A coalition composed of the Institute For Local Self-Reliance, Solar United Neighbors Action, the Initiative For Energy Justice, and Solar United Neighbors has created a white paper urging the federal government to create policy and funding initiatives that would support the addition of rooftop solar to 30 million US homes.
The proposal claims the 30 Million Solar plan would create 1.77 million new jobs and save $69 billion in energy costs in the first 6 years. Thereafter, it would reduce the nation’s energy bills by $30 billion a year. In addition, the amount of carbon dioxide kept out of American skies would be equivalent to shuttering 48 coal-fired generating plants for an entire year or taking 42 million conventional gasoline and diesel powered vehicles off the road.
That last part gets a Wow! from us here at CleanTechnica. Imagine how long it is going to take to get 42 million cars off the road at the current rate of EV adoption.
Policy Help & Financial Assistance
A big part of the 30 Million Solar initiative is convincing Congress to expand and extend the federal investment tax credits available for solar projects, many of which are scheduled to shrink in the near future before expiring altogether. The plan calls for bumping those credits back up to 30% and extending them for an additional 10 years. The critical elements include:
Restoration, extension, and democratization of the Investment Tax Credit to provide a direct pay option for distributed solar projects and a 30% credit.
Substantially increased investment in energy assistance and weatherization programs to permanently reduce energy burdens, especially with rooftop and community solar.
New financing programs, including a national green bank and Clean Energy Victory Bonds.
Substantial expansion of federal matching grants and loan guarantees for schools, rural homes and businesses, tribal communities, and equitable community solar projects.
Loan loss reserves, especially to support clean energy portfolios within community development financial institutions.
Virtual permitting, a national solar marketplace, rules supporting net metering and community solar requirements, and other market-boosting policies.
Support for solar workers and small business owners from underrepresented groups.
Measures to make sure federal programs and agencies are accountable to communities.
The Executive Summary of the plan reads as follows:
“The 30 Million Solar Homes policies leverage federal power to spark investment that can serve more than 30 million households with rooftop or community solar over the next five years. This decentralized approach to reaching one in four households with solar maximizes and disperses the economic benefits of expanding clean energy in the fight against climate change, directly benefiting as many Americans as possible.
“More than three quarters of total federal investment benefits marginalized communities, including low and moderate income communities, environmental justice communities, and solar deserts. Over 300 advocacy organizations, solar businesses, and faith communities have signed on in support of 30 Million Solar Homes.”
Two Thirds Of Benefits Will Flow To Underserved Communities
As of the end of the first quarter of this year, the U.S. solar industry had installed 102.8 GW of capacity, enough to power roughly 18.6 million homes. Adding rooftop solar to 30 million homes would equate to 151 GW in new solar capacity — 50% more than all the solar capacity currently in place.
Along with job creation, installing solar on 30 million homes would lead to 100 GW of the 151 GW of proposed capacity being installed in marginalized communities, helping to improve access equity to solar and easing the historic economic imbalance of the resource. The benefits of local solar are particularly important for these communities as many have been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic and face a slow economic recovery. Specific proposals that would benefit underserved communities include:
A bonus 10% tax credit for commercial projects that provide Davis-Bacon prevailing wages and benefits.
A 10% bonus credits to commercial projects primarily serving marginalized communities, or that provide resilience by combining solar and energy storage.
A 10% bonus credits to residential projects also serving marginalized communities or providing resilience.
Modifications to prioritize projects that provide a direct financial benefit to residents through electricity bill credits and other benefits.
The proposal also calls for:
DOE loan guarantees for equitable community solar projects.
Reauthorizing clean energy block grants for state, tribal, territorial, and local governments.
Establishing solar plus storage grants for resiliency in marginalized communities.
Instituting solar grants for schools to reinvest energy savings into operations.
Establishing grants for developing residential and community solar in marginalized communities.
Speeding Up Solar Permitting
The so-called soft costs associated with rooftop solar can add a third to the cost of a system. The Solar Automated Permit Processing platform from the US Department of Energy hopes to speed up the permitting process and lower costs. It provides a standard portal for local governments to process permit applications that automatically checks codes to ensure safety while generating a standardized inspection checklist installers and inspectors can use to verify compliance in the field.
The DOE piloted the SolarAPP+ program in Tucson and Pima County in Arizona, and Menifee and Pleasant Valley in the California. “In Tucson, for example, SolarAPP+ reduced permitting reviews from approximately 20 business days to zero,” according to DOE.
“We have 3 million households today that have solar on their roofs, but the potential is so much greater,” DOE’s solar energy director told Reuters. “Having streamlined processes and an automated permitting platform that can make it faster, easier and cheaper for homeowners to go solar promises to really help expand the residential solar sector.”
Local governments and installers can now sign up to get started with the app or attend webinars listed on the DOE’s blog. It’s all part of the its Summer of Solar campaign aimed at lowering soft costs — design, siting, permitting, installation, and so forth — associated with rooftop solar power.
The Takeaway
The distinguishing feature of rooftop solar is it typically is not something done by traditional utility companies. They love solar because the cost of fuel is effectively zero. But they hate to see electricity democratized. There are a few progressive utility companies out there, but most of them take the position that, “It’s our electricity, dammit, and we alone will decide who gets it and how much you pay for it.” It’s a natural consequence of the monopoly model that has been the standard of the industry for over a century.
The 30 Million Solar plan would explode that status quo. Utility industry lobbyist are salivating over the prospect of driving a stake through the heart of this proposal.
Tesla has confirmed it has given up on plans to make a Cybertruck range extender to achieve the range it originally promised on the electric pickup truck.
It started refunding deposits for the $16,000 extra battery pack.
When Tesla unveiled the production version of the Cybertruck in late 2023, two main disappointments were the price and the range.
The tri-motor version, the most popular in reservation tallies before production, was supposed to have over 500 miles of range and start at $70,000.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Tesla now sells the tri-motor Cybertruck for $100,000 and only has a range of 320 miles.
The dual-motor Cybertruck was supposed to cost $50,000 and have over 300 miles of range. In reality, it starts at $80,000 and has 325 miles of range.
However, Tesla had devised a solution to bring the range closer to what it originally announced: a separate battery pack that sits in the truck’s bed. Tesla called it a “range extender.” It costs $16,000 and takes up a third of the Cybertruck’s bed.
Even though the Cybertruck has been in production for a year and a half, the range extender has yet to launch.
At the time, Tesla also reduced the range that the removable battery pack adds to the Cybertruck to “445+ miles” rather than “470+ miles” for the dual motor – a ~25-mile reduction in range.
Last month, Electrek reported that Tesla has quietly removed the range extender from the Cybertruck online configurator, where buyers could reserve it with a “$2,000 non-refundable deposit.”
At the time, we speculated that Tesla was most likely giving up on the product.
Sure enough, the automaker has now confirmed that it doesn’t plan to produce the range extender.
A Tesla Cybertruck owner contacted Electrek to share communication that Tesla started sending to Cybertruck owners who reserved the range extender, letting them know that the product is dead.
Tesla wrote in the email:
“We are no longer planning to sell the Range Extender for Cybertruck.”
The automaker says that it will start processing refunds for the deposits.
Here’s Tesla’s communication about the Cybertruck range extender in full:
Update to Your Cybertruck Range Extender Order
Hi [redacted],
Thank you for being a Cybertruck owner.
We are no longer planning to sell the Range Extender for Cybertruck. As a result, we will be refunding your deposit in full. The amount will be returned to the original payment method used for the transaction.
Thank you for your understanding.
The Tesla Team
Electrek’s Take
There could be many reasons why Tesla has given up on the product.
The range extender was confirmed to take 30% of the Cybertruck’s bed, and Tesla needed to install and remove it at a service center. Owners couldn’t remove them themselves. I think it was pretty much dead on arrival at $16,000.
But I think it could also be as simple as it’s not worth producing due to demand – both due to insufficient people reserving it and not enough Cybertruck buyers to create a market for the range extender.
Therefore, the range extender is dead for the same reason that the Cybertruck RWD now has the same battery pack as the AWD instead of a smaller pack for less money: the Cybertruck is a commercial flop, and it’s not a high-volume program enough to justify making several battery pack sizes, including a removable one.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USTPO) has denied Tesla’s attempt to trademark the term “Robotaxi”. which it has been using to refer to its long-promised self-driving vehicles.
CEO Elon Musk has been using the term “robotaxi” for years.
At first, it was to refer to what its existing consumer vehicles (Model S, X, 3, Y and Cybertruck) would become once it finally delivers on its “full self-driving” promises– something that was supposed to happen by the end of every year for the last 6 years.
However, Tesla held its ‘We, Robot’ event in October 2024, where it unveiled two new vehicles, a dedicated robotaxi vehicle and a self-driving ‘Robovan’ – pictured above.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Musk referred to the dedicated robotaxi vehicle as both a ‘Robotaxi’ and ‘Cybercab’.
Now, Techcrunch reports that USTPO has denied Tesla’s trademark application for being too generic:
Tesla’s attempt to trademark the term “Robotaxi” in reference to its vehicles has been refused by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for being too generic, according to a new filing. Another application by Tesla to trademark the term “Robotaxi” for its upcoming ride-hailing service is still under examination by the office.
USTPO notes that other companies and media have used the term ‘robotaxi” to refer to other self-driving vehicles.
The decision is “non-final”. Tesla can still appeal the decision.
Tesla also saw its trademark application for ‘Cybercab’ halted as USTPO reviews other applications using the term ‘cyber’.
Electrek’s Take
I don’t think Tesla should get a trademark for ‘Robotaxi’. It’s indeed too generic. ‘Cybercab’ should be fine though. If Tesla was able to get Cybertruck, it should be able to get ‘Cybercab’.
I hope the Cybercab works out better for them than the Cybertruck has so far.
But it’s tough to make a steering wheel-less vehicle works if you haven’t solved self-driving.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
California and 16 other states have sued the government for illegally withholding $5 billion in funds that Congress earmarked for EV charging, calling the action “another trump gift to China.”
The federal NEVI (National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure) program was established by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), otherwise known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, pushed for and signed by President Joe Biden.
Among other things, the IIJA dedicated $5 billion in funding to expanding EV chargers, in order to give more Americans access to EV ownership, and allow them to unlock the fuel cost and health savings that EV owners, and communities with high EV penetration, enjoy.
The NEVI program was even the main driver of Tesla opening up its charging port and creating the NACS standard, due to the law’s requirement that federal funding can only go to charging stations that have open access to multiple brands of vehicle. Tesla’s Superchargers used to be open only to Teslas, but after this law passed, Tesla started opening them up to other brands.
So, NEVI is a great program, and it’s helping Americans to save on fuel and maintenance costs, reducing barriers to charging, and making the world cleaner for everyone who breathes air.
So of course, the enemy of America currently occupying the White House (despite there being a clear Constitutional remedy for this crisis) opposes it.
In February, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), at the behest of convicted felon Donald Trump, froze funding for the NEVI program, even though that funding was already allocated by Congress for this purpose. Who knew a felon would break the law?
Now, states are pushing back against the illegal funding freeze, as 17 states, led by California, Colorado and Washington, are suing the FHWA to free up the funds that were allocated to them.
Among those arguments is something we’ve mentioned manytimeshereonElectrek: that republican efforts to diminish the US EV industry are a “gift to China,” who have well and truly taken the lead in the global EV industry, and other countries – particularly the US – are just not doing enough to keep up.
When America retreats, China wins.
President Trump’s illegal action withholding funds for electric vehicle infrastructure is yet another Trump gift to China – ceding American innovation and killing thousands of jobs.
Instead of hawking Teslas on the White House lawn, President Trump could actually help Elon – and the nation – by following the law and releasing this bipartisan funding.
Oddly, despite Mr. Trump’s clear opposition to the well-being of Americans, and particularly to the well-being of the American auto industry, Tesla CEO Elon Musk, perhaps America’s most high-profile auto CEO, donated hundreds of millions of dollars to this anti-EV candidate. He has used tortured logic to claim that raising the price of his products by $7,500 relative to the competition won’t hurt his business, but that’s just wrong.
Pausing that funding not only puts charger plans into chaos (something Musk is no stranger to), it also means that Tesla can’t use money that it created an entire charging standard just to get a piece of.
The lawsuit requests that a court stop Mr. Trump’s illegal actions and permanently halt the FHWA from withholding these funds.
Charge your electric vehicle at home using rooftop solar panels. Find a reliable and competitively priced solar installer near you on EnergySage, for free. They have pre-vetted installers competing for your business, ensuring high-quality solutions and 20-30% savings. It’s free, with no sales calls until you choose an installer. Compare personalized solar quotes online and receive guidance from unbiased Energy Advisers. Get started here. – ad*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.