWh to a customer’s account, regardless of whether they own a solar panel or not. These fees will be applied to solar-generated electrons on the customer’s roof and delivered to their own homes. The rules make it very difficult or even illegal to completely disconnect from the grid in many areas of California.

This means that even if the customer is completely self-consuming solar energy and does not use the energy generated by utilities, the utility will benefit from the homeowner’s system at the expense of the required fee.

“The urgency of the climate crisis makes it necessary for regulators to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible. The state, the nation and the whole planet do not have enough time. ” Ken Cook, president of the working group on the environment
Image: EWG

“Lips. News should listen to senior state officials on clean air, not utility regulators involved in utilities, and use their powers to protect the state’s solar program on the roof, ”said Ken Cook, president of the Working Group on the Environment.

“It is urgent that the governor rejects the conspiracy of utilities to blow up one of the main pillars of the CARB roadmap to provide renewable energy as the dominant source of electricity in the state. Any minor will send a clear signal that corrupt criminal companies such as PG&E may slow California’s progress in resolving the climate crisis, ”he said.

CPUC is continues to accept comments about new offerings in the revised version of NEM 3.0 by June 10th.

This content is copyrighted and cannot be reused. If you want to cooperate with us and want to reuse some of our content, please contact us:

Previous articleMotoGP: Qatar will not host the opening of the 2023 season
Next article2023 Cadillac Lyriq RWD, AWD Prices disclosed before opening orders