Net metering is a tiny subsidy for the homeowner (its similair to the home mortgage and property tax deductions).
The power company is trying to make this subsidy less attractive by forcing a larger initial outlay of investment $.
The congess in the state in question has already expressed its intent to encourage investment in this area by creating this defacto subsidy. A better comprimize would be to pay those who generate more power than they consume over the course of a year a slightly lower than retail price for their excess power generation. In that way, the vast majority of small producers would still get their net metering advantage while the larger producers would recieve a slightly reduced subsidy, but still a subsidy none the less.
It sounds like the net metering bill may have been poorly written in the first place to not have considered these possibilities (suprise)!
Scott Evil
Current Events » in reply to Under other circumstances, it would be almost "bait and switch."
The problem with that is that it will still enable the power company to discourage others from producing their own power.
The whole thread (52 posts)
- Xcel Energy's threat to residential photovoltaic systems.
- Update
- That is a bad deal and a blatant attempt to end run the law
- Man, you got us fired up! (n/t)
- BTW...
- A good letter to the commissioners, but not for the public.
- Good luck
- Under other circumstances, it would be almost "bait and switch."
- Go get 'em!
- re: It sounds like they are trying to get around the rules concerning net metering...
- my solution.