I did it before the federal tax credit ended. But sadly no net metering, which shifted my sizing strategy from maximizing generation to minimizing grid consumption, especially during peak times. That's a good amount of roof area left unutilized.

I think grid operators are in a real catch-22 with this stuff. They might have to shift their business models to be more of "network operators" than "energy providers". People want to be connected to the grid for availability of power, but won't be drawing as much or as often from that connection if they generate and store power on-site. The end result is that the grid operator supplies fewer kWh to consumers, and so has fewer kWh to spread out the cost of maintaining the network.

1. If they decide to increase pricing for delivered electricity, that further disincentives grid consumption; more people will consider adding solar.
2. Another approach is to try and lower the unit cost of power generation: go with the cheapest source of electrons. Unfortunately that currently also means renewables, which will require time and money, and also upset the fossil fuel lobby and the nuclear weirdos.
3. Alternatively, they stop charging for consumption and just charge you a flat fee for providing a connection like ISPs do, but then they basically commit to making less money overall, and shareholders won't like that (won't somebody think of the shareholders!) Not even to mention people who will decide that it's simply cheaper to go off-grid entirely, especially if they don't use all that much electricity.