Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

California

Showing Original Post only (View all)

usonian

(14,984 posts)
Sat Apr 13, 2024, 12:26 AM Apr 2024

California Supreme Court to review rooftop solar net metering [View all]

The state’s highest court granted review to a lawsuit challenging a “regressive” rooftop solar policy called NEM 3.0.

https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2024/04/11/california-supreme-court-to-review-rooftop-solar-net-metering/

A controversial rooftop solar rulemaking decision has risen to the Supreme Court of California, with the state’s highest court granting review for a petition filed by the Center for Biological Diversity.

The case involves NEM 3.0, a rate structure that went into effect in April 2023. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) approved a request by the state’s largest investor-owned utilities to cut compensation to customers that export excess solar generation to the grid, a process called net energy metering.

Net metering rates were rapidly cut by 80% under NEM 3.0. This change, combined with a high interest rate environment, has pushed the state’s robust rooftop solar industry off a cliff, damaging the return on investment for homeowners, and leading to more than 17,000 solar jobs lost, demand falling 80% post-implementation, and numerous companies filing for bankruptcy.

“The commission’s new rooftop solar policy enables the utilities’ self-interested attack on rooftop solar,” said Bill Powers, an energy expert with The Protect Our Communities Foundation. “The real problem is heedless pursuit of maximum profit by the utilities at the expense of reasonable rates and commonsense climate action.”


At issue:

did the Commission fail to proceed in the manner required by section 2827.1(b)(3), which mandates that a net energy metering tariff must be ‘based on the costs and benefits of the renewable electrical generation facility?’”

You've got three guesses. Hint:
✅ Yes
✅ Yes
✅ Yes

(IMNSHO)

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Latest Discussions»Region Forums»California»California Supreme Court ...»Reply #0