Virginia senators from both parties said that the shared solar program is only a name because it is too expensive for most customers.
Virginia’s State Corporation Commission approved a $55.10 minimum bill for its new “shared-solar” program. Customers can sign up for off-site solar when rooftop solar is not an option with “Shared Solar”.
This is the most expensive charge of its type in the United States and has been criticized by both solar advocates and senators from Virginia.
Dominion Energy administers the program. They originally wanted a $75 minimum bill.
The state senators Emmett Hanger (R-Augusta), Scott Surovell (D-Fairfax), as well as Rip Sullivan (D-Fairfax), wrote to the Commission in a letter that the high cost of the bill was a hindrance to its purpose. It was intended to create a market for third party developers to build community solar facilities.
Third-party community solar project developers sign up customers for Dominion’s Shared Solar program. Customers receive a credit on their bills for the power generated.
Bill credits are also determined by the approved legislation. Customers receive $0.11765/kWh. However, Dominion Energy customers pay up to $0.124/kWh for traditional power. Rates are on the rise. Community or shared solar programs generally offer savings on your bills or price parity with other markets, but the economics of this program are not particularly appealing to residential customers.
In a letter to the Commission, the senators stated that they did not propose legislation to create a program “that exists only in name.” “… (the share solar program) should only be implemented if it is clear that it will work. Virginia’s new competitive shared solar program is an exciting idea. We recommend considering the suggestions of industry advocates and others regarding what has worked in other markets .”
Dominion claimed that the high cost is to offset the “cost shift” that participants would experience as a result. The company has yet to provide evidence as to how large a cost shift non-participants would have to bear.
The monopoly utility playbook uses the “cost shift” argument to quash distributed solar projects and third party participation in their territories. Here’s a detailed account of California’s struggles with the cost shifting argument, as well as a discrediting of its false assumptions.
“It’s correct that the record doesn’t include evidence that specifies precisely what cost shift would take place under Dominion’s proposed minimum bill or any other proposed minimum bills,” said Mathias Roussy, SCC Hearing Examiner.
“If Dominion were so worried about the cost shifting to non-participating clients, it should have attempted to support its proposition with evidence quantifying this purported shift,” Will Cleveland, Southern Environmental Law Center attorney, wrote in a brief to Appalachian Voices. Program participants should not be liable for speculative costs that are not supported by evidence span.
This legislation is expected discourage the building of clean energy in Virginia, which would be in direct contradiction to Virginia’s climate change mitigation goals.
Apex Clean Energy vice president Tim Marvich stated that “it will definitely deter many Virginians” from taking part in the program. He said, “It’s been challenging working in the commonwealth.”
