Florida utilities spend $43 million to make case to limit rooftop solar

[HAB911]

Source: Tampa Bay Times

TALLAHASSEE — Lost in the tumultuous presidential election and the down-ballot fears, something big has been happening quietly in Florida this year: Electric companies have dropped $42.7 million into political campaigns.

Since January 2015, $20 million of the industry's profits went to finance and promote Amendment 1, the ballot initiative that attempts to frustrate the expansion of consumer-owned rooftop solar in Florida, but another $15 million more went to fuel the campaigns of a select group of powerful legislative leaders in an effort to prepare for a prolonged war against rooftop solar.

The bulk of the money is being used to promote Amendment 1 but, if that effort fails, the industry is also investing heavily into the Legislature to create favorable conditions in Florida, as utilities have in other states, to push back against the proliferation of rooftop solar.

In other states that effort has included attempts to make solar less economically feasible by reducing the amount the utility spends to reimburse customers for generating excess electricity to the grid through "net metering," imposing new fees on solar users and pre-empting local governments from opening the door to more solar competition.　

Read more: http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/florida-utilities-spend-35-million-to-make-case-to-limit-rooftop-solar/2300966?utm_source=TBT_email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daystarter

[florida08]

1. Exactly

We have been discussing it's benefits as well. Vote NO on the convoluted Amendment 1

[florida08]

4. another article

I read called it shady solar not smart solar. That's exactly what it is.

[putitinD]

2. why didn't they invest the 43 Million into rooftop solar?

[HAB911]

3. What pisses me off is it's OUR MONEY being used against us

[Paladin]

5. Sounds like you have every right to be pissed. (nt)

[Fritz Walter]

6. They're out to protect their profit margins, NOT the customers' rights

The list of utilities and fossil-fuel interests supporting passage of this amendment is interwoven with the tentacles of Koch Industries!

'nuff said!

[dicksmc3]

7. Which is better??

This is exactly what Missouri is doing with an amendment they have on the ballot for next week. Lobbyists and tobacco companies are trying to tell voters the amendment is not to be believed because the amendment takes the cigarette tax higher to pay for education and ONLY EDUCATION.. The lobbyists and cigarette manufacturers along with convenience store owners are all against it because they claim the money will be spent by shady legislators not on education. The way the thing is worded is really misleading.. Watch out in Florida for the same type of BS... Dirty pool IMO!!!

[Lochloosa]

9. Voted NO. Florida requires a 60% +1 Yes vote to pass.

I don't have much faith this won't pass. The wording on the ballot makes it sound like it's a good thing for solar. It's not.

[ohnoyoudidnt]

29. Also voted no.

There are a lot of people sharing articles about this on FB and local radio hosts are advocating against it (on the same stations where the commercials are promoting it). I saw one disgustingly deceptive commercial on tv supporting it, but nothing on tv to counter it.

Hopefully, enough people are aware how deceptive the wording is to reject it.

[wishstar]

10. They will try to include those payments in overhead to justify rate increases too

Without strong Attorney General and state regulators willing to stand up to them and look out for customers, power companies can get by with manipulating rate increases.

[allan01]

11. fuck these utilities that we prop up with public subsdies . they whine about the lack of generation

capacity and here it is . and i bet this concerted attack is alec orchastrated.

[The Wizard]

14. Florida remains a

Third World dictatorship.

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

15. Watch the first episode of "Years of Living Dangerously"...

It deals with solar energy and the battles we have in the US, meanwhile showing what India is doing to try to make the switch from coal to solar. They are way ahead of us in ideas and usage.

https://yearsoflivingdangerously.com/?gclid=COmgzcuSitACFdRtgQodGb8Dgg&gclsrc=ds

More in depth article and trailer for first episode.

https://www.republicreport.org/2016/years-of-living-dangerously-solar-florida/

Article about the solar industry from Nevada who had a booming solar industry.

http://www.npr.org/2016/03/11/470097580/nevada-solar-power-business-struggles-to-keep-the-lights-on

Just more corporate battle tactics to keep them wealthy and us suffering.

[florida08]

22. watched that with David Letterman

and then Before the Flood with DeCaprio. Both were very well done and exposed Rick Scott and republicans denying climate change. What can you say about Inhofe? I have no words.

[nashville_brook]

16. the proposal makes it illegal to produce energy and sell it back to utilities

this is the model that makes rooftop solar viable everywhere b/c it means that all the rooftops *work together* to increase power for the entire grid, AND it brings the cost down for consumers. Florida Power and Light, and Duke Energy are mortally threatened by this.

by all rights, Florida should have a TVA-style solar generation project that would lower costs, decrease emissions and secure our grid.

[Nitram]

17. I'm a very strong supporter of solar energy. But a friend who has studied the topic points out...

...that if middle income and higher income people all install solar panels on their roofs, electricity rates for lower income people will have to go up. Just like health insurance, if fewer people are paying a utility for power, the price goes up.

[mahina]

24. While true, that's not a reason to refrain from installing.

There are lots of ways to fund low income installations.

[TexasBushwhacker]

18. All utilities should be publicly owned

The situation in Florida is a great example of why. If the electric company had a bit of foresight, they would realize that as people install rooftop solar, the demand on the power grid would be less, especially during peak hours. That lessens the need for costly expansions in the future.

[freebrew]

19. Absolutely...

seems as if there was a time when we were on that road.
There was much better regulation of utilities BR(before reagan).

Now, it seems like the whole nation is up for auction.
Water companies, road repair even NASA. For sale.
Even your property if some rich guy wants it bad enough.
Whether you like it or not.

[TexasBushwhacker]

31. In Austin, they'll give you a $85 rebate if you have a Nest Thermostat

or any other smart thermostat. All you to do is allow them to adjust your thermostat up to 4 degrees during peak demand. There's no obligation. You can drop out of the program at any time.

[ronnie624]

20. Capitalists have a moral imperative to profit from the earth's resources and human labor.

Even if it means destroying our biosphere.

And that's that.

[Judi Lynn]

27. Unrelentingly sleazy. They are not friends of the human race, nor the planet itself. n/t

[ronnie624]

30. I can't think of anything more illogical

or more at odds with a fundamental sense of justice. The capitalist theology, in my opinion, is about as rational as creationism.

[mahina]

25. Agree all utilities should be community owned!

[whistler162]

23. reduce any rate increase by $86 million

[HAB911]

26. Solar advocates file suit to block 'misleading' Amendment 1

TALLAHASSEE — Using new information that came from a leaked audio recording, solar industry advocates on Wednesday filed two legal actions aimed at asking the Florida Supreme Court to disqualify the outcome of Amendment 1 voting because of revelations they claim are proof that Florida's electric utility industry intentionally attempted to deceive voters.

The lawsuits, filed by the Florida Solar Energy Industries Association and Floridians for Solar Choice, the pro-solar political committee opposing the amendment, ask the court to reopen the case involving the ballot language used in the proposed Amendment 1 on the Nov. 8 ballot and declare it unconstitutionally misleading.

Proponents of the amendment, the utility-backed Consumers for Smart Solar, intentionally "withheld relevant and material information as to the objective and intended purpose of the amendment, and thereby misled this Court (and is now misleading the public) as to the adequacy of the ballot title and summary presented to the voters," the groups allege in their emergency lawsuit.

They cite a report by the Tampa Bay Times/Miami Herald that quotes Sal Nuzzo, the policy director and vice president at Tallahassee think tank supported by the utility industry, calling Amendment 1 "an incredibly savvy maneuver" that attempts to deceive voters into supporting restrictions on the expansion of solar by shrouding it as a pro-solar amendment.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/solar-advocates-file-suit-to-block-misleading-amendment-1/2301102

[mitch96]

28. FPL/DUKE don't want to block solar they want to control it

I was riding in West Virginia years ago.. Came upon a huge (yuuugge) wind farm.. Every on of the windmills had FPL plastered on the side.. A cheap source of energy would benefit their bottom line.. Of course they would not lower the price to consumers...
The Documentary was great btw..
m