SRP (Arizona POCO) hits solar customers with $50/month fee. APS next?

[HX_Guy]

Whoa. That's completely different than here, though I think APS locally has a net billing plan but no one signs up for that one as you get a lot more benefit from net metering here.

The way it works here would be like this (we'll use a non summer month as they charge a flat fee and no tiered system like they do in the summer).

March 2015

House use: 1150kWh
Solar production: 1575kWh
Net: -425kWh

Bill = $0 for energy consumption + $X.XX for service charges

That net 425kWh gets rolled over to the next month, it gets "banked" in your account. Just like rollover minutes work with cell phones (or did before it all went unlimited pretty much).

Now say you produced less solar than you used...

House use: 1150kWh
Solar production: 800kWh
Net: 350kWh

Bill = $32.96 for energy consumption (billed at $0.09417/kWh) + $X.XX for service charges

The following month is a fresh start.


Now lets say the end of the year comes around. If your "bank" still has credits in it, then they pay you out at $0.029/kWh. And that's all there is to it.

[silversaver]

So your POCO actually credit you by kWh instead of dollar value? if so, that will be 1 to 1 kWh credit/debit.

So in Summer months, POCO offering tier rate true? But you are getting same tier rate for credit....Is that because Arizona is hot, so most likely your generation is lower than your consumption so you might be paying higher rate at Summer and use low Winter creidt to offset. Right?

[HX_Guy]

So your POCO actually credit you by kWh instead of dollar value? if so, that will be 1 to 1 kWh credit/debit.

We have the option of either, we can choose credit by kWh or by dollar value, but the dollar value is so low ($0.029/kWh) that it's not worth it because they sell it to you at $0.094/kWh).

So in Summer months, POCO offering tier rate true? But you are getting same tier rate for credit....Is that because Arizona is hot, so most likely your generation is lower than your consumption so you might be paying higher rate at Summer and use low Winter creidt to offset. Right?

If you choose the Standard plan, then yes, it's tiered. If you do a Time-of-Use plan, then no, it works the same as the 1 to 1 credit/debit outlined before (with a separate "bank" for on-peak and a separate "bank" for off-peak").

If you do go with the Standard (which I switched to), then the summer looks like this...

summer (may-october billing cycles)
1-400 kWh $0.09687
401-800 kWh $0.13817
801-3000 kWh $0.16167
3001 kWh+ $0.17257

So it's still a 1:1 kWh credit/debit, and then whatever you end up using from the POCO is charged at the above rates.

[Ian S]

Ian,

Are you saying generation/consumption at different rate/price? Or are you saying:

For the month, if your solar generation is higher than what your consumption, POCO pays you $0.029/kWh

For the month, if your solar generation is less than what your consumption, POCO charges you at TOU/Tier rate.

In CA, regardless of what plan you had, it shows dollar value on your monthly statement. It add up to 12 billing cycles. If you have overgeneration at trueup, POCO pays your $0.049/kWh. If your solar generation is less than what your consumption, you pay the final dollar value at end. It is not 1kWh to 1kWh offset too.

For example:

Tier system, Tier 1 @ $0.15, Tier 2 @ $0.19, Tier 3 @ $0.26 and Tier 4 @ $0.32

if you bank 100kWh each month for the first 11 months for total of 100kWh X 11 months = 1100kWh, POCO only credit your account 1100kWh X Tier 1 rate of $0.15 (at tier 1 rate of 0.15) = $165 credit bank.

If your last month you used 1100kWh from POCO, then they are chargin you at

Tier 1: 296kWH X 0.15 = $44.4
Tier 2: 88kWH X 0.19 = $16.72
Tier 3: 207kWh X 0.26 = $53.82
Tier 4: 509kWh X 0.32 = $162.88

Total of $277.82

You still need to pay $277.82 - $165 (bank credit) = $112.82

HX_Guy explains it pretty well. The fundamental difference compared to what I gather to be California's approach is that we get kWh offset on a monthly basis and bank over production starting in January and draw from the bank during the summer months. In my case, I have gas heat so my peak summertime total monthly usage runs around 3100 kWh compared to my lowest total usage in November and February of around 800 kWh. With that usage profile, it's impossible, using solar, to both cover all your high cost summer usage and not wind up with a significant amount of banked kWh in December that get bought @ $0.029/kWh. My system is sized to provide 2/3 of my total annual usage and as it works out using the TOU plan, I manage to cover all my on-peak needs throughout the year but wind up paying for a lot of off-peak kWh late Spring through summer and also having significant on-peak banked kWh to be bought back in December. I'm happy enough with that but a switch to April trueup would really upset the apple cart.

[Sunking]

The only people getting screwed are your neighbors paying artificially higher electric rates to pay for your luxury and comfort. Time for you to start paying up and carry your own weight. You can afford to pay your own way without your neighbors help.

[HX_Guy]

The only people getting screwed are your neighbors paying artificially higher electric rates to pay for your luxury and comfort. Time for you to start paying up and carry your own weight. You can afford to pay your own way without your neighbors help.

I feel it comes down to how it's broken down. I have this conversation going on on another forum and as someone pointed out there...

"Personally I think the utilities are approaching this all the wrong way. The rates for grid maintenance and usage should be separated from the generation completely. Then each user of the utility system gets a fair shake at the cost of attachment. Actually this should be fairly easy to accomplish. The cost for grid maintenance is really easy to separate out from generation. Now that would be fair and probably raise my utility bill a fair amount. Another upside of this method would allow for the deregulation of the generation and the possibility to buy from any generation source (or be your own generator). The grid then becomes truly a distribution system. Could they then allow private generation onto the grid to compete with the utilities. The utilities are pretty fat here, new trucks every other year, fancy office buildings, lots of fat in the employment."

Right now the bill is all jumbled up and even though there are two lines that say they are for generation making it as if every other line on the bill is for everything else but generation, but I'm sure that all the prices are subsidizing the generation.

In the end it would probably cost the same to solar users, maybe more, maybe less...but like the other person mentioned, they are approaching it the wrong way. It should be split up and then people would understand.

[silversaver]

HX_Guy explains it pretty well. The fundamental difference compared to what I gather to be California's approach is that we get kWh offset on a monthly basis and bank over production starting in January and draw from the bank during the summer months. In my case, I have gas heat so my peak summertime total monthly usage runs around 3100 kWh compared to my lowest total usage in November and February of around 800 kWh. With that usage profile, it's impossible, using solar, to both cover all your high cost summer usage and not wind up with a significant amount of banked kWh in December that get bought @ $0.029/kWh. My system is sized to provide 2/3 of my total annual usage and as it works out using the TOU plan, I manage to cover all my on-peak needs throughout the year but wind up paying for a lot of off-peak kWh late Spring through summer and also having significant on-peak banked kWh to be bought back in December. I'm happy enough with that but a switch to April trueup would really upset the apple cart.

Yes, if the billing offset on monthly basis, that will be really bad. my account has about $188 balance, but I only pay less than $2 each month. I got whole year to bring that balance down with over generation.

The only people getting screwed are your neighbors paying artificially higher electric rates to pay for your luxury and comfort. Time for you to start paying up and carry your own weight. You can afford to pay your own way without your neighbors help.

I wont worry about my neighbors, they have their own plans and so am I. The world will not change for you, the other way around.

[J.P.M.]

I feel it comes down to how it's broken down. I have this conversation going on on another forum and as someone pointed out there...

"Personally I think the utilities are approaching this all the wrong way. The rates for grid maintenance and usage should be separated from the generation completely. Then each user of the utility system gets a fair shake at the cost of attachment. Actually this should be fairly easy to accomplish. The cost for grid maintenance is really easy to separate out from generation. Now that would be fair and probably raise my utility bill a fair amount. Another upside of this method would allow for the deregulation of the generation and the possibility to buy from any generation source (or be your own generator). The grid then becomes truly a distribution system. Could they then allow private generation onto the grid to compete with the utilities. The utilities are pretty fat here, new trucks every other year, fancy office buildings, lots of fat in the employment."

Right now the bill is all jumbled up and even though there are two lines that say they are for generation making it as if every other line on the bill is for everything else but generation, but I'm sure that all the prices are subsidizing the generation.

In the end it would probably cost the same to solar users, maybe more, maybe less...but like the other person mentioned, they are approaching it the wrong way. It should be split up and then people would understand.

Not only is a breakdown easy to accomplish, it's a matter of fact in CA, at least for the IOU's. For those who want to take the time to look at a tariff sheet or two, the tiered rates, and the T.O.U. rates for residential tariffs, are broken down with a separate charge for the "energy portion" of a bill - and also clearly visible on a monthly bill, at least for SDG & E customers.

Part of the rub with that, at least for me, is how much faith do I put in what I'm told is an actual energy charge of say, ~ $ $.07/kWh in winter and ~$.14/kWh in the summer ( as of 02/01/2015, CPUC sht #'s 25896 - e, et seq.), and an implied straight pass through, and constant, regardless of tier when, on the very same bill - sometimes the very same sheet of the same bill, the POCO tells me that the POCO will only reimburse excess generation at something called "avoided cost", and another implied straight pass through of something like $.045 to $.055/kWh - W.T.F. is up with that ?? Makes their indecipherable games and obfuscation all the less likely to be believed, and another reason for their bad, self inflicted PR and self image.

Some of AB 327's mandate is to put a reasonable and realistic value on the energy that solar electric really provides - something still to be worked out and another reason to pay attention but avoid the fear mongering by the solar peddlers that is heating up as I write this.

[HX_Guy]

Is the bill in California different than this?

Like I mentioned earlier, the make it as if the generation portion is actually separate with their own line items, but the prices just seem a bit to cheap leading me to believe that all the other line items are inflated and "subsidizing" the true cost of the generation.

Her is a spreadsheet of my February bill...

[Ian S]

This is an APS bill for last April (with solar) showing negative net usage i.e. banked energy for both on and off peak:

ScreenHunter_01 Mar. 03 18.57.jpg

[silversaver]

CA is true net metering. You pay your final bill at tureup once per year. Unless your solar were small and you choose monthly offset (which is a NO NO) My bill were $128.60, but I only need to pay the base fee of $1.17

[HX_Guy]

That's pretty crazy. Here, even if your solar covers 100% of your use, you're still going to pay at least $15 - $20 per month for misc items...and now with some of these new fees they are putting in, it'll be more like $65 - $70 per month even if your solar covers all your usage.

[HX_Guy]

Leaning more about this new SPR rate plan...interesting that they've drastically slashed the prices of power you use from the grid compared to people who don't have solar. Summer on-peak is 4.86¢/kWh, off-peak is 3.71¢...winter is 4.3¢ on peak and 3.9¢ off peak. People without solar are paying summer on-peak 19.57¢/kWh, off-peak is 7.8¢...winter is 10.2¢ on peak and 7.11¢ off peak.

Also, I just now learned by reading up on the rates again is that apparently they are taking away net metering? That's some BS!
According to Part G of the document...

G. The kWh delivered to SRP shall be subtracted from the kWh delivered from SRP for each billing cycle. If the kWh calculation is net positive for the billing cycle, SRP will bill the net kWh to the customer under this price plan. If the kWh calculation is net negative for the billing cycle, SRP will credit customer for the net kWh at the retail per-kWh price under this price plan. For the purposes of this calculation, excess generation will be tracked by time-of-use period.

Excess generation used to be credited to the account to be used at a later time. But I do see they are giving retail prices, not wholesale, so it may not be so bad.

[Ian S]

Excess generation used to be credited to the account to be used at a later time. But I do see they are giving retail prices, not wholesale, so it may not be so bad.

Yeah but those retail prices are only 4-5 cents a kWh because of the demand rate structure! The demand number is where they screw you. As I've said before, I've been on a demand plan in the past and this is exactly how they work: they have low per kWh rates but that is made up for by the demand charge.

SRP has been making a big production of how this demand plan is so fair. Well, if that's truly the case, all of their customers should be on it. So why aren't they?

[HX_Guy]

Haha great point Ian.

Funny thing, I used to be on a Demand plan with APS at our old house and it happens I actually have a spreadsheet of all my APS bills going back to June 2011. It's a little hard to compare because we're now in a different house and it's years apart but our bills were actually better on the Demand plan??

For example, October 2012 at the old house, we used a total of 1,945kWh (497 on peak, 1,448 off peak) with a Demand of 7.3kWH and our total bill was $239.43. This past October, in the new house, we used 1,995kWh (405 on peak, 1,590 off peak) and our bill was $270.48! And that was with quite a bit less on-peak usage. Interesting.

Another example, Nov 2012 old house, used 1,478kWH, 5.2kWH Demand bill as $156.43. Nov 2014 new house, used 1,338kWH (140kWh less) and bill was $173.78.

I do know that we were conscious of the fact that we were on the Demand plan and watched as best we could that we didn't use high usage appliances at the same time during on-peak hours, many people may not be that conscious about it and it could cost them.

If APS changes to the same model, we're going to have to watch our usage again. Looking back at the spreadsheet, I had Demand as high as 11.3kWh in Sept 2011! If APS adopted the same rates at SPR, that would equal $149 in just the Demand charge of the bill! Though that 11.3kWh could have happened during the day when the solar would offset a lot of that demand.

I just hope APS doesn't change the TOU times at least, if they keep it till 7pm it could be pretty manageable. I assume in the summer the solar will still be producing pretty decent even at 5pm, so it'll just be a 2 hour window between 5-7 that we need to be careful with our use.