New Hampshire’s future for compensating solar power contributors remains uncertain as state regulators evaluate the benefits and costs of the current net metering system. Despite strong advocacy from utilities, residents, and clean energy supporters, the state commission expresses doubts about the policy’s value. The debate revolves around the financial implications and the potential for encouraging renewable energy adoption in the state.
Throughout recent years, other states have seen changes in their net metering policies, reflecting a broader national trend of re-evaluating renewable energy incentives. While New Hampshire’s rules have been stable since 2017, the current proceedings could lead to significant alterations. Nationwide, utilities often push for lower compensation rates, arguing high costs, while New Hampshire utilities have surprisingly backed maintaining the existing rates.
Striking an Agreement
In August, an agreement was reached among diverse stakeholders, proposing the continuation of the current net metering structure for two more years. This agreement, supported by utilities and clean energy groups, also suggests implementing time-of-use rates post the two-year period. This approach aims to match compensation more accurately with real-time power values. Projects joining the program within this period would retain their compensation rates for 20 years.
Public comments overwhelmingly supported the agreement, with nearly 450 submissions urging the commission to preserve the existing system. Advocates like Brian Stiefel highlighted the financial benefits of net metering, citing significant savings on electric bills thanks to their solar setup.
An Uncertain Path Forward
Despite the support, clean energy advocates see troubling signs that the commission may focus primarily on potential costs of net metering. Evidence suggests the commission is scrutinizing the policy for cost burdens on non-participating consumers. This approach echoes past decisions, such as the drastic reduction of energy efficiency program funding in 2021.
Advocates express concern that the commission’s precedent could negatively influence the net metering decision. The commission chair’s skepticism about climate science and energy efficiency further complicates the outlook. Stakeholders await the commission’s ruling, which could be delayed or prompt legislative intervention.
The uncertainty around the commission’s decision underscores the complexity of balancing cost concerns with the need to promote renewable energy. Should the commission decrease net metering rates, legislative action may be necessary to sustain the program. However, this could prolong the uncertainty and hinder solar energy growth in New Hampshire.
