SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the what-sunny-state-will-be-next dept.
The Center for American Progress reports
Solar power could soon be flourishing [in] the Sunshine State. [On October 22,] the Florida Supreme Court approved [PDF] an initiative for the 2016 ballot that would allow Floridians to vote to reduce the state's restrictions on rooftop solar power.
Although solar is growing exponentially nationwide, it has not thrived in Florida. Florida is one of a handful of states that prohibit residents from purchasing electricity from a source other than an electric utility. This has locked out third-party solar rooftop companies, such as SolarCity and SunRun, which install rooftop solar panels on a customer's property at no cost and sell solar-generated power to that customer at a reduced electric rate.
As ThinkProgress previously reported, a coalition of solar advocates called Floridians for Solar Choice has been leading the effort to change this policy by pursuing a ballot initiative to permit third-party financing for rooftop solar by private companies. To get the initiative on the ballot, Florida required the coalition to first collect 68,314 voter signatures and then have the initiative language approved by the state Supreme Court.
On [October 22], the ballot initiative cleared this major hurdle when the Florida Supreme Court approved the "Solar Choice Amendment" for the November 2016 ballot. Advocates now have to collect the requisite 683,149 signatures to ensure the initiative goes on the ballot. It will then have to pass with 60 percent of the vote in 2016.
[...] In 2008, the Florida [Public Service Commission--the state body responsible for regulating electricity--]released a report saying that rooftop solar alone had the potential to generate nearly 100 times [the current 530 MW derived from renewables in Florida]. [PDF]
Meanwhile, "public servant" Pam Bondi, Florida's Attorney General, continues to fight on multiple fronts to block renewables.
(Score: 3, Informative) by mmcmonster on Saturday October 24 2015, @04:28PM
Exactly.
The outlay on a solar setup maybe $20k or more. If you have that much to spare (or can get the home equity loan to cover it), then fantastic. It's definitely worth it rather than going to Solar City route.
But most people can't tie up that much money for a decade to recoup the outlay.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Hyperturtle on Saturday October 24 2015, @05:52PM
And this is why those with money are able to keep their money, invest their money, and otherwise, gain the benefits of having their money.
The poor get to lease what the rich get to own, and thus control.
Of course. I fool myself about of lot of things I think I control, too, but this is a pretty clear cut case of who owns what and how the economies related to it work.
I agree with Runaway, though--I would want to own them even if the payback takes a long time. I am patient, if not wealthy enough to exercise such patience.
(Score: 2) by mmcmonster on Saturday October 24 2015, @06:18PM
And this is why those with money are able to keep their money, invest their money, and otherwise, gain the benefits of having their money.
But what I am describing isn't control. It's human nature.
It's human nature to avoid the large initial outlay for a benefit you'll get a decade in the future (deferred pleasure).
Those that want to buy the solar panels outright are welcome to do so under current Florida law (apparently). It's the "lease with option to buy" which is outlawed.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by frojack on Saturday October 24 2015, @08:00PM
No, its not lease with option to buy that is outlawed. That would be perfectly ok in Florida if the contract was written that way.
If they sold you the equipment on an installment plan, that would be fine too.
But these companies are selling electricity by the KWH.
Electricity is just dangerous enough that its sale and distribution is regulated in every single state in the union, and every Canadian province.
Some of these companies have developed a way to end-run just about all regulation other than the Electrical Code.
Florida law only allows a few utilities such as Florida Power & Light, Duke Energy and Tampa Electric to sell power directly to consumers. If a solar power generator wants to get into the state market, it must first sell to one of those utilities. This applies to wind turbines, private generation plants, and also commercial solar farms. They all have to sell to the grid operators rather than directly to consumers.
There are several big-companies in this Install-on-your-roof-for-free business in many states. They aren't selling solar systems, they are selling Electricity by the KWH. The homeowner never owns the equipment. The power never flows over the grid. (In most cases the houses still need or have a grid inter-tie.)
The state is trying to prevent these companies from doing business in Florida with that business model. Probably at the behest of the large gird operators.
But you shouldn't assume all of the lobbying against the state regulations is "grass roots" either. There is a lot going on behind the scenes here.
Companies like SunSolar [sunsolarus.com] are pretty circumspect about how and who you pay for your electricity, and what happens when you decide to sell your home.
And abuses of this model [newsmax.com] are common. [dailycaller.com]
Removing the prohibition of this business model had better come with some consumer protection or there will be a lot of pissed off customers down the line.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 26 2015, @02:01AM
This is one scam that Florida doesn't currently have. Good. Let's keep it that way.
The law should change in just a few ways for solar. First, providing a bit of fairness, retail electrical bills need to split the grid maintenance costs out. Everybody hooked up to the grid should be paying that, and it shouldn't depend on power usage. Power usage should be billed separately. Second, homeowner associations should have no ability to restrict solar. Florida does at least keep them from 100% banning solar, but really they should have no say at all.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Phoenix666 on Saturday October 24 2015, @07:28PM
$20K? Not necessarily. Installation costs are falling swiftly, which has become the higher cost barrier than the panels themselves. The panels you can get wholesale [wholesalesolar.com] at ~$1/watt. The site I linked to has pallets of 20 Astronergy 315W panels for $5670. My family uses below 300kwh/month, so I'd need 8-9 panels in NYC, which has an insolation (calculated hours of maximum solar production per day) of 4. In NYC we pay ConEd $0.35/kwh, or $1260/yr. That would put our break-even at 2 years if we installed the panels ourselves, or 4-5 years if we pay someone to do it. The panels are rated to last 30 years. So that's a savings of $31,500 over the lifetime of the panels, assuming grid electricity costs stayed constant (though they've been growing something like 10%/yr for the last decade).
And people get loans that size to renovate their bathrooms, buy trucks and lots of other stuff all the time. Why wouldn't you do something that would save you that much money? Plus, as demand destruction accelerates and the utilities jack up their rates even more to maintain their margins, you won't get stuck holding the bag. If you switch to an EV, too, then you'll be 100% energy independent.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday October 24 2015, @08:14PM
Exactly.
The installed cost is falling every day, and locking yourself into a long term payment plan by the KWH seems sort of silly at this time.
Even if you assume a 20 year fixed KWH price from one of these "Your-Roof, Our-System" operators you still are locked into a price in a falling price market.
And if someone else owns the equipment on your house, that means your title to your house is encumbered. You may well find you have to pay off
the system just to sell your house [newsmax.com].
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 24 2015, @09:01PM
> you still are locked into a price in a falling price market.
lolwut?
At best residential fees for centralized power never drop more than a few percent even when oil prices have halved. Factor in inflation and the fixed price solar contract is the one with a falling price, not the utility.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 24 2015, @09:51PM
Except you'd never see those falling prices because you'd be locked into paying whatever price was determined when the contract was signed. Are you really so naive that you think they'd let anybody sign a contract that wouldn't have the falling prices increase their profit margin?
(Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday October 24 2015, @11:14PM
The price of solar is falling daily.
But if you sign a contract with one of these "Your Roof, Our Power" solar companies you will never see that drop.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 26 2015, @04:38AM
> The price of solar is falling daily.
> But if you sign a contract with one of these "Your Roof, Our Power" solar companies you will never see that drop.
Duh! Same thing if you bought it outright too. Come on man...
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Sunday October 25 2015, @12:30PM
No doubt the solar installer business gets big discounts. Perhaps because they are also the manufacturer, they can obtain solar panels at or near cost. Their labor is much cheaper too, especially if they engage in a little wage theft. If the homeowners go the ownership route they have to pay a big, and probably excessive markup.
It's like home security. All these security businesses are eager give equipment away (free installation!) as long as they get you hooked on the monthly monitoring plan. But try to find a different deal, where you do the monitoring, no need for a service, and you have to hunt. They all also try to convince you that self-monitoring is a huge burden, does not work, etc. As if it is so hard for an open door or window notification to be texted or tweeted to you when it happens, and then you can take a look through your security cameras and decide whether to call 911.