Early net metering let many households treat the grid like a free virtual battery: every exported kWh was credited at the same retail rate they paid when importing. In 2026, "Net Metering 2.0" and "3.0" style reforms in several regions now pay less for exports—often tied to time‑of‑use (TOU) prices or fixed export tariffs. At Energy Solutions we translate these changing rules into payback times, self‑consumption targets and battery decisions for homes and small businesses.
What You'll Learn
- From Classic Net Metering to 2.0/3.0: What Changed?
- Export Tariffs, TOU Credits & Solar Value Stacks
- Household Load Profiles & Self‑Consumption
- Illustrative Payback Under Different Rules
- How Batteries and Smart Loads Change the Picture
- Case Studies: Homes & Businesses Under New Rules
- Devil's Advocate: When Solar Doesn't Pay
- Outlook to 2030
- FAQ: Policy Risk, Retrofits & Small Businesses
From Classic Net Metering to 2.0/3.0: What Changed?
Classic net metering credited each exported kWh at roughly the same volumetric retail price a customer paid when importing, regardless of time of day or system stress. That made billing simple and boosted rooftop PV uptake—but it blurred the real costs of integrating variable solar and shifted grid fixed costs onto non‑solar customers.
Net Metering 2.0/3.0 style reforms typically introduce one or more of the following:
- Lower export credits than retail import prices, sometimes set near wholesale or "avoided cost" levels.
- Time‑varying export rates, paying less for midday surplus and more for early‑evening supply.
- Fixed charges or grid access fees to recover network costs independent of kWh flows.
For new solar customers, this means that self‑consuming energy on site becomes more valuable relative to exporting, and headline paybacks lengthen unless systems or behaviour change.
Export Tariffs, TOU Credits & Solar Value Stacks
The table below shows stylised values for a hypothetical region moving from classic net metering to a two‑period TOU export structure in 2026. Numbers are illustrative but consistent with reforms seen in several high‑solar markets.
Illustrative Retail and Export Rates (2026)
| Tariff element | Classic net metering | Net Metering 2.0 | Net Metering 3.0 style |
|---|---|---|---|
| Retail import (flat) | US$0.22/kWh | TOU: US$0.18–0.28/kWh | TOU: US$0.18–0.32/kWh |
| Export credit (solar) | US$0.22/kWh (retail parity) | US$0.10–0.18/kWh (TOU‑linked) | US$0.06–0.16/kWh (TOU‑linked, lower midday) |
| Fixed charge | ≈US$10/month | ≈US$15/month | ≈US$20/month |
Stylised Value of 1 kWh of Rooftop Solar (Illustrative)
The chart emphasises that a kWh self‑consumed behind the meter still offsets full retail cost, while exported kWh under 2.0/3.0 receive a smaller credit—especially midday.
Household Load Profiles & Self‑Consumption
Two identical 5 kW solar systems can have very different economics depending on when occupants use energy. A household that is empty all day exports more energy at low midday export rates; a home with daytime loads (heat pumps, EVs, flexible appliances) can push self‑consumption above 50–60% and soften the impact of lower tariffs.
- Daytime‑at‑home households: can time laundry, dishwashers and EV charging to sunny hours.
- Evening‑heavy households: may see more exports and a larger gap between gross production and bill savings.
- Small businesses with daytime operation: often still see strong returns even under 2.0/3.0 rules.
Illustrative Payback Under Different Rules
The table below models a simple 5 kW residential system costing US$12,000 installed, producing 7,500 kWh/year. It compares bill savings and simple payback for three policy regimes, assuming 40% self‑consumption under classic net metering and behaviour adjustments under later regimes.
Indicative 5 kW Rooftop Solar Economics by Tariff Design
| Scenario (illustrative) | Effective average value per kWh | Annual bill savings | Simple payback |
|---|---|---|---|
| Classic net metering | ≈US$0.22/kWh | ≈US$1,650 | ~7.3 years |
| Net Metering 2.0 (moderate export cut) | ≈US$0.17/kWh | ≈US$1,275 | ~9.4 years |
| Net Metering 3.0 (TOU + low midday exports) | ≈US$0.14/kWh (after behaviour change) | ≈US$1,050 | ~11.4 years |
These values are stylised and region‑dependent, but they highlight the direction of travel: reforms lengthen payback unless customers increase self‑consumption or pair PV with storage and smart loads.
How Batteries and Smart Loads Change the Picture
Under 2.0/3.0 frameworks, batteries and flexible loads become tools for arbitrage rather than pure backup. Storing low‑value midday solar and discharging during expensive evening hours can partially restore the economics of earlier net metering, though hardware costs and round‑trip losses must be weighed carefully.
- Behind‑the‑meter batteries raise self‑consumption and can support backup power.
- EVs and heat pumps provide flexible loads that can be time‑shifted into sunny or low‑price periods.
- Aggregated resources (virtual power plants) can earn capacity or grid‑service payments on top of bill savings.
Case Studies: Homes & Businesses Under New Rules
Case Study A: Family home – California, USA
- System: 6 kW rooftop PV, installed 2024 under NEM 3.0.
- Approach: Added smart EV charger and shifted laundry/dishwasher to midday.
- Results: Self-consumption rose from 35% to 62%; payback ~9 years vs ~13 years without load-shifting.
- Lesson: Behaviour change and smart loads can recover much of the value lost to lower export rates.
Case Study B: Retail shop – Sydney, Australia
- System: 10 kW rooftop PV on small retail premises.
- Approach: Daytime operation aligns with solar production; no battery added.
- Results: 75% self-consumption; payback ~5 years despite low export tariff (A$0.05/kWh).
- Lesson: Businesses with daytime loads can thrive under NEM 2.0/3.0 without storage.
Case Study C: Solar + battery – Germany
- System: 8 kW PV + 10 kWh battery, installed 2025.
- Approach: Store midday surplus; discharge during evening peak and grid outages.
- Results: Self-consumption ~85%; payback ~10 years including battery cost.
- Lesson: Batteries make sense where export rates are very low and outage resilience is valued.
Devil's Advocate: When Solar Doesn't Pay
Low daytime usage: Households empty all day export most production at low rates. Without batteries or load-shifting, payback can exceed 15 years.
Shading and orientation: Roofs facing away from optimal angles or shaded by trees/buildings produce less and export even less valuable power.
Policy uncertainty: Grandfathering periods end; future rate changes can erode expected returns mid-system-life.
High upfront cost: In some markets, installation costs remain high relative to electricity prices, stretching payback beyond comfort.
Bottom line: Solar still works for many, but not everyone. A site-specific analysis beats generic advice.
Outlook to 2030
2026–2027: More jurisdictions adopt NEM 3.0-style rules. Battery costs continue to fall, improving solar+storage economics. VPP programmes expand.
2028–2030: Dynamic export tariffs (real-time pricing) may replace fixed TOU schedules in some markets. Grid-interactive inverters become standard, enabling automated response to price signals.
Wildcards: Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) could turn EVs into home batteries. Community solar and peer-to-peer trading may offer alternatives to traditional net metering.
Projected Rooftop Solar Payback Trend (Illustrative)
Methodology Note
Tariff, payback and self-consumption figures are illustrative composites based on Energy Solutions analysis of utility rate filings, installer data and household monitoring (2024–26). Actual values vary by location, system size, load profile and policy.