WTF: Why That’s Fantastic
There are plenty of good reasons to “go green.”
Lowering your carbon footprint. Producing clean energy. Reducing dependence on
fossil fuels. Doing something tangible for the environment instead of simply talking
about it.
But what if going green could also help you get green?
As in: keep more money in your pocket.
That question became much less theoretical for me recently when I had a 17-panel
solar energy system installed on my home — with no upfront cost for the system.
The system is projected to produce approximately 9,100 kWh of solar electricity
annually, resulting in an estimated $1,320 in first-year electricity savings — an
average of about $110 per month.
For electricity my household was going to use anyway.
That caught my attention.
And with electricity prices moving in the wrong direction, federal clean-energy incentives
being rolled back, and some remarkably favorable solar opportunities still available here
in the Washington, DC region, this may be one of those moments when waiting to see
what happens could be considerably less valuable than finding out what is possible
now.
That is what Get Green By Design is really about.
Disclosure:
I have referral relationships with solar providers and may receive
compensation if I introduce a homeowner who completes a qualifying meeting with one
of them. My experience with solar described here is my own.
Introduction: What “Get Green By Design” Really Means
Get Green By Design is about looking at solar through two lenses at once. The first is environmental. Every kilowatt-hour generated by rooftop solar is electricity that does not have to come from the grid. Multiply that across thousands of homes, businesses, schools, churches, nonprofits, and other buildings, and rooftop solar becomes part of a much larger distributed clean-energy system. The second lens is financial. Your roof may be one of the largest unused assets you own. It sits above you every day absorbing sunlight while you simultaneously purchase electricity from the grid below it. Solar changes that equation by turning otherwise unused roof space into an energy-producing asset.
And in Washington, DC, that equation can be particularly attractive. The District maintains policies including net metering and Solar Renewable Energy Certificates, or SRECs, which can provide additional financial value to qualifying solar- system owners. Eligible lower- and moderate-income residents may also benefit from DC’s Solar for All program. At the same time, private solar providers offer arrangements that can make rooftop solar available even to homeowners who don’t want to make a large upfront investment. That combination creates something worth examining carefully. Not green by accident. Green By Design.
1. Electricity Prices Are Already Sending a Signal
You don’t need a complicated energy forecast to understand one of the strongest arguments for solar. Look at your electric bill. Beginning July 1, 2026, Pepco’s Standard Offer Service electricity rates increased again in the District. The DC Public Service Commission estimates that an average residential SOS customer using 614 kWh per month will see approximately a 7% increase in the total monthly bill — about $9.56 more each month. And one of the forces the Commission specifically identifies behind rising electricity costs is particularly noteworthy: data centers.
The extraordinary growth of artificial intelligence, cloud computing, streaming, digital services, and other data-intensive technologies requires enormous amounts of electricity. The DC Public Service Commission specifically cites higher demand from new energy-intensive data centers in the region among the factors contributing to increased electricity costs, alongside power-plant retirements, reliability requirements, and other market pressures.
That does not mean data centers are solely responsible for higher electric bills. They’re not. But it does mean homeowners should probably stop assuming that tomorrow’s electricity will cost roughly what yesterday’s electricity did. Under the traditional utility relationship, the consumer is largely on the receiving end of that equation. Electricity demand increases. Wholesale prices change. Infrastructure costs increase. Rates change. Your bill arrives. Solar gives homeowners an opportunity to change part of that relationship. Instead of purchasing every kilowatt-hour your home consumes, you begin producing some of it yourself. That isn’t merely an environmental decision. It’s an energy-cost strategy.
2. “Free Solar” Deserves a Closer Look
The phrase free solar understandably makes people skeptical. It made me skeptical. Because when someone offers to put thousands of dollars of solar equipment on your roof at no upfront cost, the obvious question should be: What’s the catch? The answer is that there doesn’t necessarily have to be a catch — but there absolutely is a business model.
The arrangement I ultimately chose is a Power Purchase Agreement, or PPA. Under my agreement, the solar system was installed with $0 upfront cost. The electricity produced by the panels carries a $0 solar rate, with a $0 monthly solar cost and no annual solar-rate escalation during the 20-year agreement. I still receive a Pepco bill for any electricity my home needs from the grid when the solar system isn’t producing enough to meet our needs. That last point is important. “Free solar” does not mean your house disconnects from Pepco or that every electricity-related charge magically disappears. Instead, the panels produce electricity that your home can use rather than purchasing that same electricity from the utility.
Under this type of arrangement, the solar provider owns the equipment and retains certain financial benefits associated with ownership, including renewable-energy credits and other incentives available to the system owner. The homeowner gets the electricity generated by the system. The provider gets the economics associated with owning the asset. Both parties derive value from the same rooftop. That is essentially the model I chose for my own home.
3. Buying Solar Creates an Entirely Different Opportunity
The $0 PPA option isn’t necessarily the best choice for everyone. Some homeowners may decide they want to purchase and own the system themselves. Ownership requires a greater financial commitment — either upfront or through financing — but it can also allow the homeowner to retain more of the financial benefits created by the system. One particularly valuable part of the DC solar equation is the Solar Renewable Energy Certificate — or SREC. An SREC is created for every megawatt-hour — 1,000 kWh — of qualifying solar electricity generated. Those certificates have market value because electricity suppliers use them to satisfy the District’s renewable-energy requirements. Their value fluctuates with market supply and demand.
DC’s net-metering policy creates another potential benefit. When a qualifying rooftop system produces more electricity than the home needs at a particular time, the homeowner can receive credits for that excess generation and use those credits when the system isn’t producing enough power. So for someone who owns a system, the financial equation can include: Electricity you no longer have to buy. Net-metering credits associated with excess electricity generated. SRECs produced by the system. And the long-term value of owning an energy-producing asset. There is one major 2026 caveat.
The federal Residential Clean Energy Credit previously provided a credit equal to 30% of qualifying residential clean-energy expenditures. Federal legislation enacted in 2025 ended that credit for property placed in service after December 31, 2025. That’s an important reminder that the financial incentives surrounding clean energy are not permanent. Which makes understanding the opportunities that are still available even more important.
4. Washington Took Away One Incentive. It Did Not Take Away the Sun.
For years, homeowners considering solar could reasonably assume there would be another federal incentive waiting for them if they waited another year. That assumption deserves reconsideration. The 30% Residential Clean Energy Credit had been scheduled to remain available considerably longer. Instead, federal legislation enacted in 2025 accelerated its termination, and the IRS now makes clear that it is unavailable for residential clean- energy property placed in service after December 31, 2025. That is no longer a hypothetical possibility. One major homeowner solar incentive is already gone. Yet Washington, DC’s local solar ecosystem remains unusually favorable in several respects. SRECs remain part of the market. Net metering remains available for qualifying systems. Solar for All continues to provide benefits for qualifying lower- and moderate-income households.
And private providers continue to offer arrangements capable of putting panels on qualifying homes with no upfront purchase of the equipment. That doesn’t mean any particular program will disappear tomorrow. But homeowners should understand a fundamental difference: Sunlight is physics. Incentives are policy. The sun will still hit your roof ten years from now. The financial programs available to help you capture its value may be very different.
5. Your Roof May Be an Asset You Have Never Put to Work
Not every house is a good solar candidate. That’s another reason I prefer an evaluation-first approach rather than telling everybody they should immediately install panels. Roof size matters. Orientation matters. Shade matters. Roof condition matters. Your electricity consumption matters. And — something I learned firsthand — the electric infrastructure serving your particular property and neighborhood can matter, too. A reputable evaluation should answer some very practical questions: How many panels can reasonably fit? How much electricity should they produce? How does that compare with your historical electricity use? What happens when you produce more electricity than you consume? What happens when you produce less? Who owns the SRECs? Who maintains the panels? Who pays for repairs? What happens if you sell the house? How long is the agreement? And most importantly: What should this actually save me? Those are the questions that turn solar from an environmental idea into a financial decision.
6. Seventeen Panels Made Sense for Me. Forty Might Make Sense for You.
This is where my own solar experience became especially interesting. The system I ultimately chose consists of 17 panels. Its projected annual output is approximately: 9,100 kWh Its projected first-year savings: $1,320 Or approximately: $110 per month That’s the solar configuration that ultimately made sense for my property. But it wasn’t the largest system I considered. Another proposed configuration would have installed 40 panels, taking advantage of substantially more available roof space. That larger system was projected to produce approximately: 16,378 kWh annually With estimated first-year electricity savings of: $2,375 Or approximately: $198 per month That’s nearly 80% more projected solar production and savings than my 17-panel configuration.
So why didn’t I choose it? Because there was another number that mattered. I learned during the process that accommodating the larger system at my property would require approximately $15,000 in Pepco infrastructure upgrades. At that point, the economics didn’t work for my wallet. So I went with 17 panels. But here’s the important part: Your answer might be completely different. The need for utility-system upgrades isn’t determined simply by whether somebody wants 17 panels, 25 panels, or 40 panels. Solar interconnection is evaluated project by project, and the capacity and condition of the local distribution infrastructure can affect whether upgrades are necessary and what they cost. DC regulatory records demonstrate that distribution-system and interconnection upgrade costs can vary substantially between projects. That means another homeowner with enough usable roof space — including a garage, addition, or other suitable roof surface — could potentially support a considerably larger system without encountering the same infrastructure expense I did. For that homeowner, the economics could look much closer to that 40-panel scenario: 16,378 kWh of projected annual solar production. $2,375 in projected first-year savings. About $198 per month. That’s worth finding out.
And homeowners who already have solar shouldn’t necessarily assume their original installation exhausted their property’s potential. Look at the garage. Look at an addition. Look at other usable roof surfaces. Ask whether today’s panels, technology, incentives, and interconnection conditions create an opportunity to expand. The lesson I took away wasn’t: Install as many panels as possible. It was: Find the configuration that creates the greatest practical value for your particular property. That’s a much more useful definition of doing solar By Design.
7. My Numbers Made the Decision Real
Solar can sound abstract until someone puts actual numbers in front of you. My installed configuration: 17 panels. Projected annual solar production: 9,100 kWh. Projected first-year savings: $1,320. Average projected monthly savings: $110. Upfront solar-system cost: $0. That doesn’t mean every homeowner will save $1,320. Some will save less. Some may save considerably more.
A smaller roof may accommodate fewer panels. A larger or better-oriented property may accommodate substantially more. Weather changes. Energy use changes. Utility rates change. Actual solar production varies. But seeing the potential of my property changed the conversation. Instead of: “Wouldn’t solar be nice someday?” the question became: “Why wouldn’t I find out what my roof could be producing right now?” And the alternative 40-panel design taught me something equally valuable. The objective isn’t simply to generate the greatest possible number of kilowatt-hours. It’s to understand all of the economics involved and select the option that makes sense. That’s what “By Design” means. Make the decision intentionally.
Conclusion: Go Green. Get Green. Do It By Design.
Solar energy has been marketed for years primarily as something environmentally responsible people should do. That case still matters. But I think the more interesting conversation today is what solar can potentially do simultaneously for the environment and for the homeowner. Generate clean energy. Reduce dependence on increasingly expensive grid electricity. Put unused roof space to work. Create meaningful household savings. And, depending upon how a system is structured, potentially create additional financial value through SRECs, net metering, and other available programs. Even homeowners who already have solar may discover that an unused garage or another roof surface offers additional potential they have never explored.
My answer happened to be 17 panels. Yours might be 10. Or 25. Or 40. You won’t know until someone looks at the roof, evaluates your electricity use, checks the interconnection possibilities, and runs the numbers. That is why I call it Get Green By Design. The first green is the energy. The second green is your money. And right now, the opportunity deserves a look — particularly as electricity costs rise while some of the federal policies that previously encouraged residential clean energy have already been curtailed.
You don’t have to buy anything to find out whether your property makes sense for solar. Start with the roof. All of the roof. Start with the numbers. Start with the questions. Then decide. To discuss the potential benefits of solar for your property, email me at [email protected]. I can connect you with a solar professional who can evaluate your property’s potential, explain available options and current programs, and answer your questions — and we’ll see that you get compensated for your time and interest when an applicable meeting or referral incentive is available. Going green is good. Getting green while you do it? WTF. Why, That’s Fantastic.