another hiccup to going solar?

[ddbackhoe]

Ca. is changing the net metering rules.

Major changes coming to California’s rooftop solar rules

A decision by the California Public Utilities Commission will make it much more expensive to get rooftop solar starting April 15th.

www.cbs8.com

 

[Hay Dude]

oh no!

 

[Dftodd]

Arkansas just passed similar. So much for selling back to the grid to help fund your solar investment

 

[ddbackhoe]

oh no!

I too was surprised

 

[sea2summit]

Can't let you think you can be independent of "them" and make your own power.

 

[ddbackhoe]

It's actually not. This is the energy providers doing this. Arkansas just passed similar regulations.

Your pretty much providing the electric companies with free electricity to sell back to your neighbors under the new regulations.

I'm sure you will see similar regulations pass in other states as well.

So the utilities can recoup their profit margins after the coal plants were closed? The projections for utility solar farms looks good, can hardly wait to see where the feds money really went.

Loan Programs Office

LPO investments accelerate the deployment of innovative clean energy projects & advanced technology vehicles manufacturing facilities across the U.S.

www.energy.gov

 

[Dftodd]

So the utilities can recoup their profit margins after the coal plants were closed? The projections for utility solar farms looks good, can hardly wait to see where the feds money really went.

Loan Programs Office

LPO investments accelerate the deployment of innovative clean energy projects & advanced technology vehicles manufacturing facilities across the U.S.

www.energy.gov

Yeah, they are building a solar farm down the street from my work.

We were consididering adding solar to our property we just purchased.

But will have to check out and see what our options are going forward. That kind of chaps the fanny when your providing them with free energy to sell

 

[LD1]

Welcome to my world with rural coop electric and why I havent switched to solar.

But to be clear.....anyone can be "free" of them if you have your own storage (batteries).

But the days of being able to use the "grid" as your "battery" for free are coming to an end. And I knew this day was coming because current solar model is not sustainable. Why should all the non-solar customers have to pay extra to subsidize all the solar customers.

Ill use 25ȼ and 4ȼ because thats what the article used

They said people currently paying 25ȼ for electric are currently getting a 25ȼ credit for solar they arent using. Directly offsetting their bill. Even though they are using "grid" power during peak times (evening when everyone is cooking and has lights on and TV, etc). Yet during the peak of solar output during the day when no one is at home and everyone working.....they are selling it back to the grid for the same 25ȼ they are paying. But that is gonna get cut to 4ȼ

Why is that you wonder......

Well your electric company is SELLING you power for 25ȼ. But that encompasses everything. That is the sum of their generation, transmission, distribution, transformers, meters, etc etc. They are BUYING their power at wholesale for 4ȼ. The other 21ȼ is all those other things that you STILL NEED if you are grid tied. You still need distribution, and the power lines/poles, and the linemen, and a meter, etc etc.

So let me ask.....why should NON-solar customers be forced to buy your surplus solar @25ȼ instead of the market wholesale rate which is 4ȼ? In what world does that make sense? As a business you want to buy from the most affordable supplier right?

 

[LD1]

Everyone thinking that if they go solar you are providing the electric company with "free" power to sell is sadly mistaken and has no understanding of how power companies work.

Power companies are just tired of being forced to pay residential customers 4x or 5x what they can buy the SAME power from their suppliers at wholesale for. Which only drives up the cost for everyone else, because you know damn good and well the power companies are just passing along that cost.

This is just the difference between wholesale and retail. No different than any other market.

You go into walmart and see they are selling milk for $5/gallon so you decide to get a couple of dairy cows and approach walmart. You intend to sell walmart milk if your cows make more than you use.....but if mil production drops you will still buy walmart's $5 milk. Now with this scenerio.....do you honestly expect walmart to buy YOUR surplus milk at the same $5/gal they are selling it for Or do you think they will only buy it at their wholesale rate of $2-$3 a gallonor whatever it is?

This is the same for solar. The only difference is it got screwed up because the government got involved and forced the utilities to do this.....thats the ONLY way solar got traction. Because from the very beginning if the electric companies were allowed to purchase residential solar at the market wholesale rate....not many would have went solar.

Again, why should the electric companies be FORCED to pay 4x or 5x for residential solar power when they can purchase it from their normal suppliers for a fraction of the cost. And at the same time while being forced to do so.....they also had to maintain their infrastructure to be your battery for FREE.

It was NEVER sustainable this way. And it was only a matter of time until enough people started switching to solar that things were gonna change. We have reached that time

 

[mrmikey]

You go into walmart and see they are selling milk for $5/gallon so you decide to get a couple of dairy cows and approach walmart. You intend to sell walmart milk if your cows make more than you use.....but if mil production drops you will still buy walmart's $5 milk. Now with this scenerio.....do you honestly expect walmart to buy YOUR surplus milk at the same $5/gal they are selling it for Or do you think they will only buy it at their wholesale rate of $2-$3 a gallonor whatever it is?

I never thought about it in those terms before, good example .
I can see the electric companies not paying you the same as what they charge, they are into it for profit not charity which I have no problem with. Is there that much of aa actual difference between what they charge and what they pay for electricity?
Our local company tried to drop the rates they'd pay for consumer supplied electric. Consumers and solar power installers raised such a stink the goobermint stepped in and halted it. What they're trying to do now is get people to sign up for off peak rates but the only way you can is if you:
1: have a thermal storage system for heat
2: pay an additional $8 a month (I think it is) billing fee and pay more for using power at regular times
They're in it to make money not be nice to people

 

[orezok]

Welcome to my world with rural coop electric and why I havent switched to solar.

But to be clear.....anyone can be "free" of them if you have your own storage (batteries).

But the days of being able to use the "grid" as your "battery" for free are coming to an end. And I knew this day was coming because current solar model is not sustainable. Why should all the non-solar customers have to pay extra to subsidize all the solar customers.

Ill use 25ȼ and 4ȼ because thats what the article used

They said people currently paying 25ȼ for electric are currently getting a 25ȼ credit for solar they arent using. Directly offsetting their bill. Even though they are using "grid" power during peak times (evening when everyone is cooking and has lights on and TV, etc). Yet during the peak of solar output during the day when no one is at home and everyone working.....they are selling it back to the grid for the same 25ȼ they are paying. But that is gonna get cut to 4ȼ

Why is that you wonder......

Well your electric company is SELLING you power for 25ȼ. But that encompasses everything. That is the sum of their generation, transmission, distribution, transformers, meters, etc etc. They are BUYING their power at wholesale for 4ȼ. The other 21ȼ is all those other things that you STILL NEED if you are grid tied. You still need distribution, and the power lines/poles, and the linemen, and a meter, etc etc.

So let me ask.....why should NON-solar customers be forced to buy your surplus solar @25ȼ instead of the market wholesale rate which is 4ȼ? In what world does that make sense? As a business you want to buy from the most affordable supplier right?

Consider this. If individuals didn’t produce that power, the utility would have to build multi billion dollar generation plants and greatly updated distribution systems. The solar I generate stays local on the existing systems. What would it cost SDG&E rate payers to fund that expense that I provide for free. Hmmm…

Fortunately, my rates are Grandfathered for 10 years at the old rates. Only the new systems get screwed.

 

[LD1]

. Is there that much of aa actual difference between what they charge and what they pay for electricity?

IT is usually itemized on the bill. And probably varies by region.

I just used those numbers for example because that is what they used in the article.

My rural Coop pays about 7 cents per kwh for wholesale (they call it generation and transmission) and charges me another 3 cents per kwh to get it to my house (they call this distribution). Then there is a flat $50 meter fee.....(so I use ~2000kwh.....that factors to about another 2.5 cents per kwh on the total bill) So in total I pay ~12.5 cents per kwh for using 2000kwh. But the less I use....the more I pay if you factor the total.....because that $50 is a fixed fee.

I have a rental property on AEP and only get a bill from them when I'm between tenants.
Last one was for 2183kwh.....

They separate the generation and transmission
Generation: 5.3 cents
Transmission: 2.9 cents
Distribution : 4 cents
And they only charge a flat $10 meter fee. So at 2000 or so kwh....thats ~1 cent per kwh

Total of 13.2 cents per kwh

I've inquired about solar. With my rural electric coop they separate the generation and transmission charges if you want to go solar. (they are lumped together for everyone else to simplify the bill as no one really cares).

But they too are ~5 cents per kwh for "generation".....which is all you get for "credit" if you have solar.


So if I use 2000kwh my bill would be ~$250 currently. If I went solar......they have to use a different meter which cost $10/mo more.....and I only get the generation portion knocked off IF I produce all 2000kwh. So if I installed solar capable of makeing 2000kwh/mo....I would STILL pay $160/mo to the electric company.

And $90/mo savings just isnt enough. $16,000 would be the limit for 10 year payback. And a system to produce 2000kwh/mo cost 2x or 3x that. 20-30 year payback on solar.....no thank you

Further......Im in ohio. Winter is my highest usage when heating. Also when the panels produce the least. That further complicates things

 

[LD1]

Consider this. If individuals didn’t produce that power, the utility would have to build multi billion dollar generation plants and greatly updated distribution systems. The solar I generate stays local on the existing systems. What would it cost SDG&E rate payers to fund that expense that I provide for free. Hmmm…

Fortunately, my rates are Grandfathered for 10 years at the old rates. Only the new systems get screwed.

Trying to charge too many electric cars?

Spending billions to build an electric plant dedicated to producing electric.....vs spending billions subsidizing residential solar.....

My money says you get more bang for your buck building a power plant.

Cost per kwh produced is FAR cheaper on a mass scale than homeowners installing 10kwh panel systems on their roofs.

 

[Roric]

I do not have sympathy for the power companies "having to" pay par rates for distributed energy production. Their infrastructure and sunk-cost investments exist; are the cost of doing business for a publicly held utility. These companies profit from both the wholesale power suppliers and the individual solar providers. Any costs you see as passed on to other customers are a profit point for the local power company.

See the "laundry-list" of other charges on the standard electric bill...

The dramatic increase in percentages of return on investment to the shareholders of
these providers in recent times show no reason to bemoan the fate or future of these poor companies. They have very powerful lobbies that are well publicized. They suffer not.


regards,

R

 

[Hay Dude]

Nukes is the answer. It has been for 50 years

 

[Eagle1]

Nukes is the answer. It has been for 50 years

True either version could cause usage to meet generation capability.

 

[LD1]

I do not have sympathy for the power companies "having to" pay par rates for distributed energy production. Their infrastructure and sunk-cost investments exist; are the cost of doing business for a publicly held utility. These companies profit from both the wholesale power suppliers and the individual solar providers. Any costs you see as passed on to other customers are a profit point for the local power company.

See the "laundry-list" of other charges on the standard electric bill...

The dramatic increase in percentages of return on investment to the shareholders of
these providers in recent times show no reason to bemoan the fate or future of these poor companies. They have very powerful lobbies that are well publicized. They suffer not.


regards,

R

No one is asking you to have sympathy for the power company.

"Profit" has seem to become such a bad word in the eyes of so many people anymore. Synonymous with "greed".

Isnt that the goal of business......to make a profit? Why are they any different? They have shareholders that want to make a return, employees that want benefits and pay raises, etc.

I have electric bills from TWO providers out of the THREE in my area. There is no "laundry" list of other charges like you see with cell phones or cable TV. My bill has FOUR charges. Generation/transmission, distribution, meter charge, and tax. Thats it. Its actually one of the simplest bills I get.

And most people pay MORE for Internet/TV and Cell phones per month than we do for electric.

IT simply doesnt make sense to FORCE a power company to pay MORE for raw power just because it comes from a residential solar customer. But you are right, the power companies arent suffering at all. The increase cost of having to cater to the 5% with solar is distributed out to the remaining 95%.

 

[Roric]

Would the incentive to go solar only be tied to installed batteries?
What would the pricing look like?

As a hypothetical example:

Suppose you have an electric vehicle. That vehicle has 50 or 60 or 70 or more
kilo-watt-hours. This means a stand by power source, as in vehicle-to-home.
Or sell to the utility, as in vehicle-to-grid.

So if the grid is having a brown-out, or needs peak power:

In a Vehicle-to-Grid scheme, where the vehicle owner were to sell power to the grid, who sets the price? Is it par value, wholesale value or does the sunk-cost of the vehicle and battery, required equipment and wear costs get passed on.
The battery owner sells power to the grid.
What is to be determined is who sets the price.

It should not be set only by the utility.
Nor should it set the price of solar.

(Postscript: V2H and V2G are probably an eventuality. The utilities are setting up to install large battery installations to time shift power. The costs of new power plants and delivery systems are the alternative.)

regards,

R

 

[Roric]

I have no issue with profit.

I have an issue with predatory capitalism the same as my issues with cabalistic socialism. Either way the individual is harmed.

See "the dramatic increase in return on investment of utility shareholders"

regards,

R

 

[Diggin It]

The system needs a reset.

We have large hydro facilities nearby. Our co-op providing power to my house does not use the power generated 20 miles away. They use power generated 100 miles away. The power generated 20 miles away is used 500 miles away.


When a very large industrial user went out of business and shut down, all residential user small business users saw a rate increase. Larger companies did not.

We (as most users do) have two main components on our statements. Usage in KwHrs and Facilities (lines, poles, substations, tree trimming,etc.) As long as we are connected, we pay the facilities charges, whether we use s single watt of power or not. I can understand that.

Users that go solar or wind SHOULD be able to get full credit for KwHrs generated and sold back to the grid, or at least the wholesale price the utilities pay other providers. They should not have to pay for not using power, or get paid less for generating it.

Now, the really bad part is that in some places, all addresses are required to pay the facilities charge even if they are not connected to the grid at all. Don't ask me for specific examples because I can't quote them right now. But I have read more than a few articles on it.