In short: A for-profit solar power installer wants to build a solar installation on city property, operate it and sell the power to the city. The local electric utility sues, as they have the monopoly on supply in that territory. The district court ruled in the installer's favour. This ruling sets an interesting predecent but it is also important in the light of discussion about subsidies, which the (for-profit!) installer received to install renewable generation.

From the utility standpoint, business becomes smaller. The court said that the city property will not be fully supplied by the solar panels, so the utility is still needed. However, if this becomes the norm, utilities must reconsider their whole cost/benefit structure. In the US, they are already thinking about that:



12 Apr 2013 - 17:38
You are seeing a selection of all entries on this page. See all there are.