Equal access to clean power and a shared investment in our infrastructure will make America greener.
Over the past few decades, "going green" has evolved from something a handful of elites discussed over tempeh and green tea to a national priority shared by the majority of Americans. A confluence of factors -- the Gulf Wars, Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth, and the industrialization of China and other economies helped convince Americans that going green is as good for us as it is for the planet. Even our most prolific capitalists have come to terms with the economic impacts of pollution and climate change. And in a sense, this evolution is natural: we're Americans -- we don't want to be beholden to foreign states or big oil companies. We want to be free.
Now we're focusing on the best way to get there.
Over the past few years, a heated battle has emerged over which source of clean power should be prioritized. Some argue, for example, that wind and solar are the only acceptable means of going green. Others make the point that only carbon-free nuclear power can generate the volume required to support whole cities. These arguments can be distractions. The best way to reach our goal isn't to pit one tool against another -- it's to democratize the energy markets so everyone can afford to go green.
But over the past decade, government policy has focused narrowly on one means of bringing clean power to the masses. A host of federal and state programs and tax incentives have come online to help people produce their own energy at home with rooftop solar panels. There are two problems with this approach, and both revolve around basic fairness.
The first is that these programs have really only enabled the very wealthy to participate. Even with the generous incentives, installing solar panels still costs between $12,000 and $40,000 in California, and is generally available only to homeowners, not renters. That cuts the vast majority of individuals and businesses out of the market, and gives a tax advantage to those at the upper echelons of the income scale. For these programs to have real impact, they have to be available to more families. And right now neither the lease nor buy option is available to anybody other than the wealthy.
The second problem involves our shared investment in our energy infrastructure. Some groups argue that people who have installed solar panels shouldn't contribute to the cost of maintaining the electric grid. In order to support safety and maintenance efforts, some utilities have started charging a fixed fee for homes connected to the grid. Many solar owners don't want to pay it - they argue that it lowers their overall savings. But the practical effect of that argument is poorer families must subsidize the solar arrays of the wealthy.
Extremely few people are truly 'off the grid'. Even those who pay zero to their power company are still using traditional power at night and relying on the grid for backup. Net Metering, which allows customers to be paid back at generous rates for the power they put in to the grid, creates tiny or nonexistent energy bills for some consumers. But that doesn't mean they're not using any traditional power -- it just means they're generating more power than they use during the day, and relying on traditional power at night. The utilities become in essence a free backup battery for the solar customers.
This accounting method creates a false sense of being "off the grid" for many -- but they still use and rely on the grid, and shouldn't force regular users to bear that cost for them. A fixed fee is only fair -- if you truly don't use the grid, you are free to disconnect. But forcing lower-income people and renters who could never afford to install solar panels to make up the difference lets wealthy program participants off the hook.
As we move closer to our goal of going green, the real question isn't which source of carbon-free power we should be using. It's whether or not America can forge a future where everyone has access to clean power, and where everyone is equally invested in our energy infrastructure.