california public utilities commission
New Bill Seeks to Salvage Rooftop Solar for Working Class in California
"This is not a zero-sum game. We can't ignore our climate, the urgent need for energy justice, and the significant community benefits of rooftop solar and expect to have a fighting chance against climate change."
Backed by two climate action groups, Democratic state lawmakers in California on Tuesday launched an effort to reverse the damage done by state regulators last year when they slashed incentives for residents to install rooftop solar panels—wreaking havoc on the once-thriving industry even as the state faces an energy crisis.
Introduced by state Assemblymembers Laura Friedman (D-44) and Marc Berman (D-23), Assembly Bill 2256 would unwind the policy put in place last year by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), which was supported by the state's three investor-owned utilities and sharply reduced the amount utilities pay people with solar panels when they sell surplus power to the grid.
The policy applied to homeowners as well as renters in disadvantaged communities, and critics warned it would put solar panels even further out of reach for low- and middle-income Californians.
A.B. 2256, sponsored by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) and Environment California, would require the CPUC to "consider the wider community benefits of rooftop solar" in its policymaking, said CBD.
"This bill will force state regulators to stop shirking their duty and consider renewable energy's wide-ranging benefits so rooftop solar is available to everyone," said Roger Lin, a senior attorney at CBD. "The commission's decision to tank the state's rooftop solar policy was a gift to corporate utilities and a gut punch to communities and our environment. We're in a climate emergency, and it's reckless for the commission to ignore the harm fossil fuels do to our health and environment when it's making energy decisions."
Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group (EWG), said earlier this month that "rooftop only pencils out for the wealthy" under the CPUC policy, which has caused solar companies to lay off 17,000 workers in less than a year and pushed 75% of firms toward bankruptcy.
Rooftop solar power had "been making great strides in low-income communities," state Sen. Josh Becker (D-13) told the San Francisco Chronicle earlier this month, but "this [CPUC decision] makes it harder."
A.B. 2256 was introduced weeks after CBD, EWG, and the Protect Our Communities Foundation asked the California Supreme Court to overturn the CPUC policy following unsuccessful challenges at the commission and a state appeals court.
It also comes a day after Environment America Research & Policy Center and Frontier Group published a report marking the dramatic growth of rooftop solar nationwide over the past decade, with 10 times as much power produced in 2022 than 10 years prior.
California ranked as the state with the largest growth in small-scale solar generation, producing 24,121 gigawatt hours (GWh) in 2022—just before the CPUC policy was introduced. In 2012 the state produced just 2,453 GWh.
"Rooftop solar is good for the environment and consumers," reads the report. "It reduces our dependence on fossil fuels, eases strain on the grid during periods of high demand, can increase resilience to threats like extreme weather, and limits the amount of land needed for clean energy—all at steadily falling costs."
The California Air Resources Board suggested in 2022 that disincentivizing solar power for residents was the wrong direction for the state to go in, saying the state needed to double its rooftop solar to meet its target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions 40% by 2030.
"How can we weigh the costs and benefits of rooftop solar without considering all the benefits to our health, our neighbors, and what's left of our open spaces?" said Lin. "This is not a zero-sum game. We can't ignore our climate, the urgent need for energy justice, and the significant community benefits of rooftop solar and expect to have a fighting chance against climate change."
Rooftop Solar Champions Ask California Supreme Court to Reverse Corporate Giveaway
“The commission shrugged off California's climate goals, put rooftop solar's benefits further out of reach of working-class families, and gave another gift to corporate utilities," said one climate advocate.
Climate advocates on Monday asked the California Supreme Court to reverse a new rooftop solar panel policy in the state that the groups say has proven "irony is alive and well," as the policy is impeding the expansion of renewable energy in California just as regulators are calling for a solution to the state's energy crisis.
The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) approved a new solar policy last year at the urging of the state's three investor-owned utilities, led by Pacific Gas & Electric. The new rules slashed a solar power incentive for homeowners by about 75%, sharply reducing the amount utilities pay people with solar panels when they sell surplus power to the grid.
The "disastrous decision," made with the approval of three companies whose "only real competition" is customer-owned solar, said the Environmental Working Group (EWG), has reduced solar industry jobs by 17,000 in less than a year, and the group reported that "75% of California's once-thriving rooftop solar installation companies face a 'high risk' of bankruptcy."
A state appeals court upheld CPUC's new policy last month, leading EWG, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), and the Protect Our Communities Foundation (POCF) to bring the case to the state Supreme Court.
"California utility regulators shouldn't be untouchable and I'm hopeful the state's highest court will agree," said Roger Lin, a senior attorney at CBD. "The commission shrugged off California's climate goals, put rooftop solar's benefits further out of reach of working-class families, and gave another gift to corporate utilities."
Last month, Lin said, "the appeals court wrongly deferred to these state regulators. This sets a dangerous precedent of endorsing utility talking points and torpedoing an essential tool to fight the climate emergency and environmental injustice."
CBD noted that the California Court of Appeals ignored a state law that "requires the court to review the commission's decisions as it would those of any state agency."
The three-judge panel claimed there was "no basis for faulting the commission's work."
State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-11) said the state is "shooting itself in the foot" by following the guidance of utilities which have a financial interest in reducing solar energy even as the state promotes its ambitious climate goals.
As CalMattersreported last week, California's aim of transitioning to 90% carbon-free electricity by 2035 and 100% by 2045 requires a significant shift to solar power.
"The market is in the gutter," Bernadette Del Chiaro, executive director of the California Solar & Storage Association, told CalMatters. "It should be no surprise to anybody. If you are a business and your market took a 80% nosedive, with great pain, you have to lay off. Some companies shut their doors."
"We are talking about the largest solar market in the country," Del Chiaro added. "This was the most impactful energy decision, easily, for this century so far."
EWG accused California regulators of holding a "confused position" on energy sources, as the group is also challenging a separate decision by the state in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. In that case, EWG is joining Friends of the Earth and Mothers for Peace in arguing against extending operations for "the dangerous, outdated Diablo Canyon nuclear plant," which opponents say runs a safety risk as the plant as its reactors are on several earthquake fault lines.
In the Diablo Canyon case, said EWG, "California is arguing—apparently with zero self-awareness—that the state is in the midst of an energy crisis and needs to generate more electricity... Solar is one of the energy leading solutions, but California can't even seem to agree with itself on the right path forward."
In its state Supreme Court case launched on Monday, EWG said it was asking the court to review the CPUC's "failure to assess the far-reaching benefits of widespread customer-owned rooftop solar."
"Instead, in approving the utility's plan, the commission looked at a narrow set of economic factors only," said EWG. "We'll argue this violates the CPUC's duty under state law to look at a broader range of benefits."
The commission impeded the expansion of rooftop solar power in the state as climate scientists and energy experts have made clear that extreme weather events including wildfires—which have increasingly plagued California in recent years—are intensifying and growing more destructive as a result of continued fossil fuel extraction and planetary heating.
CalMatters reported that the loss of solar power jobs has also devastated communities that would have benefited from employment in the growing industry, which pays solar panel installers an average of $70,000 per year.
"These jobs have been a foot in the door for people who have been in the justice system; their lives have changed," said Adewale OgunBadejo, vice president of workforce development for the non-profit Grid Alternatives, told CalMatters. "This is 100% a job killer."
Caroline Leary, general counsel and chief operating officer at EWG, said it was "absurd" to leave "the destiny of California's clean energy aspirations and the battle against the climate crisis" up to the CPUC's five unelected members.
California Needs More, Not Less, Rooftop Solar
Rooftop solar installations in the state have plummeted by more than 80% just during the time between regulators’ approval of a plan slashing energy credits and the court’s ruling upholding it.
A legal fight in California could determine whether the state will meet its clean energy and climate goals—or whether power companies’ greed could prevent millions of hardworking residents from reaping the many benefits of rooftop solar.
On January 29, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) and two other environmental groups filed an appeal with California’s Supreme Court over a ruling that rubber-stamped the state’s misguided solar policy. Our appeal argues that the ruling bent over backward to uphold the policy, which state regulators approved following a request from California’s three largest utilities.
The policy, and the ruling upholding it, threaten the growth of affordable, renewable energy in California.
Experts say 75% of California’s once-thriving rooftop solar installation companies face a “high risk” of bankruptcy
And showing that irony is alive and well, the same utility regulators who approved the plan to impede solar power’s much-needed expansion are now arguing in unrelated litigation that California faces an electricity supply crisis and must generate more energy.
How do we meet that crisis? By finding ways to maximize, not minimize, a diversified energy portfolio with a heavy reliance on clean energy like solar and wind. California needs more, not less, rooftop solar to meet its goal of 100% clean energy by 2045.
But rooftop solar installations have plummeted by more than 80% just during the time between regulators’ approval of the plan and the court’s ruling upholding it.
Going Back to Court
At issue in the Supreme Court case is the three environmental group’s challenge to the solar policy approved last year by the California Public Utilities Commission, or CPUC. The state’s three investor-owned monopoly utilities, led by Pacific Gas & Electric, asked the commission to back its plan to hike fees for customer-owned solar—its only real competition.
The CPUC has long been effectively an extension of the utilities, almost always approving whatever rate increases, clean energy restrictions, and other obstacles they can dream up. And the utilities pursue these policies to protect and grow their profits, not to benefit captive ratepayers.
With solar, the CPUC signed off on the utilities’ plan to slash the credits rooftop solar owners could get from their electric company for the surplus energy they generate and sell back to the grid. The credits allowed households to lower their monthly electricity bills.
A key issue we’re asking the Supreme Court to review in our just-filed appeal is the CPUC’s failure to assess the far-reaching benefits of widespread customer-owned rooftop solar.
The decision immediately put the brakes on rooftop solar’s growth in the state, as EWG warned. Recent developments back us up. Experts say 75% of California’s once-thriving rooftop solar installation companies face a “high risk” of bankruptcy. At least 17,000 well-paid solar jobs have also been lost.
All of this is due to the CPUC’s disastrous decision.
EWG, the Center for Biological Diversity, and the Protect Our Communities Foundation sued in the California Court of Appeals over the CPUC’s approval of the plan. Oral arguments took place December 13, and the court upheld the plan.
Our Key Arguments
We think the appeals court deferred inappropriately to the CPUC’s decision and failed to acknowledge important legal steps that should have led to a rejection of the policy.
A key issue we’re asking the Supreme Court to review in our just-filed appeal is the CPUC’s failure to assess the far-reaching benefits of widespread customer-owned rooftop solar. Instead, in approving the utility’s plan, the commission looked at a narrow set of economic factors only. We’ll argue this violates the CPUC’s duty under state law to look at a broader range of benefits.
As adopted by the CPUC, the revised policy reduces by almost 75% the compensation that rooftop solar owners get for the clean power they generate. That’s a huge disincentive for other people to install solar and will further shrink the industry.
Solar is one of the leading energy solutions, but California can’t even seem to agree with itself on the right path forward.
The appeals court neglected to heed our warning that the CPUC also failed to meet a duty to consider the barriers facing would-be rooftop solar customers in disadvantaged communities, areas where people already struggle to pay sky-high utility bills.
California’s confused position
The CPUC, and therefore California, will defend the solar policy approval in the Supreme Court just as the state tries to call for a greater energy mix in a separate legal case.
EWG, Friends of the Earth, and Mothers for Peace have a lawsuit ongoing in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit challenging a separate decision by the state to extend the life of the dangerous, outdated Diablo Canyon nuclear plant. We believe that solar and other clean energy can make up for the electricity generation lost by shutting the plant.
In that lawsuit, California is arguing—apparently with zero self-awareness—that the state is in the midst of an energy crisis and needs to generate more electricity. Oral arguments in that case were held on January 10 and the court has not yet issued a decision.
Solar is one of the leading energy solutions, but California can’t even seem to agree with itself on the right path forward.If we’re successful in these two legal challenges, we can right the course of the state’s clean energy future.