LETTERS RE: TROUBLE OVER SOLAR ROOFS

Thanks to Paul Scott of EE Solar for making these letters available.

Letters from solar professionals to the California Assembly and to the Los Angeles Times.

Dear Assemblymember Levine,

As a solar provider of many years, I was relieved to see the article in today's Times highlighting the problem with mandatory Time Of Use (TOU) rates for solar customers. This provision has indeed caused many potential customers to opt out of going solar, clearly not the intent of the regulation's authors.
click to enlarge
In addition to the TOU provision, there is much more in the CSI regulation that has hurt the solar business.

The big issues are that this new solar incentive program multiplied the bureaucratic "red tape" by a factor 5 or 10, rather than simplifying the hassle factor of the rebate process... but it's important to note that these issues impact installers directly, and customers only indirectly (sloooow processing and higher prices).

Examples of the program's problems:
-inane requirement for a home "energy audit" (what kind of fridge,
how may hours is your curling iron on, is that a wasteful halogen bulb in the
bathroom vanity!?...), and a copy of the full 15pg audit results have
to be printed with every rebate application
-redundant requirements to re-prove extensive contractor qualifications with every job
-redundant requirements for lengthy net-metering contract paperwork
-new system that makes it much more difficult to figure the amount of rebate for a given system and location
-new redundant inspections
-new requirements for expensive metering systems
-requirement for 10 year system warranty from installers (at the rate we're going, many won't be around in 10 years)
-draconian penalties for contractors when application or inspection "errors" are detected
click to enlarge
So, as you can see, the TOU problem is but one of many. We know the intent was to design a program that gets clean solar energy flowing into the grid from a million rooftops, but the inordinate provisions have had the effect of reducing the number of systems sold. Please help!

Paul Scott
William Korthof
EE Solar
click to enlarge
Re: Rebate rule chills sales of solar

Your article, "Rebate rule chills sales of solar - May 8, 2007", makes it sound as if the Time of Use requirement is the only problem with the new California Solar Initiative. Unfortunately this new program is rife with problems for the solar industry and ultimately California solar customers.

The ruling adds a much more bureaucratic process, increasing rebate paperwork as much as 10-fold. It also replaces the former state-wide processing office, with individual utility managed offices, each with their own nuanced rules and preferences. Worst of all, it accelerates the decline in rebate payouts which have gone down at a much more rapid pace than the decline in solar component cost. As a result, the effective price of residential solar has gone from $4.50 per watt just a few years ago to more than $6.50
per watt under the current rebate program.

Residential solar is still a good deal for many potential customers, but the state could do much better. This failure of public policy is the kind of story that belongs on the front page, not in the business section.

Mike Kane
EE Solar