Putting the Potential Rate Impacts of Distributed Solar into Context

Renewable energy policy design and framing influence public support in the United States

“…Such a large change in residential electricity costs would not happen immediately from new RPS policies-it would take many years. [27] Still, this finding suggests that citizens are very sensitive to cost frames, and it is in line with findings from other public opinion poll questions that emphasize costs. [25] Asking citizens, through residential rate increases, to bear the costs of transitioning the electricity system may lead to a backlash as these costs add up over the longer term.…”

“…It is important to note that such a large monthly increase is very unlikely in the short term. [27] Still, if RPS policies are accurately or inaccurately blamed for rising utility bills, this will undermine public support.…”

Was it worthwhile? Where have the benefits of rooftop solar photovoltaic generation exceeded the cost?

“…Because they are skewed towards the better-off, they raise questions of equity as well as effectiveness. The cross subsidy-paying rooftop solar PV owners a price higher than the LMP for surplus electricity sold back to the grid-would increase the price of electricity for the vast majority of ratepayers, although recent analysis suggests that this effect is (and will likely remain) quite small [48]. Our analysis lends support to regulatory initiatives that more closely match the value of electricity at a particular time and place to the compensation offered distributed generators, while also expanding access across socioeconomic strata (e.g.…”

Evolving Grid Services, Products, and Market Opportunities for Regulated Electric Utilities

“…Utilities have expressed concerns about over-compensating DG (EEI, 2016) along with potential financial impacts on achieved earnings and return-on-equity (Satchwell et al, 2014). As a related motivation, regulators and consumer advocates note potential cost shifting from DG owners (i.e., participants) to non-participating customers, which could be mitigated or removed entirely with DG compensation reforms (Barbose, 2017;Satchwell et al, 2017). The potential for and degree of cost shifting depends in large part on underlying retail rate design (e.g., California NEM study) and ability of net-metered DG to contribute to meeting RPS targets (e.g., Nevada NEM study), among other factors.…”