CALIFORNIA residents.Please take a minute to make a public comment on NEM3.0 proposal

[SunEagle]

Don't take it the wrong way but I would rather rip out my solar system than moving to FL

LOL. I understand and take no offense.

I just get tired of people that have the finances to install a solar pv system and then want to complain that their POCO is ripping them off.

As JPM stated making a choice belongs to you and no amount of discussion will change a mind that is fixed on a point and mad.

Again I feel bad that the new solar rules are going to eat into the owners in CA savings but again it is their choice to stay or go, or vote out those that cause this type of irritation.

[Ampster]

I have two systems. One is on a rental in SCE territory. The PTO was issued in 2011 so in five years I will begin to see the impact of the new rule. I pay the electrical for the tenant and I am sure I can increase the rent to compensate for any increased costs. I previously lived there and the system has paid for itself including a new replacement inverter.
The other system received the PTO this year from PGE so I will not be affected until 2036. I have already invested in batteries, a hybrid inverter, and additional solar panels, all of which are behind the meter. I am not worried about the impact of the new rules in 14 years.

[solardreamer]

I have two systems. One is on a rental in SCE territory. The PTO was issued in 2011 so in five years I will begin to see the impact of the new rule. I pay the electrical for the tenant and I am sure I can increase the rent to compensate for any increased costs. I previously lived there and the system has paid for itself including a new replacement inverter.
The other system received the PTO this year from PGE so I will not be affected until 2036. I have already invested in batteries, a hybrid inverter, and additional solar panels, all of which are behind the meter. I am not worried about the impact of the new rules in 14 years.

Sure 2036 if you believe there won't be further changes just like you believed the 20 year guarantee when you got your first system in 2011. Once the precedent is set to allow breaking NEM contracts at will then it's almost certain to happen again.

Nevada terminated NEM abruptly a few years back for everyone including existing customers and they sued. Nevada had to restore the original NEM for existing customers and soon after resurrected NEM in general because home solar installations tanked so badly.

NEM 1/2 customers (including me) are probably not at risk of near term impact but I am looking at it more as an advocate for home solar growth so I am concerned about the drastic negative impact the proposal will cause as we have seen from similar but less punitive changes in Hawaii and Nevada. I am all for everyone paying their fair share for grid upkeep but the proposal is unreasonable and doesn't make sense for a state with clearly stated aggressive clean energy goals.

[heimdm]

Fair share would be forcing solar owners to sell at wholesale (3-5 cents / kwh) and having them buy at 12+ cents / kwh. Any other stuff beyond that is just monopolistic retribution to a competitor. My understanding is that with some of the TOU tariff's in CA, retail rates can exceed 30 cents /kwh.

[Ampster]

Sure 2036 if you believe there won't be further changes just like you believed the 20 year guarantee when you got your first system in 2011.

2036 is beyond my statistical life expectancy. I never believed there was guarantee of any sort when I installed the first system. By 2015, I was living in another home, installed solar there and installed a small inverter/battery system to reduce peak charges. With two EVs, I was running a dollar credit but was consuming about one MegaWhr of energy. I knew that wasn't going to last with the way TOU time periods were eroding the benefits. Six years later and I am in a different home with a much less favorable EV rate so I moved the hybrid inverter and invested in a much bigger LFP pack. I do believe there will be further changes and my strategy with the hybrid inverter and batteries is to reduce the risk to me of those changes.
I too am concerned about the the proposal and the impact on the solar installation industry in California.

[Reid1boys]

I understand that you pay more for road upkeep, but the vast majority may not because they may not have an EV Fee. As long as more people start to drive EV's and unless everyone is charged to help keep up the roads they will fall apart just like the POCO's grid.

Look I don't like the idea that POCO's are allowed to change the NET metering rules but I also understand that they have to keep the lights on for all of their customers. And that requires money which they charge for. If you want to save money then I would suggest people find a way to use less electricity just like some people are using less gas. Conservation on all fronts is the best way to save.

Oh and I don't know of any ICE vehicles that get 35mpg but hey if that is what you want to hang your hat on then ok.

Well when I got my solar system it was based upon the AGREEMENT I signed that said the rules for me would be in place for TWENTY years. Now an AGREEMENT is just another word for CONTRACT. So if they try to change the net metering contract that they agreed to, I can not imagine a class action lawsuit not following.

As far as us not paying our fair share for the grid?? Well my house is about 80% fed electricity from my panels. During the Summer, my panels feed the grid which sends that power right next door to my neighbor, which actually save the electric company grid usage. At the end of the year, I am almost exactly break even on my production vs what I use. To charge me $80 a month for grid usage access is a JOKE and nothing more than a money grab.

Bottom line is NEM3.0 will kill residential solar in Ca. When the state was giving us incentives to buy solar, they did it knowing without the incentives there is no way we would have bought solar. To go back on that deal years later????

Your argument that we should move if we do not like it is just nonsense.

[Reid1boys]

LOL. I understand and take no offense.

I just get tired of people that have the finances to install a solar pv system and then want to complain that their POCO is ripping them off.

As JPM stated making a choice belongs to you and no amount of discussion will change a mind that is fixed on a point and mad.

Again I feel bad that the new solar rules are going to eat into the owners in CA savings but again it is their choice to stay or go, or vote out those that cause this type of irritation.

So because I have the money to buy a solar system, I am supposed to be ok with the CPUC reneging on the deal that the state made with us to help reach THEIR goal of 5% total generated power to be solar? If they change the deal from 20 years to 15 years, that will cost me likely in the neighborhood of 15 to 20 thousand dollars depending on how much electricity rates increase in the year 2030-2035. More importantly, because I worked my rear off to not be on welfare like I was as a kid, Im supposed to be ok with being charged 1k a year to help low income families have access to solar????? cmon

[Reid1boys]

I have two systems. One is on a rental in SCE territory. The PTO was issued in 2011 so in five years I will begin to see the impact of the new rule. I pay the electrical for the tenant and I am sure I can increase the rent to compensate for any increased costs. I previously lived there and the system has paid for itself including a new replacement inverter.
The other system received the PTO this year from PGE so I will not be affected until 2036. I have already invested in batteries, a hybrid inverter, and additional solar panels, all of which are behind the meter. I am not worried about the impact of the new rules in 14 years.

uhmmmmm, have you read NEM3.0? You might want to be worried.

[heimdm]

I feel that NEM 3.0 is really a test to see what the utilities can get through. However, a lot of what is in NEM 3.0 is what we have been seeing in other areas for some time. The grid support fee or whatever they are calling the $8/mo per DC KW installed, that's taking it to the next level. Ending equal rates for buying and selling electric is something the utilities having been working through lobbying for some time. Indiana (my state) started phasing out net-metering back in 2017.

I do think the concept of Tesla's Virtual Power Plant (VPP) and other such programs will be interesting to see how they go. Those type of programs are about selling power to the utilities when they really need it, and that comes with increased rates. The utilities do take the capacity that Solar customers provide for granted. In most cases the energy put back into the grid from solar customers is consumed by neighbors around. The utilities are probably just seeing how they are making $$$ with a lower utilization of their big power plants. Knowing how unefficient large organizations are, there is reason to expect that all the dots get connected.

With the way capital expenses work for utilities, they just get to largely pass those on to ratepayers. If they have to build another power plant if the utility comission allows that expense to be passed on from the utility perspective that can even be viewed as a feature.

The way forward will be without net metering, which will change the ROI models. Storage needs to come down in price. The price for a Tesla model 3 (~50k includes a 82KWH battery pack), would take about 6 powerwalls. The battery without the car should be cheaper, but at the moment, its not. However, you say its not 50k for the powerwalls, but more like 37k after you subtract the Solar Tax Credit. Regardless this will usher in a market transition that will have negative impact in the short term.

[SunEagle]

So because I have the money to buy a solar system, I am supposed to be ok with the CPUC reneging on the deal that the state made with us to help reach THEIR goal of 5% total generated power to be solar? If they change the deal from 20 years to 15 years, that will cost me likely in the neighborhood of 15 to 20 thousand dollars depending on how much electricity rates increase in the year 2030-2035. More importantly, because I worked my rear off to not be on welfare like I was as a kid, Im supposed to be ok with being charged 1k a year to help low income families have access to solar????? cmon

Chill my friend. Contracts are broken every day by the rich and powerful.

Yes it sucks that they reneged on your contract and you will have to pay more for solar but think about all of those poor people that can't even install a solar pv system because they rent and don't own a home. If you can afford an installation then you fall into a group of people that may not be in the top 1% but are definitely richer then most.

So complaining on an open forum will not get you sympathy points from me. Maybe you should be complaining to your local Politian who voted for those higher electric rates.

[J.P.M.]

Well when I got my solar system it was based upon the AGREEMENT I signed that said the rules for me would be in place for TWENTY years. Now an AGREEMENT is just another word for CONTRACT. So if they try to change the net metering contract that they agreed to, I can not imagine a class action lawsuit not following.

As far as us not paying our fair share for the grid?? Well my house is about 80% fed electricity from my panels. During the Summer, my panels feed the grid which sends that power right next door to my neighbor, which actually save the electric company grid usage. At the end of the year, I am almost exactly break even on my production vs what I use. To charge me $80 a month for grid usage access is a JOKE and nothing more than a money grab.

Bottom line is NEM3.0 will kill residential solar in Ca. When the state was giving us incentives to buy solar, they did it knowing without the incentives there is no way we would have bought solar. To go back on that deal years later????

Your argument that we should move if we do not like it is just nonsense.

I get the impression that somehow you think life is fair.

I signed my MEM 1.0 contract and hoped for 20 years, but was never so naive as to think such a sweetheart deal would last that long. As for moving, it's still a free country (at least for now), you can vote with your feet with one eye on your wallet as the press and media tell us many disfaffected (and I'd guess more than likely conservative) CA residents are doing more and more these days (in spite of a claimed housing shortage and increasing home prices.

IMO, I've seen a lot of results of NEM and one on them is that, fair or not, people who can afford higher electric bills in CA are usually the ones who have PV on their property. I've not seen much PV in the gettos and barrios. I fly a fair amount and notice the roofs in/around the county. Seems to me the more affluent the area the more rooftop PV I see. I live in what's probably considered a somewhat affluent area of n.county San Diego. My HOA has ~ 550 single family homes. At this time there are about 170 homes with PV arrays on them, and the rate of install is rolling off. Although I have no numbers to back up my opinion, all that and a good eyeball leads me to the conclusion that my association is pretty typical with respect to solar PV penetration in San Diego county if you're part of the landed gentry. NEM has, IMO only, benefitted the affluent more than it has benefitted Joe and Jane 6 pack, at least in San Diego. NEM, and for that matter fed. and state tax credits are liitle more than welfare for those who don't need it.

Also, I'd note that this is a proposal of a rate change, not a rate change that's a done deal. It will most likely be revised and voted on by the full CPUC. Until then, for the most part I'm keeping my mouth shut.

Such proceedings and rate change proposals happen about 1X/yr. or so or more often. The last such proposal looked about as ominous as this one but got watered down quite a bit before becoming law.

While I believe the handwriting is on the wall for NEM in CA and probably elsewhere, the last such large proposed rate change to begin gutting NEM in CA with a lot of language similar to this proposal was rejected by the CPUC when voted on.

I'm not so naive or stupid as to think that NEM in CA will not end. It will. Maybe sooner than a lot of the lucky affluent (yes, including me) might want. But based on the prior actions of the CPUC as I've been watching them since 1995 I do not think that all the language and provisions of this propsosed legislation will make it to law intact.

It's been a good ride for NEM and it may continue for a while, but the fairness card the utilities have been playing for years is beginning to have an effect on public opinion. NEM's days are numbered and we may as well get used to it.

When NEM does end, I'm of the opinion it will only serve the long term good of the alternate energy industry anyway, allowing it to break free from the apron strings and the tit of public largess that stunted or at least delayed the maturation of an industry that is overdue to grow up and compete on an even basis. When it does, watch prices drop and quality go up.

[Reid1boys]

Chill my friend. Contracts are broken every day by the rich and powerful.

Yes it sucks that they reneged on your contract and you will have to pay more for solar but think about all of those poor people that can't even install a solar pv system because they rent and don't own a home. If you can afford an installation then you fall into a group of people that may not be in the top 1% but are definitely richer then most.

So complaining on an open forum will not get you sympathy points from me. Maybe you should be complaining to your local Politian who voted for those higher electric rates.

well you clearly do not understand what a "Contract," means legally. No, the rich do not just break contracts at will, neither do electric companies.

As for the poor people... yea, they are poor. They cant afford to buy a home, they cant afford to by solar, they also cant afford to buy a Corvette. Am I supposed to feel sorry for them? Nah. I grew up poor as can be. I didnt like it, so I did something about it which is exactly why I have zero sympathy for the poor. You dont want to be poor, you do something about it. You damn sure dont wait around for others to pay for you.

Oh, yea, you can break a contract.... just expected to pay for the costs you owed the person in that contract. Just like in Nev. there WILL be a lawsuit if they change the rule son people.

[Reid1boys]

I get the impression that somehow you think life is fair.

I signed my MEM 1.0 contract and hoped for 20 years, but was never so naive as to think such a sweetheart deal would last that long. As for moving, it's still a free country (at least for now), you can vote with your feet with one eye on your wallet as the press and media tell us many disfaffected (and I'd guess more than likely conservative) CA residents are doing more and more these days (in spite of a claimed housing shortage and increasing home prices.

IMO, I've seen a lot of results of NEM and one on them is that, fair or not, people who can afford higher electric bills in CA are usually the ones who have PV on their property. I've not seen much PV in the gettos and barrios. I fly a fair amount and notice the roofs in/around the county. Seems to me the more affluent the area the more rooftop PV I see. I live in what's probably considered a somewhat affluent area of n.county San Diego. My HOA has ~ 550 single family homes. At this time there are about 170 homes with PV arrays on them, and the rate of install is rolling off. Although I have no numbers to back up my opinion, all that and a good eyeball leads me to the conclusion that my association is pretty typical with respect to solar PV penetration in San Diego county if you're part of the landed gentry. NEM has, IMO only, benefitted the affluent more than it has benefitted Joe and Jane 6 pack, at least in San Diego. NEM, and for that matter fed. and state tax credits are liitle more than welfare for those who don't need it.

Also, I'd note that this is a proposal of a rate change, not a rate change that's a done deal. It will most likely be revised and voted on by the full CPUC. Until then, for the most part I'm keeping my mouth shut.

Such proceedings and rate change proposals happen about 1X/yr. or so or more often. The last such proposal looked about as ominous as this one but got watered down quite a bit before becoming law.

While I believe the handwriting is on the wall for NEM in CA and probably elsewhere, the last such large proposed rate change to begin gutting NEM in CA with a lot of language similar to this proposal was rejected by the CPUC when voted on.

I'm not so naive or stupid as to think that NEM in CA will not end. It will. Maybe sooner than a lot of the lucky affluent (yes, including me) might want. But based on the prior actions of the CPUC as I've been watching them since 1995 I do not think that all the language and provisions of this propsosed legislation will make it to law intact.

It's been a good ride for NEM and it may continue for a while, but the fairness card the utilities have been playing for years is beginning to have an effect on public opinion. NEM's days are numbered and we may as well get used to it.

When NEM does end, I'm of the opinion it will only serve the long term good of the alternate energy industry anyway, allowing it to break free from the apron strings and the tit of public largess that stunted or at least delayed the maturation of an industry that is overdue to grow up and compete on an even basis. When it does, watch prices drop and quality go up.

well seeing how the less affluent you speak of pay little to no taxes, im not sure how they could possibly take advantage of any tax credits. Do you really think the electric companies are concerned about who can and can not afford solar? This has zero to do with the low income and the "Inequities," that are present in who gets to take advantage of solar. This is 100% about the electric companies wanting to take cash out of the pockets from those that are saving cash on their bills. There was a reason there was a federal tax credit. There is a reason that NEM 1.0 existed. The govts wanted US to get solar power moving and they needed to give us incentives to do so. You cant then say.... well, you all did what we wanted, we now have enough solar, but nah, we now are going back on the deals we told you wed give you.

The fact they are even trying is infuriating.

[SunEagle]

well you clearly do not understand what a "Contract," means legally. No, the rich do not just break contracts at will, neither do electric companies.

As for the poor people... yea, they are poor. They cant afford to buy a home, they cant afford to by solar, they also cant afford to buy a Corvette. Am I supposed to feel sorry for them? Nah. I grew up poor as can be. I didnt like it, so I did something about it which is exactly why I have zero sympathy for the poor. You dont want to be poor, you do something about it. You damn sure dont wait around for others to pay for you.

Oh, yea, you can break a contract.... just expected to pay for the costs you owed the person in that contract. Just like in Nev. there WILL be a lawsuit if they change the rule son people.

Hmm. Actually I do know what a contract is along with most of the Indian people that had one with the US which was broken again and again when they were moved from one place to another "for their health".

Glad you made it out of poverty but please have some concern for those that still live below that level and may not even see a meal today because they really can't get out of debt. You have more money now because you worked hard to be where you are. So remember to donate to those that are not where they want to be.

I am actually done discussing this topic with you. So please do not reply or I will just close it.

[Ampster]

well you clearly do not understand what a "Contract," means legally. .....

The terms of any contract are what determine if there has been a breach. Years ago I learned that the big print giveth and the fine print taketh away. I also know that the Investor Owned Utilities employe some law firms that know how to write contracts to give the IOUs flexibility.
Can you tell us the exact terms that will be breached if this Sucessor Tariff goes into effect?
Have you read the contract? I have, and there is no language in my NEM agreement that guarantees me much of anything.