Florida lawmakers continued to move forward Monday with key changes in rules for rooftop solar energy, drawing heavy opposition from the solar industry and environmental groups.
But as the House State Administration & Technology Appropriations Subcommittee approved the bill (HB 741), sponsor Lawrence McClure, R-Dover, said he is working on a proposed amendment to more gradually make the changes. He described that approach as taking a “glide path.”
“One could argue it (the bill) is too heavy-handed and too swift and doesn’t give rooftop solar the ability to adjust,” McClure said. “So I look forward to presenting that amendment.”
The issue, which has sparked a noisy fight throughout this year’s legislative session, deals with an otherwise wonky concept known as net metering. That involves the interplay between utilities and rooftop solar owners, including credits that utilities provide for electricity generated by rooftop solar systems.
McClure and other supporters of the bill contend that the state’s current rules result in people without rooftop solar systems subsidizing rooftop-solar owners. That argument stems, at least in part, because utilities continue to face overall costs of operating the electrical grid. Among the supporters of the bill are Florida Power & Light, which has run television ads calling for changes in net metering.
While McClure said his amendment will phase in proposed changes over a longer period of time, the bill will continue to be aimed at eliminating subsidies.
“The bottom line is rooftop solar, I believe, will be a part of our long-term solutions, but it cannot ride on the backs of the other ratepayers indefinitely,” McClure said.
But rooftop solar installation businesses argue the bill — at least before McClure proposes the amendment — would severely damage the industry. Also, opponents of the bill dispute that costs are being shifted to people who do not have rooftop solar systems.
“It’s predicated on the myth that solar customers in Florida right now are raising bills on (non-solar) Florida customers, and I can tell you that’s nonsense,” said George Cavros, an attorney for the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy. “It’s utter nonsense.”
Rep. Yvonne Hinson, a Gainesville Democrat who voted against the bill, said lawmakers “can ill afford to guess at this” and should take a deeper look at whether costs are being shifted.
“At this point, I think we need a study so we can know what the heck we are talking about,” Hinson said.
The Florida Public Service Commission in 2008 approved a net-metering rule, and the bill would direct the commission to make revisions, including ensuring that “public utility customers who own or lease renewable generation pay the full cost of electric service and are not cross-subsidized by the public utility’s general body of ratepayers.”
People who own rooftop solar systems are required to hook up to utility systems and are able to sell excess electricity and receive bill credits in return. Under the 2008 rule, monthly credits are provided at utilities’ retail rates. An important part of the bill would change that to providing the credits at what are known as “full avoided cost” rates, which could reduce the amounts going to rooftop solar owners.
As the rooftop solar industry has grown in recent years, similar debates have played out in other states. The industry contends it would be hurt by the potential Florida changes because homeowners would be less likely to see financial advantages of installing systems — a concern that a House staff analysis acknowledged.
“The bill may have an indeterminate negative impact on the revenues of private businesses that install customer-owned renewable generation systems, since customers may not purchase these systems if they cannot recoup as much of the costs through the new net metering rate design,” the analysis said.
McClure earlier made a change in the bill to allow people who have rooftop solar systems by the end of this year to keep the current net-metering rate design for 20 years. That would help people who have financed the systems.
While he did not go into extensive detail Monday, McClure indicated the upcoming amendment would phase in over a series of years the changes in rates used to determine credits. The House panel voted 9-6 along almost straight party lines to approve the bill, with Rep. Anthony Sabatini, R-Howey-in-the-Hills, joining Democrats in opposing it.
The bill needs approval from the House Commerce Committee before it could go to the full House. The Senate version (SB 1024) needs approval from the Rules Committee before it could go to the full Senate.
–Jim Saunders, News Service of Florida
Reader Interactions
Comments
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Alonzo says
If it is true people are helping pay for the solar panels and they don’t have solar it isn’t fair to them.
R. S. says
We should be encouraging solar solutions instead of building and maintaining potentially very dirty and downright lethal nuclear reactors in a flood-prone state. Florida Power and Light has a history of not shutting down cracked reactors. According to an article in the Tampa Bay Times of 2014, “St. Lucie’s owner, Florida Power & Light, the state’s largest utility, replaced the steam generators at its St. Lucie 2 plant in 2007, intending them to last until the plant’s license expired in 2043. Since then, more and more wear has developed on the thousands of thin alloy tubes inside the two steam generators.
By the last inspection in November 2012, the number grew to 3,745 tubes with 11,518 dents and wear indications. Almost all the active nuclear plants with replaced steam generators have less than a few hundred worn tubes.”
A building code specifying solar on each new home would be so much safer and saner for energy production. Let’s not forget that lethal nuclear waste is carted to Yucca Mountain, Shoshone holy ground, to keep on festering and poisoning for about another 20,000 years. And tritium is being released daily into the environment by all nuclear plants.
Dennis C Rathsam says
This is sorry way FPL to operate, and the morons that started this bill, should be hung! Since the invention of electricity, the consumer had to pay what ever the electric company wanted, then we got relief when the goverment figured out we were getting poorer & the companies were getting rich. Solar…the wave of the future, clean energy from the sun. Now FPL is complaining about our roof top pannels. These are greedy fools, that cant except change. At night I use FPL,s power, during the day I sell them power. If this bill passes, it will be a travesty. But if it does I will add pannels, buy Tesla,s battery packs and kiss FPL goodbye for ever.
E, ROBOT says
Look up environmental impact of disposing of solar panels before commenting about.
Percy's mother says
Thank you for your comment.
I would also like to add looking into the environmental impact of wind turbine blades, which don’t last forever. No one seems to think about the after effects. Old used wind turbine blades are also wreaking havoc on the environment. No one knows what to do with them.
Denali says
As for the ‘morons that started this bill’, take a good look at who they are and what initial follows their names. Most likely it is an R. They are in the pocket of FPL, the vacation rental folks, casinos and big sugar to mention a few. Hang ’em all as far as I am concerned. But I do remain curious as to how these morons got elected.
Don't Tase Me Bro says
“Should be hung” huh? Hang (or kill) the freely elected fellow Americans for even thinking of doing their sworn duties? Murder citizens for proposing something you disagree with? Does all this sound familiar? 1939 Germany or 2020 United States?
Mark says
At one time when not many homes or business’ had solar panels it was okay for the utilities to buy the excess electricity. For the past 10+ years as more and more homes and business’ use solar it may very well be time to phase out old programs. Not as FPL wants but maybe as a gradual phase out. As time goes on solar panels and batteries will become more affordable and getting our electricity the old fashion way (FPL) will go the way of whale oil.
Willyj says
As a current residential solar user both PV with battery storage and solar hot water I can assure you that was the best decision we ever made. Our main motivation to install solar packager on our home was for the pure peace of mind. NOT for a reduced power bill. We pay the same taxes, service charge, discretionary sales surtax (like to know what that’s all about) perhaps that needs to be explained in the bill as well. We pay the same rate for KWh used as the non solar customers pay. The KWh sold back to the utility for credit is definitely not the same rate purchased from the grid it’s far less.
Solar users only pay for what they use from the grid.
The author/ sponsors for this bill and the Senate companion bill is fundamentally flawed from the very beginning.
Build, Build, Build. Neighbors look around you. Soon all of these homes and businesses will need power ie hooked to the grid. A grid some day will be stressed to it limits. Has anyone ever heard of “brown outs” how about “load-shedding “ . How about the grid hacked for ransomed. Those with solar on their homes and businesses will not face those realities. Not to mention the storm on the horizon taking dead aim on the grid. When those realities come to fruition the power companies and lawmakers will be begging for the solar power from us little guys.
In closing if you want to really reduce your power shift to solar hot water. You’ll be amazed on how much KVa you’ll save off your power bill. Just that installed alone.
Neighbors be safe
BIG Neighbor says
Great point, peace of mind and resiliency are keys to the “avoided costs” discussion managing risk. Having a secondary distributed power capability is not exclusive to roof top and net metering. Although without financial incentives like net metering, market scale penetration of alternative energy solutions delays modernization and dulls any resemblance of a competitive edge we have globally. Exterior home and patio lighting systems can be reverse engineered to serve as collectors when a secondary electrical backup is needed and mobilized to be portable to take with you when changing locations. When talking costs, be realistic and demand microgrid proliferation on demand service capability at the local scale.