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.
If you’re considering going solar, you might be wondering if your utility will compensate you for pushing electricity you’re not using back onto the grid. These customers are only billed for the ‘net’ energy they use each month.
While Texas doesn’t offer statewide net metering, some utilities do offer it. Referred to as ‘buyback plans,’ solar consumers can receive either credits or monetary compensation. Municipal utilities and rural electric coops (regulated utilities) offer one kind of compensation. Private electric retail providers (deregulated utilities) offer another.
For both regulated and deregulated electricity markets, the value of the credit/payout is determined based on the net generation of the system; in other words, how much of the electricity produced by the system the homeowner did not consume directly, compensated at the retail rate for electricity…how much consumers pay for that electricity. With net-metering, the retail rate is calculated on a monthly basis.
For regulated buyback methods, each municipal utility or electric co-op has its own distinct buyback plan. Some may not have any. The city of Austin uses a Value of Solar (VOS) buyback plan. VOS measures the total amount of electricity generated by a system – not just excess generation – and credits the homeowner at a rate calculated by the city. In Austin, the rate takes into consideration energy savings, environmental savings, and savings from heightened grid stability as a result of the system. Find more information on specific municipal utilities or electric co-ops here.
For deregulated utilities, those buyback plans compensate the homeowner for net generation at the energy credit rate (retail rate minus delivery fees). Credit plans are either capped or uncapped (no limitation on the amount of electricity that will be credited). Deregulated markets alternatively use real-time metering payouts. In this plan, real-time metering payouts pay the homeowner for the amount of electricity they do not consume directly but put onto the grid. The retail electric provider pays the homeowner the retail rate for the electricity at the time of use. This is very similar to net-metering, but rather than using a retail rate on a monthly basis, the retail rate is applied at the time of use.
More detailed information on net metering options in Texas:
Almost every Texan remembers Winter Storm Uri, which in 2021 highlighted the inadequacies of the ERCOT power grid as it faced total failure. However, the consequences were not uniform. Read the report to learn more about how low-income Texans were disproportionately burdened by the storm and subsequent ERCOT failings.
