Last week the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency canceled a $7 billion grant program aimed at helping low-income Americans benefit from solar energy. The program is called Solar for All and it was supposed to send more than $156 million dollars to Michigan’s Solar for All program. The now canceled program planned to invest in things like rooftop and community solar projects, energy storage and workforce development.
For a look at how the cancellation of the program will affect Michigan residents, we reached out to the director of the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy Phil Roos. He spoke with Michigan Public’s Caoilinn Goss.
Caoilinn Goss: EGLE had already announced 13 pilot projects across the state and assigned $13.9 million in funding. Could you tell us more about some of those specific projects and what will happen to them now?
Phil Roos: Yeah, so we had projects across the state. Some in urban areas, some in more rural areas. The City of Ann Arbor, in Washtenaw County, there was a grant for the Bryant neighborhood to install solar power and storage at 20 households there. There's Cadillac solar power and storage at the wastewater treatment plant and solar power plant there. In Metro Detroit, we have in Highland Park and Detroit retrofitting homes with rooftops, solar battery storage, weatherization and high efficiency dual-fuel cold-climate heat pumps. And the idea was to scale that ultimately to 100 homes. These are programs that would make a real difference in the lives of the people that can benefit from them most. Save them energy costs, create jobs along the way, and allow people all over the state who need it the most to be able to enjoy the benefits of solar energy.
CG: What's going to happen next to these programs?
PR: What we're hoping to do, we're working with the Attorney General's office to figure out a response to this. There are several possibilities, but we'll be sharing that when we know it.
CG: Are any of these projects in process and half-built or anything like that?
PR: No, early stages on all of them. Much of the work that had been done was the administrative efforts to organize the program, do the planning. And then it was quite a bit of work in working with these communities. We had [Request for Proposals] that they responded to, and then we worked with applicants on their applications. And then we did the awards for a number of those, the $13 million and change that you mentioned. So I don't know if I'd say thankfully, but there hasn't been a lot of funds spent on directly starting the programs. We were about to do that.
CG: So that $13.9 million - some of it, it sounds like has already been spent. Do you as a State Department need to pay that back to the EPA? How does that work?
PR: We have had some of that - I think it's around $1 million or so of the $156 million - we have received reimbursement for. So I think for us right now, there isn't really an issue for work that has already been incurred, getting reimbursed for that. The issue would be if there were further work completed.
CG: As you mentioned, solar energy can improve reliability and help residents save money. The department estimates that the Solar for All program would have saved participants, on average, $400 per year. Is EGLE pursuing other sources of funding to help Michiganders access this cost saving technology.
PR: Well, you know, $156 million is a lot to make up. But we are going to continue with our goals of making solar energy accessible to people around the state, particularly those who need it the most, and creating the ecosystem around that. That can create good quality local jobs. And certainly we will look for and be open to any opportunities to continue funding, but we hope we can get this program reinstated.
CG: To your point that the program would have stimulated the state economy and created jobs and increased Michigan's energy independence, can you talk about some other consequences that we might see now that the EPA has cut the funding?
PR: I'd like to just amplify your last point about energy independence. We are in, last I heard, a declared national energy emergency. And it just seems like cutting a program like this, that actually increases our energy independence while lowering costs for thousands of Michigan households, that should be prioritized, not cut. We all have experienced power outages due to extreme weather or other reasons, and the Solar for All Program is a way to buffer against some of those outages. Make us more independent, not less. Give us more energy, not less. And that's why it's really hard to understand why a program like this would be cut at this point.
CG: Are there other programs in the state to help Michiganders afford solar energy technology?
PR: I believe there may be some IRS related programs, I don't know the details on those, that may give credits or breaks for folks. But that's the only one that comes to mind. I will say that part of this general effort that we, in the state of Michigan, have as part of our MI Healthy Climate Plan implementation, is another program called Home Energy Rebates, which is not specifically targeted to solar, but it's targeted to other kinds of similar benefits that result in people saving money on their energy bills. It's rebates for things like home weatherization, or buying heat pumps to electrify and make more energy efficient homes. So there are other efforts that attack the broader problem, but not specific to solar right now, that I'm aware of.
CG: Part of the reasoning the EPA has given for cutting the program is that there were several different entities that the money moved through before it got to the states, and they were suggesting a good amount of waste or abuse there. Can you speak to that?
PR: I honestly don't know what they're talking about. There's not waste in this program. We submitted a grant that had all the controls and all the steps and the and the strategy for deploying the funds and getting the most benefit from them. That was all laid out in the contract that we had with the EPA. And I just think they're reneging on that.
