Solar policies come at the expense of communities least able to afford them

In the drive to develop certain sectors in our nation’s economy, we have all too often seen policies born of good intentions produce damaging consequences, particularly for people on the economic margins.

Yet policymakers continue to make this mistake again and again—most recently in a relatively obscure area: the solar industry. With the laudable intention of promoting more solar panels on consumer rooftops, many states have created subsidies and other incentives. But this approach has, in many cases, delivered concentrated benefits to solar panel owners (who are usually high income earners) at the expense of working class families and individuals on fixed incomes.

Here’s how: Under an approach known as net metering, homeowners who can afford to install solar panels are given the right to sell back any excess electricity they generate to utility companies at the full ‘retail rate’. While this full rate is good for solar panel users, utility companies that are forced to buy back the excess energy either absorb the costs or, worse, pass them on to traditional consumers, including working families on tight budgets and the poor. In effect, traditional consumers are forced to underwrite expensive home improvements – in this case, solar panel systems – that affluent homeowners decide to undertake on their own.

Consider this: A recent analysis found that a majority of people taking advantage of solar rebate programs in Austin, Texas, lived in some of the city’s wealthiest zip codes. The local newspaper in Austin summed up the situation best, saying: “Residents of wealthier neighborhoods are more likely to be able to afford the upfront capital costs associated with adding solar panels to their roofs — a cost the city helps defray through one of its major rebate programs.”

The concept of ‘homeowners’ in its own right fails to account for those living in or near poverty who do not own their own homes and are more likely to rent. For these individuals, solar subsidies have little to no benefit, and may in fact become detrimental. Budgets aren’t growing, and funding ordinarily used to assist low-income individuals – for things like direct financial assistance, rate relief, or housing vouchers – end up competing with solar subsidies for the well off.

This is not to say that solar energy is a bad thing. While promoting greater use of renewable energies is laudable, solar subsidies should be implemented in a way that creates benefits for society as a whole. But as these subsidies are currently structured, a narrow portion of society gains at the expense of others, including those least able to pick up the tab.

In an effort to ensure that such benefits are more equally distributed, consumer advocates across the country strongly recommend programs designed for a broader demographic, such as large scale solar projects or overall conservation goals for a community.

As our states continue to set goals in energy affordability and conservation, we must keep in our hearts and minds those of modest means in our communities. We cannot further burden individuals living paycheck to paycheck with inequitable policies that accelerate upward distribution of income. We know that it is often “expensive to be poor.” A car repair can contribute to crippling debt and lost time at work.

It is heartening to see that this issue is drawing growing attention from advocates for the poor, most notably the National Policy Alliance, an organization that is devoted to highlighting public policies that pose adverse consequences to individuals who struggle the most in our economy.

And so the message and solution is becoming increasingly clear: we must rethink our unbalanced solar policies and take the right steps to providing affordable energy options for all in our communities.

– Arley Johnson
Former executive director Advocates for the Other America –
a Washington-based lobbying
and advocacy group

This article originally published in the December 8, 2014 print edition of The Louisiana Weekly newspaper.