Andy Alfaro / Bee file, 2011

Student housing at UC Davis' West Village uses rooftop solar panels and other energy-saving innovations that reduce the utility bill.

0 comments | Print

Editorial: Solar bill warrants legislative support

Published: Wednesday, Aug. 29, 2012 - 12:00 am | Page 16A
Last Modified: Wednesday, Aug. 29, 2012 - 7:31 pm

Well-thought out legislation to create midsized solar energy systems at the community level faces intense opposition from two of California's behemoths, PG&E and Southern California Edison.

Senate Bill 843 by Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis, has backing from several cities and school districts including Davis and its schools, environmental groups, numerous green energy producers and the U.S. Department of Defense, which is under an Obama administration mandate to increase its use of alternative fuels.

But the bill languishes as the legislative session comes to its conclusion this week. The question for the Legislature is straightforward: Does it want to make solar energy available to all residents of the state at reasonable prices, or does it want to side with the utilities, which worry about more change to their business model?

As it stands, many residents do install rooftop panels for good reason. People who don't directly participate include renters, apartment house owners, homeowners who have large trees that block the sun, and individuals who don't have adequate credit needed to qualify for the financing.

Under the community solar concept, those residents would be able to contract for power from companies operating midsize arrays. They'd get something of a price break, and help the state wean itself from traditional sources of power.

Utilities view residential rooftop solar panels as less than efficient, arguing that ratepayers who don't use solar subsidize ratepayers who do. Now, PG&E and Southern California Edison are making similar arguments against community solar, though, importantly, San Diego Gas & Electric is supporting Wolk's bill.

Wolk has made an important concession, agreeing to permit the California Public Utilities Commission to sort out details if SB 843 becomes law. That means PG&E and Edison could make their case to commissioners who know about electricity. If the PUC determines that the program is not working as anticipated, the commission could alter it.

PG&E and Edison are lobbying powerhouses and major players in campaigns in California.

On its own, PG&E handed out $1.2 million to California candidates and political parties in the first half of 2012, and spent an eye-popping $108 million on California campaigns since 2000.

The lines in this fight are clear. Will the Democratically controlled Legislature side with the Obama administration's Defense Department, environmentalists, local governments and many consumer advocates, or will the Democrats side with the utilities?

© Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved.

Read more articles by the Editorial Board



About Comments

Reader comments on Sacbee.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Sacramento Bee. If you see an objectionable comment, click the "Report Abuse" link below it. We will delete comments containing inappropriate links, obscenities, hate speech, and personal attacks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. See more about comments here.

What You Should Know About Comments on Sacbee.com

Sacbee.com is happy to provide a forum for reader interaction, discussion, feedback and reaction to our stories. However, we reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments or ban users who can't play nice. (See our full terms of service here.)

Here are some rules of the road:

• Keep your comments civil. Don't insult one another or the subjects of our articles. If you think a comment violates our guidelines click the "Report Abuse" link to notify the moderators. Responding to the comment will only encourage bad behavior.

• Don't use profanities, vulgarities or hate speech. This is a general interest news site. Sometimes, there are children present. Don't say anything in a way you wouldn't want your own child to hear.

• Do not attack other users; focus your comments on issues, not individuals.

• Stay on topic. Only post comments relevant to the article at hand.

• Do not copy and paste outside material into the comment box.

• Don't repeat the same comment over and over. We heard you the first time.

• Do not use the commenting system for advertising. That's spam and it isn't allowed.

• Don't use all capital letters. That's akin to yelling and not appreciated by the audience.

• Don't flag other users' comments just because you don't agree with their point of view. Please only flag comments that violate these guidelines.

You should also know that The Sacramento Bee does not screen comments before they are posted. You are more likely to see inappropriate comments before our staff does, so we ask that you click the "Report Abuse" link to submit those comments for moderator review. You also may notify us via email at feedback@sacbee.com. Note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us the profile name of the user who made the comment. Remember, comment moderation is subjective. You may find some material objectionable that we won't and vice versa.

If you submit a comment, the user name of your account will appear along with it. Users cannot remove their own comments once they have submitted them.

hide comments
Sacramento Bee Job listing powered by Careerbuilder.com
Quick Job Search
Buy
Used Cars
Dealer and private-party ads
Make:

Model:

Price Range:
to
Search within:
miles of ZIP

Advanced Search | 1982 & Older



Find 'n' Save Daily DealGet the Deal!

Local Deals