Comments on: Opposing interest groups agree on one thing: California’s community solar market is wrecked Still, the unlikely coalition holds out hope for a winning community solar decision.

By: Person

Person — Wed, 29 May 2024 17:56:59 +0000

In reply to Rick Brown, PhD. The CPUC is corrupted by the utilities.

By: John Cothier

John Cothier — Mon, 27 May 2024 02:52:29 +0000

Good writing!
Thanks for info.
My comment is to ask if there is enuf bravery in the solar editorial world to use the correct term, AFL and its lawyers, in place of the sanitized, feel-good term “workers” .

Because the bottom line deterrent to the success of cost-efficient, local solar proliferation, is that union lawyers are in bed with the legislature and its CPUC. Clearly, solar is following the lead of Cailfornia’s embarrassing rapid rail (the disaster!).

As in all of history, there can be no citizen, community voice in this socialist dictatorship. NEM 3.0 is an example, clearly the unwanted child born of union and CPUC intercourse.

So we Californians watch helplessly as the Unions again rape the state and our powerless, frightened citizens have another reason to leave.
– – john clothier

By: Keith Weber, NOT, PhoofDah

Keith Weber, NOT, PhoofDah — Thu, 23 May 2024 17:33:01 +0000

In reply to Rick Brown, PhD.

Hmmm… “misleading opinions?” The governance speakeasies and utilities have done an absolutely amazing job of (purposeful?) misguidance for a very long time. And, I might add… a massive leading eye toward (only?) their profit and bottom line rather than a balanced camaraderie with all stakeholders. This behavior goes much further back on the calendar than “simply” solar.
Most ratepayers never take the time to hire teams of experts to explain the legal & reversed-mechanics and flashy merchandised innuendos. And why should they have to? Unfortunately, the “economic truths” usually hit them in the pocketbook… alas, when the first rate “change” hits their monthly bill. And… to boot… some utility companies are actually allowed last-minute changes… and favorable-to-them begin dates to those changes… some retroactively… at dark subterranean meetings.
So… “misleading information?” I doubt very much that the “industry” and the “general public” started this “union-like” adversarial relationship… but rather, the ones in power at the bully pulpit.
ALL opinions should be shared EQUALLY… and perhaps encouragingly corrected with facts along the way… in a timely manner. (Timely manner applying mainly to the governance and the utilities…) before the other stakeholders forget what their question was about. And the communication should be performed with an eye toward the mental level of the general public. JMHO

By: Ronald Stahl

Ronald Stahl — Tue, 21 May 2024 00:12:33 +0000

I spent thousands & thousands of $$$$ to get solar because the government said it is what will help the planet. I did my part and now they want to screw us. Give me back my investment and then screw us.

By: Rick Brown, PhD

Rick Brown, PhD — Mon, 20 May 2024 15:07:21 +0000

You repeat the contested cost shift opinion without providing alternative perspectives. For example, the CPUC’s own 2022 Net Metering Lookback study reported data that unequivocally showed non-residential solar customers paid significantly more than their cost of service; ie, they subsided non-participating rate players. The opposite of the cost shift opinion. Please do your research before sharing misleading opinions.