Center for Business and Economic Research - Ball State University


CBER Data Center
Projects and PublicationsEconomic IndicatorsWeekly CommentaryCommunity Asset InventoryManufacturing Scorecard

About

Commentaries are published weekly and distributed through the Indianapolis Business Journal and many other print and online publications. Disclaimer

RSS Feed

Disclaimer

The views expressed in these commentaries do not reflect those of Ball State University or the Center for Business and Economic Research.

Recent

Two Key Economic Lessons in One BillHoosiers face trade-offs and opportunity costs in the wake of SEA1.

Time to Fix Economic Development PolicyAllocating tax dollars to land development won’t cause economic growth.

The Unanticipated Effects of SB1Businesses, governments and households may all feel the effects.

The Stupidest of PoliciesThis whipsawing of tariff rates has unnerved financial markets, which on Wednesday, were toying with a liquidity crisis.

View archives

Top Tags

jobs and employment 261
economics 201
state and local government 188
education 186
economic development 171
indiana 171
budget and spending 145
taxes 144
law and public policy 142
workforce and human capital 139
Browse all tags
Reporter / Admin Login

February 22, 2015

The Strange Politics of Net Metering

— Author’s Note 03/08/15: In my recent column on net metering I referred to ‘Indiana’s Community Action Coalition’ when I intended to write the ‘Citizen’s Action Coalition.’ The error was all mine, and I apologize to readers and members of both organizations for the mistake. —

Indiana faces a looming problem in electricity markets that many states have already tackled. It is not a specially complicated issue, but with more than the usual demagoguery surrounding it, a little explanation is in order. Electricity is sold to consumers under a form of price regulation. The reason for this is that consumers cannot change the wires to their home any time they see a lower price. So, electricity production is what economists call a ‘natural monopoly’ and everywhere power is sold there is some form of pricing regulation.

The way this works is that the electric company builds power plants, pays workers and buys fuel. Then the regulator (usually an appointed board) sets a price for consumers that covers the cost of the fuel and the people and pays the companies a ‘fair’ rate of return on their plant and equipment. In return, the company must provide service to everyone in their region.

This pricing regulation is not perfect. It cannot be. No price will meet the mutually exclusive goals of getting service to everyone at the lowest costs. So, regulators (or owners of rural co-ops) compromise by having some consumers subsidize others. Traditionally, it has been structured so wealthier households subsidize poorer ones, but that is changing.

A decade ago Congress passed legislation that required electric utilities to buy power from consumers (typically large farms) who installed solar and wind power on their land. As in many states, the requirement was that the power companies buy any excess power from this homemade electricity at the same price other retail customers pay for their electricity. Therein lays the problem.

The power company loses money on the deal, and growth in solar and wind power means that soon it will be big money. Many of us might be tempted to say, “Who cares??!” But remember that the electrical company is regulated, so it cannot lose money overall. That means someone else is paying wealthy landowners to have wind and solar power. That someone else just might be all those customers who do not have solar cells on their roof.

It gets worse. The folks who have the solar cells and wind turbines are going to be a good bit more affluent than the typical electric utility customer. These systems are expensive. So, this pricing scheme acts much like a regressive tax that most ratepayers pay to wealthier owners of the home solar cells and wind turbines.

Now, there are solid arguments for subsidizing renewable energy, but implementing a regressive tax that hits low- and middle-income electricity customers is close to the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard of in years.

Many groups including the National Black Caucus of State Legislators are calling on states to change the rules. Indiana should do so. It is funny though, that Citizen's Action Coalition is fighting against change even though this rule might honestly be called a CAFO subsidy. Wow. Pigs may not fly, but they have subsidized electricity.­

Link to this commentary: https://commentaries.cberdata.org/774/the-strange-politics-of-net-metering

Tags: regulation, energy


About the Author

Michael Hicks cberdirector@bsu.edu

Michael J. Hicks, PhD, is the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and the George and Frances Ball distinguished professor of economics in the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. Note: The views expressed here are solely those of the author, and do not represent those of funders, associations, any entity of Ball State University, or its governing body.

© Center for Business and Economic Research, Ball State University

About Ball State CBER Data Center

Ball State CBER Data Center is one-stop shop for economic data including demographics, education, health, and social capital. Our easy-to-use, visual web tools offer data collection and analysis for grant writers, economic developers, policy makers, and the general public.

Ball State CBER Data Center (cberdata.org) is a product of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University. CBER's mission is to conduct relevant and timely public policy research on a wide range of economic issues affecting the state and nation. Learn more.

Terms of Service

Center for Business and Economic Research

Ball State University • Whitinger Business Building, room 149
2000 W. University Ave.
Muncie, IN 47306-0360
Phone:
765-285-5926
Email:
cber@bsu.edu
Website:
www.bsu.edu/cber
Facebook:
www.facebook.com/BallStateCBER
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/BallStateCBER
Close