SDGE Standard (DR) NEM 1.0 Customer ... what's next?

[MoJ]

I also looked at your PVOutput output, both daily and yearly. On the yearly, I noticed you're output for 2016, 2017 and 2018 is 9,686, 9,746 and 9219 kWh/yr. respectively.

I then ran PVWatts for zip 92116 and got an annual output of 11,388 kWh/yr. w/ horizontal orientation and 10 % system losses on a 7.29kW array.

NOMB or concern, but either PVOutput is underreporting, or you've got a lot of shade (as might be the case looking the photos you've provided), or that horizontal orientation is raising hell with keeping things clean, or all of the above or other things as well. I've found PVWatts to be reasonably good at modeling output in a way that matches reality provided the model input reasonably reflects on site reality. At 11,800 kWh/yr. modeled vs., say 9,600 kWh/yr. or less actual, the model is missing something.

Also, are you sure you use more than you generate over a year ? Staying in tier 1 for 10 months out of 12 would mean 10 months of usage would be ~ 9.1 kWh/day*1.3*31 days/billing period * 10 billing periods ~ 3,667 kWh for 10 billing periods (if you're in the coastal zone and also have nat. gas service). But, if you use more than the 9,219 kWh that PVOutput reports you generated for 2018, that would mean for 2 months you used something like 9,219-3,667 = 5,552 kWh. That would also put you way over the 400 % superuser threshold you also say you have avoided.

Am I missing some information here ?

JPM- thanks for that! There are some rounding errors I'm sure (I'm not on a calendar month billing cycle) so I have to track things off my bill manually... this is how it has played out over the last 3 years:

Bill Date	Consumption	Generation	SDGE Billed - NEM 1.0
3/1/2016	619	696	77
4/4/2016	702	952	-250
5/4/2016	701	1020	-319
6/3/2016	773	955	-182
7/5/2016	1157	1141	16
8/3/2016	1499	1228	271
9/1/2016	1519	1104	415
10/3/2016	1135	862	273
11/2/2016	905	723	182
12/2/2016	588	416	172
1/4/2017	820	482	338
2/2/2017	707	451	256
3/6/2017	746	680	66
4/4/2017	744	916	-172
5/4/2017	780	1084	-304
6/5/2017	870	985	-115
7/5/2017	1039	1096	-57
8/3/2017	1594	1007	587
9/1/2017	1374	919	455
10/3/2017	1092	906	186
11/1/2017	1039	704	335
12/1/2017	795	497	298
1/3/2018	845	518	327
2/1/2018	692	485	207
3/5/2018	750	762	-12
4/3/2018	727	856	-129
5/2/2018	834	1118	-284
6/4/2018	845	979	-134
7/2/2018	865	1032	-167
8/2/2018	1590	951	639
8/31/2018	1301	909	392
10/1/2018	1066	752	314
10/31/2018	783	620	163
12/3/2018	813	567	246
1/3/2019	824	465	359
2/1/2019	702	461	241

I've only creeped into T2 4 times in 3 years (without solar, I was always in T2, and 2x/year would hit the "hi-use" tier, if it were implemented). I trued-up 1249 in 2016, 1813 in 2017, and 1628 in 2018.

When we installed, we knew we were going to have some loss - our roof only gets AM sun full, then it tapers in the PM and because of how the roof is laid out (flat but has a center stairwell for a deck, plus walls) it blocks late-day sun. My neighbors (it's a condo) who use the other side of the roof have the opposite problem.

My "best" day so far was 5/23/16 - it takes a while to get over the parapet wall, then there was probably some morning fog, and it trails off into the PM:

Annotation 2019-03-09 175559.jpg

[Ampster]

......... But I did notice you chose to not answer my question.............

Did your question have anything to do with the topic of this thread?

[J.P.M.]

Yes, I agree, enough said. This has nothing to do with the subject of this thread. This is not a forum for venting your psychological issues. I have learned to live with SK's behavior and however you may consider my comments they are benign in comparison to his treatment of people. If you don't have anything constructive to add to the conversation about "what is next" then leave your feelings at the door and don't try to hijack this thread with your personal issues.

Well, we agree to disagree. That's either a start or a finish.

As for hijacking, and as you wrote, it takes two. But I did notice you chose to not answer my question.

As for SK's M.O. (with that being even more off topic BTW), I'd respectfully suggest if you don't care for his style, ignore it - the same as mine, and move on. Matters not one whit to me.

As for your comments, they are more than benign - I consider them thoughtless and boorish, and often rude. If you consider calling out rude behavior a symptom of psychological problems, maybe you might consider an evaluation by someone more professionally qualified to make such a judgement than you seem to think you're able to do. I just hate rude behavior.

But expect return comments from me to you for what I consider rude, inconsiderate and thoughtless comments from you. Don't like it, don't make'em.

I'm done wasting time on your attempts at baiting.

The last word is yours.

[Ampster]

Take this FWIW. What makes you think or assume I have not ?.............................if I point out what I consider your presumptive and condescending thinking as exemplified above, you might gain further insight in understanding why I take your questions and what I take as your presumptive comments as loutish and hambrained.

Enough said.

Yes, I agree, enough said. This has nothing to do with the subject of this thread. This is not a forum for venting your psychological issues. I have learned to live with SK's behavior and however you may consider my comments they are benign in comparison to his treatment of people. If you don't have anything constructive to add to the conversation about "what is next" then leave your feelings at the door and don't try to hijack this thread with your personal issues.

[Ampster]

Good news, for those who find tiered rates optimal. I have not been on tiered rates in a while so I guess I have been too pessimistic about them being available much into the future.

[UkiwiS]

Additionally, I chatted with SDG&E just now and they confirmed that Standard (DR) will be available to me for 20 years from my PTO date.

Capture9999.jpg

[UkiwiS]

In the "Legislative Counsel's Digest" of AB327 here:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB327

...I found the following...


This bill would delete these provisions and instead prohibit the commission from requiring or permitting an electrical corporation from employing mandatory or default time-variant pricing, as defined, for any residential customer, except that beginning January 1, 2018, the commission may require or authorize an electrical corporation to employ default time-of-use pricing to residential customers, subject to specified limitations and conditions. The bill would permit the commission to authorize an electrical corporation to offer residential customers the option of receiving service pursuant to time-variant pricing and to participate in other demand response programs. The bill would provide that a residential customer would have the option to not receive service pursuant to time-variant pricing and not incur any additional charge as a result of the exercise of that option. Unless the commission has authorized an electrical corporation to employ default time-of-use pricing, the bill would require the commission to require each electrical corporation to offer default rates to residential customers with at least 2 usage tiers and would require that the first tier include electricity usage of no less than the baseline quantity established by the commission. The bill would authorize the commission to modify the baseline seasonal definitions and applicable percentage of average consumption for one or more climate zones.

So, Has the commission authorized an electrical corporation to employ default time-of use pricing? If they haven't, then SDGE must make Standard (DR) available, right?

[J.P.M.]

Well if you think what the IOUs are telling you is confusing try to follow what the CEC, CPUC or the CAISO are saying and doing. I have also watched some of those hearings and heard Michael Picker, Chair of CPUC, speak at a Greenwash symposium I attended when I was more engaged. I generally support the aggressive goals that the legislature and Governor have set but I also recognize the difficulty in implementing them.

Take this FWIW. What makes you think or assume I have not ? It has been my experience to find that usually, but not always, somewhere in a document, things are eventually found that addresses most terms and conditions. That includes most all of the information put out by the sources you cite and others. I believe my knowledge of such things is reasonably up to date, complete and thorough. I'm not afraid to get in anyone's face or manipulate them as may be necessary as peddler's seem to do best to get an answer.

You wondered if you struck a nerve the other day. That might be too strong a description, but maybe if I point out what I consider your presumptive and condescending thinking as exemplified above, you might gain further insight in understanding why I take your questions and what I take as your presumptive comments as loutish and hambrained.

Enough said.

[Ampster]

Well if you think what the IOUs are telling you is confusing try to follow what the CEC, CPUC or the CAISO are saying and doing. I have also watched some of those hearings and heard Michael Picker, Chair of CPUC, speak at a Greenwash symposium I attended when I was more engaged. I generally support the aggressive goals that the legislature and Governor have set but I also recognize the difficulty in implementing them.

[J.P.M.]

Welcome to the land of the terminally confused brought to you by (what seems to be) the equally and perhaps deliberately confusing and inadequate to the task explanations from the apparently (and attempting to be kind here rather than being cynical as to their motives, but not na

Well, the word "n a i v e" again truncated a post. My bad for not learning/remembering to stop using that word. Great software and follow through.

Synopsis of what got chopped which was probably mostly bloviating anyway: Yea, I've been bitching about the confusion caused by SDG & E's lack of clarity and information for a long tine now, probably in violation of one of the mandates of AB 327. Welcome to the land of what looks like intentional confusion.

[J.P.M.]

Early adopters made financial decisions before many of these TOU plans came into effect

My reading of this document is that the transition period to the successor tariff is 20 years from the PTO date:

http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M089/K386/89386131.PDF

I'm not exactly sure what this means with regard to which plans are available to switch to. Could it mean that the tiered rate has to remain for NEM 1.0 customers until their 20 year anniversary?

Welcome to the land of the terminally confused brought to you by (what seems to be) the equally and perhaps deliberately confusing and inadequate to the task explanations from the apparently (and attempting to be kind here rather than being cynical as to their motives, but not na

[jflorey2]

So what do you think is next? Hourly market based pricing?

We were on an experimental real time pricing program last year. We saved a lot - but did not get to keep the savings; after the trial billing defaulted to the old tiered plan. I spent a few hours trying to track down what happened and gave up.

[UkiwiS]

I would not rely on being able to stay on a tiered rate for long.

Early adopters made financial decisions before many of these TOU plans came into effect

My reading of this document is that the transition period to the successor tariff is 20 years from the PTO date:

http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M089/K386/89386131.PDF

I'm not exactly sure what this means with regard to which plans are available to switch to. Could it mean that the tiered rate has to remain for NEM 1.0 customers until their 20 year anniversary?

[Ampster]

As I mentioned to the original poster it all depends on you usage and how much of that you can shift to lower rate periods. J.P.M. and I agree that tiered rates wont be around for much longer. TOU rates are already common in the commercial and industrial sector and are becoming more common in residential. I predict that TOU rates will be around for a while. What will happen is the time periods will shift. I have already seen that in the one commercial rate plan I have, which also has solar and EV charging. We are not able to change when the sun will shine but we are able to shift loads. Since you are already on TOU you have enough data to determine whether going to a tiered rate would be beneficial. I would not rely on being able to stay on a tiered rate for long.

[UkiwiS]

This is an interesting topic. It's also a confusing one. I'm on NEM 1.0 and I believe the legislation gives us 20 years to transition to the "Successor tariff". I'm already on a TOU rate plan and have been since my PTO in July 2015. I have around 16 months to go on the Noon-6pm "On-Peak" window and then it's going to get interesting. I've been tracking my usage very closely over the last year and have just started doing it assuming the ON-Peak window has already shifted...the change is minimal right now due to the winter rates but in the summer it's going to be staggering. I'll effectively lose the 30 cents per kWh credit from that generation between noon and 6 pm so I already know my bill is going to take a big hit.

One pricing plan that is available to me currently is "Standard (DR)" which I assume is the standard tiered plan. My net usage would put me in tier 1 for 10 months of the year and slightly into tier 2 for the other 2 months. Net usage ranges from -80 kWh to 287 kWh and averages 158 kWh. I can already see that this Standard (DR) plan is going to be the one for me but I'm wondering how long it''ll be available for.

If I knew with certainty that this Standard DR plan would be an option for me for the next 15 years I would switch to it in July 2020. Maybe I should bite the bullet and switch now while it's still an option.