Distributed generation (DG) is one of the most disruptive and democratic models in the electricity sector: homes, communities, rural properties, and schools installing solar panels or hybrid systems, generating energy locally, consuming what they need, and sharing the surplus via the distribution network. This is the essence of DG — nearby, autonomous, inclusive energy. But now, close to becoming a reality for less privileged segments of the population, the model is threatened by Provisional Measure 1304, which is currently being debated in the National Congress.
The narrative used by those who defend the change is offensive: "the rich put solar energy on their roofs and the poor are the ones who pay the bill." This fallacy serves to justify regulatory setbacks. At the same time, subsidies were and are an integral part of the traditional electricity sector—which makes the accusation selective and full of hidden interests. Banks, investment funds, traditional families, and large generators don't want to see distributed generation flourish because they will lose control and market share. They install technical discourses and "social injustice" as a smokescreen to maintain privileges.
MP 1304 presents itself as a "modernization of the electricity sector," but in practice it seems to be an action to guarantee favors to actors in the status quo while stifling distributed generation. Entities linked to distributed generation are already sounding the alarm about regulatory insecurity: the Brazilian Association of Distributed Generation (ABGD) states that "amendments to MP 1304 could destroy the distributed generation model in the country."
And why should we care? Because imagine if a hurricane like Melissa, which is currently sweeping through the Caribbean with winds of 250 km/h, were to hit Brazil—which is not unthinkable given the climate emergency—it would be the metropolitan areas and the most vulnerable who would suffer first. Without microgrids, without distributed generation, we would depend on fragile centralized networks, vulnerable to failures and collapses. GD It is a route to making the electricity system more resilient, intelligent, decentralized, digitized, and decarbonized.
However, outdated technocratic narratives—replacing "generating energy on rooftops" with "privileging the rich"—have gained traction and confused the public and parliamentarians. The provisional measure was processed in a joint committee with public hearings, but the speed, lobbying, and vested interests indicate a real risk of immediate regression.
If they approve Provisional Measure 1304 in this format, the whole of society loses out—especially the most vulnerable segments of society. When distributed generation becomes inaccessible, it will be the poor, the small farmer, and the schools in the periphery that will be trapped in the logic of the old system. After all, solar technology has already reached social programs; once blocked, it will not be democratized again with the same ease.
Joint Committee approves report on Provisional Measure 1.304 by 22 votes to 2.
In short: this narrative that portrays "the poor paying for the rich" is cowardly, because it obscures who really profits—and who is being excluded. The true solution is not to concentrate generation or maintain current oligopolies, but to spread power plants across rooftops, rural properties, villages, and communities. Distributed generation is energy justice.
We cannot remain silent. Tomorrow may be too late. Speak to your congressman. Don't let the interests of a few delay the future of many. Brazilian society is being deceived—and perhaps doesn't even imagine the game being played behind this provisional measure. The time to act is now, before the delay becomes entrenched and we all pay the price.
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.
