Wayne Hesse, a semiretired southwest Minnesota farmer, wants to install a raft of solar panels on his property. He'd generate electricity for his home and farm, and sell excess power back to his electric co-op.
But his plan has hit a big roadblock. His co-op, Lyon-Lincoln Electric, recently rolled out a new fee for residential solar customers. It would cost Hesse $49 per month, a blow to the economic feasibility of his project, he said.
To Hesse, Lyon-Lincoln is penalizing him for producing and selling more power back to the co-op than he would buy from it. "I think they feel very threatened," he said. "I think they feel it will cut into their energy sales."
To Tim O'Leary, Lyon-Lincoln's general manager, the fee ensures that Hesse and others who produce surplus power pay their share of grid maintenance. "There are costs we are no longer recovering through revenues."
Electric co-ops across Minnesota have instituted such fees on new residential solar arrays after the passage of a 2015 law, stirring anger among renewable energy advocates. The issue hit a boiling point in June when the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) ordered an investigation of the fees.
The solar fee flap here is part of national debate that's risen with the popularity of residential solar. Essentially, some utilities worry that lost revenue from residential solar will erode their business model.
Battles have erupted in Nevada, Hawaii and other sunny high-solar demand states, with big investor-owned utilities at the center of the fray. In Minnesota, Xcel Energy and other investor-owned utilities have steered clear of such controversy with policies that are relatively friendly to residential solar.
In Minnesota, residential solar poses a bigger threat to cooperative power suppliers. The co-ops, which cover more sparsely populated areas, spread their grid costs over fewer customers than investor-owned utilities, which serve cities and larger towns.