Net Metering:
A Better Solution for Everyone — Not Just Solar Owners
Net metering is one of the most effective policies for expanding rooftop solar and transitioning to a cleaner, more resilient energy system. Despite efforts by utilities to weaken net metering by calling it an “unfair cost shift,” the reality is that solar energy benefits all ratepayers—including those who don’t have solar panels on their roofs.
But there’s a deeper reason why utilities are attacking net metering: it threatens their monopoly.
When a home or business generates more solar energy than it needs, the excess power flows back into the grid, helping meet local electricity demand. In return, the solar owner gets a credit on their electricity bill, which offsets future electricity use when the sun isn’t shining. This setup ensures that solar customers get fair compensation for the energy they contribute to the grid, reducing the need for expensive new power plants and transmission lines.
But what about those who don’t have solar? Are they unfairly subsidizing solar customers? Utilities claim that net metering shifts costs onto non-solar customers, but this argument is false — a misleading attempt to justify policies that protect utility profits while undermining clean energy progress.
Utilities aren’t just worried about cost shifts—they’re worried about losing control.
For over a century, large utility companies have operated as monopolies—centralized entities that own the power plants, control the transmission lines, and decide how electricity gets to customers. But more rooftop solar means more decentralized energy, and that weakens their grip on the system.
Every solar panel installed on a rooftop gives individuals and communities more control over their energy, reducing reliance on big utilities. This shift toward energy democracy—where people generate their own power and share it locally—undercuts the monopoly business model that utilities have relied on for decades.
Instead of adapting, utilities are rewriting the rules to maintain control.
This isn’t about fairness—it’s about preserving corporate profits at the expense of consumers.
If utilities were truly concerned about “cost shifts,” they would address the much larger and longstanding subsidies that disproportionately burden residential ratepayers:
Big industrial and commercial customers drive massive increases in electricity demand, requiring utilities to expand power plants, substations, and transmission lines. Yet residential customers are the ones who primarily fund these expansions through their electricity rates—even if they don’t benefit from them. Why don’t utilities call this an unfair cost shift?
It costs significantly more to provide electricity to rural customers because they are spread out, requiring more poles, wires, and maintenance per customer. Yet urban and rural customers pay the same rates, meaning city dwellers are effectively subsidizing rural electricity service. If utilities were consistent, they would apply their “cost shift” logic here, too—but they don’t, because it’s an industry-wide practice.
Most utilities charge residential customers a flat base rate, regardless of how much electricity they use. That means low-energy users (often lower-income households) end up subsidizing high-energy users (often wealthier households with bigger homes, pools, and more appliances). If utilities were really concerned about fairness, they would structure rates to reflect the true burden each customer places on the grid.
Rather than blaming rooftop solar owners, utilities should embrace Better Solutions that truly distribute costs and benefits fairly, such as:
Across the country, states are revising their net metering policies, often under pressure from monopoly utilities that want to weaken solar incentives. In California, for example, the NEM 3.0 decision drastically slashed the value of solar exports, making it harder for families to justify installing solar panels. Other states are following suit.
But instead of cutting rooftop solar, states should be expanding net metering and rewarding households that invest in clean energy. If utilities can charge customers for the cost of expanding infrastructure for industrial facilities and data centers, then solar customers deserve fair compensation for the energy they provide.
Net metering isn’t an unfair burden—it’s a Better Solution that strengthens the grid, lowers costs, and reduces pollution. The real cost shifts in the energy system come from outdated utility practices that favor big corporations over everyday customers.
Utilities don’t want to lose control of the energy system, which is why they fight rooftop solar. But energy democracy is growing, and more people are demanding fair policies that benefit everyone—not just the utility monopolies.
We need to fight for policies that expand solar and protect net metering, rather than letting utilities push False Solutions that keep us locked into an expensive, centralized, fossil-fuel-heavy grid.
03/11/2025 – This article has been written by the FalseSolutions.Org team
