House Energy Committee hears proposals on net metering

February 4, 2009

The House Energy and Utilities Committee held hearings on legislation that would establish net metering in Kansas. This legislation is contained in House Bills 2043 and 2051.

Net metering is an opportunity for customers to generate their own electricity by way of renewable resource, meter it bi-directionally on one meter, and receive credit for their contributions, paying only for the “net” electricity provided to them by their utility.  House Bills 2043 and 2051 are mirror bills, meaning they are essentially the same piece of legislation, only one addresses wind generation and the other addresses solar generation.

According to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), net metering programs serve as an important incentive for consumer investment in renewable energy generation, and represent a low-cost, easily administered method that benefits not only consumers but utilities, because consumer systems often offer support during times of peak load. Net metering is already offered in 35 states and is a major component of Governor Sebelius’ energy plan.

While the bills support a 150% payback to customers using renewable energy,
House Bills 2043 and 2051 differ from the current parallel generation statute.  Parallel generation involves two meters: one to measure the total amount of energy used and one to measure the energy saved by using renewable resources.  Although both the current statute and the proposed bills reimburse customers at a rate of 150%, opponents of net metering argued that it ignores the energy that the customer does use.  Proponents, on the other hand, recommended a greater payback because it would provide a greater incentive for renewable energy use.

Utility representatives voiced concerns about Sections 19 in the bills because they declare local regulations regarding any wind turbine (or solar energy device) void an unenforceable, which removes control from local governments.  These representatives were also apprehensive where the cost burden of renewable energy will fall.  Technically, the bills are a subsidy to those who can afford to pay for a solar panel or wind turbine, while those who cannot afford one will foot the bill.  There appeared to be general support among the committee for net metering, but only if there becomes a way to prevent the costs of the initiative from being passed on to other customers and only if there was a way to prevent the undermining of local authority.

There were also concerns raised about Section 18 because it references “restrictive covenants,” which are similar to conservation easements.  These are agreements between landowners and land trusts in which the landowner retains ownership of the property, but forfeits certain uses of it.  In exchange, the land trust protects the land from certain types of development, all under private financial agreements.  In Section 18 of these bills, there is a loophole which would allow homeowners to evade conservation easements.  There was also worry that tax deductions of those with conservation easements would be called into question.

Additionally, it is important to remember that these programs are highly cost prohibitive.  Although “going green” is in the best interest of the state and the country, many people currently will not be able to take advantage of these policies. 

Similar to the RPS proposals we heard last week, I expect other net metering proposals to come before the committee in the near future.  I am hopefully we will find a way to move some productive policy through this session that advances our long-term energy goals for the state.

Website by
Kring Associates

Paid for by Cindy Neighbor for State Representative - Kathleen Jenkins, Treasurer