X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • NEM 2.0 and California

    New to this forum, but not to solar as I've had small off-grid systems in my home and boat for 20 years now. I decided a while ago that it was time to invest in a grid-tie system for my home. As my roof is pointing the wrong way and I had been wanting to build a small storage/workshop building anyways, I designed the building to accommodate sufficient solar panels. It took a while (like 2 years) to get all that through Building and Safety and build it, but it was all signed off and finished January of this year, including the 2.65 KW Solar System. I missed out on any incentives or credits except for the Fed'l credit, but that's OK. What's NOT OK is that the local utility is refusing to tie me into the grid, with some BS about how their "solar program" ended at the beginning of the year...
    Now it was my understanding that California's solar energy policy, NEM 1.0 required the utilities to pay customers for power they generated from solar until it reached 5% of peak electric demand. That has now been replaced by NEM 2.0, which doesn't pay quite as well as there some fixed costs that can't be offset as well as having to pay a new, one time connection fee, but it does remove the "cap" on how much solar power can be generated. This would be great if it was true, but it seems state sanctioned monopolies like utilities can do whatever they want. What good is a State implemented energy policy if utilities can ignore it? I wonder how this is supposed to play out in 2020 when ALL new construction in California will be required to have rooftop solar? Add $10-20K to the cost of all new homes so that they can have useless equipment on their roofs, like I do?

  • #2
    Who do you take service from ?

    Comment


    • #3
      "Bear Valley Electric Service" , but it's owned by Golden State Water. I've had experience with them before in the Ojai valley where their water rates were three times as much as other adjacent water companies were charging - and they all draw water from the same aquifers. They finally got kicked out of there last year after years of legal battles by the residents. Then I find out I'm stuck with the same outfit in Big Bear.

      Comment


      • #4
        Looks like you're right. See their Website. Maybe something will pop up in the future. Give them a buzz and get confirmation and /or news for possible connection under successor tariff(s) if/when approved, especially if there's a queue or waiting list.
        Last edited by J.P.M.; 09-18-2018, 10:10 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Already seen their website. Obviously they can make a lot more money by building their own solar installation out on the lake than by allowing me to connect. Looks like I made a big expensive mistake and discovered solar energy's dirty little secret.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by pukawai View Post
            it seems state sanctioned monopolies like utilities can do whatever they want. What good is a State implemented energy policy if utilities can ignore it? I wonder how this is supposed to play out in 2020 when ALL new construction in California will be required to have rooftop solar? Add $10-20K to the cost of all new homes so that they can have useless equipment on their roofs, like I do?
            There are exceptions for non-publicly traded utilities like Bear Valley.
            so one option you have is to install solar without net metering using grid zero or non-feed in programming on the inverters. you can do this with many grid tie inverters without batteries though it would be more efficient with a battery.

            Without a battery it will offset your use during the day only. with a battery it will offset your use as much as solar will allow and can shift load if you are on a TOU rate.
            OutBack FP1 w/ CS6P-250P http://bit.ly/1Sg5VNH

            Comment


            • #7
              Running without net metering is going to cut system effectiveness by an order of
              magnitude. Batteries just make it much more expensive, with very limited benefit.
              Bruce Roe

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by bcroe View Post
                Running without net metering is going to cut system effectiveness by an order of
                magnitude. Batteries just make it much more expensive, with very limited benefit.
                Bruce Roe
                I agree. Until battery prices come down, a better financial decision would just let the excess kWh generated go out the door. Seems like a waste but the only option is battery storage which is very costly.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by pukawai View Post
                  Already seen their website. Obviously they can make a lot more money by building their own solar installation out on the lake than by allowing me to connect. Looks like I made a big expensive mistake and discovered solar energy's dirty little secret.
                  It wasn't really a secret to those who looked for confirmation and didn't assume everything the media and the treehuggers puked out was true. NEM in CA mostly and strictly applies to the big 3 I.O.U.'s (investor owned utilities). Smaller CA utilities, including smaller I.O.U.'s often/usually followed along, but were either under no mandate to offer NEM, or are required to conform to some of the requirements of the CPUC with respect to NEM, depending on that POCO's status, or, a POCO may offer some type of NEM at times.

                  You gotta' read all the fine print.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by pukawai View Post
                    Already seen their website. Obviously they can make a lot more money by building their own solar installation out on the lake than by allowing me to connect. Looks like I made a big expensive mistake and discovered solar energy's dirty little secret.
                    Yep. Utilities like to make money - and so they prefer that they install grid scale solar, rather than let customers do it on smaller scales. They can't charge you for energy you make and use yourself.*

                    (* - actually they can; a few utilities have mandated two-meter systems, so you get a small amount of credit for the power you generate, but they still charge you per kwhr. Fortunately these are not very common.)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Yes, I considered batteries to salvage the money already wasted on this system, but that would financially foolish given the cost. Even though the power here is among the most expensive in the country, almost twice what the big 3 charge and about the same as Hawaii, I won't live long enough to even break even on batteries. Throwing good money after bad. Or, I could buy a "virtual" battery like the Powerwall and have even less to show for it...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I just read an article about a 11kWh battery system being promoted by ElectrIQ called the PowerPod. It stated the starting price of $9000 with a 10 year life but I have no idea concerning installation costs. So IMO still too expensive for the average home owner.

                        They will be going head to head with the Tesla Powerwall unit but no idea when they ship or if they will ship to the US.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by SunEagle View Post
                          I just read an article about a 11kWh battery system being promoted by ElectrIQ called the PowerPod. It stated the starting price of $9000 with a 10 year life but I have no idea concerning installation costs. So IMO still too expensive for the average home owner.

                          They will be going head to head with the Tesla Powerwall unit but no idea when they ship or if they will ship to the US.
                          So with a 10 year life + installation one could figure roughly $900/year - roughly what I'm paying for power at the moment. Seems to me the whole power storage technology is about where solar was when I paid about $5/watt for just the panels. Not worth it unless you have no other way. Maybe we need another 2008 style financial crash and bailout to get power storage into the practical realm.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by pukawai View Post

                            So with a 10 year life + installation one could figure roughly $900/year - roughly what I'm paying for power at the moment. Seems to me the whole power storage technology is about where solar was when I paid about $5/watt for just the panels. Not worth it unless you have no other way. Maybe we need another 2008 style financial crash and bailout to get power storage into the practical realm.
                            Or maybe someone will find a way to make cheap but quality battery storage systems. Where I live in Florida that is going to be a very long wait.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by pukawai View Post
                              Yes, I considered batteries to salvage the money already wasted on this system, but that would financially foolish given the cost. Even though the power here is among the most expensive in the country, almost twice what the big 3 charge and about the same as Hawaii, I won't live long enough to even break even on batteries. Throwing good money after bad. Or, I could buy a "virtual" battery like the Powerwall and have even less to show for it...
                              You could see if they will accept a grid-zero system. Such a system never exports to the grid; it powers local loads only. This is not nearly as beneficial as a net metered system - but if you can move most of your loads to during the day, it can help reduce your bill. I know Fronius, Enphase and Solaredge support zero-export (actually they support export limits that go down to zero) and I _think_ SMA has that available now.

                              Since it never exports to the grid, the utility just sees reduced load rather than imported energy they have to deal with, so in theory they should like this better - and it does not impact their 5% limit. In practice they will make less money off you so they have no real reason to approve it.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X