California Has Killed the Rooftop Solar Market With Taxes. Net Metering 3.0 that takes effect TODAY, taxes anyone who owns a rooftop solar system for just owning the panels. Thousands of companies, including installers, manufacturers & distributors. are reeling from the new policy.

14 comments

1. Such a stupid fucking move devoid of common sense. This is one of hundreds of reasons (besides housing prices) why people are fleeing CA.

   I am glad I am in MA as far as solar is concerned, except “everything is illegal in MA” as well, as they say.

2. Can someone help me understand what are the reasons to do this?

3. I’m struggling to understand the actual rationale for this. There can be legitimate safety concerns when people give power back to the grid from their panels. But it doesn’t seem logical to implement these taxes.

   Is this just naked protectionism for the utility companies or is there a legitimate rationale?

4. God bless government sanctioned monopolies.

5. Commiefornia

6. Fuck these energy companies, nationalize them.

7. From the article, besides Net Metering 3.0, there’s another new tax idea from California’s braintrust:

   >Under the proposal, households will see a fixed rate covering basic electricity services and the utility company’s operating costs on a scale based on their household income.

   >Households with annual income from **$28,000 – $69,000** would pay **$20 a month** in Edison territory, **$34 a month** in SDG&E territory and **$30 a month** in PG&E territory.

   >Households earning from **$69,000 – $180,000** would pay **$51 a month** in Edison and PG&E territories and **$73 a month** in SDG&E territory.

   >Those with incomes **above $180,000** would pay **$85 a month** in Edison territory, **$128 a month** in SDG&E territory and **$92 a month** in PG&E territory.

   Even worse.

8. That feels like complete bullshit

9. Government must be extremely limited and constantly under scrutiny

10. Whoever controls renewable energy will be allowed to sell it to their neighbors and also create a decent amount of jobs. Be looking for states that are promoting renewable energy and rooftop solar to have an economic boom.

11. The title is misleading. It’s not a tax. They raised the install fee to connect to the grid and changed the credits formula. The new plan is less attractive but by no means is it a tax. Also PGE and Edison are allowing people to be grandfathered in up until 2027.

    As more people get solar that bit of surplus energy you feed back into the grid is now worth less than before.

12. I have solar that produces slightly more than we use, my bill was about $50 for the YEAR (mostly connection fees) now that’s jumping up to $700. I called Edison and all the asshats there couldn’t tell me why is going up so much when I over produce and the new rates were cheaper per kwh. They connected me to the “solar expert” who never returns my calls. I’m now considering a battery to go completely off grid. Why am I paying more to give you energy that you buy back at ridiculously low rates from us producers in CA.

13. This is an article on a conservative rag that calls itself hot air; how accurate is it?

    “Like me, he figured that after 10 years he’d break even on the cost and would still get years of free power. But under the new system his break even point would be 18 years or more so now he doesn’t see the point”

    If this is true, some will still see the cost benefit, besides the climate and environmental benefits.

    Interesting that a California con invested in solar.

14. I’m going to be honest and say that this source is slightly problematic. For one thing, this is still open for public comment and discussion, also any fixed charges also comes with a reduction in electricity rates. It also looks like the income based proposal is dead in the water and the rules are not set to go into effect until late 2025 and early 2026.

    “This fixed-charge proposal will now be open to comment before the CPUC decides either to approve it or alter it. If approved, it would start going into effect for Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric in 2025 and for Pacific Gas & Electric in 2026.”

    https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/utilities/california-regulator-takes-income-based-electric-bills-off-the-table

    ” The proposal would cut the usage rate by 5 to 7 cents per kilowatt hour, making electricity
    cheaper.”

    “In the CPUC proposal, the CPUC recommends a flat rate of $24.15 per month, which would reduce the
    price of a unit of electricity by 5 to 7 cents per kilowatt hour.”

    **• No Income Verification Required.** The proposal does not require any customer to verify their income. Existing programs like CARE and FERA already establish income eligibility through enrollment in programs like MediCal and SNAP or through a voluntary income self-attestation process followed by audits.

    • All Customers Included. All residential customers, including those with rooftop solar, will transition to flat rates. Rooftop solar customers consistently rely on grid infrastructure. They draw electricity
    from the grid and send electricity back to the grid throughout the day to balance their usage with
    intermittent solar production. Additionally, they need grid support to meet energy needs during
    nighttime or when solar panels are not generating power.

    • No Profit Increase for IOUs. The proposal ensures that utilities **cannot increase the costs they collect or make any profit.** Instead, it redistributes costs associated with running the electrical grid in a more
    equitable manner on customer bills.”

    [Actual proposal](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/-/media/cpuc-website/divisions/energy-division/documents/demand-response/demand-flexibility-oir/ab205-pd-032724.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjI6v-GzMSFAxWELtAFHZTyD3kQFnoECDkQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2nhj_H3748XGk-PD-AbFMt)