ERCOT 12CP: What the End of 4CP Means for Texas Facilities’ Electrical Demand Charge Assessment
By Adam Glick, Solar Sherpa, NATiVE Solar

For more than twenty years, large commercial power users in Texas have cut a big piece of their electric bill by using less power on four specific summer afternoons -by which the utility bills’ “demand charge” is set for each customer. State regulators now plan to replace that system, known as 4CP, with ERCOT 12CP, which counts a peak in every month of the year. Here is what is proposed, who it affects, and where solar + battery energy storage fits.

One note before we start: as of early October 2026, this is a proposed rule. The Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) expects a final decision in December.

*Heads up: This article is a bit longer and more in-depth than most here at The Feed. Here’s the short version before we get started:

• What is changing: Texas plans to divide the cost of upgrading and maintaining our state’s transmission grid using calculations based on twelve monthly grid peak measurements instead of four summer ones.
• Who it applies to: Every utility in ERCOT. The rule changes how the statewide grid bill is split among them. How that cost reaches your bill depends on your utility and your size.
• Affected most directly: Facilities over 700 kW in the Oncor, CenterPoint, AEP Texas and TNMP areas. They are billed today on their own usage at the grid’s four summer peaks, so twelve peak measurements would change how their charge is calculated.
• Smaller businesses in those areas: You are billed on your own monthly peak, and that method is not changing. This said, your rate could shift as costs are re-divided among customer groups.
• In Austin, San Antonio or a co-op area: Your utility’s share of the grid bill would be set by twelve peaks instead of four. The city or co-op board decides how to pass that on to you.
• When: A final decision is expected in December 2026. Nothing is final yet.
• What to do now: Perhaps find out how your utility bills you for transmission, and look at your power use in every month, not just summer. Also, maybe be open to new ways your site might be able to reduce grid power draw during those times. (hint: adding solar and BESS (battery energy storage) could be one way. :)  )

What 4CP is, in plain English

Everyone in Texas helps pay for the high-voltage transmission grid. For large users in much of the state, the share is set by a method called “four coincident peak,” or 4CP.

First, one definition. Demand is how much power you draw at one moment, measured in kilowatts (kW). Energy is how much you use over time, measured in kilowatt-hours (kWh). Think of demand as your speed and energy as the miles you drive. 4CP is about demand.

Here is how it works. In each of June, July, August and September, the ERCOT (Electric Reliability Council of Texas) grid hits one highest 15-minute moment. “Coincident” means at the same moment. What counts is how much power your facility was drawing at the grid’s peak, not at your own.

The average of those four readings sets your transmission charge for the entire next year, as Oncor’s delivery-charge guide explains. So if you use less power during those four 15-minute windows, you pay less (by way of lower “demand charges” on your utility bill) for the next twelve months.

Who is on 4CP billing? In the competitive areas served by Oncor, CenterPoint, AEP Texas and TNMP, meters with peak demand over 700 kW are billed on 4CP. Smaller commercial accounts are billed on their own monthly peak instead. Austin Energy works differently, and we cover it in its own section below.

What it is worth. Each kilowatt you are drawing during those four peaks costs about $68.55 over the following year. That rate is up 121% since 2013. A facility that cuts 1,000 kW (one megawatt) during the peaks avoids about $68,550 a year at the full rate, or about $40,740 at Oncor’s rate, according to a joint filing by Base Power, Octopus Energy and Tesla.

Bottom line: under 4CP, four short windows each summer set a full year of transmission charges.

Why regulators are moving on from 4CP

Three things are pushing the change to ERCOT 12CP.

The law requires it. Senate Bill 6, passed in 2025, tells the PUC to revisit how transmission costs are divided and to change its rules by December 31, 2026 (K&L Gates summary).

The grid’s stress points have moved. 4CP only looks at summer afternoons. According to the same summary, PUC staff found the grid now runs tightest on summer evenings, after solar output drops, and that 4CP ignores winter shortages entirely. Staff also found 15 minutes too short a window. ERCOT’s independent market watchdog has recommended dropping 4CP since 2015, according to an ERCOT board presentation from September.

Households are paying more than their share. In 2024, homes used 34.5% of the electricity but paid 46.7% of transmission charges, according to PUC staff figures cited in the retail-provider filing. The reason is simple. When a large user cuts back during the four peaks, its share of the bill does not disappear. It moves to everyone else. As PUC Chairman Thomas Gleeson put it on the Energy Capital Podcast in June, “those transmission costs have to be paid by someone.”

The bill itself is also growing. ERCOT endorsed about $14.0 billion of transmission projects in 2025, compared with $3.8 billion in 2024.

What the ERCOT 12CP proposal would change

On July 9 the PUC voted to publish a proposed rule, Project 58000. It appeared in the Texas Register on July 24. The core change replaces 4CP with ERCOT 12CP:

The proposal also sets a minimum charge, lasting at least 20 years, for “large loads.” ERCOT defines a large load as 75 megawatts or more at a single connection point. That piece is aimed at data centers, not at a typical plant, hospital or distribution center.  This seems like a fine idea to us here at NATiVE. :)

None of the ERCOT 12CP proposal is final. Public comments closed August 11. In a July 17 letter to Gov. Abbott, Chairman Gleeson wrote: “The PUCT expects to make a final decision on the rulemaking in December 2026.” He has also said the commission may count some months more heavily than others, or group the peaks in summer and winter. The details could still change.

Who ERCOT 12CP applies to

The rule applies to every utility in ERCOT, but it does not reach every customer the same way. Think of a restaurant bill split among several tables. The rule changes how the bill is split among the tables. How each table divides its share among the people sitting at it is a separate question.

First, the grid bill is split among utilities. This part applies to everyone. Oncor, CenterPoint, Austin Energy, CPS Energy and the electric co-ops would all have their share set by twelve monthly peaks instead of four summer ones.

Then each utility bills its own customers. This is where it differs. The PUC sets customer rates for the investor-owned utilities, such as Oncor, CenterPoint, AEP Texas and TNMP. City-owned utilities and co-ops set their own.

Bottom line: everyone is affected, but large facilities in the investor-owned utility areas are affected most directly.

What ERCOT 12CP could mean for your facility/site:

The biggest unknown is your own bill. The proposal explains how the cost is divided among utilities and among customer groups. It does not yet say how each utility will calculate an individual large customer’s charge. That answer comes after the final rule, when each utility files its new rates. (We’ll try to cover this in a timely manner with updates published here at The Feed.)

Twelve peaks to manage instead of four, and each counts for less. Today, each summer peak sets about a quarter of a large facility’s transmission charge. With twelve equally weighted peaks, each would set about one-twelfth. The retail-provider filing estimates that power used during a 12CP peak would effectively carry more than $5,000 per megawatt-hour in transmission line cost.

Sites that cut back in summer have more to cover. A facility that has reliably reduced its power use for four summer peaks would now have eight more months to watch. The forecasting firm Amperon notes that the months nobody used to watch have the weakest track record.

The shift between customer groups looks modest. A draft PUC staff analysis shows 12CP lowering the residential share of transmission cost by about 3.1 percentage points, from roughly 46.3% to 43.1%. The retail providers call that “meaningful but still relatively small.”. Yeah, it’s small, but it ain’t nothin’ -plus other parts of the new PUC rules should mean that the additional cost burden of new data centers should also largely be kept away from us “normal” residential and commercial rate-payers that aren’t gobbling up so much energy as those gargantuan facilities.

The total does not shrink. ERCOT 12CP changes how the transmission bill is divided, not how large it is.

What ERCOT 12CP means for Austin Energy customers

Austin Energy customers are not billed on 4CP. Commercial customers at 10 kW and above pay a Regulatory Charge on their own highest 15-minute peak each month. That charge covers Austin Energy’s ERCOT transmission costs and related fees, according to its tariff. In other words, Austin businesses already pay for transmission on twelve peaks a year. They are their own peaks, not the grid’s.

That charge just went up. On October 1, 2026, it rose from $3.73 to $5.03 per kW for secondary-voltage customers, about 35%. Austin Energy’s budget shows transmission and ERCOT expenses rising from $217.7 million to $234.8 million. Add the demand charge, and a secondary customer at 300 kW or more now pays $18.22 for each kW of monthly peak, based on Austin Energy’s posted rates.

Summer still matters in Austin, but not the way 4CP does. Your demand is measured every month, and each bill is based on that month’s own highest 15 minutes. What summer decides is your rate class. Once a year, Austin Energy averages your June through September demand to place you in a class, such as 10 to 300 kW or 300 kW and up, and that class sets your per-kW rates for the next calendar year. Separately, Austin Energy pays businesses $50 to $80 per kW to cut load during summer peak events through its Commercial Demand Response program.

4CP also shapes how Austin Energy values solar. The formula in Austin Energy’s tariff for valuing solar production includes a credit for avoided ERCOT transmission charges. That credit is based on how much solar was producing during the hour of ERCOT’s peak in each of June, July, August and September. In other words, solar earns part of its value in Austin by showing up at the four summer peaks. If Texas moves to twelve peaks, including winter mornings and evenings when solar produces little, that formula may need to change. Austin Energy has not said how it would handle that.

ERCOT 12CP would reach you indirectly. Austin Energy’s own share of the statewide grid bill is set by the city’s load at the four summer peaks. Under 12CP it would be set by twelve. How that changes the Regulatory Charge is a City of Austin decision that has not been announced.

Bottom line: in Austin, your own monthly peak already drives what you pay for transmission. Lowering it, with load management, solar or solar + storage, may reduce both your demand charge and your Regulatory Charge.

When ERCOT 12CP peaks are likely to land

ERCOT 12CP counts one peak per month, so the time of day those peaks tend to fall matters for planning.

Summer peaks are moving later, past solar’s best hours. ERCOT’s highest peak of the year fell at 5:00 p.m. every year from 2008 through 2022. It then fell at 6:30 p.m. in 2023 and 6:00 p.m. in 2024, according to a table in NRG’s filing. This summer’s all-time record of 91,134 MW, set July 22, came between 6 and 7 p.m. (ERCOT summer review).

Winter peaks come early and late. ERCOT says winter risk is highest from 6 to 9 a.m. and 6 to 9 p.m., hours with “the highest loads and low or no solar production” (ERCOT Monthly). Winter peak demand has grown about 30,000 MW in ten years.

Bottom line: many of the twelve peaks are likely to fall when the sun is low or down.

Where solar + storage fits

Solar still does what it has always done. It reduces the amount of grid energy you buy and lowers your demand through the sunny hours, including many summer afternoons. ERCOT’s own review of this summer credits it at grid scale: “Solar growth outpacing large load additions helped make the daytime hours this summer uneventful.”

What solar cannot do alone is cover a January morning at 7 a.m. or a July evening at 7 p.m. That is the job battery energy storage is suited for. Covering a 30-minute window is short work for a properly sized battery. The harder part is knowing which half hour it will be, twelve times a year. That takes good forecasting and controls. Your company’s site energy plan(s) should comprehend this.

There is also a year-round reason to manage demand that has nothing to do with this rule. Under Oncor’s rates, you are billed for the higher of two numbers: this month’s peak, or 80% of your highest peak in the previous 11 months. One bad interval can follow you for a year. In Austin, each month’s charge is based on that month’s own peak.

NATiVE has treated commercial solar as a systems engineering problem since 2007, and our advice is the same under 4CP or ERCOT 12CP. Start with twelve months of your meter data. Find out when your facility peaks compared with the grid. Size the system from there. For some sites, that points to solar + storage now. For others, solar alone does the job and storage waits until the numbers support it. Either way, solar + storage may reduce exposure to demand-based charges. How much depends on your usage pattern, your rate and your utility.

What to do before December, perhaps

1. Ask your electricity provider or broker whether your meter is billed on 4CP.
2. If you are served by Austin Energy, CPS Energy or a co-op, ask how it plans to pass 12CP costs through to commercial rates.
3. Pull twelve months of interval data, your meter’s record of power use in 15-minute steps, from your utility or Smart Meter Texas.
4. Ask your provider how transmission charges pass through in your contract, and what happens if the method changes mid-term.
5. Look at your demand during each month’s grid peak, not just the summer ones.
6. Watch for the PUC’s final ERCOT 12CP rule, expected in December, and the utility rate filings that follow. (We’ll be reporting o that here at The Feed.)
7. If you are evaluating solar or storage, ask a competent solar+BESS design-construction firm (blatant NATiVE Solar plug here) to help with the modeling under both methods.

Not sure how your facility is billed for transmission, or what twelve peaks could mean for it? Talk with our commercial team. Bring a recent bill and we will start there.

Frequently asked questions

What is ERCOT 12CP?

ERCOT 12CP stands for twelve coincident peak. Under it, transmission costs would be divided using demand during the grid’s highest 30-minute window in each calendar month, instead of four summer windows.

When does ERCOT 12CP take effect?

No date is set. The PUC expects a final decision in December 2026. The proposal measures peaks from October 1 through September 30, with ERCOT filing the results by December 1 each year.

Does ERCOT 12CP apply to my business?

It applies to every utility in ERCOT, so every business is affected in some way. Facilities over 700 kW in the Oncor, CenterPoint, AEP Texas and TNMP areas are affected most directly, because they are billed on their own usage at the grid’s peaks. Smaller businesses, and customers of city-owned utilities and co-ops, are affected through how costs are shared and passed on.

Will ERCOT 12CP lower my electric bill?

Not by itself. It changes how the transmission bill is divided, not its size. Sites that relied on cutting back in summer may see their share rise unless they manage demand year-round.

Does solar still help with demand charges under 12CP?

Solar helps in daylight hours, including many summer peaks. Winter and evening peaks fall when solar output is low, which is where battery storage and load management come in to play.

Does 12CP apply to Austin Energy or CPS Energy customers?

Not directly. City-owned utilities and co-ops would see 12CP in what they pay for the grid, and they set their own customer rates. Austin Energy already bills commercial customers for transmission on their own monthly peak, through its Regulatory Charge. We’ll be watching from here at our Austin (Dripping Springs) HQ and will publish updates when/if anything changes for commercial sites within AE’s and CPS’s jurisdiction.

Sources and how we checked them

We referenced the proposed PUC rule itself, ERCOT’s own reports, and Austin Energy’s tariff and budget -among other sources. Yes, we used AI a bit to help us sort through all the data and its implications. We did not have direct access to some of the reporting and data on this topic, including a paywalled trade-press account of the July 9 vote, several filings in the PUC’s document system, and the PUC staff’s final report. Where that was the case, we worked around the edges to substantiate the facts through documents we could open: the Texas Register, ERCOT board materials, the PUC’s letter to the Governor, and public filings that quote the staff report’s figures. The staff numbers above come from the draft report, as quoted in those filings, and two of our sources (NRG and the retail-provider coalition) have a stake in the outcome.

• PUC Project 58000, proposal for publication (July 9, 2026)
• Texas Register, July 24, 2026
• PUC Chairman Gleeson, letter to Gov. Abbott (July 17, 2026)
• Energy Capital Podcast with Chairman Gleeson (June 10, 2026)
• K&L Gates, alert on the PUC staff draft report (March 30, 2026)
• NRG Energy, comments in PUC Project 58484 (September 2025)
• Base Power, Octopus Energy and Tesla, joint comments in PUC Project 58484
• ERCOT, staff response to the Independent Market Monitor (September 2026)
• ERCOT, Summer 2026 Operational and Market Review
• ERCOT Monthly, November 2025
• ERCOT, System Planning and Weatherization Update (February 2026)
• Oncor, Delivery Charges 101
• Amperon, 12CP explainer (August 2026)
• City of Austin Electric Tariff, FY 2027 (effective October 1, 2026)
• City of Austin Electric Tariff, FY 2026
• Austin Energy, commercial rates
• Austin Energy, FY 2027 proposed budget (July 20, 2026)
• Austin Energy, Commercial Demand Response program

OK. I know many of our readers have been staying tuned in on this topic. So here’s the latest on how state legislators and regulatory agencies are pushing for constraints on how the coming wave of data centers operators (and their enormous expected power demands) will get access to the Texas grid.

On June 10, Governor Abbott directed the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) and ERCOT (the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, which operates the state’s power grid) to keep the cost of data center growth off residential electric bills. On July 24, the two agencies reported back with specifics. Here’s what they actually committed to, what it doesn’t cover, and why on-site power harvesting/generation/stroage remains the one variable homeowners and businesses can control directly. (Governor’s office, June 10 directive; KVIA, July 24 response)

What the State Actually Committed To

Per the PUC and ERCOT’s joint response, the state is moving to:

• Require data centers to fully fund the transmission infrastructure built to serve them, and to contribute toward reducing residential electric bills -not just avoid raising them.
• Adopt rules preventing large data centers from diverting existing power away from residential and small-business customers during periods of grid stress.
• Implement a new interconnection screening process before large loads can connect to the grid.
• Mandate that data centers reduce power draw quickly when ERCOT instructs them to.
• Require data centers to register with the PUC and ERCOT so the state has accurate visibility into electricity and water use.

Both agencies also recommended legislative changes for the next session, including expanding the Lone Star Infrastructure Protection Act to cover large data centers and clarifying PUC/ERCOT authority to set additional reliability requirements. Governor Abbott said he’ll work with lawmakers to codify the protections. (KVIA)   

What This Doesn’t Do

These are regulatory and administrative actions, not law yet -the legislative pieces won’t move until the next session convenes. And the underlying pressure hasn’t gone away: ERCOT is currently tracking more than 438,000 MW of large-load interconnection requests, the vast majority from data centers, a queue NATiVE Solar covered in more detail after ERCOT’s record-breaking demand week earlier this month. Cost-allocation rules can slow how much of that growth lands on residential rates, but they don’t change the fact that Texas electricity demand is climbing faster than in past cycles — a dynamic Austin Energy itself flagged earlier this year. (NATiVE Solar)

Oh, then there’s the Texas energy lobby…we expect them to push back hard.   There’s an industry on the other side of this, and it hasn’t gone quiet. The Data Center Coalition -the sector’s main trade group — responded to the July 24 announcement by saying it “shares” Abbott’s commitment to responsible growth and will “work with” his office, the PUC, ERCOT, and the Legislature. That’s cooperative language, but the coalition has a track record worth noting: during the 2025 fight over SB 6’s cost-allocation rules, it argued that changing terms on data centers would make developers “rethink their investments in Texas,” and said afterward that the final law still didn’t address all its concerns. (KVIA) Separately, some Republican lawmakers are pushing to pause a related $100 billion transmission expansion tied to data center growth until the 2027 session can review it — a sign the fight over pace and cost isn’t settled, even inside the governor’s own party. (KSST Radio) The PUC’s actual rulemaking on cost allocation and curtailment mechanics is still in progress through the rest of 2026 — which is exactly where a well-resourced trade group has the most room to shape outcomes without ever staging public opposition.

Why On-Site Generation Still Matters Here

These rules govern who pays for new infrastructure. They don’t change how much electricity you pull from the grid, or when you pull it. That’s still on you — and it’s the part battery energy storage and solar actually affect, no matter how the cost-allocation fight in Austin plays out, or how the rulemaking ultimately lands.

For commercial and industrial facilities, that’s a demand charge mitigation story: behind-the-meter generation cutting exposure during peak-draw periods, especially for manufacturers, healthcare facilities, and other high-electricity-cost operations that feel rate volatility first. For homeowners, it’s energy resilience — less dependence on a grid now carrying an entirely new category of industrial load on top of everyday household demand.

None of this is a guarantee against rising rates; how much a given system reduces exposure depends on load profile, system sizing, and how a project is designed and dispatched. But it’s a lever you control directly, on a timeline you set — which is more than can be said for the outcome of next session’s legislative fights.

NATiVE Solar’s Perspective

We’ve watched this exact dynamic play out before: policy responds to a stressor after the stressor is already visible in the data. That’s not a criticism of the state’s approach here — fully funding data center infrastructure and requiring fast curtailment are genuinely useful tools. But we design systems for the property owners who’d rather not wait to find out how a future legislative session resolves cost allocation on a grid serving an entirely new category of industrial customer. Fifteen-plus years of working inside ERCOT’s interconnection and rate structures is what lets us size a system around your actual exposure, not a headline.

If you want to understand what rising data center-driven demand means for your specific facility or home, talk with our team about a system built for the Texas grid as it actually exists — not as the next legislative session might reshape it.

Texas Homeowners, It’s Here: SB 1036 Goes Live

Back in June, we published The End of Solar Scams in Texas, celebrating the passage of SB 1036 -the Texas Solar Consumer Protection Act. That post explained how the law was designed to end misleading solar sales tactics, require clear contract language and terms, and level the playing field for ethical installers.Now, as of late September, many of the most important provisions are officially in effect for newly completed and commissioned systems in Texas. But not everything went live at once, and understanding what’s active today (and what’s still coming in 2026) is important if you’re trying to stay up with this stuff.

Quick Refresher: What SB 1036 Covers

• Requiring plain-language contract disclosures
• Mandating a 5-day cancellation window
• Registering solar salespeople and subjecting them to background checks (and big potential fines!)
• Requiring solar retailers to carry general liability insurance (reputable firms like us have *ALWAYS* carried this)
• Giving state regulators power to audit and enforce compliance (big potential fines!)

What’s Live Now vs. Coming in 2026

Provision	Effective	What It Means
Plain-language contract templates	Live now	Every solar contract must clearly state system size, cost, financing terms, and expected performance.
5-day right of rescission	Live now	Homeowners can cancel within five business days without penalty.
General liability insurance	Live now	Solar retailers must carry adequate coverage, protecting homeowners from contractor negligence.
Ban on misleading savings claims	Live now	No more “free solar forever” or exaggerated bill-savings pitches.
Mandatory registration & background checks for sales reps	Sept 2026	Sales personnel must be registered; background checks and tracking increase accountability.
Random audits by TDLR; full enforcement	Sept 2026	Regulators gain teeth to audit, penalize, or revoke non-compliant operators.

Bottom line: We’re in a transition period until full enforcement ramps in 2026.

Key Nuances Homeowners Should Know

• Electrical contractor exemption: If a licensed electrical contractor employs salespeople, some registration requirements don’t apply — but disclosure and contract rules still do.
• Statewide preemption: The law overrides conflicting municipal ordinances, creating consistency across Texas.
• Enhanced penalties for targeting vulnerable Texans: Higher fines apply if violations affect seniors (65+) or limited-English speakers.

We highlighted why these protections matter in our original explainer, but they’re worth repeating — especially as enforcement begins.

What Homeowners Should Do Right Now

• Check your contract: Make sure it uses the new disclosure format. Look for clear system specs, total cost, financing terms, and performance guarantees.
• Confirm insurance: Ask your installer for proof of liability coverage.
• Use your 5-day window: If you feel rushed or pressured, you can cancel in writing within five business days.
• Beware high-pressure deals: Some bad actors may try to sign customers before 2026’s tougher rules kick in.

Pro tip: Bookmark this page — we’ll update it again when TDLR launches its public contractor lookup tool.

How NATiVE Solar Is Staying Ahead

• Adopting contract templates that meet or exceed state requirements
• Training our team on compliance and transparent sales practices
• Maintaing robust general liability insurance for every project
• Refining internal QA and customer journey processes to keep every project aligned with best practices

We wrote about SB 1036 before it was cool — and we’ve been running our business as if it were already law. That’s why homeowners and builders (and architects!) trust NATiVE for ethical, transparent solar design and installation.

Remaining Risks & What to Watch Next

• Companies claiming they “aren’t covered yet”
• High-pressure pitches that gloss over financing terms
• Missing or non-compliant contract language

The next big milestone comes in mid-2026, when mandatory registration, background checks, and TDLR audits begin. We’ll post another update then — and help keep you, dear reader, ahead of the curve.

Resources & Call to Action

• Verify an Installer: TDLR License Search (solar retailer lookup expected with rollout)
• File a Complaint: Texas AG Consumer Protection
• Read the Law: SB 1036 Enrolled Bill Text

If you have a solar proposal and want to confirm it’s SB 1036-compliant,
send it to us for a no-hassles/no cost review. We’ll shoot straight with you.

We mentioned it here several times in previous posts before it was passed into legislation, but if you haven’t heard of Texas SB 6 solar implications yet, don’t worry  -this new law is reshaping the grid, and it matters for solar and storage. We’re gonna break it down  here for ya’ll. Outside of legislative circles and ERCOT boardrooms, this new Texas law hasn’t made it to the dinner table yet. But it’s kinda a big deal for those concerned about the power being consumed by mega data centers.

Recently signed into law in at the height of the Texas summer, SB 6 changes the rules for really large electricity users -think data centers, crypto mines, semiconductor fabs, and hyperscale warehouses of servers. These facilities can pull down as much power as an entire city, and when the Texas grid is already stressed by heat waves or winter storms, that’s a serious problem. The law does three big things:

• Makes big users share grid costs. No more free rides on transmission upgrades.
• Forces transparency. They have to disclose projects and backup generation.
• Gives ERCOT new authority. In a grid emergency, large loads can be disconnected to keep the lights on for everyone else.

So, what does this mean for solar? Everything. Because those mega-users all want clean energy bragging rights, and Texas homeowners and businesses want stability and resilience. SB 6 is basically an open audition for solar + storage to prove it’s not just clean, but reliable.

Instead of parsing the bill line by line, let’s hear from the people shaping the conversation. Eight voices — senators, analysts, energy experts — and what their words tell us about the future of Texas solar.

1. “What we’ve done here today may become the model for the rest of the country.”  -Sen. Phil King (Texas Tribune)

Texas isn’t just making rules for itself  -it’s auditioning to be the national model.

Solar angle: If SB 6 really is a prototype, Texas solar developers have a first-mover advantage. Build projects that marry solar, batteries, and reliability now, and you’ll be ready when other states inevitably copy-paste this framework. Think of it as Texas exporting not just electrons, but policy leadership.

2. “Clear rules where large load customers know what they’re getting.”  -Rep. Ken King (Texas Tribune)

No more shifting sand. Developers need to know what they’re signing up for.

Solar angle: This kind of clarity is gold. With defined interconnection fees and backup requirements, solar+storage projects serving data centers or manufacturers can actually line up financing and power purchase agreements without biting their nails down to nothing. Predictability = bankability for these folks.

3. “Texas is open for business like never before… SB 6 will make our state more attractive for investors.”  -Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (Lt. Gov. Official Site)

Texas has long pitched itself as the energy capital of the world. Now the message is: “Bring your capital, y’all.”

Solar angle: Investor-friendly rules + a stronger grid = smoother runway for utility-scale solar and storage. And by keeping households protected from the costs of massive infrastructure, rooftop solar stays attractive too. Solar wins on both ends of the spectrum.

4. “It’s not an oil boom. It’s an economic boom led by big technology and their corresponding need for big electricity.”  -Sen. Charles Schwertner (Houston Chronicle)

The new “boomtowns” in Texas aren’t derricks and pumpjacks  -they’re racks of servers and AI chips.

Solar angle: Schwertner just gave solar its business case. The surging demand from AI, data centers, and fabs needs big, scalable, and clean electricity. Solar+storage isn’t just part of the solution  -it’s the only realistic way to meet this load without choking the grid.

5. “To make sure [large loads] pose as little reliability risk as possible and not drinking the milkshake of all other Texas power customers.”  -Travis Kavulla, VP of Regulatory Affairs, NRG (Utility Dive)

Yes, he really said “milkshake.” And yes, it matters.

Solar angle: Protecting everyday Texans from subsidizing mega-loads is good news for solar customers. It keeps retail rates fair, which preserves the value proposition of rooftop solar: lock in your own predictable energy costs and avoid the volatility caused by grid-hungry neighbors.

6. “It would create some friction… but we will build for decades to come if there is clarity.”  -Dan Diorio, Policy Director, Data Center Coalition (Houston Chronicle)

Data centers aren’t spooked. They’re committed to Texas -they just want to know the rules of the road.

Solar angle: That’s long-term demand knocking on solar’s door. Data centers will keep building, and every one of them wants a clean energy badge. Solar developers with reliable, clarity-aligned PPAs are in the perfect spot to meet this appetite.

7. “SB 6 will provide regulatory certainty for independent power producers, such as Vistra and NRG, and data centers seeking colocation.”  -Monica Chen & Jack Painter, Capstone Energy Analysts (Utility Dive)

Wall Street loves certainty, and analysts see it here.

Solar angle: If IPPs like Vistra and NRG get confidence to invest, that confidence spills over to solar IPPs in ERCOT too. Certainty on interconnection timelines and cost-sharing rules means less risk and smoother pipelines for large-scale solar projects.

8. “Without wind and solar, we would be having rolling blackouts.”  -Ed Hirs, Energy Fellow, University of Houston (Fox 7 Austin)

While others debate bills, Hirs reminds us of the obvious: renewables are already carrying the grid.

Solar angle: This is the mic-drop moment. Solar (especially paired with batteries) isn’t a nice-to-have -it’s the backbone preventing Texans from sweating in the dark. SB 6 raises the reliability bar, but solar+storage is already the workhorse stepping up.

🎯 Wrap-Up: What SB 6 Means for Solar

SB 6 isn’t a headline-grabber yet, but it’s quietly rewriting the rules of the Texas grid. For solar, the implications are clear:

• Utility-scale solar + storage: Perfectly positioned to meet corporate demand and backup mandates.
• Rooftop solar: More attractive as retail customers are shielded from subsidizing mega-loads.
• Corporate solar PPAs: Stronger market as data centers demand clean, reliable supply.
• Texas as test case: If SB 6 is the model, Texas solar gets first-mover advantage in shaping national standards.

The bottom line? SB 6 isn’t a wall blocking solar -it’s a framework demanding solar step up. And if there’s one thing Texas solar knows how to do, it’s step into the spotlight when the grid needs it most.

We’ll be reporting more on this soon!

This new Texas law should shut down all the bad actors that remain.

Starting September 1, 2025, the Texas solar industry is about to change—for the better.

A new era of consumer protection is coming to Texas solar. That’s right, dear reader. The recently passed Texas solar scams law—SB 1036—is designed to shut down unethical sales tactics and restore homeowner trust in the Texas residential solar industry. Starting September 1, 2025, the Texas solar industry is about to change—for the better.

Aggressive door-to-door sales, exaggerated savings claims, opaque lending terms, and confusing contracts have made it difficult for Texans to trust what should be a clean, empowering energy solution. The poor folks who got taken have gone through hell. And it isn’t right.

But, dear readers, a new law –Senate Bill 1036, known as the Texas Residential Solar Consumer Protection Act- is going to put an end to all that.  And all of us here at NATiVE Solar are 100% in support of it!  *I reported on this (now passed) legislation back in January when it was slated for a debate and a vote.

Why the Texas Solar Scams Law SB 1036 Matters (and what it actually does).

SB 1036 was recently passed the Texas Senate and introduces fairly sweeping consumer protections (that’s you) designed to restore faith in residential solar -and to severely punish bad actors, including flat-out shutting them down.  It’s scheduled to take effect Jun 1 of 2026. Here’s what the law requires solar contractors (that’s us) to do :

• Licensing for Salespeople: Solar sales representatives must now be registered, fingerprinted, and pass a background check with the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation.
• Mandatory Insurance: Solar companies must carry general liability insurance to operate legally in Texas.
• Stiff Penalties for Bad Actors: Civil fines of up to $10,000 per violation—and up to $100,000 for repeat violations targeting seniors or vulnerable consumers.
• Consumer Education: All solar proposals must include a state-approved consumer guide outlining homeowner rights, financing risks, and what to expect from installation.

These changes don’t just target shady companies -although it will force them to change (or die!). I think the new state law actually (finally!) creates a clear framework of accountability for legitimate installers to stand apart from (and push back against) all of what has for decades been the unfortunate “dark side” of the solar industry here in Texas.

SB 1036 Timeline

• September 1, 2025: Core provisions take effect. (*NATiVE Solar has pretty much *ALWAYS* implemented these as standard practices)

Provision	Requirement Starting Sept 1, 2025
Cancellation Window	5 business days
Installation Qualification	Must be performed by licensed electrical contractor
Permitting & Interconnection	Handled by installer/retailer, not homeowner
Contract Disclosures	TDLR–approved format with clear cost/financing info
Sales Conduct	Must follow TDLR code; prohibits deceptive/utility claims

• Mid-2026: State releases official consumer guide and seller licensing rules.
• Late 2026: Enforcement begins; all residential solar sellers must be licensed and compliant.

What This Means for You -the Homeowner

For Texas homeowners, this is a game-changer. You’ll soon be able to:

• Verify the credentials of anyone selling solar to you.
• Understand your solar investment before signing anything.
• Report unethical behavior and expect real consequences for deceptive practices.

In short: solar in Texas is about to get safer, smarter, and more transparent.

What This Means for Reputable Installers

For ethical solar companies like us, this law is a welcome evolution. We’ve built our reputation on integrity, transparency, and long-term client success—not gimmicks or high-pressure sales. For us, SB 1036 rewards that commitment.

And for those other solar firms who took folks for a ride? Well, all i can say is: “Bubbeye now!”

As the solar market matures, we believe consumer trust will be the most valuable currency. This law helps make that possible.

Final Thoughts

We (here at NATiVE) support the Texas solar scams law SB 1036 and believe it will raise the bar for ethics in our industry. I don’t really understand why it took so long.  This measure passed the state house and senate by a huge margin.  And I don’t know of any reputable people or firms in this market who oppose these new laws.  In any case, it’s a major step toward a better solar future for Texas.

Of course, NATiVE Solar clients have always been safe. And we’re super-greatful to all the folks that have placed their trust in us over the years.

Here’s a link to the bill’s actual final text, as well as the related procedural /legislative data bits for anybody that’s interested in going deeper…

And until next time – be well, dear reader.

---

NATiVE Solar has been helping Texas homeowners and businesses go solar the right way for over 18 years. If you’re ready to talk to a team that leads with ethics, experience, and service—let’s talk.

Here’s some good news, dear reader!   In a major win for supporters of Texas renewable energy legislation, several controversial bills aimed at curbing clean power development failed to pass in the 2025 legislative session. Although they gained traction in the Senate, proposals like SB 388, SB 715, and SB 819 were ultimately left to die on the House floor at the last minute. As a result, our state’s massive forward momentum in solar and wind energy growth was preserved.

What Were These Bills Trying to Do?

Each of the bills targeted Texas’s fast-growing solar and wind sectors in different ways. Specifically:

• SB 388: Required 50% of new generation on the ERCOT grid to come from “dispatchable” sources—explicitly excluding batteries and favoring natural gas over renewables.
• SB 715: Imposed retroactive mandates requiring existing wind and solar farms to secure backup generation, adding costly and burdensome requirements.
• SB 819: Added new permitting hurdles for renewable projects over 10 MW, including environmental reviews and subjective “public interest” tests.

In short: the bills threatened to stall clean energy investment, limit grid innovation, and drive up long-term costs. (And now Big Oil lobbyists are sad – boo hoo)

Why These Bills Failed

While the bills passed the Texas Senate, they ultimately died in the House—mostly due to a combination of procedural delays, strategic pushback, and economic pragmatism. From the outset, it’s pretty clear the bill’s sponsors were in for a fight:

• Legislative Deadlines: The bills were not prioritized for House debate and expired when the legislative session ended. Therefore, no action was taken in time.
• Bipartisan Opposition: A wide-ranging coalition of clean energy advocates, manufacturers, landowners, and even some oil and gas companies opposed the measures. Consequently, concerns about risks to jobs, rural economies, and affordability gained traction.
• Economic Concerns: Critics emphasized that the bills would destabilize the market, discourage investment, and lead to higher electricity prices. As such, they lost key support from stakeholders.
• Public Sentiment: Polls showed broad support for renewables, even among conservative voters—which in turn added political risk for legislators backing anti-solar policy.
• Legal & Practical Issues: Proposals like SB 715 raised retroactive enforcement concerns and would have forced expensive, impractical upgrades on existing systems. Not surprisingly, this became a major sticking point.

What Industry Experts Are Saying

“You can’t kill renewables and grow data centres in Texas in the next five years. It’s just not possible.”

— Kay McCall, Renewable Energy Alliance Houston

“This bill will kill renewable energy in Texas, plain and simple… We cannot pit energy resources against each other.”

— Jeff Clark, CEO, Advanced Power Alliance

“The failure of these three bills is a victory for ratepayers. Renewable energy sources are an indispensable part of powering the state.”

— Adrian Shelley, Director, Public Citizen Texas

So…What Does This Mean for Texas Grid-Scale Solar Development?

The defeat of these anti-renewable bills sends a strong message: Texas is open for clean energy business. In other words, progress can continue.

For commercial property owners and grid-scale utility operators planning future energy investments, this outcome removes a major source of policy uncertainty. Wind, Solar and battery storage remain attractive, proven strategies for reducing costs and increasing operational resilience in the Texas energy market.

I’d call that a win for nearly everyone. And looking ahead, momentum seems likely to continue -at least at the state level.  (Yes, we need to also consider all of this pending federal action to roll-back the ITC solar tax incentives. That wouldn’t help matters for anyone. And that’s a topic for a related blog.)

What’s Next?

While the worst of this year’s legislative threats have passed, similar proposals may (ok let’s count on it) return in future Texas legislative sessions. Therefore, ongoing education and advocacy is going to be essential to preserve progress and help ensure Texas continues to lead in renewable energy innovation. I

At NATiVE Solar, we’re proud to be part of that future—helping businesses, schools, and communities build resilient, high-performance energy systems across the state. Meanwhile, we’re going to keep our eyes on all-things-solar and related to our electrical grid. And we’ll keep you informed!

Could New Texas Bills Undermine Utility-Scale Solar + Battery Growth?

You’ve probably heard the phrase “don’t mess with Texas”—but lately, renewable energy advocates (like me!) are wondering if that’s exactly what’s happening at the legislative level. Two new proposals in the Texas Legislature—House Bill 3356 and Senate Bill 715—are sending some waves of uncertainty through the solar and storage industry. And that’s putting it mildly.  So, could new Texas bills undermine utility-Scale solar?

These bills would require all existing and future wind and solar farms in Texas to provide “backup” power. This would come from either natural gas-powered electric generators or very large battery energy storage (BESS) arrays. This or else face heavy penalties, including shutdowns. One catch? This requirement would be retroactive, meaning it doesn’t just affect future projects. It would hit systems that are already installed and operating today. So, could new Texas bills undermine the utility grid and clean energy advances? (hint: yes. definitely.)

What’s at Stake?

It’s not totally bad policy. Some of these measures could help grid reliability. HB 3356 and SB 715 may be framed as reliability measures, but their real-world impact could be both economically and operationally disruptive. Here’s a deeper look at what’s on the line for Texas:

•  Higher Electricity Prices for Consumers
  Requiring solar and wind projects to add backup capacity adds significant capital and operating costs. These costs will likely be passed down the line:
  • Power producers may raise wholesale rates to recoup new infrastructure investments.
  • Retail electricity providers could respond by increasing prices for residential, commercial, and industrial customers.
  • The most impacted consumers will be in competitive markets without long-term fixed-rate plans.

•  Greater Grid Reliability Concerns in the Short Term
  Ironically, forcing wind and solar operators to retrofit with dispatchable resources—or risk penalties—could backfire:
  • Some operators may shut down altogether rather than make costly upgrades, reducing available generation during high-demand periods.
  • Texas could see a shortfall of available capacity during heat waves or winter freezes, especially if gas plants or firming resources can’t be built in time.
  • This could actually increase blackout risks during grid emergencies—the very thing these bills claim to prevent.

•  Loss of Investor Confidence in Texas Clean Energy
  Our state has historically been a magnet for renewable investment. This due to our deregulated market, low land costs, and abundant sun and wind. These bills introduce retroactive rules that change the game midstream and will likely create confusion and delay in the industry:
  • Retroactive regulation undermines contractual stability and project bankability—key drivers of large-scale energy finance.
  • Uncertainty around future compliance costs could stall both in-state and out-of-state capital from funding new Texas-based projects.
  • Investors may redirect funds to states with more consistent, market-aligned energy policies.

•  Loss of Intertia in Lowering Carbon Outputs and Pollution
  The option here for these operators to build large natural gas-fired backup generators in leu of more costly battery storage arrays has trade-offs. They may allow for decision-making shortcuts that could dramatically reduce the velocity towards which Texas has been (mostly) embracing the clean energy economy. While cleaner than diesel-powered electrical generators, burning natural gas is much dirtier than battery installations over time.

The Industry Responds

The renewable energy community’s backlash has been swift and loud. Organizations like Public Citizen have flagged potential constitutional issues with the bills. Especially concerning to them are retroactive regulation and the impairment of existing contracts. That could open the door to legal challenges.

Even beyond the solar and wind sectors, businesses are raising red flags. The Texas Association of Manufacturers warned that increased electricity costs will be passed on to commercial and industrial customers, which could impact prices and operations across the board.

The Bigger Picture

This legislative push comes at a time when Texas needs more energy resilience—not less. Events like Winter Storm Uri and record-breaking summer demand have already shown that the grid is under pressure. Battery energy storage and distributed solar play a critical role in adding flexibility, reliability, and backup power to the state’s electric system.

While mandating more instant backup power for our grid sounds like a logical plan, it’s the details that matter. Jammig through one-size-fits-all legislation is never the best policy – just the most expeditious. Plus, there’s a ton of evidence that our state’s electrical distribution lines are about to run out of capacity (projected to happen in 2026). We (as a state) desperately need to invest money on that too. And building new grid capacity ain’t cheap either.

Our Take

Suppose Texas truly wants a stable, self-reliant, and diversified grid. In that case, we shouldn’t mandate statewide retroactive policy without a better look at the tradeoffs for a more balanced, all-of-the-above approach. Penalizing the ratepayers and forcing technology implementation in a ham-fisted way is not the path to our brightest solution. The importance of this topic demands more discussion, more stakeholder discussions, and more flexibility in proposed solutions.

We’ll be watching how these bills progress—and as always, we’re here to help you understand how policy changes could affect your energy choices.

Want to future-proof your residence or business and further embrace the new energy economy? Get in touch and let’s talk about building smarter energy solutions—regardless of what the legislature is up to.

---

Sources:

• Aurora Energy Research Report on SB 715 and HB 3356
• Public Citizen testimony against retroactive legislation