In the spirit of "Know thy Enemy" I am posting this link to an interview from Fortune with the NV regulator, Chairman Thomsen, who had a lot to do with the alarming decision by the public utility commission in NV killing Net Metering in NV
in Dec 2015.
The original decision phased out grandfathering which no other state had tried, but I believe grandfathering of Net Metering was re-instated later.http://fortune.com/2016/04/12/solar-firestorm-nevada/
At one point deep in the interview he states:
I’ll tell you, we sat through 20 hours of public comment and the most moving parts of that were the seniors who said, 'I've taken out a second mortgage on my home to put on solar that starts at the retail rate and escalated 3% annually.' I was gobsmacked to hear that. That to me is a reprehensible sales tactic. I wish the commission had the ability to prevent that from happening.
I seriously doubt this. Most likely he was conflating two different sales deals:Either buy system outright
(and possibly do that with 2nd mortgage), Or pay nothing upfront
, and buy the electricity from the array owner at a rate that goes up 3% annually.
If it was both, I agree it would be a fraudulent sales proposal. I also agree the second deal by itself is not good, but some people get pressured into it.
You say what’s the difference between solar power coming off a rooftop that the utilities have to pay 11 cents for, versus the 4.5 cents they're paying for solar energy from large-scale solar panel projects? The delta has gotten so big. That’s the debate.
Compared to SCE prices, 11 cents looks awfully cheap to me. He seems to attribute very little extra value above wholesale
to fully distributed power from our rooftops.