A solution to local opposition to renewable projects.

Local opposition often kills renewable energy projects. Builders ​try and convince locals to support the projects by talking about jobs and city revenue, but that's all a little indirect. People, I assume, would be more moved by money in their pockets.

Things like community solar do this effectively, but I'm trying to think of how to do this even with a private installation.

One idea is locational/zonal pricing, but ​that has had its own problems that have prevented implementation​.

I was trying to come up with another idea, and after a long back and forth with ChatGPT (yes, yes, I talk to the AI about science and technology topics,) we'd produced an idea we both thought was workable.​

It's a host/export credit for rate payers in areas (small ones ideally) that are net exporters of electricity, paid for by a utility-wide transmission surcharge. Areas that are net exporters (this would be done at as local a ​level as possible, county or even town if ​possible) would receive a credit pool split among all ratepayers.

These ratepayers in areas ​that were ​net exporters of electricity would receive credits and pay less for electricity.

The idea is to encourage residents to support solar and wind installations because they directly decrease their electricity bills. Developers often tout benefits to townships, but these are usua​lly one time benfits that don't go directly ​to residents. And they feel like one-time bribes.

This would go directly to residents, yet it would feel like justice. Produce more electricity, pay less for electricity, for decades. ​Don't like the look of wind turbines? Well, the money in your pocket will make them a lot prettier. ​Townships would hopefully go from trying to stop installations to competing for them.

Yes, the transmission surcharge would be a cost for those in cities that are net importers of electricity. This is partially a feature: it would encourage these areas to try and become net exporters. That would be impossible in ma​ny big cities, but urban Americans are used to subsidizing rural Americans, and this time it would be for something useful — pay a little more now so you can pay a lot less later, and also decarbonize.

Structure: I see four basic ways to do the credits. In all versions, the credit appears as ​a line item on your electric bill, showing exactly how much you've saved.

1. per meter. Every meter gets, say, the first $20 of electricity free.
2. a flat per kwh discount.
3. a kwh discount with a cap, perhaps benchmarked to a stat like median regional household power demand, or some multiple thereof. The cap would naturally rise as electrification progresses.
4. a hybrid of per meter and kwh discount with benchmarked cap. This is my favorite. The benchmarked cap would reduce the value of gaming the system thru things like ​meter splitting, but, at the same time, if ​the benchmark were high enough (say, 1.5 times median residential electricity use) it would encourage electrification more than the flat per meter credit.

This idea is, so far as I know, new, tho very likely it's been discussed before and perhaps even implemented occasionally, and perhaps some of you know about that and can tell us how it went.