It's the article's title, for sure, but it feels misleading to call a reduction in incentives from a successful program (rooftop solar generating 11% of California's power is amazing) a strike against the goals of that program.
LEDs/CCFLs being subsidized until consumers switched over to them (I know the story is more complex than this) made sense too.
LEDs/CCFLs being subsidized until consumers switched over to them (I know the story is more complex than this) made sense too.