PG&E opposes solar bills

Though likely the country's leading utility on renewables and efficiency, PG&E is not always constructive as shown by their opposition to a pair of promising bills in the state legislature.

For consumers who might be considering a solar system, the bills enhance one of the most attractive financial benefits of making such a move: the opportunity to sell excess power back to their electric utility.

Assembly Bill 560 would increase the cap on "net metering," which gives solar customers credit on their electric bill for surplus power they transfer to the utility. Currently, a utility is not obligated to sign net-metering contracts once solar power equals 2.5 percent of its peak electricity demand, a level PG&E is approaching. AB 560 would quadruple that cap, to 10 percent.

The second bill, AB 920, would change the way customers with solar installations are paid for surplus power. Utilities now give them full retail rate credit on their monthly bill that can be used to offset the customer's energy consumption at other times, like nighttime. But at the end of the year, leftover credits are zeroed out. AB 920 would require utilities to pay for credits or any electricity left over at the end of the year, although at a lower rate, or allow them to be rolled over to the next year.

Dan Kammen, professor in the Energy and Resources Group at University of California-Berkeley, said the bills will help open up competitive markets that favor low-carbon and clean energy, and help the state meet the goals of its landmark climate-change legislation.

But PG&E and other opponents contend the bills would impose a financial burden on non-solar customers, who pay for the state rebates for solar installations. And because solar customers buy less electricity from the utility, PG&E said they do not contribute as much to transmission and generation costs, increasing the burden of non-solar customers. So far, about 30,000 of the utility's 6 million customers have solar systems.

PG&E's counter-argument is a bit problematic as PG&E gets paid regardless of consumption level and the rebate incentives are not indefinite. It is much more likely that PG&E wants to not encourage decentralized power generation too much as it could ultimately threaten its business.