Distributed generation in Brazil: what is at stake is energy democracy

DG (distributed generation) is not a summary of throat-below speech téconic or tendencyêniche ance: represents democratizationherethe access à energy.

When a residenceência, a school or a community installs panelséis solar connected à network, it changes from a passive consumer to an energy producing agent — reducing your bill, injecting surplus, increasing resilienceêence and alleviating the load on the centralized system. And it also actively contributes to the transitionherethe energéethics, decreasesherethe issueõand strengthening the local economy.

But in Brazil, we're currently witnessing a harsh institutional attack on this model. Provisional Measure 1304/2025 is just the most recent example. The sector was still struggling with limited rules and incentives, and now a narrative is emerging that paints DG as "unfair": it was said that "the rich put solar energy on their roofs, and the poor foot the bill."

This speecháret ciaórich transforms an innovaherethe democratáethics in a pretext to defend the status quo —convém deconstructí-the.

First, let's be clear: subsidies are common practice in the electricity sector. From the CDE (Energy Development Account) to exemptions for large consumers, the centralized system has always been subject to overlapping subsidies—some visible, some hidden. Therefore, arguing that DG is illegitimate because it "subsidizes the rich" is hypocritical, to say the least.

Second, calling it "injustice" to allow someone to generate their own energy because "the poor pay" is an ethical and social violation. The construction of this narrative has already contaminated the social fabric: some speak of "energy racism" as if generating clean energy were a privilege of the rich—when, in fact, what they seek is equal empowerment.

Technology has already reached the most disadvantaged classes and is even included in social programs like Minha Casa Minha Vida (My House, My Life). The real risk is that, if we eliminate DG from the map, it will be precisely the most vulnerable segments of society that will be trapped in a centralized electricity system, subject to blackouts, tariff instability, and dependence on a few large companies.

We encounter a paradox: states and institutions say they want "modernization of the electricity sector," "clean energy," and "climate resilience," but then pass regulations that reduce incentives for DG. It's pure nonsense.

It is also cowardice against those who believed they could do their part—individually and collectively.

Therefore, a moral clarity is needed: the narrative that blames GD for “social injustice” is a facade to protect the energy oligopoly.

The poor aren't the ones paying for rooftop panels—they're the ones who remain without access, autonomy, and the power to generate their own energy. DG, on the contrary, is a powerful tool for inclusion.

If we truly want a just transition, we must defend DG as a right—and not allow it to be dismantled by lobbies. Investing in microgrids, smart grids, and decentralized efficiency is the technology of the moment. It will be very sad if Brazil misses this leap because of those who want to keep its citizens trapped in the past.

In short: either we defend distributed generation and unleash its full potential or we will continue with a closed, unequal and vulnerable system.

This moment demands a choice. And this choice belongs to everyone—governments, businesses, civil society, and citizens. The transition won't happen for us without us.

Now, returning to Provisional Measure 1304/2025: this measure carries a serious pitfall. In its wake, it risks criminalizing GD or severely limiting access.

Who will really lose? Yes, the poorest. Because without DG, energy democratization will be hindered—and the more privileged classes will continue with contracts, generators, or their own grid, while the majority will remain dependent on structural failures.

What is the role of DG? It works like this: you install your own generation (solar, biogas, batteries), reduce your grid consumption or inject surplus, with crésayings or compensation feeshereo.

This reduces transmission losses.ão, improves resilienceênce and facilitates integrationherethat of smart grids and microgrids. In other words, é cutting-edge technology, participatesherethe citizenã and sustainability — all together.

But what they are trying to maintain is the traditional model: centralized generation, tariffs set by a few, hidden subsidies, risk of blackouts and great corporate control.

If we are true to the spirit of the energy transition—which involves smart grids, distributed generation, microgrids, flexibility, and technology—DG should be the center, not the target.

The opinions and information expressed are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the author. Canal Solar.