NET METERING

I find it fascinating how historically corporations have utilized whatever new technology was available to transfer the work they normally did themselves, to the consumer, thereby lowering the cost to produce the service and increasing the profit made by those corporations. A few examples: Only a few short years ago we called travel agents to make our flight arrangements or when we called companies for service we spoke to a live representative who asked us questions and offered answers and solutions and then there were people, numbering in the millions, working on factory floors, all now replaced by robots.  This is the process and point of all business and industry. It correctly looks for the least expensive method to produce a product its customers are willing to pay for. Technology has generally been the most effective go-to answer to lower costs and increase profits so it has been used extensively.

Then why is there now such a resounding opposition to renewable energy? Think about it: what is more available than the power of the sun, the power of the wind and the power of water in motion? We are talking about nature, the very core of our existence. If it is available why not use it?

History suggests we have not been able to fully harness the power of nature although we watched it every time a hurricane, tornado, flood or drought affected our lives. We could see it, feel it and even fear it but we could not use all of it. Now we can, through wind and solar.  And, who is complaining the loudest, of course, the corporate world.

The solar industry has utilized “net metering” as an incentive to consumers to sign up for solar panels. The point is if you use solar energy and produce more power than you need, then sell the excess to others to reduce your own expenses. Sounds like a good business model to me.

But this turn of events is threatening to the utility companies and private energy companies, most of which are monopolies that depend on customers buying their energy for whatever rates the companies charge.

Renewable energy is a new competitor and, with all the self-righteous bloviating we hear from the industry “job creators” about letting the market work, one thing they hate is competition. Their answer is to charge a solar customer, who has accessed more power than they need, a fee to be paid to the Power Company or utility BEFORE the excess power is sold to other consumers.

Wouldn’t that be like charging an airline company a fee for the time and effort consumers put into making their own flight reservations so as to make the transaction cost more equal to the cost the airline would have had, before they got rid of all the flight reservation people who used to make those reservations for us?

How does utilizing a new technology such as nature differ from a company that uses technology to lower its costs, increase its profits and utilize the increased profit, to pursue other businesses?

But now we have money, huge sums of money, employed by industry, utility companies and private individuals, in almost every state, campaigning and lobbying at state legislature levels to fight a competitor that has figured out how to access a new and natural technology and make it more affordable to customers. If industry succeeds the fees will effectively eliminate the competitive solar advantage, the energy costs will remain high for the consumer and the suppliers will be the same companies that need to destroy large portions of the earth in order to pursue their own profit agendas.

If we are expected to make our own reservations, fix our own cable systems and pump our own gas, then why should we not be encouraged to access our own energy and when sated sell the “profit” to others not interested in accessing it themselves?

It is hypocrisy for the corporate world to complain about disruption from technology when competitors come along and do what they do, but do it better and cheaper.