NEWS

Elon Musk Calls Gavin Newsom's California Solar Tax a 'Bizarre Anti-Environment(Yes, Elon has a stake in this but, so do Californians)

Jan 12, 2022

Skip to comments.

Elon Musk Calls Gavin Newsom's California Solar Tax a 'Bizarre Anti-Environment(Yes, Elon has a stake in this but, so do Californians) MSN ^ | 1-12-20222 | Brendan Cole

Posted on 1/12/2022, 6:18:30 PM by Vendome

Elon Musk has attacked a draft plan under consideration in California that critics say disincentivizes the use of rooftop solar panels.

The Tesla founder was responding to changes proposed by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to the state's Net Energy Metering (NEM) program.

Under the program, the estimated 1.3 million homeowners and businesses in the Golden State who have installed rooftop solar panels can sell back surplus energy to the grid and receive credit on their bills.

But last month the CPUC released a proposal calling for a number of changes, one of which is how much customers are paid when they send power back to the grid, giving them the lower "actual avoided cost" instead.

Also there would be a "grid participation charge" of $8 per kilowatt on the solar systems of residential customers, adding up to $48 per month for customers of one provider, San Diego Gas Electric, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported.

Bizarre anti-environment move by govt of California https://t.co/1OwdBNWbxT — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 12, 2022

(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...

TOPICS: Business/Economy ; Constitution/Conservatism ; Culture/Society ; News/Current Events KEYWORDS: go ; let ; my ; people

This is anti-environment...

This is anti-consumer...

This is anti-business....

This is anti-common sense.

Imagine is ATT were allowed to do this back in the 80's?

There would have been even fewer competition and innovation

1 posted on 1/12/2022, 6:18:30 PM by Vendome

To: Vendome

Is this retro active? I’m consulting with sunrun for a new install, and the guy says if I sign before this takes effect I’m good and it doesn’t effect me. Anyone know?

2 posted on 1/12/2022, 6:24:23 PM by Pocketdoor

To: Vendome

If people want rooftop solar, and are willing to pay for it themselves, I’m all for it. If one cares about encouraging renewables, why make people pay for the privilege? Really, California has lost the plot.

3 posted on 1/12/2022, 6:24:41 PM by hinckley buzzard ( Resist the narrative.)

To: Vendome

Interesting in that, IIRC, California law says all new construction must have solar.

4 posted on 1/12/2022, 6:27:59 PM by IYAS9YAS (There are two kinds of people: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.)

To: hinckley buzzard

If people want rooftop solar, and are willing to pay for it themselves, I’m all for it. If one cares about encouraging renewables, why make people pay for the privilege?

This is so right. I live in the wealthier part of San Jose and I know for a fact that the friends and neighbors who have installed solar panels (especially the higher end Tesla ones) do not need the federal and state subsidies and rebates. But they're there so they'd be silly not to accept them. The classic example of welfare for the rich.

5 posted on 1/12/2022, 6:28:08 PM by NohSpinZone (First thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers)

To: Pocketdoor

We chickened out.

We were planning to go solar, but following the NEM 2 vs NEM 3 discussions, it looked like they might retroactively add a charge for connection and possibly reduce the grandfathering in timeframe from 20 to 15 years.

Ended up canceling even after getting the permit. Supposedly if you are actually up and running before it takes effect you *might* be OK, but all it would take is a month’s delay in permitting to blow that.

IF I recall correctly Sunrun basically leases your roof, so if it turns to crap, you might be protected in the contract and they take the loss; depends on the exact wording.

Since with my small house, even in the most optimal circumstances it was 7.5 years until break-even I bailed.

Good luck! Let me know!

6 posted on 1/12/2022, 6:29:06 PM by Republican in occupied CA (I will not give up on my native State! Here I was born, here I fight and die!!)

To: IYAS9YAS

7 posted on 1/12/2022, 6:31:07 PM by Vendome (I've Gotta Be Me https://youtu.be/wH-pk2vZG2M)

To: Vendome

Worse than that...it’s bait and switch! Public hearing today at 3PM local.

8 posted on 1/12/2022, 6:31:38 PM by Rowdyone (Vigilence)

To: hinckley buzzard

To look at it differently, you can believe that retail prices will drop significantly, if the subsidy ends.

9 posted on 1/12/2022, 6:32:14 PM by ImJustAnotherOkie (Let's go Brandon)

To: hinckley buzzard

Paying people for the privilege incentivizes a reduction on demand of the electric infrastructure that has no realistic way of keeping up with demand or growth.

PGE is the one being given an incentive in this instant and will continue to rob the citizens of California...

10 posted on 1/12/2022, 6:37:34 PM by Vendome (I've Gotta Be Me https://youtu.be/wH-pk2vZG2M)

To: Pocketdoor

11 posted on 1/12/2022, 6:37:52 PM by Vendome (I've Gotta Be Me https://youtu.be/wH-pk2vZG2M)

To: Vendome; All

What behaviors liberal government considers positive and encourages with tax money today

Become the problem behaviors liberal government punishes with new taxes tomorrow

12 posted on 1/12/2022, 6:38:53 PM by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; not averse to Going Bronson.)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson

Related Posts