Indiana Senate Bill 309

Governor signed SB 309 into law. Man on Local news claims it going to be the end to individuals investing in solar panels.

I don't know the details, but a man on news who invested $70K in solar panels is upset even though he is exempt for 30 years.

Perhaps someone on YT can explain the details. Has something to do with the metering.
geo.
SB 309

I don't know what you mean by not "investing in solar panels." All the law does is put an end to the state government forcing utility companies to accept net-metering. I was never in favor of any government forcing them into it. Anybody can buy any solar panel they want and the law has nothing to do with that. I have owned two homes with net-metering and as far as I can tell, it is a huge rip-off when government cash incentives are involved, and power companies are forced to participate. Note that when power companies are forced to do so - they charge all the other customers with no solar to pay extra.

Good neighbor George, I have no idea what the law does or doesn't do. It may or may not have something to do with whether or not the utility allows home solar systems grid tied into their distribution. I think now in Indiana some allow grid tie and some don't. I have used solar in the RV for years and love the independence and freedom it affords me, and so long as I like it that's all that matters (screw Billy Bob if he don't like it lol) and I wouldn't be without it as I can dry camp free (still with the comforts I like and choose) in the Utah and Colorado mountains for weeks on end. If we sell the farm and downsize in my next and last (at my age) smaller super energy efficient home, I'm going to utilize a vast array of energy saving features including but not limited to wind and solar and geo thermal and earth sheltering and super insulation and passive solar and other methods to reduce my dependency on the grid. The Amish believe it or not near me are into 4000 to 6000 watt fixed earth mount tilted arrays using inverters and of course, with no grid tie availability, they use battery energy storage which IS REALLY EXPENSIVE. If a person can grid tie they can get by without that huge battery investment (subject to limitations). As far as solar payback if any, that's strictly a persons own free choice, regardless if it pays off in 7 years or NEVER lol. If you want to live where the utility cant provide service but want electricity, you must make your choices. If people consider solar or wind or super insulation or geo thermal or passive solar a bad investment because it doesn't payback when they like or never will, they are free to do without it, but in my next home and already the RV I love it and wont be without it, regardless of any payback calculations for the freedom and independence and joy it brings me to NOT be slave to a utility.

To each their own okay???

John T BSEE, JD Retired Electrical Engineer and fan of alternative energy and super efficiency

What net metering amounts to is your solar electric production is deducted from your monthly use with simple math. No consideration is given for the time of production and whether the utility needs your power or not.

Without net metering, if you are producing more power than your house needs, the utility only pays wholesale rate for the power. Wholesale rate is only pennies of your power bill.

The man the news interview said he invested $70K in solar panels. He claimed it was going to take 30 years for the pay off. Now it never will, bad investment. He claimed he did it to improve resale value of property too.

So here is a person who invested in solar thinking he was going to make money, NOT.

Man said this will be the death of individuals investing in solar in Indiana.

I invested in solar yard lights. They never paid for themselves; only lasted a year or so.
geo

In NY and MI and likely most other states - grid-tie works like this. Certain power companies are forced to allow customers install solar with net-metering. Rates go up to make up for it. Customer is allowed to install a system that produce no more then 110% of what past usage was with no solar. If there is any excess power made - the customer gets a credit that is held for one year. Then if not used, the power-company gets it with no payment ever to the customer. I suspect anyone who buys such a system expecting it to ever pay for itself fell for a lot of sales hype. I have it but certainly did not get it for any "investment" reasons.

The net-metering requirement forced on the power-companies was only temporary to start with. All that has happened now is it being terminated 10 years early. I fail to see how this has any great affect on someone's grand plan of solar "revenues" forever.

THANKS FOR THE INFORMATION..............One more reason to install yourself and on your own terms regardless what the Government or Big Brother says or can regulate. If I choose to install it in my next home a person doesn't necessarily need to be concerned with grid tie or not, just design the installation for your own use to reduce purchasing from the utility and get by without their monthly or yearly pittance lol. Whether or not the cost and investment in wind and solar and geo thermal and earth sheltering and super insulation and all other energy saving will pay back or even NEVER pay back is a persons own free choice, so I say do as you please and don't rely on or worry about how much the utility or big brother or other taxpayers will reimburse you. Obviously, if there's no grid tie available its gonna cost a whole lot more if you want to store your own energy reducing chances of investment payback, but that's still an available option for those who so choose and NOT your neighbors concern. I would NOT place all my eggs in one basket and limit myself as far as energy savings, diversification in the likes of wind and solar and earth sheltering and geo thermal and super insulation could all be a part of my toolbox depending on location and geographical and economic considerations.

John T Love my Solar RV long term lifestyle and the utility company sure didn't install it either lol

Betcha most people didn't know about the expiration date on the original law.

If payoff is in 30 years and the law expires in 10 years with little hope of renewal, the smart cookie would've known that the payoff was never coming anyway.

Of course people like to twist the story so they can whine and be on TV, and of course the local news agencies are more than happy to accommodate. I've lost count of the number of "breaking news" stories on local TV where someone is using 3rd grade playground logic to twist the narrative in their favor so they can rage about some social injustice.

This makes sense to me. Why should the grid user be forced to subsidize someone elses investment in their property? As it stands now here in NY, there are schemes, and I don't misuse the word, for public entities like schools to invest in "power consortium's" who buy solar power produced by a 3rd party and sell it, as demanded by law, at about twice what it costs the public entity to buy it and issue a credit to the school or town. This gives the public officials the ability to say they are "saving money by using solar power" while never having to mention they are doing so by driving up the costs of everyone elses power since the utility could produce the power for far, far less than the solar producer. And the utility HAS to make a profit or they go under. It's a scheme to defraud IMO.

Geo can't help you with the law but always wondered why they (the USA as a whole) did not go heavy on solar roofs and tie into the grid to solve the energy crisis on electrical. I know some places due it but not 8 out of 10 buildings.

Brett,
After thinking about I can to the same
conclusion as you.

Man feeds into the grid and meter runs
backwards. Then he uses power from the
grid. If he put into the grid in the day
time the same amount of electricity he
uses at night, his electric bill would
be zero and the electric company loses
money because it has the cost of the
grid and the expense to keep it working.

So the man on the news may be right. The
end of individual solar power back
feeding into the grid. End of free
loading off the power company.

I get it.
geo

Jocco, the energy "crisis" was nothing more than a group of people pulling another "[i:5cf93645c7]The sky is falling[/i:5cf93645c7]!" routine. The USA has not ever truly been in an energy crisis. The closest we've come to that is back in the 70's oil crunch. And most of that, if I remember correctly, is because the oil wasn't on US soil in the first place.

Now on an individual basis, there have been local power companies that have been running higher than they should due to lack of capacity, but that was only because the population/business growth outpaced the capabilities of the power station. In many areas, they don't even have a power station of their own, but rather they purchase blocks of power - what they forecast being able to sell. If they buy too much and don't sell it, then they lose money. If they don't buy enough, they end up paying more for it when needed.

Around here that has pretty much leveled off over the years. The local power distributors still have to buy blocks of power, but it seems they are no longer just at a loss if that reserved power isn't sold/used. I think they now get a partial refund. But could be wrong on that.

(quoted from post at 06:24:03 05/04/17) The man the news interview said he invested $70K in solar panels. He claimed it was going to take 30 years for the pay off. Now it never will, bad investment. He claimed he did it to improve resale value of property too.

So here is a person who invested in solar thinking he was going to make money, NOT.

Man said this will be the death of individuals investing in solar in Indiana.

I invested in solar yard lights. They never paid for themselves; only lasted a year or so.
geo

Click to expand...

Any man who invested that much in solar panels for a non-commercial use deserves to lose every bit of his money and have to live under a bridge and eat government cheese for the rest of his asinine life.

Not true in MN- Legislature mandated that power companies pay their retail rate to the producer....which means the power company (we) have to pay infrastructure and distribution costs for that power being produced.

Big oil have been getting a subsides since 1913 so to level the field wind farms and solar power should get subsides also.

Asking for every customer to pay extra so that the solar users can have the luxury of backup power when their solar won't cut it. They use little but the lines/distribution costs are still there, just as for those who use a lot. Perhaps a surcharge is in order for low consumption users of the distribution system. A minimum connection fee?

Like everything else, JMOR, the market will optimize resource usage if not for governmental interference.

Simple.

Dean

Jessie,
Why should a power company pay an
individual retail price power just
because it's from solar when a power
company can buy electricity at wholesale?
geo

(quoted from post at 16:53:21 05/04/17) Jessie,
Why should a power company pay an
individual retail price power just
because it's from solar when a power
company can buy electricity at wholesale?
geo

Click to expand...

hey shouldn't & you & I wouldn't if we were in the business. Unless of course the gov clubs us into it.

iND HAS A FACILITIES CHARG ABOVE ELECTRIC COST therefore that cost is covered no matter of usage.

What subsidy is that?

Totally agree, you have to be stupid to
spend that much money in solar to save
so little.

I've invested about the same amount of
cash in the market. My monthly market
returns will not only pay my electric,
it will also pay my homeowner's
insurance, and property taxes.

And I still have my initial investment.
No waiting for 30 years just to get
initial investment back.
geo

(quoted from post at 16:24:01 05/04/17) Big oil have been getting a subsides since 1913 so to level the field wind farms and solar power should get subsides also.

Click to expand...

Don't confuse subsidies with deductions. The oil companies profit margin is running about 5%. High tech companies (think Apple) are running about 17%. If you remove more of the deductions for oil, you pay more at the pump to make up for it. They have to make a profit to stay on business. How much pain do you want?

(quoted from post at 11:26:11 05/04/17) Brett,
After thinking about I can to the same
conclusion as you.

Man feeds into the grid and meter runs
backwards. Then he uses power from the
grid. If he put into the grid in the day
time the same amount of electricity he
uses at night, his electric bill would
be zero and the electric company loses
money because it has the cost of the
grid and the expense to keep it working.

So the man on the news may be right. The
end of individual solar power back
feeding into the grid. End of free
loading off the power company.

I get it.
geo

Click to expand...

They aren't freeloading off the power co so much as off the other grid customers that have to pay a higher rate to cover their costs, PLUS whatever taxes are needed to fund the subsidized investment. People can't seem to grasp that nothing comes for "free".