Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SDG&E sharpening the guillotine for residential solar.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • SDG&E sharpening the guillotine for residential solar.

    https://www.sdge.com/sites/default/f...lication_5.pdf

    Their application to CPUC: In a nutshell, $10 fixed charge per month, plus additional $37.25 minimum bill which is explicitly additive to fixed charge: that's 0kWh usage. You'd have to go entirely off grid to avoid and that probably means your house is out of code.

  • #2
    In our area in Phoenix SRP has a $50/mo solar charge, and APS has a charge per kwh, and gave you a choice between doubled the offpeak rates or ridiculously high demand charges. They are all trying to squeeze out solar. Minimum bill charge though, that is just insane. So they just keep for free any extra you generate that would have taken your bill lower. Criminals.

    Comment


    • #3
      Why should they give you anything for free? You are using their equipment and as such you should pay for it. It is called a business and all businesses are in biz to make money. That is how life works. You must be a criminal if you expect a paycheck from your employer.
      MSEE, PE

      Comment


      • #4
        ^ He makes a point. You are using their grid to store your energy for when you need it. They have the right to set the rates... don't like it? Time to go off-grid or relocate. Lol

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Mr4btTahoe View Post
          ^ He makes a point. You are using their grid to store your energy for when you need it. They have the right to set the rates... don't like it? Time to go off-grid or relocate. Lol
          We've about beat this one to death more than a few times. One way to describe it that I believe DanS26 came up with (maybe not ?) that seemed to cut to the chase for me was that net metering with full rate offset was like someone who has a home size mini refinery and the law says they can store any and all their gasoline production at the local gas station at no charge while getting to withdraw as much of their equivalent production as they want at no charge and at any time, paying only for what the gas station supplies in excess of what the home mini refinery produces. Kind of a lousy business model.
          Last edited by J.P.M.; 05-06-2018, 11:44 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            In these parts the PoCo is a REGULATED MONOPOLY, and rates are subject to public commission
            approval to allow a reasonable return on investment. The commission has also decided to help
            development of renewable energy with rules favorable to PV solar and other renewables. Naturally
            the original suppliers are not happy with any competition and prone to make unreasonable rules
            to kill it. Bruce Roe

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by bcroe View Post
              In these parts the PoCo is a REGULATED MONOPOLY, and rates are subject to public commission
              approval to allow a reasonable return on investment. The commission has also decided to help
              development of renewable energy with rules favorable to PV solar and other renewables. Naturally
              the original suppliers are not happy with any competition and prone to make unreasonable rules
              to kill it. Bruce Roe
              Bruce, no one has a gun at our heads forcing you, me or anyone else to buy their product. It's just that you, me and most everyone benefits from the rather superior and cost effective way they supply it, and we've allowed ourselves to become effectively addicted to it. What's your LCOE for what you generate ? I bet it's more than the average cost from your robber POCO.

              How unreasonable such alleged attempts to kill net metering are may well be a matter of some opinion.

              If a concept or way of doing something cannot stand on its own without living in the government's basement and dragging off the gov. (taxpayer's) tit, then maybe it ought to grow up or die. It's called capitalism.

              FWIW, just like training wheels on a bike make for overreliance on crutch mechanisms, I think subsidies and ideas like over compensatory net metering schemes (that apparently some never want to sunset) do more to harm renewable energy than help it.

              Time for solar energy to take the training wheels off and live on its own. If it can't, then it ought to get it right or die.

              As for the arguments about oil depletion allowances and nuke subsidies etc., you can't call them bad, or imply that they are and at the same time call R.E. subsidies good and so expect R.E. to play by the same set of rules you damn.

              Fact is, good or bad, like'em or not, oil & nuke subsidies are here to stay. Deal/live with it.

              The very real R.E. opportunity here is that if R.E. can cost effectively compete without gov. or regulatory crutches, it'll be stronger and unstoppable without the reliance on, and so what amounts to, the gov. interference in free markets via the tax and regulatory codes.

              That'll also have the real (side) benefit of getting get rid of a lot of scumbags glomming of R.E. ( and not helping its reputation) that will need to go back to selling real estate, timeshares or driveway sealer door to door if R.E. were to mature and gets honest.

              FWIW, I'd get rid of all subsidies and let real free market capitalism pick winners.

              Respectfully,

              Comment


              • #8
                Interesting that CA is going to require PV on all new housing by 2020. Wonder if it will get to the point were folks will intentionally disconnect the PV to avoid the charges from the local utilities?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by peakbagger View Post
                  Interesting that CA is going to require PV on all new housing by 2020. Wonder if it will get to the point were folks will intentionally disconnect the PV to avoid the charges from the local utilities?
                  I was thinking that, along with wondering if it might be worthwhile for the POCOs to think about getting into owning and then leasing some form of energy storage on residential to regional levels and let the PV owners feed the storage or use the power locally/household level. That also might be a way for POCOs to get in on the early stages of the next energy related method of making their businesses run a bit more efficiently - something they all missed by not getting in on PV at the ground floor and then either controlling it or killing it.

                  One problem with mandated PV is that it will probably do little to reduce consumption of electricity. The PV supplied power will soon be and go unnoticed, even more than it is now, and do little more than offset some of the negative but singularly effective impetus higher bills have on lowering consumption. Also, with that thorn of higher bills somewhat removed, consumption will continue to rise with another result being the system will be as or more difficult to keep stable than it is now.

                  I'd mandate nothing but if I had to choose, it would be to encourage and educate about residential/local storage before more PV. That would reduce the need for T.O.U. and, if the storage was to be done right, stabilize demand on the grid in an effective and reliable way.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by J.P.M. View Post

                    I was thinking that, along with wondering if it might be worthwhile for the POCOs to think about getting into owning and then leasing some form of energy storage on residential to regional levels and let the PV owners feed the storage or use the power locally/household level. That also might be a way for POCOs to get in on the early stages of the next energy related method of making their businesses run a bit more efficiently - something they all missed by not getting in on PV at the ground floor and then either controlling it or killing it.

                    One problem with mandated PV is that it will probably do little to reduce consumption of electricity. The PV supplied power will soon be and go unnoticed, even more than it is now, and do little more than offset some of the negative but singularly effective impetus higher bills have on lowering consumption. Also, with that thorn of higher bills somewhat removed, consumption will continue to rise with another result being the system will be as or more difficult to keep stable than it is now.

                    I'd mandate nothing but if I had to choose, it would be to encourage and educate about residential/local storage before more PV. That would reduce the need for T.O.U. and, if the storage was to be done right, stabilize demand on the grid in an effective and reliable way.
                    +1. I agree that mandated solar will not guarantee a reduction in electric usage. It would be better to help customers reduce their loads during peak usage.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by J.P.M. View Post

                      Bruce, no one has a gun at our heads forcing you, me or anyone else to buy their product. It's just that you, me and most everyone benefits from the rather superior and cost effective way they supply it, and we've allowed ourselves to become effectively addicted to it. What's your LCOE for what you generate ? I bet it's more than the average cost from your robber POCO.

                      How unreasonable such alleged attempts to kill net metering are may well be a matter of some opinion.

                      If a concept or way of doing something cannot stand on its own without living in the government's basement and dragging off the gov. (taxpayer's) tit, then maybe it ought to grow up or die. It's called capitalism.

                      FWIW, just like training wheels on a bike make for overreliance on crutch mechanisms, I think subsidies and ideas like over compensatory net metering schemes (that apparently some never want to sunset) do more to harm renewable energy than help it.

                      Time for solar energy to take the training wheels off and live on its own. If it can't, then it ought to get it right or die.

                      As for the arguments about oil depletion allowances and nuke subsidies etc., you can't call them bad, or imply that they are and at the same time call R.E. subsidies good and so expect R.E. to play by the same set of rules you damn.

                      Fact is, good or bad, like'em or not, oil & nuke subsidies are here to stay. Deal/live with it.

                      The very real R.E. opportunity here is that if R.E. can cost effectively compete without gov. or regulatory crutches, it'll be stronger and unstoppable without the reliance on, and so what amounts to, the gov. interference in free markets via the tax and regulatory codes.

                      That'll also have the real (side) benefit of getting get rid of a lot of scumbags glomming of R.E. ( and not helping its reputation) that will need to go back to selling real estate, timeshares or driveway sealer door to door if R.E. were to mature and gets honest.

                      FWIW, I'd get rid of all subsidies and let real free market capitalism pick winners.

                      Respectfully,
                      J.P.M., I am not arguing with you, just pointing out that here a least, the monopoly utilities DO NOT just set their
                      own rates, and some other rules. The commission sets them, certainly heavily lobbied by the utilities and the
                      citizens as well.

                      You might recall that issues with the NATURAL GAS co triggered my big leap into solar. They were in fact
                      found legally guilty of breaking the law (and contracts) to the tune of hundreds of millions of $. I never had
                      much issue with the PoCo. But I certainly am willing to try and utilize to the max, the regs that others set up.

                      Bruce Roe

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by bcroe View Post

                        J.P.M., I am not arguing with you, just pointing out that here a least, the monopoly utilities DO NOT just set their
                        own rates, and some other rules. The commission sets them, certainly heavily lobbied by the utilities and the
                        citizens as well.

                        You might recall that issues with the NATURAL GAS co triggered my big leap into solar. They were in fact
                        found legally guilty of breaking the law (and contracts) to the tune of hundreds of millions of $. I never had
                        much issue with the PoCo. But I certainly am willing to try and utilize to the max, the regs that others set up.

                        Bruce Roe
                        Understood. No argument from me either. But, a question or two: How does one legally break the law ? Did you write that as humorous, intentionally oxymoronic or both ? Or, if found illegally guilty, does it still count ?

                        Ok, just messing with you head.

                        Aside from that, I do have a different take on rates, how they are set and what influences the ratemaking process.

                        As for your natural gas utility issues, since you bring it up, I sort of thought your hardon for the gas company is at least partially responsible for some less than cost effective things you've done, (not the least of which result being that you may well have the only residential PV system that's visible from outer space).

                        But that's not a knock and NOMB. Besides, most of my R.E. shenanigans don't produce a profit either and I won't be the pot calling the kettle black. I suspect you have as much or more fun than I do - priceless.

                        Back on un utility regulation, I suspect the reality is somewhere between the utilities' public version - that is, of being a victim of regulators' bending to misplaced public outrage and indignation - and what's often the public's version, that is, that the folks working for public service commissions and regulating authorities are little more than stooges and flunkies that the utilities have in their back pocket.

                        Because I believe that free markets can be self regulating (while also being realistic and believing they most always fall short of being 100 % honest), one portion of how I see it is that the less regulation is involved, the less chance or framework there will be for chicanery. If deception/dishonesty is found, IMO, it ought to be dealt with using very draconian methods. (anecdotal story goes that Mussolini got the trains in Italy to run on time by shooting the conductor if the train was late. Very few conductors were eliminated after the first incidence of a late train, but rail service improved a lot).

                        But, more IMO only, too much regulation can and often does little to improve things, and often provides that framework for deception and fraud.

                        It also allows people to become complacent and more ignorant, but that's a separate topic perhaps best discussed under the title of communism.

                        Respectfully,
                        Last edited by J.P.M.; 05-07-2018, 10:57 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by bcroe View Post

                          J.P.M., I am not arguing with you, just pointing out that here a least, the monopoly utilities DO NOT just set their
                          own rates, and some other rules. The commission sets them, certainly heavily lobbied by the utilities and the
                          citizens as well.
                          Around here, the PUC members are bought and paid for with dark money by the POCO. Of course the millions of dollars they donated to their candidate's campaigns came from the excess they are charging customers.
                          https://www.azcentral.com/story/opin...les/352933002/
                          Dave W. Gilbert AZ
                          6.63kW grid-tie owner

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by azdave View Post

                            Around here, the PUC members are bought and paid for with dark money by the POCO. Of course the millions of dollars they donated to their candidate's campaigns came from the excess they are charging customers.
                            https://www.azcentral.com/story/opin...les/352933002/
                            Yup, that's just the way it often is. Curse the wind. Some campaign donations are for sure of that nature, but I'd not paint every regulator or PUC bureaucrat with the same brush. Some actually try to do a good job in an ethical way. I've known a few.

                            At least the regulators and bureaucrats probably know the difference between a watt and a kilowatt -hr.

                            I can imagine the results if Joe or Jane 6-pack got to make regulatory policy.

                            That might be like the chickens guarding the henhouse instead of the fox. One result would be that there'd be chicken for dinner every nite at the fox's house.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by bcroe View Post
                              In these parts the PoCo is a REGULATED MONOPOLY, and rates are subject to public commission
                              approval to allow a reasonable return on investment. The commission has also decided to help
                              development of renewable energy with rules favorable to PV solar and other renewables. Naturally
                              the original suppliers are not happy with any competition and prone to make unreasonable rules
                              to kill it. Bruce Roe
                              Bruce the issue is and most people are not aware of, the goberment aka state utility regulators allow the POCO's to jack up electric rates to cover the losses incurred. Those cost are in the form of a hidden tax built inside electric rates and forced upon the poor. It is welfare for the rich. Utilities do not want to pass those cost onto the public. So they have worked with state regulators to remove those hidden taxes and make solar users pay for the losses.

                              There is also another loss not accounted for with PV and EV's and are robbing the public blind. PV users do not pay energy taxes, and EV users do not pay fuel taxes and free-loading using the roads and not paying for it. Goberment knows about it and about to put a stop to it. No free lunch.

                              MSEE, PE

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X