Republicans Revolt as Arizona’s Utility Proposes Cut in Solar Programs

[kristopher]

Those who read EE regularly know I'm of the opinion that a tipping point in 'winners and losers' is fast approaching in the energy sector as renewable 'winners' begin to outweigh (in a political and economic sense) the entrenched system's heavy hitters. I'm not sure that's what we have here, but it certainly has the appearance of that being the case.

Republicans Revolt as Arizona’s Utility Proposes Cut in Solar Programs
“That’s not the conservative way and it’s not the American way.”
HERMAN K. TRABISH: APRIL 18, 2013

As Greentech Media heads to Phoenix for its annual Solar Summit, April 22-24, it will find an Arizona solar industry in bipartisan tumult. Arizona Public Service (APS), the state’s dominant investor-owned utility, proposed doing away with the Arizona renewables standard (RES) distributed generation (DG) carve-out and net metering.

“APS was ordered to address how it would comply with the RES rules if direct cash incentives were no longer available and it no longer received Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) from customers,” an APS representative testified to the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC), which regulates the state’s utilities. “APS proposes to track the energy produced...[but] there would no longer be a requirement that affected utilities acquire a particular amount of RECs.”

“They view the recent election of an all-Republican ACC as an opportunity to kill the independent solar market in Arizona,” said Jason Rose, spokesperson for Tell Utilities Solar Won’t Be Killed (TUSK), a newly formed organization led by former Arizona Republican Congressman Barry Goldwater, Jr.

TUSK believes it would be “very un-Republican” to take energy choice away from Arizonans, Rose said.

"We have no greater resource than our sun,” Goldwater states on the TUSK website...

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Republicans-Revolt-As-Arizonas-Utility-Proposes-Cut-In-Solar-Programs?utm_source=Daily&utm_medium=Headline&utm_campaign=GTMDaily

[marybourg]

1. Huh?

"a newly formed organization led by former Arizona Republican Congressman Barry Goldwater, Jr."

[Demeter]

2. The Republicans are Revolting!

but you knew that

[immoderate]

3. Raises a good question about renewable energy systems.

If people have their own generators or panels, how do you maintain a grid for down times and non-producers?

--imm

[kristopher]

4. You don't. At least, not in the traditional sense.

The utilities are coming to realize that their role in a world of distributed renewables will be one of "topping off" local systems. This means they will be largely out of the business of generation and focused more on transmission and distribution via "smart" networks.

There has been a great deal of discussion on this topic on the forum lately; I expect there will be more. Keep checking in.

[immoderate]

5. Ah, homework...

Thanks.

--imm

[Yo_Mama]

6. Yes, there will be a lot

But for solar, at least, it is not a matter of "topping off". Solar contribution is nil for about half the day, so either there has to be massive energy storage/redistribution projects, which would then take the place of generation, or there would have to be something else to keep power on.

The issue for utilities now is really more that net metering leaves customers who are dependent on the grid paying nothing for grid maintenance and upgrades, which is an entirely different problem. If we want it, we have to pay for it.

Arizona has a very good profile for solar generation, so I assume that the solar base will continue to grow there.

[kristopher]

8. Why do you always repeat utility talking points?

Even the ones that you know are false?

Net metering is a steal for utilities. The average value underpays the solar owner by about $0.08/kwh because of the avoided costs of purchasing high value peaking power. Of course, that's the real issue - the high value peaking plants are all too often owned by the utility or an close affiliate of the utility and solar cuts into their revenue stream.

And we don't even have to go that far - the claim you make is absurd on its face since the profile to the utility is no different than people who make energy efficiency improvements in their homes or businesses.

[FBaggins]

11. Why do you repeat things that you know aren't true?

Ok... that was to get your attention, but it isn't far off.

It's only in certain areas where solar power replaces high-cost peaking power... and we both know that it can't be true for long. Take that DE scenario that you've been pushing. They overbuilt renewables so substantially (as I've told you for years that they must do - and you've denied) in order to get a decent percentage figure for the headline... that they are literally dumping huge amounts of power in normal days.

What's the value to a utility when they're already producing more than they can use? Zero.

This isn't far fetched... it's happening in Germany right now. Those exported kwhs when the wind is blowing and solar is peaking are awfully cheap. And home solar systems are peaking at the same time. The utilities are begging neighborhing countries to take the power off of their hands to keep the system stable... it most certainly isn't high-value peaking power.

In either of our ideal worlds 20-30-40 years from now... the peaking power will run exactly when renewables are not performing well... and it will be very expensive.

[kristopher]

12. You are back to making things up, Baggins.

The only people who think they've "overbuilt renewables" are those owning conventional sources of generation who stand to lose the value of their investment.

What you don't seem to understand is that the entire purpose of the German Energy Transition is to move AWAY from control of energy by large corporate entities. You think the world revolves on the future welfare of the utilities. You are wrong.

[phantom power]

7. If I know Goldwater...

he's like any other Republican -- 100% on board with any policy that involves the ability of private citizens and corporations to take money away from a public institution.

Goldwater, being a paleo-conservative, may also be genuinely interested in competition for its own sake, but a bunch of AZ conservatives talking about "competition" and the energy sector smells a lot like the 1980s utility deregulation scam warmed over with a bit of green-wash food coloring.

Currently, private solar is concentrated among (a) individuals with enough disposable income to afford it, and (b) companies that specialize in renting out the installations. So far as that goes, it aligns with the GOP policy of arranging for wealthy people and corporations to take money from the govt.

That may still leave them as useful allies for pro-solar advocates, but I would recommend a zero-trust policy for their motives.

[kristopher]

9. Specifically how does support for the policies in the OP

Accomplish the goals you attribute to those Republicans supporting solar?
I don't see how it meshes, so perhaps you could help me out.

[phantom power]

10. Actually, I got it reversed -- SRP is state owned, not APS

You'd think I could keep that straight, since I've used both.

APS is investor owned, so the particular GOP mischief I had in mind doesn't really apply.