People have seen this net metering problem coming from far off. I wrote a very unpolished undergrad thesis on this a while ago. Some standout articles from back then showed how net metering leads to a positive feedback of solar adoption [1] because of how rates are structured throughout this country (and the world for that matter), and it was time to consider modifying the rate setting process [2]. My conclusion was that net metering ends up being a regressive tax on those who can't afford the upfront capital to install solar themselves.
It's been a while since I looked at residential solar tariffs, but there were a lot of ingenious solutions being proposed to deal with the downsides of net metering and poorly set feed-in tariff rates. Minnesota's Value of Solar tariff [3] is the one that comes to mind as being pretty clever.
>My conclusion was that net metering ends up being a regressive tax on those who can't afford the upfront capital to install solar themselves.
This is the traditional conclusion in the utility business, but I'd say it's also almost meaningless. By the exact same arguments, any kind of conservation winds up being a "regressive tax on those who can't afford the upfront capital", e.g. insulation, fancy windows, high efficiency HVAC.
If I can afford a $2400 upfront cost to go above code on my HVAC unit, but it saves 100 a month, that savings is being subsidized by the people who can't afford it. The utility loses 100 a month in revenue but much less than that in costs, and the difference is picked up by the broader customer base.
Hell, turning your thermostat settings up in the summer is a "regressive tax on those who can't handle the less comfortable temperature" by exactly the same argument.
It also ignores how R&D and tech markets work. That "regressive tax on those who can't afford upfront capital" is an "R&D subsidy to early customers who are providing the upfront capital to lower the cost of solar". As solar companies get more wealthy customers, they can spend more on technology to improve efficiency, they gain economies of scale, and they can attract more financial capital on equity markets.
All of this has actually played out - the cost per watt of a solar installation is now 1/3 of what it was 10 years ago:
Very interesting, and surprising conclusion. I hadn't seen this problem before. (Though, note regarding "coming from far off" - the articles you cite are from 2013, 2014.)
It's been a while since I looked at residential solar tariffs, but there were a lot of ingenious solutions being proposed to deal with the downsides of net metering and poorly set feed-in tariff rates. Minnesota's Value of Solar tariff [3] is the one that comes to mind as being pretty clever.
[1]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03014...
[2]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S10406...
[3]: https://www.mnseia.org/value-solar