If you are looking to install solar onto your home or business but feel overwhelmed at the number of installer options available to you, TXSES is here to help. We’ve put together a list of the top ten factors to consider when making the decision on which installer to go with.
1. Use a certified or accredited installer – The North American Board of Certified Energy Practitioners is one of the primary organizations tasked with issuing accreditation to solar installation businesses. In Texas, installers must be licensed through the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation and be performed by licensed electricians.
2. Use a member or business of a trusted industry group – Groups like Texas Solar Energy Society and the Solar Energy Industries Association have their own vetting processes for ensuring the ethical operation and standard of service for installers. Industry groups represent a good first stop to find some installers, and TXSES even offers a map of installers by county.
3. Use an experienced installer – The DOE recommends installers have a minimum of three years’ experience. They should be able to answer any and all questions about solar that you have (how is installation performed, what panels are used, what is the generation capacity of the panels, etc.).
4. Check reviews and referrals – Personal networks and online reviews are excellent sources of weeding through installers. Personal connections may be able to give you insight into the quality of previous jobs, and online resources can help identify suspicious business practices.
5. Compare quotes and cost estimates – The DOE recommends using Berkeley Lab’s Tracking the Sun tool to get a rough estimate of the cost of solar installations, and a reasonable bid before contacting installers. You should compare at least two bids across multiple installers to get a reliable estimate. Additionally, your installer should be able to explain the source of each cost within the offer, and inform you of any legitimate tax credits or installation incentives available.
6. Clarify corporate chain-of-command – The installer should disclose whether they do the work in-house or subcontract out. If the installer subcontracts, get information on the subcontractor, their experience, accreditation, etc.
7. Ensure conduction of roof-check – The installer should perform an analysis of the roof conditions before proceeding with installation. Make sure that they do so, and whether or not they recommend roof repairs or roof adjustments and options available.
8. Ensure solar is the installers area-of-expertise – Just because a business does installation doesn’t mean it’s their bread and butter. Choosing a business that focuses on installation is almost a surefire way of ensuring the quality of the job is met.
9. Verify whether warranties or legal assurances exist – Installers should be transparent about performance and equipment warranties on the system. The Renewable Energy Design Group recommends 90% production over 10 years and 80% over 25 for performance warranties, and 10-12 years for equipment warranties.
10. Verify that the installer is a legitimate business – Unfortunately, solar scams are all too common, but we recommend checking with your local utility provider, and the Better Business Bureau’s Scam Tracker as two options to ensure the installers you’re looking at are not underhanded.
Barbose, Galen, Naim Darghouth, Sydney Forrester, and Eric O’Shaughnessy. “Tracking the Sun.” Berkeley Lab Electricity Markets & Policy. Accessed October 20, 2023.
Being blamed for problems you didn’t cause is frustrating and can even be grounds for defamation. For the Texas renewables industry, it’s just another day.
Increased outages; 2021’s grid failure; conservation requests; and EEAs all point to a problem with the grid, but who or what’s to blame? Texas’ preferred boogeyman is the renewable energy industry. Pablo Vegas, President/CEO of ERCOT blamed renewables for the EEA 2 no less than 18 times on September 6.[3] His statements were unfounded – claiming low generation does not make it so. NPR reported, “there was, apparently, wind power being produced in the state on Wednesday.” If low renewable generation was the cause, ERCOT would have needed to increase power on the grid. Instead, ERCOT “cut about 1,000 megawatts.”[4]
Unfortunately, falsehoods about renewables do not address problems and cost taxpayers. The real reason an EEA 2 was issued was not because renewables were underperforming; quite the opposite. A transmission line between South Texas and Dallas was facing congestion. Congestion occurs when the lines don’t have enough space to move all of the electricity generated in one place to another. If too much electricity is on the line, it overloads and must be cut. Congestion is expensive, translating to price increases of $2B in 2021.[5] Rather than wind, the grid’s inadequate infrastructure and transmission capacity was the problem.
So why is Texas prone to congestion?
It may be the fault of our interconnection process. Most states use an ‘invest and connect’ “interconnection method in which grid upgrades are made before generators are interconnected. Texas instead uses a ‘connect and manage’ method, which allows generators to be interconnected quickly, but face curtailment (temporarily cutting a generator from the grid) if the grid has excessive power. It’s a double-edged sword; while ERCOT interconnects resources rapidly, it risks congestion.[6]
Ironically, renewables increase grid reliability in a taxpayer-friendly manner. Increased storage (batteries) allows local governments to quickly send power from virtual power plants (VPP). VPPs are 40-60% cheaper than traditional peaker plants (combustion plants that only operate when the grid exceeds peak demand or is under stress), and offer payouts to home/system owners.[7] Additionally, increasing transmission capacity puts more electricity on the grid. Greater capacity means renewables can sign favorable power purchase agreements (agreements between consumers – ERCOT, municipal utilities, co-ops, retail electric providers, etc. – and generators to purchase power) which keep electricity prices low.[8]
It’s past time to quit blaming renewables and address insufficient transmission. It’s imperative too; while primary energy consumption has been constant since 2000,[9] state population is expected to double from 2010 to 2050.[10] It’s inevitable that electricity demand will rise. Increased transmission will need to meet those demands. Changes to the interconnection process are paramount, lest we further waste taxpayer money and precious time pointing fingers.
[1] Buchele “ERCOT Can’t Move Energy Where It Needs to go, and it’s Putting the Grid at Risk” 2023.
[2] Stringer, et al. “Texas’ Winter Storm Sent Power Outages Soaring” 2023.
With the gaveling of Sine Die on May 29 for the 88th Texas Legislative Session, Texas successfully avoided the passage of catastrophic anti-renewable bills like SB 7 and SB 624. However, several bills, including those that would further subsidize the already taxpayer-laden fossil fuel industry have made their way to Governor Abbott’s desk. Here’s a brief overview of some of the more pertinent bills.
TXSES’ Wins in the Legislature:
Passed:SB 1699 (Johnson), permits aggregated distributed energy resources to participate in the ERCOT wholesale market without having to register with the PUCT as a power generation company. Additionally, the bill permits utility providers to offer and promote demand-response programs when possible and allows them to make use of grant funding for up to 10% of the costs. Demand response, as a concept, seeks to increase grid reliability by reducing energy consumption during times of peak demand through smart-metering technologies and increased energy efficiencies. Sent to Governor Abbott on May 29.
Passed:HB 3526 (Raymond), will forbid municipal or county governments from applying building codes to the construction of solar pergolas (patios with solar panels affixed). The bill was sent to Governor Abbott on May 18.
Killed: HB 4455 (DeAyala), would have increased the ability of homeowner’s associations (HOA) to restrict the location of rooftop solar. Specifically, under current law, if the homeowner can prove that an alternate location outside of the HOA-designated area would result in 10% more electrical generation, the homeowner may use the alternate location. HB 4455 would have raised that bar from 10% to 25%, a more difficult hurdle for solar homeowners. Fortunately, the bill died, having failed to make it out of the House Business & Industry Committee.
Killed:SB 7(Schwertner|King), would have mandated electric utility providers to pay exorbitant fees to generators during unreliable grid conditions. Additionally, the bill offered little regulatory oversight and would incentivize new dispatchable generation facilities. Expert estimates had pinned the cost of SB 7 from $10-$18 billion; however, legislators capped the cost to $1 billion annually. Large generators indicated this was not enough for them to build new facilities.
Killed:SB 624 (Kolkhorst|Middleton), would have imposed excessively stringent permitting processes on renewable energy generators and levied new application fees. Fossil fuel and nuclear plants were exempt from this permitting process. Additionally, non-dispatchable generators (aka renewables) would be required to pay more costly service fees than they currently pay. In sum, the bill required renewables to bankroll further development of fossil fuels.
TXSES’ Losses in the Legislature:
Passed: HB 5 (Hunter|Meyer|Burrows|Shine|Longoria), will replace Chapter 313, a recently expired program that helped oil and gas companies, chip manufacturers and other industries secure billions in tax abatements through local school districts. HB 5 also makes methane gas power plants cited in SB 2627 eligible for tax abatements. While the bill was scaled back from its predecessor and includes more oversight, it still excludes clean energy generators and battery storage facilities from receiving the benefits. HB 5 was sent to Governor Abbott on May 30.
Passed: SB 505 (Nichols) will require electric vehicle (EV) owners to pay a $400 registration fee for new first-time EVs, and a $200 annual registration fee each year after. Some purport that the bill is designed to make up lost revenues from gas taxes; however, the bill will punish rather than reward EV’s economically beneficial carbon reductions. EV advocates proposed a mileage system in addition to a lower registration fee. The bill was signed by Governor Abbott on May 13 and will become effective September 1, 2023
Passed:HB 2127 (Burrows|Meyer|Goldman|King, Ken|Raymond), will claw back the power of home rule cities dramatically. Should cities draft or pass any law that pertains to any of the contents of the Texas Agriculture Code, Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Business & Commerce Code, Finance Code, Insurance Code, Labor Code, Local Government Code, Natural Resources Code, Occupations Code, or Property Code, the law will be considered null. This will dramatically reduce the ability of cities to incentivize the adoption of renewables and disincentivize the continued use of fossil fuel generation. HB 2127 was sent to Governor Abbott on May 24.
Passed:SB 2627 (Schwertner), will establish a special fund for dispatchable (non-renewable) generators to receive 2% interest loans for up to 60% of the cost of developing new facilities. While the bill will not go into effect without the enabling legislation SJR 93, it will still withhold taxpayer dollars and provide up to 20% of costs in the form of bonuses. All the while generators have admitted that the extra financing is not necessary. SB 2627 was sent to Governor Abbott on May 29.
SJR 93, the enabling legislation for SB 2627, proposes a constitutional amendment to create the State Energy Fund Amendment and authorizes other funding mechanisms for the construction, maintenance, modernization and operation of electric generating facilities. It was filed with the Secretary of State on May 30 and will be on the general election ballot statewide on November 7, 2023.
Passed:SB 1290 (Perry) will direct the Texas Department of Agriculture and Texas A&M Agrilife + Forest Service to study the effects of the operation of, and the impacts of the disposal of solar, wind, and energy storage equipment. The bill was sent to Governor Abbott on May 29.
Killed: HB 3010 (Zwiener), would have streamlined the municipal permitting process for solar installations significantly. The bill would have required cities to use the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s SolarAPP+ program to expedite permitting and reduce costly wait times. Despite maneuvering and attempting to add the language as an amendment to other bills, HB 3010 did not make it out of House State Affairs Committee.
Killed: HB 4542 (Moody), would have required utility providers operating outside of ERCOT to institute a net-metering buyback program for homeowners with rooftop solar that produces excess generation. HB 4542 was placed on the intent calendar on May 24.
Indeterminate Impact
Passed: HB 1500 (Holland|Bell, Keith|Canales|Goldman|Clardy), the sunset bill for the Public Utility Commission (PUCT), was one of the more harrowing pieces of legislation in the 88th. Under the Texas Sunset Act, all state agencies go through sunset review to determine if that agency is still necessary, or if some of the functions of the sunsetting agency should be moved to another agency in order to improve efficiency/effectiveness. While amendments are often added in sunset legislation, it’s considered bad practice. The bill was amended to include some provisions of SB 7, the so-called “performance credit mechanism,” and SB 624, a discriminatory permitting process for solar and wind projects only.
Included in HB 1500:
Caps the cost of the PCM at $1 billion. Renewables are excluded but battery storage should be able to participate.
Mandates the “firming” of renewables at the portfolio level by 2027; includes battery storage as an acceptable firming method.
Mandates the PUCT to conduct a study of cost allocation of ancillary services by 2026.
Requires the PUCT to establish a reasonable allowance for transmission-owning utility costs associated with interconnection.
Mandates the PUCT to implement a Dispatchable Reliability Reserve Service (DRRS) by the end of 2024.
Establishes a termination date for the Renewable Generation Requirement – known in other states as the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) – on September 1st, 2025.
HB 1500 was sent to Governor Abbott on May 30.
Passed: SB 1015 (King), will amend the Texas Utilities Code to provide the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT) with sole regulatory control over tariff/rate-making adjustments. Revisions replace the 60-day minimum with a 60-day maximum process and establish limits to the frequency with which electric utilities may request adjustments. The bill was sent to Governor Abbott on May 29.
HB 3010. Rep. Erin Zwiener (D-45). HB 3010, requiring municipal/county governments to use SolarApp+ (or another online program with similar capabilities) to streamline the solar permitting process, is currently stalled. Referred to House State Affairs committee on March 14, it never had a hearing. Efforts to insert the language of HB 3010 into SB 2127 (Sen. Brandon Creighton [R-4]), a bill designed to limit the legislative autonomy of municipal/county governments from passing policies that contradict state law, were unsuccessful. Despite this, staffers for Creighton voiced some support for HB 3010 and have been willing to help identify another bill to which HB 3010 could be attached.
HB 4455. Rep. Mano DeAyala (R-133). HB 4455 amends Sec. 202.010 of the Texas Property Code changing the requirement from 10% to a 25% increase in energy production if the solar energy device is located in an area not designated by the property owner’s association, was referred to House Business and Industry committee on March 21. The bill was never set for hearing. The bill would have restricted homeowners from installing solar where they wanted. At this time, TXSES has not identified any attempts to attach the language of the bill into another.
SB 2257 Sen. Cesar Blanco (D-29)& HB 4542 Rep. Joseph Moody (D-78). SB 2257 and its House Companion HB 4542 appear unlikely to make it out of their respective committees (Senate Business and Commerce and House State Affairs respectively). The bills would have required electric utility providers (municipal utilities, co-ops, and retail electric providers) to use a net-metering buyback plan for homeowners with excess generation to interconnect to the grid. The bill’s ultimate impact however would have been minor, as it only would have applied to areas outside of ERCOT (<10%).
One of the more talked about energy bills filed in the current 88th legislative session, SB 857 and companion SJR 45 is raising lots of eyebrows. According to latest news reports, the proposed Performance Credit Mechanism could add up to $5.7 billion per year to our electric bills. Billion. Annually. Debate is heated over who really benefits from the Electric Generating Facility Fund, but the legislation provides funding in the form of loans to dispatchable power sources like natural gas, nuclear and coal-fired plants. The operative word is ‘dispatchable,’ which in layman’s terms means no renewables.
Here are the details of the legislation:
❖ Establishes the “Electric Generating Facility Fund” (ECFF – a special fund separate from the general budget, not in need of direct appropriation, used to provide loans towards the construction of electric generating and transmission facilities within ERCOT) and the “Electric Generating Facility Fund Advisory Committee (comprised of the Texas Comptroller or representative thereof; three Senators appointed by the Lieutenant Governor including the head of the finance committee and the head of the electric generation committee; and three Representatives appointed by the Lieutenant Governor including the head of the finance committee and the head of the electric generation committee.
❖ Loans may only be awarded to heat-generated electric facilities (natural gas, coal, nuclear), hydroelectric, or a wholesale interconnection facility connecting energy from the above-mentioned sources, and may cover up to 25% of total construction costs.
❖ The fund is financed through a combination of intergovernmental transfers, investment earnings, and interest earnings.
Problems Associated with SB 857
❖ SB 857 subsidizes the construction of new non-renewable generating facilities and precludes wind energy and most solar energy generating facilities.
❖ Uses budgetary gimmicks to get around Texas Spending Limit by separating it from the General Fund (does not have to meet balanced budget requirements).
❖ The subsidy towards natural gas generating facilities is counterintuitive to market rationale and would create inefficient economic outcomes. Further, natural gas is already implicitly subsidized through the non-inclusion of externalities in current market prices.
❖ The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission recommended weatherization in the aftermath of the 2021 ERCOT failure, having made no recommendation to increase dispatchable generation capacity. The ECFF would not address the reliability of the ERCOT grid during severe weather events.
Alternatives or Amendments to SB 857
❖ Expand loan eligibility to include construction of non-heat sources of energy, including photovoltaics (utility- and community-scale) and wind turbine facilities.
❖ Amend the financing structure of the bill to award loans for up to 25% of the costs of weatherizing eligible facilities.
❖ Include TCEQ (Texas Commission on Environmental Quality) representatives on the committee, and include the ECCF within the general operating budget.
What You Can Do
There are things you can do. Here are a few ideas:
❖ Prepare for the public comment period once the bill is referred to committee. The bill was referred to Senate Business and Commerce committee on March 1, 2023.
❖ Contact your representative and ask them to not support SB857. Find your local representative here.
❖ Spread awareness of SB857 to your friends, family and social media.
Citations:
Bodjona, Coboyo, et al. “The February 2021 Cold Weather Outages in Texas and the South
Central United States | FERC, NERC and Regional Entity Staff Report.” Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission. North American Electric Reliability Corporation, November 16, 2021.
https://www.ferc.gov/media/february-2021-cold-weather-outages-texas-and-south-central-unite
d-states-ferc-nerc-and.
Johnson, Brad. “Dispatchable Generation Mandate, Subsidy Funds Filed in Texas Legislature.”
The Texan, February 15, 2023.
https://thetexan.news/dispatchable-generation-mandate-subsidy-funds-filed-in-texas-legislat
ure/.
Perry, Charles. “SB 857.” Texas Legislature Online. The Senate of Texas, February 13, 2023.
https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=88R&Bill=SB857.
