California Assembly Bill 942 Revamps Rooftop Solar Framework

News Summary

California’s Assembly Bill 942 has been significantly amended to remove rooftop solar incentives amid public outcry. Originally targeting net metering changes for solar homeowners, the bill now focuses on improving consumer access to carbon credits. This shift, fueled by protests and public pressure, aims to reduce electricity costs for all Californians while addressing concerns about economic disparities between solar and non-solar customers. Ongoing discussions around related legislation may further impact rooftop solar policies in the state.

California Assembly Bill 942 Overhauls Rooftop Solar Incentives Amid Public Outcry

A contentious bill in California, Assembly Bill 942, has undergone significant amendments, effectively eliminating all references to rooftop solar incentives. Initially authored by Assemblymember Lisa Calderon, the bill sought to address concerns regarding the cost-shift of solar subsidies onto customers without solar energy systems. The reworked bill now focuses on enhancing consumer access to carbon credits rather than altering existing solar incentives.

In its original form, Assembly Bill 942 proposed that new property owners with rooftop solar systems would need to transition to a lower net metering tariff, a change that would negatively impact their agreements established by previous homeowners. This provision generated considerable public backlash, resulting in protests from both solar advocates and homeowners. A Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee meeting on July 15 marked a turning point, leading to substantial revisions that shifted the bill’s direction away from rooftop solar incentives.

Support for the amendments came from solar homeowners, particularly from individuals like Greg Sparks from Davis, who voiced approval of the changes that preserved protections for existing solar installations. Advocates for solar energy have attributed the success of the amendments to the amplified public pressure and increased participation in protests against the bill’s original intent, prompting several organizations to withdraw their opposition.

Bernadette Del Chiaro, a prominent figure in the Environmental Working Group of California, emphasized the significance of public dissent in shaping the legislative outcome. In defending the new direction of AB 942, Calderon stated that the intention was to reduce electricity costs for the majority of Californians, suggesting that the legislation aims to expand affordable energy access within the state.

With the amendments now in place, AB 942 is set to move forward to the Senate Appropriations Committee, where it may face additional revisions or the possibility of being stalled altogether. Despite the recent changes, the conversations surrounding rooftop solar and its implications are expected to persist, particularly as stakeholders monitor related legislation such as Senate Bill 710, which could provide benefits to solar installations.

A comprehensive analysis of earlier related legislation indicates that rooftop solar has contributed to significant economic disparities and cost burdens for non-solar customers across California. The older solar incentive structures, which have been in place since the mid-1990s, were created with the intention of promoting clean energy adoption. However, these systems have inadvertently led to rising costs for customers who do not participate in solar energy programs.

The advocacy community argues that extensive subsidies provided to solar-owning customers have unfairly shifted financial responsibilities, amounting to a staggering $8.5 billion last year, a burden carried by approximately 10 million non-solar customers statewide. The legislation is framed as essential in addressing long-term affordability concerns for all energy consumers within California.

Protests against AB 942 echoed sentiments from the solar industry, where advocates claimed that potential alterations to subsidy structures could adversely affect property values for homeowners invested in solar technologies. Additionally, Calderon has faced scrutiny regarding her previous employment with Southern California Edison, which has complicated public perceptions about her motivations for advancing the bill.

The developments surrounding AB 942 reflect a broader trend of regulatory shifts influencing the compensation structures for solar energy within California, further modifying how energy policies and practices are implemented in communities across the state. Stakeholders will continue to navigate this evolving landscape as the legislation advances.

Deeper Dive: News & Info About This Topic

• Sacramento Bee: Opinion Article
• Wikipedia: Rooftop Solar
• KTVU: California Bill on Solar Credits
• Google Search: California solar legislation
• ABC10: Rooftop Solar Changes
• Encyclopedia Britannica: Solar Energy
• Mercury News: Controversial Solar Bill
• Google News: California AB 942