An Australian distribution network will pay households without solar a share of the earnings from batteries charged on other people's roofs

Ausgrid, the distribution network serving Sydney, the Central Coast and the Hunter, has opened community consultation on a Community Power Network trial that would charge shared batteries with surplus rooftop solar from large commercial and industrial sites, and pay part of the proceeds to households in the area, including those that own no solar at all.

Around 130 batteries are planned across 12 candidate sites in the first trial area, covering Botany, Mascot, Pagewood, Eastlakes and Rosebery in the Bayside Council area. A second area on the northern Central Coast, covering Charmhaven, Lake Haven, Blue Haven, San Remo, Woongarrah, Kanwal, Gorokan and Hamlyn Terrace, goes to consultation next year. Ausgrid describes two benefit routes: a higher feed-in tariff for local solar owners, and an annual dividend pool shared across everyone connected in the trial area, paid through a retailer or by electronic payment. The network puts the annual benefit for a household without solar at up to 150 to 200 Australian dollars, and says it is underwriting the pilot and will cover losses if the operation does not produce net-positive dividends (https://www.ausgrid.com.au/communitypowernetwork). The batteries are to be charged from surplus generated on industrial roofs, shopping centres and schools (https://www.pv-magazine-australia.com/2026/09/18/ausgrid-trials-ci-rooftop-solar-initiative-to-share-energy-benefits-with-renters/).

Rooftop solar's structural exclusion is not technical, it is tenure. A renter cannot install on a roof they do not control, and neither can an apartment resident, and no amount of falling module price changes that. Every subsidy aimed at owner-occupiers leaves this population exactly where it was. A scheme that routes the value of a warehouse roof to people who own no roof is aimed squarely at the part of the problem the rest of the policy toolkit never touches.

The governance question is the one to keep asking. Who decides the dividend split, and on what basis? Ausgrid says the distribution model will be developed through consultation with communities, researchers and consumer groups, which is another way of saying it is not yet decided. That is honest, and it is also the whole substance of the scheme. A regulated network business that runs a trading operation and then distributes the surplus is a different accountability object from a cooperative doing the same thing: the members of a co-op can vote out the board, and a network's customers cannot. There is a settled reason why distribution businesses are ring-fenced from competitive activity, and the trial stage is when to ask how that is being handled, not after it scales.

The underwriting detail cuts both ways. Ausgrid covering losses protects participants from a pilot that does not earn its keep, which is the right call for a trial. It also means the downside sits on the regulated asset base, and the question of who ultimately pays for a network business's unsuccessful commercial venture is a familiar one with an unsatisfying answer.

And this is a pilot. Community engagement is underway; no battery is in the ground. The 150 to 200 dollar figure is an estimate by the party running the trial, not a result.

[UNVERIFIED] Reporting puts ARENA's contribution at 13.2 million Australian dollars and the trial population at around 32,000 Ausgrid customers. Neither figure appeared on the Ausgrid programme page read for this item. Total battery capacity in MW or MWh, the first installation date, whether the rebate is automatic or requires signup, and whether the commercial rooftop owners are paid for the surplus are not published.