It is unfortunate and untruthful that the city of Bowling Green continues to portray us as disgruntled homeowners trying to gouge our neighbors with costs associated with rooftop solar. These accusations continue in the 12/22 article about Joe DeMare’s continued challenge to the Rider E rooftop solar penalty that degraded our investment in solar, batteries and geothermal.
We moved to Bowling Green with the dream of finally achieving near net-zero living in a city that purports itself to be renewable energy friendly when in fact, the only clean energy BG supports is through American Municipal Power and big utility interests. As one expert told us, rooftop solar, or distributed generation, is not adequately valued and false assertions like those made by the city in the 12/22 article need to be challenged with the truth so the public will understand that the lawsuit was made necessary because of the chilling effect of Rider E on individual solar investment and energy democracy.
We have talked with experts who told us that big utilities want to own all the electrons, and that is why rooftop solar is being discouraged, not just in BG but elsewhere. This fossil-fueled lobbyist agenda and misinformation cannot be allowed to continue.
Contrast BG’s policies to cities like Ann Arbor who are actively encouraging distributed generation, community solar and expanding renewable energy to support the grid, reduce the carbon footprint, and provide much needed clean electricity during peak demand on the hottest of days. It is unfortunate that there are no checks and balances for decisions made by BG Utilities – no ratepayer vote – no oversight – no appeal process – no one to represent all residents of the city who want to take advantage of government incentives to install rooftop and community solar. We don’t even have the Ohio Consumers’ Counsel, so it is unfortunate that our only option to challenge Rider E was through a lawsuit.
But the principle of the matter was so important, we had to do what we could on behalf of all BG residents. We cannot do nothing while false assertions are made accusing us of costing others when the city, in fact, is costing residents by discouraging rooftop solar at the same time the US government is encouraging it.
Now the city will cost residents even more for a lawsuit instead of rescinding Rider E or the obvious alternative to grandfather in existing installations. Either way would have avoided a lawsuit, but only by rescinding Rider E and valuing solar for its contribution to grid support and climate change cost avoidance can residents reliably invest in solar.
For more accurate information, visit the Facebook page, BG Solar Advocates.
Leatra Harper & Steve Jansto
Bowling Green
