Sunrun and Vivint Solar Written Testimony on Hb 5002
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SUNRUN AND VIVINT SOLAR WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON HB 5002: An Act Concerning the Development of a Green New Deal and HB 5237: An Act Requiring a Study of Energy Storage Projects & Distributed Generation February 21, 2019 Dear Energy Technology Committee Leaders and Members: Sunrun and Vivint Solar, two of the largest residential solar companies in the United States, appreciate the opportunity to provide written testimony on this legislation. Our companies employ thousands of solar workers across more than 20 states, including Connecticut, and often partner with state legislatures on policies to grow solar energy and solar jobs. Last year the legislature enacted one of the most regressive solar policies in the nation. Senate Bill 9 / Public Act 18-50 eliminated “net metering,” which is offered in 38 states1 and provides bill credits to solar owners for their excess clean energy sent to the grid. Senate Bill 9 replaces net metering with two policies that have reduced solar installations and have killed solar jobs in other states.2 The 2,200 jobs your constituents hold in Connecticut’s solar industry are now in jeopardy. We have tried to communicate this risk to the legislature, DEEP and PURA over the last year (see attached), but we feel our concerns have not been taken seriously. Without legislative action this session, significant job loss will likely occur when net metering expires in the third quarter of this year. Regarding HB 5002, Sunrun and Vivint Solar support policies that promote clean energy, such as a Green New Deal, but saving Connecticut’s 2,200 solar jobs should take precedence over any other measure. We feel it does not make sense for Connecticut to advance a Green New Deal when its solar industry is facing an existential crisis. Simply put, a Green New Deal will not be possible without a viable solar industry. We respectfully urge the Committee to consider language supported by more than 40 solar companies, associations and environmental groups that would restore net metering, save solar jobs and advance Connecticut’s clean energy goals. Regarding HB 5237, Sunrun and Vivint Solar support a study of energy storage and distributed generation in Connecticut. Over the past year we have encouraged Connecticut policymakers to complete a value of solar study to identify the benefits and any costs of distributed solar generation, as many other states have done. Such a study would identify whether any alleged “cost shift” is occurring from solar customers to non-solar customers, but DEEP has indicated it opposes taking this evidence-based approach. We believe such a study is necessary and will confirm that no “cost shift” exists in Connecticut, and that solar provides a net benefit to all ratepayers, as the Brookings Institution and others have concluded.3 1 http://www.dsireusa.org/resources/detailed-summary-maps/ 2 http://www.thesolarfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Appendix-A.pdf 3 https://www.brookings.edu/research/rooftop-solar-net-metering-is-a-net-benefit/ We greatly appreciate the Committee’s consideration of these issues and welcome the opportunity to meet at your convenience. Respectfully Submitted, Evan Dube Senior Director, Public Policy Sunrun, Inc. Kyle Wallace Manager, Markets & Regulatory Affairs Vivint Solar, Inc. February 15, 2019 The Energy and Technology Committee Legislative Office Building, Room 3900 Hartford, CT 06106 Dear Energy and Technology Committee Leaders, The undersigned organizations and businesses strongly support the enclosed legislative proposal to address the near-term crisis facing Connecticut’s solar industry, which employs more than 2,100 people. These jobs are in jeopardy without legislative action this session. Last year’s Senate Bill 9 (now PA 18-50) locked in the termination of “net metering,” which will occur in October, if not sooner. Net metering is a critical clean energy policy offered in 38 states that provides electric bill credits to solar owners who send clean power to the grid.1 With less than seven months before net metering expires, no successor program is in place for either the residential or commercial solar industries. We are now facing a cliff in the sustained, orderly development of solar energy in Connecticut. There is consensus among PURA stakeholders that the process to replace net metering has been rushed, and that the new programs will not be ready in time. Merely providing PURA more time is not sufficient because the successor programs required by PA 18-50 are overly complicated, expensive to implement and have killed solar jobs in other states, including Maine, Utah, Arizona and Hawaii.2 Instead of rushing to implement harmful policies, we feel the state legislature should pause implementation of the new programs and continue Connecticut’s status quo solar policies (net metering, RSIP, ZREC, etc.). During this time, Connecticut should do what dozens of other states have done: collect data from a value of solar study and use it to determine whether new programs are warranted. The enclosed legislative proposal accomplishes these critical goals. We greatly appreciate your consideration of this language and respectfully encourage the committee to advance it to a public hearing. Sincerely, 1 http://www.dsireusa.org/resources/detailed-summary-maps/ 2 https://www.thesolarfoundation.org/solar-jobs-by-state-2018/ 1. Acadia Center Hartford, CT 2. Allco Renewable Energy New York, NY 3. Coalition for Community Solar Access Boston, MA 4. Clean Water Action East Berlin, CT 5. CMC Energy Services Yalesville, CT 6. Connecticut Citizen Action Group Hartford, CT 7. Connecticut Conference of Municipalities New Haven, CT 8. Connecticut Fund for the Environment New Haven, CT 9. CT League of Conservation Voters Hartford, CT 10. CT Roundtable on Climate and Jobs Hartford, CT 11. C-TEC Solar Bloomfield, CT 12. Earthlight Technologies Ellington, CT 13. EcoSmart Home Services East Berlin, CT 14. Environment Connecticut Hartford, CT 15. EnterSolar New York, NY 16. Fight the Hike New Haven, CT 17. Greenskies Renewable Energy Middletown, CT 18. JD Solar Solutions Glastonbury, CT 19. Litchfield Hills Solar Litchfield, CT 20. Lodestar Energy Avon, CT 21. MSL Group, Inc. Milford, CT 22. New Haven Energy Task Force New Haven, CT 23. NHS New Haven New Haven, CT 24. Northeast Clean Energy Council Boston, MA 25. Northeast Smart Energy Ridgefield, CT 26. Operation Fuel Hartford, CT 27. People’s Action for Clean Energy West Simsbury, CT 28. PosiGen Bridgeport, CT 29. PurePoint Energy Norwalk, CT 30. Renewable Energy & Efficiency Business Association West Hartford, CT 31. SHR Energy Weston, CT 32. Sierra Club Hartford, CT 33. 64Solar Port Chester, NY 34. Solar Connecticut Haddam, CT 35. Solar Energy Industries Association Washington, DC 36. Sol Systems Washington, DC 37. Star Power Southport, CT 38. Sunlight Solar Energy New Haven, CT 39. SunPower Newington, CT 40. Sunrun Hartford, CT 41. The Nature Conservancy New Haven, CT 42. Trinity Solar Stratford, CT 43. Verogy Hartford, CT 44. Vivint Solar North Haven, CT January 11, 2019 Mr. Jeffrey Gaudiosi, Esq. Executive Secretary Public Utilities Regulatory Authority 10 Franklin Square New Britain, CT 06051 RE: Docket No. 18-08-33, PURA Implementation of Section 7 of Public Act 18-50 Dear Mr. Gaudiosi, We hereby file this response to the January 3, 2019 correspondence of the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) and the Office of Consumer Counsel (OCC). We are extremely concerned that their request would result in a rushed proceeding and could create unintended consequences that state policymakers and legislators will come to regret. In implementing Public Act 18- 50 (formerly Senate Bill 9), the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) will determine the future of Connecticut’s solar industry and the fate of its more than 2,000 workers, and it should give these important issues the full process and consideration they deserve. The undersigned parties believe that the proposal from DEEP and OCC would have extremely negative practical impacts on the solar industry, including massive job loss. We ask that state agencies follow Connecticut state law Section 16-245ff, which requires that state policies “foster the sustained, orderly development of a state-based solar industry.” Representatives of the Connecticut Green Bank, solar industry and independent policy organizations have repeatedly weighed in on these issues, starting with comments on the 2017-2018 Comprehensive Energy Strategy, testimony at the legislature, and participation in the PURA process over the last seven months.1 However, DEEP has continued to press forward with ideas that we believe are misguided and against constructive policy trends in other states. In fact, the states that have proposed or implemented the policies DEEP is advancing have either experienced significant job loss or have reversed course and are moving to reinstate net metering.2 Instead of rushing to implement flawed policy, state agencies should consider the Lamont-Bysiewicz Administration’s desire to avoid a major solar market disruption, promote in-state job creation and provide a smooth transition to a net metering successor program. The process and timeline DEEP and OCC request – for PURA to establish final residential tariffs in the first quarter of 2019 – is 1 Please see the undersigned parties’ submissions to docket 18-08-33 for detailed explanations of our concerns. 2 The implementation of “instantaneous netting” in Utah caused significant job loss and reduced residential solar installations by nearly three-fourths. In Maine, former Governor Paul LePage’s “buy-all, sell-all” tariff was repeatedly rejected by the state legislature and partially overturned by the public utilities commission (Maine has reinstated net metering for large customers and is expected to reinstate it for all customers this legislative session). unprecedented. New York, Massachusetts and California have taken three years or longer to study, develop and implement successor programs, and have followed a more data-driven, gradual approach, typically considering time-of-use pricing as a first step.