‘Solar for Y'all' faces hazy future in Louisiana

Yahoo

18-03-2025

Workers install solar panels on the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Net-Zero Energy Residential Test Facility in Gaithersburg, Md. (Photo courtesy of NIST)
The future of millions of dollars in funding to help low-income Louisiana residents access solar energy has grown increasingly uncertain as the Trump administration attempts to slash grant programs awarded under its predecessor.
Last year, the state was given $156 million of Inflation Reduction Act funding to launch Louisiana's Solar for All program, dubbed Solar for Y'all by the Louisiana Department of Energy and Natural Resources (LDENR). The money is expected to boost development of rooftop or community solar for residences and apartment buildings. It will also help fund more solar-powered resilience hubs to provide safe havens after hurricanes.
The program is 'designed not only to put solar on people's rooftops who couldn't otherwise afford it, but also to invest in communities and invest in homes,' said Logan Burke, executive director for the Alliance for Affordable Energy, a utility watchdog group. 'There's a desperate need for that investment in Louisiana.'
Solar for All is one of three grant programs created to comply with Congress's creation of the $27 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. The IRA directed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to spend $7 billion on grants to help low-income and disadvantaged communities install or benefit from technology that produces zero climate-warming emissions, specifically mentioning rooftop solar.
Of the three grant programs, only Solar for All has survived so far. On March 11, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced he had canceled the other two programs, terminating $20 billion worth of contracts. Zeldin claimed his office had documented 'incidents of misconduct, conflicts of interest and potential fraud' that hurt the programs' integrity. However, a collective of former EPA employees say there hasn't been substantial evidence of the claim.
'Any instability in an expected funding mechanism throws businesses,' said Burke, adding that such projects have wide-ranging economic benefits.
So far, the LDENR is still crafting its plan for the state program. That plan will then go before the EPA for approval before being implemented.
Sweeping cuts
Since Trump took office Jan. 20, the EPA has canceled more than 400 contracts the Biden administration awarded under the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.
LDENR spokesman Patrick Courreges said the state agency's preparation to launch the program hasn't been disrupted. Despite the noise, he said they were proceeding as normal.
'We're not blind or deaf. We know what's out there, but at the moment all we've got to work with is the current status,' Courreges said, noting the LDENR staff has been in regular communication with the EPA to ensure they follow any requirements and comply with federal guidance.
But, as uncertainty looms, the solar industry and renewable energy advocates worry the program will be stopped before the historic federal investment makes any real impact.
Monika Gerhart, executive director for the Gulf States Renewable Energy Industries Association, said the $156 million was seed money for solar companies to ramp up investments in the state.
'Once you have that federal investment, then it results in more projects, direct and indirect economic benefits that don't rely on federal funding,' she said.
Wide-ranging economic impacts
Gerhart said the economic impact of the federal money can multiply by 'around three to five times' the amount invested in solar projects at this scale. This means the total value of the economic impact of $156 million in startup money could range anywhere from $468 million to $780 million in Louisiana.
She said that this money would spur indirect benefits such as 'accelerated market development, innovation, technology advancements and investment in new Louisiana manufacturing' as well as the direct benefits of job creation and increased access to affordable energy.
Jesse George, a policy director for the Alliance for Affordable Energy, said development of community solar projects would help lower energy bills in a state where its poorest have some of the highest energy burdens in the country.
For example, in New Orleans, some households spend nearly a third of their income on energy bills. In 2023, almost one in five Entergy New Orleans customers 'were disconnected for inability to pay their record high bills,' George said.
Community solar projects involve large solar arrays that sell the energy to utilities and share the savings with residents who subscribe to the project, typically paying a small monthly fee. The residents receive credit toward their energy bill without having to install solar at their own homes.
George said if the program is canceled, it would be 'a huge blow to expanding access to these money-saving technologies for people.'
The program also helps low-income homeowners update their houses to ensure they're strong enough to handle the addition of solar panels, Burke said. Upgrading a home's roof would help with more than just solar.
'So much of what we've seen over the last number of years — especially following the years of [hurricanes] Laura, Delta, Zeta, Ida — is how many rooftops are still blue [covered with tarps], how many folks still haven't had the cash flow to invest in structural; not just upgrades, but just addressing major issues like this,' Burke said.
The upgrades for solar panels could help fortify the roof against storms and bring down insurance costs, she said.
Past presidential precedents
Whether Trump's EPA can cancel the program is an open legal question.
Legal experts have said the administration is not only testing the limits of the executive branch's power but trying to expand it.
The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power of the purse, making it the sole branch that can appropriate and approve spending. Then, it's the executive branch's, or the president's, job to carry out that spending.
Refusing to spend money on what it's been allocated for goes against the separation of powers — a bedrock principle of democracy, many legal scholars say.
Abby Husselbee, a staff attorney at Harvard University's Environmental and Energy Law Program, said this isn't the first time a president has tried to avoid carrying out congressional appropriations.
In the 1970s, former President Richard Nixon tried the same tactic: holding funds to effectively veto the approved programs. In response, Congress passed the Impoundment Control Act to reinforce the Constitution's separation of powers and make the president's limitations clear.
While presidents are allowed to delay spending, they're required to report to Congress for temporary pauses or permanent cancellations. Temporary delays can't extend beyond the current fiscal year. To cancel funding, the president has to propose the action to Congress. If Congress doesn't approve, the money must be released.
As the end of Trump's first term neared, conservative legal scholars began propping up a theory that these limits on the president's discretion on spending were unconstitutional. On the campaign trail, the president shared his plans to hold funds to cut 'wasteful spending.' Unlike Nixon, the Trump administration is trying to claw back money that has already been awarded.
'It's raising really important questions about the way we have traditionally understood those roles,' Husselbee said.
She noted that specific government contracts can't be terminated unless the agency finds reasoning within the terms. Otherwise, it could be grounds for legal challenges.
'If we were to see awards get terminated, that isn't the full end of the story with money,' Husselbee said.
The EPA is already rife with litigation. The agency's sweeping termination of the National Clean Investment Fund and Clean Communities Investment Accelerator — the two other Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund programs — came amid an onslaught of lawsuits questioning the legality of previous grant contract terminations. One lawsuit alleges that the EPA's actions 'effectively nullify a congressionally mandated and funded program.'
Congress asked to make cuts
Congress has had mixed reactions to the attempts by the Trump administration, split along party lines. House Democrats launched an investigation into the EPA's stalled climate funding last week, while Republicans led the passage of a budget resolution that advocates worry could largely scrap the IRA's climate and clean energy investments.
U.S. Rep. Troy Carter Sr., D-New Orleans, sits on the House Energy and Commerce committee tasked with cutting $880 billion from the budget to pay for steeper tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. He said as more judges declare Trump's actions illegal, Republicans have pivoted to the budget, and other programs could be caught in the crossfire.
In addition to clean energy, 'the only way to get to $880 billion would be to cut Medicaid and Medicare,' Carter said.
Cutting programs such as Medicaid and Solar for All would have ripple effects that extend across party lines, the congressman added.
'It's not only impacting Democrats. It's impacting Republicans. It's impacting people throughout our country,' Carter said. 'When the storms come and power outages are in effect, no one asked what party, what race, what's your socioeconomic background.'
Despite threats to renewable energy projects under a new Trump administration, the solar industry is expected to grow in 2025, accounting for up to 81% of new power added to electric grids across the nation, according to a new report from the Energy Information Administration.
'Energy demand has continued to grow, and we have demonstrated that we need all of the energy that's available,' Gerhart said.
'Solar creates a pretty good way to reach rising energy demands very quickly … at a reasonable cost.'