another hiccup to going solar?

[caver]

I could watch the peaks at work in real time. You get a spike around 6am (coffee pots, hairdryers, electric water heaters, electric stove cooking breakfast). It drops but stays higher during the day with business using more electric. The next peak was around 6pm or supper time. I've said this before somewhere in this forum but coal plants run best wide open. Each 600 Megawatt unit would start to have trouble with slagging at the bottom of the boiler below around 300 MW. The coop added some peakers in the late 90's. Natural gas units. We also could use hydro off the Ozark lakes for peaking. We had the Noranda Aluminum smelter next door for a long time. A nice 400 MW round the clock load. Noranda wanted the coop members to subsidize the rates. Our CEO probably knew the Board of Directors would read him the riot act.

 

[Dftodd]

I have no issue with this.

However.....for the past 10 years ALOT of utilities have done 100% net metering. meaning if you use 2000kwh and make 2000kwh, their bill is $0......OR if they use 2000 and make 1000, they are only paying as if they used 1000.

Meaning that whatever electric was consumed.....they are getting FULL RETAIL PRICE as a credit and NOT at a WHOLESALE rate.

At a wholesale rate for generation of power.....(In my area thats about 50% of the bill).....If I used 2000 and made 2000....that should NOT be a $0 bill. Rather a bill at about 50% a normal bill. And that remaining 50%.....even though I generated as much as I used.....Is my charge for using the infrastructure of the grid as my battery

Is this some new kind of math???

If your using solar making 2000 and using 2000 you should only be paying the connection fee for the electric company.

If you used that month, then you pay for what you used, plus the connection fee and applicable taxes.

If you sent them a surplus of electricity that month, then that credit gets applied to your account. If what you sold them comes off the connection fee and applied as a credit if the amount you sold them is greater than the connection fee.

 

[LD1]

Is this some new kind of math???

If your using solar making 2000 and using 2000 you should only be paying the connection fee for the electric company.

If you used that month, then you pay for what you used, plus the connection fee and applicable taxes.

If you sent them a surplus of electricity that month, then that credit gets applied to your account. If what you sold them comes off the connection fee and applied as a credit if the amount you sold them is greater than the connection fee.

Not new math, just basic sense you fail to understand.

You should ONLY be credited what the wholesale cost to produce electric is. Which is only about half of what you are charged.

And that is the ONLY part of your bill that your panels replace. You are still dependent on their infrastructure, transmission, and distribution network. Why should you get all of that for free? Typical wanting something for nothing mindset that has plaged this country for the last few decades. Wanting a freaking handout instead of what is right and fair

Don't like it....spends thousands on your own batteries to act as your own infrastructure

Sorry you cannot understand my example and think it's "new math"

 

[ddbackhoe]

Winner here!! Very good explanation.

As FYI, the new CA NEM 3.0 plan goes into effect after April 15, 2023. Applicants (like myself) have until April 15 to submit their application for NEM 2.0. Once the application is in, you can get on the NEM 2.0 plan and you will be grandfathered on this plan (like all other NEM 2.0 customers) for 20-years. I don't feel bad at all for SCE. Like other monopolies that I have been dealing with during the construction of our new home, they are very, very, poorly run - a far cry from a public company who actually has to COMPETE for business.

I have not seen it mentioned where Ca adopted a requirement for solar installation on all new residential construction.
”In 2018, California created a mandate that new single-family homes and multi-family dwellings up to three stories high must install solar panels. The California solar mandate took effect on January 1, 2020, and is part of California’s building codes. The mandate was created by the California Energy Commission (CEC), was unanimously approved 5 to 0 and is the first such mandate in the United States.”

California Solar Mandate

California leads the way in photovoltaic installations with over 32 MW of installed capacity, enough to power 9.6 million homes. The Golden State is serious about transitioning to renewable energy to phase out fossil fuel consumption and reduce carbon emissions. In fact, the Golden State has...

www.greenlancer.com

 

[ddbackhoe]

EVs could be a resource to redistribute power during necessary times.

R

So, in this scenario the grid goes down and the ev’s supply the grid? What happens when the ev owner wakes up and wants to drive to school/work/etc and the batteries are dead?

 

[Torvy]

Is this some new kind of math???

If your using solar making 2000 and using 2000 you should only be paying the connection fee for the electric company.

If you used that month, then you pay for what you used, plus the connection fee and applicable taxes.

If you sent them a surplus of electricity that month, then that credit gets applied to your account. If what you sold them comes off the connection fee and applied as a credit if the amount you sold them is greater than the connection fee.

Connection fees are what consumers pay. Those feeding excess power into the grid want to be paid better than those producing more (and more consistent) energy. As a producer, you have to pay for your share of the lines and upkeep to transmit your power to others. And yes, the cost includes management and profit. We all make profit to survive. You may call yours a paycheck or interest. Most of those 'shareholders' are regular people that are employed and contributing to their 401k.

I like co-ops (a coop is something else). They tend to be more responsive to members and don't worry about profits as those get redistributed to the members. Plus, the members can vote on policies and management.

 

[Dftodd]

Not new math, just basic sense you fail to understand.

You should ONLY be credited what the wholesale cost to produce electric is. Which is only about half of what you are charged.

And that is the ONLY part of your bill that your panels replace. You are still dependent on their infrastructure, transmission, and distribution network. Why should you get all of that for free? Typical wanting something for nothing mindset that has plaged this country for the last few decades. Wanting a freaking handout instead of what is right and fair

Don't like it....spends thousands on your own batteries to act as your own infrastructure

Sorry you cannot understand my example and think it's "new math"

I understood you. That's the problem with common core math in schools A+B=X instead of C

Currently if you don't use any power at your home, you pay just the minimum connection fee. For example, close your home up for the winter months. Pay a flat fee of $20 since your not using any electricity.

Why should someone pay more than that if they have grid tied solar as your example suggests??? From your example, your paying for usage you didn't use, plus taxes and connection fees.

If your supplying more electricity back to the grid than what you use, why should the electric company get to use your investment for free???

 

[Williy]

As for me I would never have solar and
getting power from electric company. First
its a big expense for the equipment and you
have to have an electrician to hook you up.
You can spend that money on more batteries!
I use the power company for 220 volt items
water heaters. Never pay a company to install
solar for you! Buy used solar panels like 250
watt solar panels $50 ea. On controllers and
inverters ask around and watch and read on
the net. All kinds of info on how to assemble
the solar system. I prefer American made equip.

willy

 

[Jstpssng]

So, in this scenario the grid goes down and the ev’s supply the grid? What happens when the ev owner wakes up and wants to drive to school/work/etc and the batteries are dead?

I've been trying to figure this out, also. My biggest concern with an EV is getting stranded in the first place. Now I'm going to drain my battery with no way of recharging it? I guess that I still had better keep my gas tank filled in my other vehicle.

Nuscale Power is a start up in safe modular, small scale power production. There first power plant is scheduled to go online in 2029 in Utah. They recently recieved thier approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commision for thier "Small Modular Reactor".
As you can see by the 2029 date, building new nukes takes time.

If we hadn't taken it off the table 40 years ago we would be a lot farther ahead with the technology today. The biggest issue that I have with nuclear is that I don't trust the people who would be running it.

 

[LD1]

I understood you. That's the problem with common core math in schools A+B=X instead of C

Currently if you don't use any power at your home, you pay just the minimum connection fee. For example, close your home up for the winter months. Pay a flat fee of $20 since your not using any electricity.

Why should someone pay more than that if they have grid tied solar as your example suggests??? From your example, your paying for usage you didn't use, plus taxes and connection fees.

If your supplying more electricity back to the grid than what you use, why should the electric company get to use your investment for free???

They don't have to. Spends thousands and get batteries.

But the fact that the meter flows both ways....and you are using power from the grid in the evenings and nights because your system CANNOT satisfy your needs....and you choose to not spend more money on a bigger system and batteries.....you rely on the grid. You rely on it to supply your power in the evenings and nights in exchange for the power you give back during sunny days. You expect to be able to use this distribution network free of charge?

If you used NO power from the grid at all.....then disconnect from it. Otherwise pony up and quit wanting to use their distribution network for free

 

[bnold]

I don’t use it for free. Hence the minimum charge for distribution.

No matter what my power bill can’t go to $0 unless I disconnect service.

The usage is net metered by month. Consumption - Generated = Delta * Rate = Energy Bill + Min Connection Fee for distribution, admin, fluff = Total Bill.

I’m looking at expanding the solar. Produced about 20MWh in the past 12 months. I’d like another 10MWh/year

 

[LD1]

I don’t use it for free. Hence the minimum charge for distribution.

No matter what my power bill can’t go to $0 unless I disconnect service.

The usage is net metered by month. Consumption - Generated = Delta * Rate = Energy Bill + Min Connection Fee for distribution, admin, fluff = Total Bill.

I’m looking at expanding the solar. Produced about 20MWh in the past 12 months. I’d like another 10MWh/year

In your case if the "rate" you are multiplying your delta by is ONLY the generation portion....and has NO bearing on the transmission and distribution costs to you or anyone else.....

Then yes....that's basically wholesale costs and I'm fine with that.
But electric bills I get from two different companies separate into 3 parts:

Generation/transmission
Distribution
Connection fee/service charge.

During peak solar output when you are
Feeding back into the grid and supplying your neighbors with power.....YOU should only get credit for the generation of electric.IE: whole sale price. Because you do not own the distribution side of the network that is supplying it to your neighbors. So you should not get that credit

 

[JasperFrank]

"EVs are draining the grid at night." - Iman

LOL... How dare you point that out!

It was something I was not aware of till the installer said, a grid inner tie is basicly a two way system. At night, if the system isn't designed correctly, Utility power can flow TO the panels, cause diodes are not perfect: And no one is going to tell you this.

 

[bnold]

In your case if the "rate" you are multiplying your delta by is ONLY the generation portion....and has NO bearing on the transmission and distribution costs to you or anyone else.....

Then yes....that's basically wholesale costs and I'm fine with that.
But electric bills I get from two different companies separate into 3 parts:

Generation/transmission
Distribution
Connection fee/service charge.

During peak solar output when you are
Feeding back into the grid and supplying your neighbors with power.....YOU should only get credit for the generation of electric.IE: whole sale price. Because you do not own the distribution side of the network that is supplying it to your neighbors. So you should not get that credit

Agree. I’m paying for transformers, poles, lines, etc… separately.

I’m only credited for the same wholesale electric price my coop would otherwise be paying Brazos Electric to purchase the power.

The wholesale electric price is the majority of the cost on the bill.

I pay $36/month flat (up from $25/month on a non-bidirectional meter)

Without solar my bill would have been $36 + $400 last month. So I’m good at eating away at the generation portion of the bill.

(Actually more, because we are back paying Brazos due to the chapter 11 bankruptcy from the 2021 freeze, but that is another story)

 

[LD1]

Agree. I’m paying for transformers, poles, lines, etc… separately.

I’m only credited for the same wholesale electric price my coop would otherwise be paying Brazos Electric to purchase the power.

The wholesale electric price is the majority of the cost on the bill.

I pay $36/month flat (up from $25/month on a non-bidirectional meter)

Without solar my bill would have been $36 + $400 last month. So I’m good at eating away at the generation portion of the bill.

(Actually more, because we are back paying Brazos due to the chapter 11 bankruptcy from the 2021 freeze, but that is another story)

Thats good.

But there are some people with solar out there that have electric companies that are VERY generous in their net-metering practices.

In which peoples usage is directly offset by their production of solar power at the retail rate. Including the metering, distribution, lines, poles, etc. And these are the people that are upset because they are going to have to start paying their share of the distribution network.....and their solar is only gonna offset the generation fees that that would otherwise be charged.

Again they are wanting to use the distribution network of the grid, and all maintenance associated with it for free.....or should I say at the expense of non-solar customers. Kinda a "im better than thou" mentality just because they put panels on their roof. And now whining because the playing field is being leveled to be more fair.

Dont get me wrong....If my electric company offered such generous net-metering terms I would have jumped too, and enjoyed it for as long as it lasted. I would have gratefully accepted the use of their infrastructure for free to use as my battery for as long as they would allow. But I wouldnt start whining or making a bug fuss about it when the time came to as my to pay my portion of distribution and maintenance on the infrastructure I have been using for free

 

[Roric]

In your case if the "rate" you are multiplying your delta by is ONLY the generation portion....and has NO bearing on the transmission and distribution costs to you or anyone else.....

Then yes....that's basically wholesale costs and I'm fine with that.
But electric bills I get from two different companies separate into 3 parts:

Generation/transmission
Distribution
Connection fee/service charge.

During peak solar output when you are
Feeding back into the grid and supplying your neighbors with power.....YOU should only get credit for the generation of electric.IE: whole sale price. Because you do not own the distribution side of the network that is supplying it to your neighbors. So you should not get that credit

The reasoning behind providing any advantages to small solar, wind and alternative energy providers or any rebates for electric vehicles is to provide a voluntary incentive to adopt these technologies. It is not a mandate.

These are a carrot-on-a-stick method to make it a more livable world attainable.
The Rural Electrification Act was mandated.
Polio vaccines were mandated.
The unleaded gasoline change was mandated.

It is regrettable that you found to be an unfair burden.

Acting without consideration of the future will be the unfair burden of those who come after us.
Our children, our children's children, and our children's children's children benefit from how we act almost a quarter of the way through the 21rst century.


regards,

R

 

[LD1]

The reasoning behind providing any advantages to small solar, wind and alternative energy providers or any rebates for electric vehicles is to provide a voluntary incentive to adopt these technologies. It is not a mandate.

These are a carrot-on-a-stick method to make it a more livable world attainable.
The Rural Electrification Act was mandated.
Polio vaccines were mandated.
The unleaded gasoline change was mandated.

It is regrettable that you found to be an unfair burden.

Acting without consideration of the future will be the unfair burden of those who come after us.
Our children, our children's children, and our children's children's children benefit from how we act almost a quarter of the way through the 21rst century.


regards,

R

It's nice that you see it that way but sadly it is t reality....

99% of the solar installs I see are on homes of pretty wealthy people. People that can easily afford solar even without the subsidies of everyone else.

The only reason they choose it is a simple investment. They could care less about the "consideration" of future generations. They only do it because it makes financial sense. And the wealthy are the few that can even afford it....because most of America cannot afford the initial cost even if ROI was 10 years or less.

Now it's the same wealthy people complaining because they are loosing their free subsidy. And it's sickening. And the fact that you want to use bleeding heart rhetoric about the "consideration" of future generations is sad.

And the constant subsidies (either by taxpayer rebates or the generous net metering policies) is directly slowing down the decline in the cost of solar installs and keeping prices inflated.

Get the damn government out of the energy sector and let free market run it's course.

 

[MAX-24-Dean]

The reasoning behind providing any advantages to small solar, wind and alternative energy providers or any rebates for electric vehicles is to provide a voluntary incentive to adopt these technologies. It is not a mandate.

These are a carrot-on-a-stick method to make it a more livable world attainable.
The Rural Electrification Act was mandated.
Polio vaccines were mandated.
The unleaded gasoline change was mandated.

It is regrettable that you found to be an unfair burden.

Acting without consideration of the future will be the unfair burden of those who come after us.
Our children, our children's children, and our children's children's children benefit from how we act almost a quarter of the way through the 21rst century.


regards,

R

Most utilities stated that when saturation of small Renewable Energy happens due to incentives they would no longer be able to bare the costs of infrastruction needed to maintain a stable grid.
A stable grid can only be maintained by ramping up and ramping down "Base Load Power Generation".
Renewable energy will never provide "Base Load Power Generation" that is affordable.
RE "Base Load Power Generation" and distribution requires expensive batteries. Not going to happen on a grid wide basis.

 

[Roric]

I respect you having a viewpoint. I don't share it.
Your perception is your reality and you are welcome to see things as you do.

Does this mean all subsidies, tax breaks, bidding advantages and any other government advantages are to be cast aside?

Farmers have millions of dollars of acreage; yet there are multitudes of breaks that they can take advantage of. Do we base aid on their net worth?

Oil and gas companies have a myriad of different incentives, tax breaks and increment finance options. Do we base incentive spending on what is in style?

The wealthiest could not get the tax rebates for every solar installation. the rebates were not structured that way. Income over a certain level didn't qualify.

If the government is the problem that is in the way of production, consumption and deciding where the public good best served, what is the alternative you seek?
Who, then gets to decide?

Predatory capitalism and cannibalistic socialism are not the only choices.
There is a prudent mean: a more measured middle ground.

That is my perception and my reality

regards,

R

 

[oosik]

I don't think I'll ever experience the ups/downs of solar. It has been determined that there is insufficient sunlight here to justify solar. This could change as solar becomes more efficient. The current systems are simply too expensive and would be needing replacement long before any benefits would be realized.