Nevada lawmakers are trying to resuscitate the rooftop solar industry after a rate change that prompted the number of installations statewide to drop from about 22,000 in 2015 to less than 300 in 2016.

Democratic Assemblyman Justin Watkins is sponsoring a bill, AB270, that aims to chart a course for the future of the industry. It would:

• Restore net metering in the near term at the older, more favorable rates. Prior to 2016, customers with solar panels could sell back excess energy to the utility at the full retail rate (the same price at which they buy electricity). That often justified the purchase of expensive solar systems because it offered significant savings on an electricity bill. Regulators changed the pricing structure starting in 2016 to correct what they described as a cost shift from solar to non-solar customers, but the new pricing scheme meant customers generally wouldn’t see a return on their investment.
  
• Develop a pricing structure that accounts for the benefits of solar and includes a “safety net” for the industry. Watkins proposes keeping the old net metering rate until the Public Utilities Commission sets a Renewable Energy Net Billing Tariff based on a fresh analysis of how much the utility company should pay to buy back customers’ excess electricity. The measure would require the commission to consider how rooftop solar installations help the utility avoid building additional infrastructure and the value of avoiding pollution. It would set a price floor on the valuation of solar so the price wouldn’t drop so low that companies went out of business. Customers could also lock in the rates under which they signed up for 20 years or the life of their solar system — whichever is longer.

NV Energy said it would request that regulators set net metering rates in the near term based on whatever agreement lawmakers struck during the legislative session. But it unveiled its own idea for the kind of pricing scheme that would come next. It would:

• Create a competitive bidding process to determine rooftop solar contracts. NV Energy could set a goal of adding 10 megawatts of solar capacity to its portfolio, for example, and request rooftop solar companies to bid on the contract. The lowest bidder would win the chance to build installations that added up to 10 megawatts of capacity, and would then go find customers who wanted to install panels on their roof. NV Energy would commit to buying back energy from the panels over the next 20 years. The plan would mean regulators, legislators and solar companies wouldn’t have to bicker over the exact monetary value of solar — market forces would determine how much it cost.

Tesla, which makes electric cars but also whole-home batteries that integrate with rooftop solar systems, proposed an amendment of its own. It would:

• Create time-of-use rates that incentivize use of batteries. While solar energy is fleeting and must be used when it’s produced, a battery can hold onto it and allow users to tap into it at night or on a cloudy day. Tesla proposes a rate structure just for battery owners that would price energy higher during peak demand periods when the grid is maxed out and lower when demand wanes. Battery owners could potentially help the grid and their own pocketbooks by selling their stored energy back to the utility when it’s needed most.