Solar Power Rocks logo

Solar Power Rocks - Clear info on home solar power rebates, tax credits, and other benefits

Nevada is killing home solar and punishing recent solar adopters

Avatar for Ben Zientara
Published on 01/18/2016 in
Updated 01/19/2016

Nevada is one of the sunniest states in the country, and until recently it was one of the best places to go solar. That’s largely because of a solid solar policy called net metering, which basically means each kilowatt-hour (kWh) of electricity produced by a solar system reduces the homeowner’s energy bill on a 1-to-1 basis, whether the energy is used to power the home or sent out to the grid.

But in late December, 2015, in a move that shocked the solar industry and solar owners alike, Nevada’s Public Utilities Commission (PUC) approved radical changes to the state’s net metering rules and electricity rate structures, sparking huge public protests and causing multiple solar companies to shut their doors and ship jobs elsewhere.

The changes include increases in fixed monthly service fees on solar system owners and reductions in the prices system owners are paid for electricity that they send onto the grid, to be phased in over 5 years. All told, the PUC has approved a 300% increase in fees and a 76% reduction in per-kWh payments to solar owners.

That adds up to make home solar in Nevada an investment that makes no sense. But the most heinous part of this plan is that the changes will apply retroactively to people who put thousands of dollars into solar when it was a great deal, which was as recently as a month ago. And this is just the latest attack on solar at the state PUC level, a new tactic that utility companies and their cronies are using to make solar less profitable. They’ve done it in Florida, they’ve done it in Arizona, and they might be coming for your state next, so it might be time to start electing better state governments.

We wanted to know the scope of the financial impact of this decision, so we ran the numbers for Nevada home solar under the new system. The comparisons show a pretty clear picture of what the PUC has done. Our findings are below.

Before the changes

Before the recent changes in Nevada, home solar was an amazing investment, with an initial outlay of $17,500 paid back in just 10 years, and a $26,540 profit over an estimated 25-year system life. That represents an internal rate of return (IRR) of 12.75%—about 1.5 times as good as a long-term investment in the stock market. Furthermore, it was possible to go solar for $0 down with a power-purchase agreement or a loan and still rack up big savings over the long term.

Here’s how that looked:

Those returns were great! And like we said above, it wasn’t just because Nevada is one of the sunniest places in the country. Mostly, it was because of net metering. The sun shines brightest during the day when most people aren’t home, so a system produces a lot of power that is sent along to the owner’s neighbors. Under net metering, this power is also credited at the full retail rate, directly offsetting the system owner’s bill.

Since the PUC decision

Under the new scheme, electricity that is not consumed by the owner is credited at a lower rate. This year, that difference will be small—about 2 cents per kWh—but as the new rules are phased in, solar owners will be getting paid 7.5 cents/kWh less than they will pay for electricity from the utility company. That’s a reduction of 74%!

NV Energy, the state’s largest utility, says the changes in rate structures are necessary so that non-solar ratepayers aren’t subsidizing solar owners, who because of net metering pay much lower bills and thereby haven’t been charged for things like upkeep of the transmission infrastructure. But those claims run counter to the results of an independent study commissioned by the PUC in 2014, which showed that the benefits of net metering at full retail rates outweighed the costs to other ratepayers, the utility, and the state.

That disconnect has prompted many to wonder whether NV Energy plotted to kill rooftop solar so that it can continue to expand its own solar infrastructure and maintain control of the energy marketplace. In fact, many citizens have banded together to file a class-action lawsuit alleging NV Energy has engaged in illegal anti-competitive actions.

And it’s not just one lawsuit. As of today there are five petitions for reconsideration pending before the PUC, and responses to the petitions are due on January 25th. That could mean the new rate schedules will be abandoned and there might be a more favorable outcome for solar owners. But given the commission’s recent actions, a reversal doesn’t seem likely.

The current financial picture for a Nevada solar investment

That brings us to the meat of this issue. What will the effects be on people who have just recently invested in solar? As we mentioned above, before the rules changes, a solar investment in Nevada resulted in $26,540 in profits and a 12.75% IRR over 25 years.

If you can use 100% of the energy

After the new rules, the absolute best-case scenario would be a home solar installation that produces only the energy that will be used by the homeowner. But a smaller system in the new Nevada is a financial disaster, because the increase in fees has proportionally more impact. So we went with our standard estimate of a 5-kW system, which would produce more than enough energy for a standard home.

In this case, we’re either talking about a larger residence, or one where the inhabitants are at home during the day using all the electricity the panels produce. So, if you can use all the energy a 5-kW system can produce, your best possible outcome is a 13-year payback with $13,000 in profits and an IRR of 7.5%. Those are similar numbers to solar in Alaska. Ouch.

If you use 50% of the energy

But it’s much more realistic to assume that you use about half of the energy your panels produce. The other half gets sent to the grid. In most states, that works great, but under Nevada’s new rate structure, you’re screwed. Buying a solar installation outright becomes a bad investment, with a 20-year payback, $3,375 in returns, and a 2.4% IRR. Inflation traditionally beats that.

And look at the orange bars, which represent taking a loan for solar. A loan is usually a slam dunk, because you get the federal tax credit and energy savings while paying the system off slowly, but under Nevada’s new rules, it won’t save you a penny until year 33 (not shown), which is more than the maximum system life we use in our estimates.

You can’t get a PPA, because the PPA companies are moving out of the state. The blue bars make it pretty plain why that is.

So what can you do?

It’s a really difficult situation for solar owners in Nevada. The best thing you can do is to keep the pressure on the PUC to change the rules. The PUC consists of three members appointed by Governor Sandoval, and his term is up at the end of 2018. Nevada’s term-limits for governor mean an open election for 2018, and we bet that solar policy will be a major point of contention.

Should you go off-grid?

Uh, no. unfortunately, we’re not in a place right now where going off-grid makes any sense at all. First, it’s probably illegal inside your city, but it’s also inadvisable. If you’re off-grid, you’re entirely liable for any outages or other problems that might occur. Finally, from a financial standpoint, it’s a nightmare. Sure you’ll save on all those usurious NV Energy fees, but the costs still far outweigh the benefits. Need proof? Read on.

While it’s technically feasible to live comfortably with solar panels on your roof and Tesla’s Powerwall batteries in your garage, it’s really expensive. We like math, so we did some. We assume that you’ll need four 7-kWh Powerwall batteries, for a total of 28 kWhs of storage. At a cost of $3,000 per battery plus installation, we rounded the initial investment to $15,000, and plugged that into our above calculations. BUT, Powerwall batteries are under warranty for only 10 years, so we assume you’ll have to replace them once, about 13 years in, at a significantly reduced cost. Here’s how that all looks:

Ouch again. You might break even over 25 years, but only just. And again, you’re on your own if anything breaks, waiting for warranty repair or worse, while your house is un-powered.

Best just to stick with the utility company for now, as crappy as they are, and work for a change in leadership in two years. Until then, Nevada, we’ll keep the lights on for you.

Last modified: January 19, 2016

7 thoughts on “Nevada is killing home solar and punishing recent solar adopters

  1. Avatar for Eric Eric says:

    Exactly right the electric companies are controlling the solar business. They have the strongest lobbyists in the states. In Florida FPL is the biggest solar company in the U.S. They have a rebate for P.V. and advertise it but it is gone in two days. They then say there going to put more money in next year. People in Fl. put it off for the following year and it is the same story “it’s gone in two days” killing the residential market. B.S. We need a grass root uprising to change it or this crap will never stop!!

  2. Avatar for Jenn Jenn says:

    Similar legislation is being considered in Michigan, we have solar & are afraid the fallout will be just as disastrous as predicted in NV. I don’t have faith that our state government will vote any different either, can only hope… Been describing the situation to others so they understand net metering & asking them to contact our legislators in opposition.

  3. Avatar for SHANNON SHANNON says:

    Nv state electric just sounds like a bunch of greedy cocksuckers and are and will be stealing from solar energy owner for a long time to come. would be cool if people could actually band together and start there own and tell Nv electic to take a flying fuck.

  4. Avatar for bert bert says:

    Maybe its just my DIY / rugged individualism coming out but I’ve always looked at putting solar on my house or RV as a way to get free electricity from the sun- not as a way to go into business with the electric utilities. Saving up for solar is a burden but it has to be done. Seems simple to reason that the people you are paying for power don’t want to lose your money. Utility and government subsidies are just payments to keep us tied to the grid.

  5. Avatar for Mixie Duckinson Mixie Duckinson says:

    It is all about control. Utilities want to own solar production. NV Energy should instead build battery “farms” and sell back excess residential solar power. But that requires changing mentality from producing to storing.

  6. Avatar for WILLIAM LONG WILLIAM LONG says:

    What can an individual do to help reverse the PUC decision?

  7. Avatar for Joe Joe says:

    The folks that run the power companies are liars.. the answer is to stop buying power from them when the do this..Id charge batteries during the day and use them at night with LED lighting, high efficiency appliances and 98.6 % methane heat or wood .. the politicians that allowed thus need to go..

Have anything to add?

Your email address will not be published.

Subscribe to get solar news

The Federal Solar Tax Credit Has Stepped Down. It Steps Down Again In:

Learn more about the Federal Solar Tax Credit before it goes away.

Solar Power Rocks is a Wave Solar company

Wave Solar Logo