How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Existing law allows a customer of a utility provider (such as PG & E or SMUD) to sell solar power to the utility provider to offset the cost of his/her electric bill. This is referred to as “net-energy metering.”
If the customer produces enough solar power to cover their electrical use, the customer owes nothing on their bill at the end of the year. If the customer produces less solar power than the electricity consumed, at the end of the year the customer owes the utility provider money.
The problem, Wiggins said, is that a utility customer can also produce more solar power than they use, but the utility provider doesn't have to pay the customer anything at the end of the year.
While some will argue that was the deal made under the net-energy metering statutes, others will argue that it's not fair because the customer produced solar power when their utility company agreed to buy the power, but in the end, the customer/solar producer believes he/she didn't get paid.
“This is kind of like having frequent flyer miles that you can never cash out or use,” Wiggins said. “And it sends the wrong message to consumers about the importance of energy conservation.”
Her legislation, Senate Bill 7, requires utility providers to allow customers who produce their own solar power to roll over unused energy credits for up to two years.
Senate approval of SB 7 means the bill next heads to the Assembly for further consideration.
The measure is supported by, among others, Recolte Energy, California Farm Bureau Federation, City of Calistoga, City of Oakland, David Arthur Vineyards, Family Winemakers of California, Far Niente, Napa Valley Vintners, Peter A. & Vernice H. Gasser Foundation, Redwood Empire Chapter of the U.S. Green Building Council, Schramsberg, Sustainable Napa County, The Wine Institute and Vintage High School.
Also on June 3, the California Senate voted 26-7 to approve SB 542, another Wiggins bill,to encourage solar power installations and energy efficiency in apartments, commercial buildings, and manufactured homes, from which solar power opportunities have historically been excluded.
Senate approval means SB 542 next heads to the Assembly for further consideration. The bill is co-authored by Senator Tony Strickland (R-Thousand Oaks).
Since the 2000-2001 energy crisis, state policy has elevated energy efficiency measures as the highest priority activity for meeting California's energy needs. Energy efficiency is often cost effective, cheap, clean, and relatively quick to implement.
The California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) authorized substantial energy efficiency programs for the major investor-owned utilities for the period 2006-2008. This program was expected to produce $2.7 billion in net benefits, reducing customer bills. Moreover, these savings are the equivalent of avoiding three large power plants over the next three years, eliminating 3.4 million tons of carbon dioxide in 2008, equivalent to taking 650,000 cars off the road. For the 2009-2011 period, the PUC has adopted slightly more ambitious goals.
Renters make up about 43 percent of California households. As a consequence, Wiggins said, “the incentives for energy efficiency, and solar power, aren’t cost effective for either the tenant, or the landlord, in many instances.”
Her bill requires the PUC to address these issues and barriers, so that all ratepayers who pay into the state’s solar initiative and energy efficiency programs can benefit from the programs. SB 542 also seeks to eliminate barriers for installation of solar on manufactured homes by requiring the PUC to inform installers about permitting processes.
