© 2024 Wyoming Public Media
800-729-5897 | 307-766-4240
Wyoming Public Media is a service of the University of Wyoming
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations
Transmission & Streaming Disruptions

Controversial bill changing rooftop solar rate structure dies after limited testimony 

Solar Panels on a roof overlooking green grass and a gray barn.
Creative Energies Solar

A controversial bill that would have increased fees on rooftop solar users died in the House Travel, Recreation, Wildlife and Cultural Resources Committee.

Tensions were high – with more than 20 people joining the committee meeting on Feb. 16 to testify against Senate File 92. Of the eight that actually got a chance to speak, they only had two minutes each. Meanwhile, the four in support all testified and had three minutes, per the rules set by Chairwoman Sandy Newsome (R-Cody) at the beginning of the testimony.

Travis Spears, who runs a solar panel service company and spoke against the bill, asked Newsome why during his testimony.

“Why are we giving them three minutes and us two minutes?,” Spears said.

Newsome replied, “Okay, I mean, if you want this to carry over forever, we can do that or we can limit testimony.”

Spears spoke for a few seconds more and then was cut-off by Newsome and testimony was closed. The frustration was palpable among those who did not support the bill.

Ultimately the bill did not pass. It did not even come to a vote as no committee member seconded the bill after it was moved by Rep. Donald Burkhart (R-Rawlins). Rep. Liz Storer (R-Jackson) made a motion to table the bill, but it also did not receive a second. The bill had originally passed the Senate.

“I guess it dies for lack of a second,” Chairwoman Newsome said.

The bill would have likely implemented additional utility charges on rooftop solar customers that are connected to the power grid.

People with rooftop solar are usually still connected to the grid as a supplement, and they pay a fixed cost of about $20 per month for this service. But, these types of customers mostly generate their own electricity, and any surplus goes back into the grid. That surplus is then turned into a credit by public utilities that can be put toward supplemental energy used from the grid.

For example, if a rooftop solar user produces 500 kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity and only 400 kWh is used at the residence, that extra 100 kWh would go into the grid for the general public to use. That 100 kWh would become a direct public utility credit for the solar user. So, if the next month the solar user does not generate enough electricity for the residence, that 100 kWh credit could go toward additional power pulled from the grid.

It is a concept called ‘net metering.’ In theory, a solar user’s monthly utility bill could zero out, other than the fixed cost of around $20, because of the credit system.

“What that means is that the amount of electricity they produce offsets the electricity they buy,” said Sen. Cale Case (R-Lander), who was the sole sponsor of the bill.

Case argued that because of the net metering system for solar users, they are not paying their fair share to upkeep the grid infrastructure.

He said that the roughly $20 per month fixed cost is not designed to fully cover the costs of the system, but rather the utility tacks on additional charges per kWh of power used that help cover the upkeep costs.

“That means in your kilowatt hour charge – your hourly charge – it's inflated, in order to collect more of that fixed cost. So you pay too much per hour, and too little for the monthly connection,” Case said. “And the reason is, it helps to make it more affordable for very small users and poor users that don't use much electricity. So they get a lesser rate, and they don't contribute much to fixed costs.”

Case testified that if the net bill zeros out, the solar users are not paying that additional charge per kWh of power used from the grid because of that one-to-one credit system.

“This very large customer who's relied on the utility a lot may only be making a contribution to the fixed cost of the $20 per month because the other costs are all netting out,” he said.

Case added that this could potentially put an undue burden on non-solar rooftop customers.

Both major public utilities in Wyoming, Rocky Mountain Power and Black Hills Energy, testified in support of the bill. The Wyoming Public Service Commission, which would have been in charge of working out the fee structure on solar users, said the bill was ‘workable.’

But the people who testified against the bill to the House committee and previously to a Senate committee said many of Case’s statements were false.

Many pointed to a non-partisan study released this past summer that looked at the benefits and costs of net metering with rooftop solar users. The study found that non-solar customers are not absorbing the costs for rooftop solar users in the state.

Stacy Young, a rooftop solar supporter, said the bill would have completely ‘disincentivized’ people from using the renewable source of energy.

“It forces you to pay for all infrastructure, give excessive energy freely to the power company, and then authorizes them to charge you a fee simply for having your own electrical system,” Young said.

The bill ultimately failed, even though it had passed the Senate. Similar bills were brought forward and failed during the 2020 and 2021 sessions.

Caitlin Tan is the Energy and Natural Resources reporter based in Sublette County, Wyoming. Since graduating from the University of Wyoming in 2017, she’s reported on salmon in Alaska, folkways in Appalachia and helped produce 'All Things Considered' in Washington D.C. She formerly co-hosted the podcast ‘Inside Appalachia.' You can typically find her outside in the mountains with her two dogs.
Related Content