Study on NEM 1.0 vs. NEM 2.0

[sensij]

Yes, I understood. You didn't want to provide personal information, and I already had. I thought there might be interest in seeing the full report. It provides a level of details that is missing from the article and gives a complete picture of how the statistical research was done and how the conclusions were reached.

Unfortunately, in my quick read it looks like they are basing their analysis on how they *think* the IOU's will calculate NBC's, and not anyone's actual bill. That could be problematic.

[sensij]

Here is my bills page images:

page1.JPG

page2.JPG

page3.JPG

page4.JPG

[sensij]

So, one more thought on this.

On May 26, 2017, the CPUC agreed to open a new hearing on how NBC's should be calculated, so this matter may still be open for discussion.

I've just subscribed to proceeding A1607015, which will hopefully keep me in the loop as the NBC calculation is reviewed and clarified.

http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDoc.../180593709.PDF

[CharlieEscCA]

NEM Charges can be offset by NEM credits, which is valid since none of the non-bypassable charges were included in the offsettable NEM charge calculation. The NEM balance after the credits are netted against the charges is 42.42, which is greater than (0.329 * 32), so the minimum charge won't apply at this time. However, that 42.42 remains to be carried forward to next month, when I will have sufficient NEM credits to cover it, and also roll credits ahead to August. On my next statement, a minimum charge will apply, but the true whole minimum charge total won't be resolved until true-up.


That leaves the non-bypassable charges.
DWR-BC contribution = 452 kWh * .00549 = 2.48
Other NBC contribution = 452 kWh * 0.01191 = 5.38

Total NBC's = 7.86

This number is not shown directly, but implicitly agrees with the (192.14) line shown in "Additional charges/Payments" on page 4.
-200 EV credit + 7.86 NBC charge = -192.14

The combined total of all these numbers:
42.42 - 192.14 = -149.72, which matches the statement balance on pages 1 and 4.

Actually, I read your statement differently in getting to the -149.72 figure.

You get there simply by 200 credit (EV) minus the 50.28 electric charges for the month. The 50.28 electric charges are the 44.51 electric charges shown on page 3 (and this total is from all your electric charges on page 2 and 3 minus the credit for your negative peak kWh) plus the 5.77 taxes and fees shown on page 3.

There is no mention of any NBC chargeable kWh on your bill -- I contend they billed you no NBC charges on this bill.

This continues to validate that we either do not know how kWh subject to NBC are determined (I've had 3 solar bills now, the first with no mention of NBC [I had net usage for the month], the second with 10 kWh subject to NBC, and the third and most recent with 15 kWh subject to NBC) or SDGE has programmed their systems wrong.

[CharlieEscCA]

I did not download the complete study because it requires I give information that I do not want to give.

However, I believe, after reading the article that the study is mostly B.S.

If what the article says is in the paper is being reported correctly and accurately, the paper is full if innuendo and twisted crap, a lot of which, if it is a statement of some truths, has those truths look to be twisted to make a trap for the solar ignorant.

Start with the idea that the article comes from Greentech Media - a greenwash rag with an agenda. Add that the source of the study is an outfit called Aurora. If that's the Aurora I'm thinking it is, their advert. statement says: "We are a diverse team based in Palo Alto CA, passionate about advancing the growth of solar energy". They peddle solar sizing software. I'll let those readers with a brian draw their own conclusions about the objectivity of both Greentech Media and Aurora.

I do not intend to chapter and verse the article. There is simply way too much that's B.S. in it. I'd be writing for the next several hours and still not get it all in.

In my opinion, and I am not an expert at all, the report study methodology seemed pretty sound to me, and I did not see a lot of bias in what was written. One could argue with their selection criteria for systems to examine under NEM 1.0 vs NEM 2.0, but for the systems they choose the study seemed to give a true result of these systems using real Greenbutton data applied to NEM 1 vs 2 rules and then plot and discuss the difference.

I have not yet read the article -- it may be using the study to push their agenda (bigger system from what you all seem to be saying), but the study made no such suggestion to go bigger.

[brucet9]

[QUOTE=cebury;n355965]

"

[sensij]

Actually, I read your statement differently in getting to the -149.72 figure.

You get there simply by 200 credit (EV) minus the 50.28 electric charges for the month. The 50.28 electric charges are the 44.51 electric charges shown on page 3 (and this total is from all your electric charges on page 2 and 3 minus the credit for your negative peak kWh) plus the 5.77 taxes and fees shown on page 3.

There is no mention of any NBC chargeable kWh on your bill -- I contend they billed you no NBC charges on this bill.

This is true, but in order to explain how the 50.28 number is derived, you need a coherent calculation for the 49.25 generation credit, which contributes to that number. You'll also need to be able to explain the 91.67 NEM charges on page 4, since that is what will determine the monthly carry forward of charges or credits.

If you work through the "breakdown" section line by line on page 3, you'll see that the calculation I've outlined above explains every number on the bill, and definitely treats NBC's differently than they were handled in NEM 1.0. NBC's are the DWR-BC charge, the public purpose charge, the nuclear decommissioning credit, and the competition transition charge. These lines are not equal to zero, so to say that NBC's are zero on my bill is kind of silly.

[sensij]

This continues to validate that we either do not know how kWh subject to NBC are determined (I've had 3 solar bills now, the first with no mention of NBC [I had net usage for the month], the second with 10 kWh subject to NBC, and the third and most recent with 15 kWh subject to NBC) or SDGE has programmed their systems wrong.

If you would be willing to share with me your bills and your downloaded 15 min data, I am sure I can find a more logically consistent explanation for your numbers. You could send them to my user name at yahoo.

However, as I pointed out a couple of posts ago, it appears NBC methodology is still being debated at the CPUC, so it is possible that different rate plans and billing software are treating them differently for now.

[brucet9]

After viewing the video, it becomes clear how the pocos have tweaked the rules to suck more out of PV owners.

Also apparent, was that for those hours of the day when your PV is exporting to the Grid, NBCs are not charged. It would seem beneficial therefor to extend the number of hours that PV production exceeds load, thereby reducing the kWh of usage against which NBCs can be levied. If one could set up east, south, and west arrays sized to offset load occurring during their respective active hours, the NBCs penalty would be reduced to only night time load.

Where I live, east-facing panels perform poorly due to marine layer overcast that burns off about 10:00am, but west and south are almost always clear, and west has the advantage of maximum output during SCE's peak TOU-D-T rates in place from noon to 6pm. Maybe a south and west split might be ideal?

[J.P.M.]

Did you try clicking on the file? I uploaded the pdf to solarpaneltalk's server, so it ought to point back to them, but will download a pdf however your browser handles that (it works correctly when i click on it). Here is a dropbox link, if that helps:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/1cljnr72es...20135.pdf?dl=0

I understand where you are coming from, everything I read and understood suggested an implementation like what you've written here would be correct. I've only shifted my stance since I've gotten my bill and worked through the numbers first hand.

Further supporting the implementation I've described in this thread, is no evidence that SDG&E is looking at the net of each 15 min period individually. For example, over the billing period that I've shared here, I can download the 15 min data from their site and re-create the 359 kWh net for the month, as well as the net totals for each time period. If I drill into the 15 min data though, I see the following:

Peak: -93 net kWh, 72 kWh imported and 165 kWh exported
Off-peak: 124 net kWh, 219 kWh import and 95 kWh exported
Super off peak: 328 kWh, all imported.

There is *nothing* in the bill that suggests NBC's are being applied to the 15 min export numbers, only the monthly net, as described above.

Thank you for the pages. I appreciate it.

As for who's doing it right/not, we may be coming to the same conclusion from different directions. Something being added to a bill is mathematically identical to a credit to a bill being made smaller.

More to follow next 24-48 hrs. or less from me after more homework. Whatever the outcome, I'd like to think we're doing a service by maybe clearing some confusion. I doubt it would happen, but it's also possible that SDG & E is dancing with our leg.

[Mike7381]

I don't know about other Utilities company, but SCE only charge NBC on net amount that are calculated monthly, take a look at sample Net Metering Bill from SCE, focus on # 6 and # 7, 531 KWH from # 6 is the net of the total power generated and consumed. # 7 clearly say it NBC are calculated net monthly. However I don't know there is additional 0.03 per KWH for CTC, NDC, & PPPC charge.

https://www.sce.com/wps/wcm/connect/0f84c312-2a99-411f-bfb8-ef8ac677d2c2/NEM+2.0+UYB+0617+r4.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

[brucet9]

# 7 clearly say it NBC are calculated net monthly.

https://www.sce.com/wps/wcm/connect/0f84c312-2a99-411f-bfb8-ef8ac677d2c2/NEM+2.0+UYB+0617+r4.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

#7 specifically says, "Non bypassable charges (NBCs) are assessed on the net of kWh consumed in each metered interval of the current billing period

[sensij]

#7 specifically says, "Non bypassable charges (NBCs) are assessed on the net of kWh consumed in each metered interval of the current billing period

If you read the document I linked in this post, you will see there is quite a bit of uncertainty about what that specific language actually means.

https://www.solarpaneltalk.com/forum/solar-panels-for-home/solar-panels-for-your-home/355945-study-on-nem-1-0-vs-nem-2-0?p=356061#post356061

[Mike7381]

#7 specifically says, "Non bypassable charges (NBCs) are assessed on the net of kWh consumed in each metered interval of the current billing period

I think each metered interval means Peak hours, OffPeak and super offpeak, On the sample bill, NBC was only billed for 531 KW, it is the net each Peak, Offpeak and Super offpeak level.

[Mike7381]

I guess you guys are right, each metered interval is 1 hour for residential customers. So I guess it will charge 2 cents per excess KWH each hours.