Sunny Nevada Just Killed the Solar Industry with 40% Tax Hike, Derailing the Off-Grid Movement.

[elleng]

Nevada regulators and NV Energy are conspiring to push solar energy competition out of their state.


'While Nevadans were celebrating the holidays under solar-powered lights, the Nevada Public Utilities Commission (PUC) voted unanimously to increase a monthly fee on solar customers by 40% while reducing the amount they get paid for excess power sold to the grid. Adding insult to injury, they made the rate changes retroactive, sabotaging consumer investments in solar energy.

This single move by government regulators will effectively kill the solar industry in Nevada and put an end to the surge of people seeking to detach from the grid by harnessing their own energy from the sun. Just as importantly, it serves to protect the profits of Nevada’s public utility company, NV Energy.

“It will destroy the rooftop solar industry in one of the states with the most sunshine…There is so much wrong with the decision,” said SolarCity CEO Lydon Rive. “The one beneficiary of this decision would be NV Energy, whose monopoly will have been protected.”

Two major solar companies, SolarCity and Sunrun, have already left the state, causing upwards of a thousand job cuts. Many more renewable energy jobs are at stake. Solar industry supporters and workers are planning to protest the new rates at a rally in Carson City and Las Vegas, as industry and public outcry may force regulators to reconsider their decision.

One Nevada resident wrote in the Las Vegas Sun that she feels “financially ambushed” after tapping into their retirement savings to become a solar household. Before the rate change, the system would have paid for itself in 14 years, but now that will never happen.'>>>

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/sunny-nevada-set-kill-solar-industry-40-tax-hike-derail-off-grid-movement/

(Sorry that 'old' news.)

[still_one]

1. Do voters have any recourse?

[Wilms]

2. Vote for Bernie.

[still_one]

3. I was talking about the state level in Nevada

[Ilsa]

4. Protecting monopolies sounds like a Republican

Tactic. I hope no Democrats voted this way. They killed a clean industry in their state.

Can someone sue them for this arbitrary decision, or do resonable people need to take over their legislature?

[Hortensis]

8. Absolutely. And when the GOP does

approve solar, all the energy produced at our own homes, even with our own solar panels, if rhe home is connected to the grid would belong to a commercial enterprise, not to us.

Power supply would be an excellent project for socialization. Even if left commercialized, home power generation should be purchasef for the power grid from the homeowners. Only Democrats will see to that.

We are not labor to be worked and consumers to be milked. We are citizens and, one way or another, we will be making this decision ourselves: either wisely and deliberately or very foolishly through neglect and default to the locusts. In which case, delete the first sentence.

[nxylas]

5. It'll be interesting to see conservatives trying to defend this

On paper, the off-grid movement ought to appeal to them, since they're supposed to be in favour of self-reliance. But of course in reality, fealty to the Kochs is the one overriding principle of modern movement conservatism, so they'll be obliged to pretend that it's saving America from the socialist fascist muslim hippies.

[Yo_Mama]

17. This is not about off-grid, but about on-grid. Solar was being subsidized by non-solar customers.

Off-grid there are no fees.

I would think that for those who can afford it, this would encourage going off-grid.

[bananas]

6. "casinos and businesses is looking to leave NV Energy’s grid and start generating their own power"

“A consortium of casinos and businesses is looking to leave NV Energy’s grid and start generating their own power, saying they’re being placed at a competitive disadvantage because they’re paying more for energy than their business rivals in nearby states. The state Public Utilities Commission has said it would charge hefty fees — $27 million in the case of Las Vegas data center Switch — to let industrial ratepayers leave the system.”

[Delver Rootnose]

7. Isn't this the one warren buffet,

.a huge Hillary supporter push for because of his investments.

Another example of the rich getting what they want above the people or the environment.

[randr]

10. Actually it is the Koch brothers who are fighting to end

the growth of the solar industry.

[bananas]

13. Yes, mentioned in the article, with embedded links

NV Energy—a regulated monopoly with an “authorized rate of return”—is unabashed in saying that the surge in renewable energy is cutting into their profits. Last year the company, owned by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, got Sen. Patricia Farley to draft the amendment that shifted the state’s net metering over to the PUC. In their view, solar customers “don’t pay their fair share to maintain the grid.”

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

9. Question... Can't they go off the grid entirely?

You can't be charged a 'fee' if you're not even a customer, no?

Yes, it means more hassle in terms of battery storage and so on, but if you've already invested a lot in a system, I'd think it would make more sense to invest a bit more than to simply give up and turn off your system to avoid paying onerous 'fees'.

[Yo_Mama]

19. Yes, of course, but it is more costly, and prob. most people don't want to do it.

Effectively, solar was being subsidized before. When you go off-grid you don't get the subsidy and of course you need more equipment and more solar panels, so the math changes.

But over the long term, this type of change is necessary for solar power to mature as a tech.

[Enthusiast]

11. This is fucking sickening.

[mhatrw]

12. How in the hell can they get away with this?

Who appointed those bastards?

[cprise]

14. Derailing Off-grid? I don't think so

If anything, this could increase the number of people opting for off-grid solar.

[Yo_Mama]

16. Yes - if you don't like the fees, go off-grid.

I guess the reporter doesn't know that off-grid is!!!

[cprise]

18. Temporary loss for Solarcity, but a gain for Tesla. n/t

[Yo_Mama]

15. The fees don't affect those who are truly off-grid. They affect only those who use the utility co.

The problem is that for many people, the solar systems don't pay to go off-grid. By the time you factor in batteries and all that, the math doesn't work.