#

State utility regulators decided to remove the limits on how much surplus energy owners of solar panels can sell back into the grid. This highly anticipated decision is expected to have a significant impact on the growing solar industry in New Hampshire.

The 74-page ruling was handed down late Friday from the Public Utilities Commission and settled a years-long dispute over net metering between utility interests and the solar energy advocates. The issue at hand was how to fairly compensate homeowners who utilize solar panels without increasing costs on those who don’t have the technology.

“We thank all the parties and stakeholders that worked together during this long, sometimes contentious, process. Ultimately we reached a fair result that works for all of NH, and we look forward to continuing the thoughtful work necessary to keep our state competitive, consumer-friendly, and to grow our in-state renewable energy resources,” said Kate Epsen, executive director of the New Hampshire Sustainable Energy Association. “This is a result that will protect and benefit utilities, businesses, ratepayers and the renewable energy industry.”

Under the order, the net meter limit of 100 megawatts for the state utilities is lifted and new rates begin on September 1 and continue until a new order is issued. All existing net metering systems are grandfathered through 2040 at current rates.

The state previously managed with a 50-megawatt limit, until home solar installations took off in 2015. Soon after, state utilities were either at or nearing the statutory limit. Former Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan signed a bill lifting the cap to 100 megawatts  on net metering after most state utilities reached the limit. Even after that cap increase, state utilities were still reaching that limit.

The ruling also states that solar installations after September 1 will not be entirely reimbursed for the distributed charge — their potion of the bill that reimburses utilities for the upkeep cost of maintaining the electric system’s poles and wires. Currently, solar owners receive a full reimbursement of distribution charges, but utilities have argued that they aren’t paying their fair share to maintain the power grid, shifting that cost to ratepayers who don’t have solar panels.

“We find that there is little to no evidence of any significant cost-shifting,” the order states. “Nevertheless, we agree with the parties and believe it is prudent to adopt new net metering tariff provisions to mitigate the potential for future cost-shifting, and we believe the new net metering tariff provisions we have approved further that objective.”

Residential systems will still be credited monthly at 100 percent of retail energy and transmission charges. The dollar amount of the change depends on how much electricity is used and produced by a given system.

The ruling comes as somewhat of a compromise between utilities and solar advocates, but still favors the ratepayers, said state-appointed consumer advocate for utility issues Donald Kreis.

“We have our long-awaited net metering order, and it is a qualified victory for consumers,” he wrote in a Saturday Facebook post. “We were able to persuade the utilities to walk away from draconian rate design schemes that were calculated to punish rather than reward people for generating some of their own electricity and sharing some of it with their neighbors.”

Eversource, one of the region’s largest energy utilities, is also required to perform a study over the next 12 months on the value of distributed generation, focused on solar and small hydropower, using a 10- to 15-year framework for the analysis.

“Our initial look tells us that the PUC adopted the common elements of two settlements that were developed and is committed to resolving remaining differences,” said Martin Murray, spokesman for Eversource. “There seems to be broad agreement that everyone who uses the energy grid should share fairly in the cost of the grid. Eversource is looking forward to participating in the working groups and studies that the order indicates will soon get underway.”

Kreis said he was concerned that the order didn’t mention anything about community solar, a system where multiple properties can share the financial benefits of a single solar power system.

“We believe it is critical to provide meaningful opportunities for all Granite Staters to take part in distributed generation, even if they lack the financial resources or live in the shade or rent their premises. We will consider a motion for rehearing to address this issue,” he said. “The commission opened this docket at the express command of the Legislature, which wanted progress away from old-fashioned net metering. It will be interesting in the days ahead to see what key legislators think about the results the docket yielded.”

During the legislative session, lawmakers were considering a bill that would eliminate the cap on net metering, but it was tabled in anticipation of the PUC’s ruling with the hopes of revising it in 2018. Solar advocates did not like the wording of the legislation, but it’s not immediately clear what they would do with the bill in the new session. Lawmakers could alter the PUC’s decision when they come back to Concord next year.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

Sign up for NH Journal’s must-read morning political newsletter.

It’s New Hampshire Energy Week in the Granite State. Throughout the week, lawmakers and energy policy advocates discussed some of the challenges facing the state, solutions to solve these problems, and important pieces of legislation coming up in the next two years.

Under the Republican-controlled Legislature, it’s not exactly clear what energy policy issues the GOP leadership and Gov. Chris Sununu are going to prioritize, but there are some interesting bills that could come up for a vote during Sununu’s term.

Here are two controversial energy bills in front of the Legislature this session:

REPEALING RGGI

Rep. Michael Harrington, R-Strafford, is sponsoring House Bill 592, which would end New Hampshire’s participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). RGGI is a cap-and-trade program where utilities pay for carbon dioxide emission allowances. This serves to control and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The funds from these allowances are used for energy efficiency projects and ratepayer rebates.  Currently, eight other states in the Northeast participate in the program. New Jersey was also a member of RGGI, but pulled out of the program in 2011.

This bill has been opposed by pro-energy and environment groups like the NH Sierra Club and the New Hampshire Sustainable Energy Association (NHSEA).

“Repealing RGGI would be a mistake for New Hampshire in terms of our economy, our environment and our public health,” said Michelle McCarthy, campaign organizer of Environment New Hampshire, at a hearing on the bill in February in front of the House Science, Technology and Energy Committee.

Opponents of the bills point to an Abt Associates report that was released in January, which estimates that the state avoided $100 million in higher health care costs by reducing pollution. They claim that since RGGI’s inception in 2008, electricity prices have decreased in the participating states by 3.4 percent, while costs nationally have increased by 7.2 percent.

Supporters of pulling out of RGGI say New Hampshire still has some of the highest energy costs, especially for commercial and industrial companies. With high energy costs, businesses are looking to move or expand in other states.

“This is not rocket science, and companies like Sig Sauer are doing the math and realizing it’s cheaper to move jobs out of New Hampshire to cheaper-power states,” said Greg Moore, state director of American’s for Prosperity, at the hearing.

In December, Sig Sauer announced it was expanding its operations in Arkansas, and New Hampshire’s high electric rates was a motivating factor. The company is still retaining its offices in the Granite State, though, and it was announced this year that the company was awarded with a whopping $580 million, 10-year contract with the U.S. Army to manufacture its pistols.

A University of New Hampshire research study released Tuesday determined that New England does not need to increase energy use to continue to grow its economy.

“It is important to prevent further increases in the cost of energy and ideally to reduce the overall cost of electricity in New Hampshire, especially for customer groups adversely affected by the state’s relatively high electricity prices, including more intensive commercial and industrial users as well as low-income households that pay a greater portion of their income for energy,” the researchers noted.

Kate Epsen, a member of the NHSEA, said it’s time to quash the belief that just because of New Hampshire’s energy prices, businesses are leaving or not coming to the state.

“We hear a lot of clamor over these high rates, but the bottom line of the bills people receive is that they are the same or lower than the national averages,” she told NH Journal. “We need to weigh the risks versus rewards of a single, very large type of project or more energy efficient technologies that are more broad based and keep jobs and dollars in the state economy.”

Epsen alluded to the ever controversial Northern Pass project — the 192-mile proposed hydroelectric line from Canada to Deerfield. Proponents of the project says the power would reduce energy costs for residents and businesses, but opponents cite possible environmental issues from putting the lines underground to high towers ruining New Hampshire vistas and impacting tourism. The state’s Site Evaluation Committee (SEC) is expected to decide in the fall if the project will move forward or not.

However, Moore and supporters of RGGI agreed that perhaps the program shouldn’t be repealed, but could be made better to fit New Hampshire’s needs.

He said all the money collected should be rebated to customers, which could save homeowners $1.3 million a year and commercial and industrial customers could save $2 million.

Catherine Corkery, chapter director of the NH Sierra Club, said the program should be made better, not eliminated.

“The politically motivated repeal bills are putting the program at risk every year, making it unstable and difficult for users to rely on,” she said. “Repeated repeal threats exhaust resources and delay helping people.”

The bill has been retained in committee, meaning after working on the bill during the summer months, it could come up again for a vote in the next legislative session. A complicating factor to the debate is the federal Clean Power Plan (CPP), former President Barack Obama’s initiative to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. RGGI currently satisfies the federal requirements for the plan, yet President Donald Trump has pledged that he would dismantle CPP and could do so as early as next week.

Sununu indicated on the campaign trail that he would consider withdrawing from RGGI, but only if other states also left.

REPEALING ELECTRIC RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO STANDARD

House Bill 225 would repeal the state’s renewable portfolio standard (RPS), which would require 17 percent renewables to be used by the state’s utilities this year. Those renewable energy sources include wind turbines, hydroelectric dams, solar panels, and even biomass plants.

If a utility does not meet its quota for renewable energy, it must make payments to the renewable energy fund, which is then spent on grants and rebates for individuals and businesses working on renewable energy projects.

New Hampshire’s RPS sets annual targets for electricity providers, and they meet targets by earning renewable energy certificates (RECs) for selling renewable power to retail customers. They can also buy RECs from other providers to comply.

Supporters of a repeal say renewable energy is more expensive than other energy sources, so the RPS forces consumers to pay for more expensive electricity. When utilities do not buy enough renewable energy, they essentially pay to subsidize more renewable energy projects. Due to these subsidies, there is little incentive for renewable energy sources to lower their prices. The legislature has also used money from the renewable energy fund to pay for unrelated budget items in the past.

Supporters of the RPS argue the law is necessary to ensure the development of renewable energy. A shortage of natural gas in New England caused electricity rates to spike over the winter months, highlighting the need for more diverse and renewable energy sources. Grants from the renewable energy fund also contribute significantly to the North Country economy, for the biomass and forestry industries.

Rep. Bart Fromuth, R-Bedford, sponsored a similar bill in 2015, but the House tabled it. However, the bill with an amendment was passed by the House in a Thursday executive session.

The Citizens Count, NH’s Live Free or Die Alliance — a nonpartisan organization looking to give citizen’s a voice in their local government — conducted a Facebook survey of New Hampshire residents on their support for the bill in January.

Approximately 55 percent said they were opposed to repealing the RPS, compared to 45 percent who were in favor of repealing, the survey found.

Senate Majority Leader Jeb Bradley has been a leading voice of energy policy in New Hampshire. He said he understand the concern of high energy prices, but doesn’t believe the bills repealing RGGI and RPS will ultimately pass.

“When all is said and done, the current laws will largely stay in place,” he told the Associated Press. “What we need to do in New England is to site new sources of generation in a way that protects people’s property values and their rights. That is a tough needle to thread.”

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

Sign up for NH Journal’s must-read morning political newsletter.