A New Study Ranked 18 U.S. Locations for Ditching the Grid. Massachusetts Showed Up Twice.

What the Study Actually Did

I watch a lot of solar content, and most of it is either sales pitch or hand-waving. So when I came across a video breaking down an actual peer-reviewed study on grid defection, meaning when it makes financial sense to disconnect from the utility entirely, I went and read the paper myself. What I found is more relevant to my South Shore customers than I expected, and it's not the headline you'd guess.

The paper is called "The threat of economic grid defection in the U.S. with solar photovoltaic, battery and generator hybrid systems," published in the journal Solar Energy in November 2024 by researchers Seyyed Ali Sadat and Joshua Pearce at Western University in Ontario. They modeled 18 real-world locations across 13 states, sizing a hybrid off-grid system for each one (solar, battery, and a backup generator) and comparing its lifetime cost against just staying connected to the grid.

Every location landed in one of three buckets:

• Grid defection wins. The off-grid system costs less over its lifetime than staying on the grid.
• Marginal. The off-grid system costs up to 20% more. Close enough to matter, not a clean win.
• Stay on the grid. Not close.

Only four locations landed in the "defection wins" bucket: Honolulu, Kauai, San Diego, and San Francisco. All island or California markets with electricity rates the researchers flagged as the real driver, mostly north of 25 cents per kilowatt hour, with San Diego running as high as 69 cents at the time of the study.

The Bucket Nobody's Talking About

Here's what the video I watched skipped past. Five locations landed in the marginal bucket: Los Angeles, Boston, Martha's Vineyard, Concord NH, and Hartford CT. Marginal doesn't mean "almost as good as the top four." It means the researchers' own off-grid model, generator and all, came within striking distance of beating a fully built-out New England grid connection.

Massachusetts is the only state on the entire list that shows up twice. Not California with its famously high rates. Not Hawaii. Massachusetts, with both Boston and Martha's Vineyard landing in that narrow marginal band. That's not a coincidence, and it's not something I'm reading into the data. It's what the researchers' own case-study table shows.

Why This Matters More in 2026 Than It Did in 2024

The study's numbers come from 2023 and 2024 data. Two things have changed since then that push in opposite directions, and I want to be straight with you about both instead of just picking the one that helps my argument.

First, Massachusetts electricity rates have kept climbing. As of late July 2026, I'm seeing National Grid and Eversource residential rates running between 33 and 36 cents per kilowatt hour, roughly 80% to nearly double the national average of about 18 cents. Massachusetts consistently ranks among the three or four most expensive states in the country for electricity. That's well past the 25-cents-and-up territory the study flagged as the point where grid defection starts to become worth a serious look.

Second, the federal 30% solar tax credit that existed when this study was done is gone. Section 25D expired December 31, 2025. No phase-down, no extension. That credit made off-grid systems cheaper to build, so losing it stretches out any payback period, including the marginal Massachusetts case the researchers modeled.

That's not the only option on the table, though. I now offer an energy service agreement through the Propel program, a Concert Solar financing product, which typically saves homeowners between 25 and 35% off retail system pricing, with full ownership of the system transferring to you at the end of year five. It's a different structure than a straight cash purchase or a loan, so if you want the details on how it works for your situation, that's worth a direct conversation.

I haven't seen an updated version of this study with 2026 rate and cost data, so I'm not going to tell you Boston would flip into the "wins" bucket today. I don't know that. What I can tell you is that the rate side of the equation has moved in the direction that matters, and it's worth watching.

What I Actually Install, and Why It's an Easier Case Than What This Study Modeled

I want to be clear about something: I don't push full off-grid systems as the default, and for almost nobody I work with is that actually the right call. But I do design and install battery-plus-generator systems, and I'm capable of building something close to what this study modeled if that's genuinely what someone wants.

Where that combination earns its keep on the South Shore isn't chasing off-grid economics, it's storm resilience. Nor'easters and blizzards take the grid down out here for days at a time, sometimes longer, and a solar-plus-battery system backed by a generator means you can ride that out completely independent of the grid for as long as you need to, then plug right back in once power's restored.

That's a different question than what this study is measuring, though. The study is asking whether it's cheaper to disconnect permanently. For almost everyone I work with, the answer to that specific question is no, and it doesn't need to be yes for solar to make sense. What I design for most South Shore homeowners is grid-tied solar first. You stay connected to National Grid or Eversource, and Massachusetts still has true 1:1 net metering for standard residential accounts. When your system produces more than your house is using, that extra flows back onto the grid and you get full retail credit for it, not a discounted buyback rate, and those credits roll over indefinitely, month to month and year to year.

That's the cheapest way to capture the core benefit these researchers are pointing at: Massachusetts electricity is expensive enough that generating your own is worth serious consideration, without spending what it takes to size a system for total independence. If riding out extended outages matters to you too, and around here it often does, that's where I layer battery and generator capacity on top of the grid-tied system, sized to what you actually need for the storms we get, not built from scratch as a full off-grid replacement for the grid.

The 2026 Massachusetts Incentive Picture

The federal credit is gone, but there's still real money on the table here:

• True 1:1 net metering through National Grid or Eversource for standard residential service
• The SMART program, Massachusetts's own solar incentive
• The Massachusetts state tax credit, 15% of system cost, capped at $1,000
• ConnectedSolutions, a battery incentive program that pays you for helping the grid during peak demand events

None of these are federal, and none of them require the 25D credit to work. They're what's actually available to someone installing in 2026, along with the Propel energy service agreement I mentioned above if you're looking for something closer to what that expired federal credit used to offer.

A Quick Note on Utilities If You're on the South Shore

Most of the towns I work in, Scituate, Duxbury, Plymouth, Marshfield, Norwell, Weymouth, and Pembroke, are served by National Grid or Eversource, so the 1:1 net metering above applies as described.

A few towns are different, and I'd rather flag it than gloss over it:

• Hingham runs its own municipal utility, HMLP, with a different rebate structure and its own net metering terms that don't match the standard picture above.
• Braintree runs on BELD, another municipal utility. I'm not going to state a specific buyback rate here without confirming it directly for your account, so if you're in Braintree, that's a conversation worth having on the phone rather than guessing at in a blog post.
• Quincy is split. Depending on your address, you're either on National Grid or Eversource.

So Where Does That Leave You

You don't need to disconnect from the grid to benefit from what this study is really describing, which is that Massachusetts electricity has gotten expensive enough that producing your own is worth a serious look. That's true whether you're in a marginal case study city or twenty minutes down the road from one. And if what you actually want is the peace of mind of riding out a nor'easter or a blizzard without losing power, that's a battery-and-generator setup I build regularly, not something exotic.

I've been doing this since 2011, I'm NABCEP-trained, and I've personally handled the design, permitting, and utility paperwork on more than 1,800 installations. I work across every major brand, Enphase, SolarEdge, REC, Maxeon, Q Cells, Tesla, Fortress, so I'm not steering you toward one manufacturer because of what I have sitting in a warehouse. I'm also the guy who actually answers the phone when you call, not a call center reading a script.

If you want to know what this actually looks like for your specific roof, your specific utility, and your specific bill, call me at 617-360-8603 or find me at solardavema.com. I'll walk you through the real numbers, not a national average.

Frequently Asked Questions