Green mean_老虎社区_美港股上老虎

NRN
2021-12-14

Green means go!

California proposes cutting major rooftop solar incentive after years of debate

Dec 13 (Reuters) - California on Monday proposed reducing the rate at which homeowners can sell exce

California proposes cutting major rooftop solar incentive after years of debate

免责声明：上述内容仅代表发帖人个人观点，不构成本平台的任何投资建议。

推荐
最新

暂无评论

热议股票

关于我们·老虎社区守则·老虎社区账号管理规范·老虎社区服务协议·老虎社区隐私政策

公司名称：北京至简风宜信息技术有限公司

违法和不良信息投诉：010-5681-3562（工作时间9:30-18:30）

邮箱：service@laohu8.com

营业执照：91110105MA01A4U55R

ICP备：京ICP备18016422号

网安备：京公网安备11010502036490

关注我们

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"data":{"magic":2,"id":604715703,"tweetId":"604715703","gmtCreate":1639446031591,"gmtModify":1639446032016,"author":{"id":3563581390514944,"idStr":"3563581390514944","authorId":3563581390514944,"authorIdStr":"3563581390514944","name":"NRN","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3561ad0f76bae7ec1e64062bc70f0207","vip":1,"userType":1,"introduction":"","boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[],"fanSize":42,"starInvestorFlag":false},"themes":[],"images":[],"coverImages":[],"extraTitle":"","html":"<html><head></head><body><p>Green means go!</p></body></html>","htmlText":"<html><head></head><body><p>Green means go!</p></body></html>","text":"Green means go!","highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/604715703","repostId":1171542547,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1171542547","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Reuters.com brings you the latest news from around the world, covering breaking news in markets, business, politics, entertainment and technology","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Reuters","id":"1036604489","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868"},"pubTimestamp":1639445931,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1171542547?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-12-14 09:38","market":"us","language":"en","title":"California proposes cutting major rooftop solar incentive after years of debate","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1171542547","media":"Reuters","summary":"Dec 13 (Reuters) - California on Monday proposed reducing the rate at which homeowners can sell exce","content":"<p>Dec 13 (Reuters) - California on Monday proposed reducing the rate at which homeowners can sell excess electricity from their rooftop solar panels into the grid, weakening a policy that has underpinned dramatic growth in the renewable energy industry for years.</p>\n<p>The announcement by the California Public Utilities Commission triggered an outcry from the solar panel installation industry, whose backers have warned such proposals could darken the outlook for new projects and undermine the state’s efforts to combat climate change.</p>\n<p>The PUC justified the proposal, however, saying it would encourage the solar industry to accelerate battery storage technology so excess power can be held in reserve instead of sold, while undoing a policy it said amounted to a multi-billion dollar subsidy for wealthy homeowners at the expense of other utility ratepayers.</p>\n<p>Under the proposed reforms, Californians with new solar installations would see a discounted rate for power they sell into the grid and a monthly utility charge of $8 per kilowatt to cover the cost of maintaining the grid.</p>\n<p>Existing solar owners would be moved to the new structure once their installations have been connected for 15 years, the PUC said. But, they would be offered an incentive to pair a battery with their solar installations before then, which would push them on the new rates sooner.</p>\n<p>If adopted, the changes would represent the state's most significant reform of the so-called net metering policy since it was adopted in the 1990s, allowing homeowners to sell excess electricity into the grid at or near the retail rate.</p>\n<p>The changes could impact the outlook for utilities and solar providers - including big panel installers like Sunrun Inc, Tesla&nbsp;Inc&nbsp;and SunPower Corp&nbsp;- and could also provide a cue to other states that tend to take California's lead on clean energy policies.</p>\n<p>California is home to about 40% of the nation's residential solar energy capacity.</p>\n<p>The PUC said its review of the policy found it was not cost-effective and harmed homeowners without solar panels by shouldering them with the price of maintaining the grid. Those ratepayers are disproportionately lower income, the regulator's review found.</p>\n<p>It said California ratepayers spent about $3 billion a year to support net metering.</p>\n<p>Those funds would be better directed elsewhere, Commissioner Martha Guzman Aceves said in an interview. \"If you use that money to purchase the large-scale clean energy projects, we would be able to meet our 2045 goals\" of producing all the state's electricity from clean sources, she said.</p>\n<p>The nation's top solar trade group, the Solar Energy Industries Association, slammed the announcement, saying the changes would \"create the highest solar tax in the country and tarnish the state's clean energy legacy.\"</p>\n<p>Affordable Clean Energy for All, a utility-backed group, said the decision \"recognizes we can grow rooftop solar in California while taking steps to reduce inflated subsidies.\"</p>\n<p>The PUC could vote on the proposal as soon as next month, after receiving stakeholder feedback. The new policy would take effect four months after a final decision is issued.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>California proposes cutting major rooftop solar incentive after years of debate</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nCalifornia proposes cutting major rooftop solar incentive after years of debate\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1036604489\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Reuters </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-12-14 09:38</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Dec 13 (Reuters) - California on Monday proposed reducing the rate at which homeowners can sell excess electricity from their rooftop solar panels into the grid, weakening a policy that has underpinned dramatic growth in the renewable energy industry for years.</p>\n<p>The announcement by the California Public Utilities Commission triggered an outcry from the solar panel installation industry, whose backers have warned such proposals could darken the outlook for new projects and undermine the state’s efforts to combat climate change.</p>\n<p>The PUC justified the proposal, however, saying it would encourage the solar industry to accelerate battery storage technology so excess power can be held in reserve instead of sold, while undoing a policy it said amounted to a multi-billion dollar subsidy for wealthy homeowners at the expense of other utility ratepayers.</p>\n<p>Under the proposed reforms, Californians with new solar installations would see a discounted rate for power they sell into the grid and a monthly utility charge of $8 per kilowatt to cover the cost of maintaining the grid.</p>\n<p>Existing solar owners would be moved to the new structure once their installations have been connected for 15 years, the PUC said. But, they would be offered an incentive to pair a battery with their solar installations before then, which would push them on the new rates sooner.</p>\n<p>If adopted, the changes would represent the state's most significant reform of the so-called net metering policy since it was adopted in the 1990s, allowing homeowners to sell excess electricity into the grid at or near the retail rate.</p>\n<p>The changes could impact the outlook for utilities and solar providers - including big panel installers like Sunrun Inc, Tesla&nbsp;Inc&nbsp;and SunPower Corp&nbsp;- and could also provide a cue to other states that tend to take California's lead on clean energy policies.</p>\n<p>California is home to about 40% of the nation's residential solar energy capacity.</p>\n<p>The PUC said its review of the policy found it was not cost-effective and harmed homeowners without solar panels by shouldering them with the price of maintaining the grid. Those ratepayers are disproportionately lower income, the regulator's review found.</p>\n<p>It said California ratepayers spent about $3 billion a year to support net metering.</p>\n<p>Those funds would be better directed elsewhere, Commissioner Martha Guzman Aceves said in an interview. \"If you use that money to purchase the large-scale clean energy projects, we would be able to meet our 2045 goals\" of producing all the state's electricity from clean sources, she said.</p>\n<p>The nation's top solar trade group, the Solar Energy Industries Association, slammed the announcement, saying the changes would \"create the highest solar tax in the country and tarnish the state's clean energy legacy.\"</p>\n<p>Affordable Clean Energy for All, a utility-backed group, said the decision \"recognizes we can grow rooftop solar in California while taking steps to reduce inflated subsidies.\"</p>\n<p>The PUC could vote on the proposal as soon as next month, after receiving stakeholder feedback. The new policy would take effect four months after a final decision is issued.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"RUN":"Sunrun Inc.","TSLA":"特斯拉","SPWR":"SunPower"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1171542547","content_text":"Dec 13 (Reuters) - California on Monday proposed reducing the rate at which homeowners can sell excess electricity from their rooftop solar panels into the grid, weakening a policy that has underpinned dramatic growth in the renewable energy industry for years.\nThe announcement by the California Public Utilities Commission triggered an outcry from the solar panel installation industry, whose backers have warned such proposals could darken the outlook for new projects and undermine the state’s efforts to combat climate change.\nThe PUC justified the proposal, however, saying it would encourage the solar industry to accelerate battery storage technology so excess power can be held in reserve instead of sold, while undoing a policy it said amounted to a multi-billion dollar subsidy for wealthy homeowners at the expense of other utility ratepayers.\nUnder the proposed reforms, Californians with new solar installations would see a discounted rate for power they sell into the grid and a monthly utility charge of $8 per kilowatt to cover the cost of maintaining the grid.\nExisting solar owners would be moved to the new structure once their installations have been connected for 15 years, the PUC said. But, they would be offered an incentive to pair a battery with their solar installations before then, which would push them on the new rates sooner.\nIf adopted, the changes would represent the state's most significant reform of the so-called net metering policy since it was adopted in the 1990s, allowing homeowners to sell excess electricity into the grid at or near the retail rate.\nThe changes could impact the outlook for utilities and solar providers - including big panel installers like Sunrun Inc, Tesla Inc and SunPower Corp - and could also provide a cue to other states that tend to take California's lead on clean energy policies.\nCalifornia is home to about 40% of the nation's residential solar energy capacity.\nThe PUC said its review of the policy found it was not cost-effective and harmed homeowners without solar panels by shouldering them with the price of maintaining the grid. Those ratepayers are disproportionately lower income, the regulator's review found.\nIt said California ratepayers spent about $3 billion a year to support net metering.\nThose funds would be better directed elsewhere, Commissioner Martha Guzman Aceves said in an interview. \"If you use that money to purchase the large-scale clean energy projects, we would be able to meet our 2045 goals\" of producing all the state's electricity from clean sources, she said.\nThe nation's top solar trade group, the Solar Energy Industries Association, slammed the announcement, saying the changes would \"create the highest solar tax in the country and tarnish the state's clean energy legacy.\"\nAffordable Clean Energy for All, a utility-backed group, said the decision \"recognizes we can grow rooftop solar in California while taking steps to reduce inflated subsidies.\"\nThe PUC could vote on the proposal as soon as next month, after receiving stakeholder feedback. The new policy would take effect four months after a final decision is issued.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1031,"commentLimit":10,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"symbols":["GNBC"],"verified":2,"subType":0,"readableState":1,"langContent":"CN","currentLanguage":"CN","warmUpFlag":false,"orderFlag":false,"shareable":true,"causeOfNotShareable":"","featuresForAnalytics":[],"commentAndTweetFlag":false,"andRepostAutoSelectedFlag":false,"upFlag":false,"length":13,"xxTargetLangEnum":"ZH_CN"},"commentList":[],"hasMoreComment":false,"orderType":2}