The Boom Gets Lowered On Residential Solar In Arizona

[SunEagle]

So here's another spin on this which I hadn't heard yet...

Someone on another forum said in Northern California, the POCO actually measures your Demand kW both on the consumption end AND the generation end, and uses the higher of the two for your bill.

Their logic is that they need to have the capacity to cover your max in case your solar is off-line or it's cloudy etc. Makes sense I hate to say it but wow, talk about no way to beat the system in that scenario.

SRP here locally is actually saying to mitigate demand, solar customers should face their panels to the west to help in the late afternoon sun when the AC's are cranking at max power or to supplement the system with batteries. So it does seem they are just monitoring your peak Demand from the actual grid, not the peak demand your house actually needs.

SRP is looking out for itself trying to get the co-generators to produce more and use less during peak usage times like the afternoon. That is why they are asking for the West panel orientation. I think they are giving some type of reduced rate as an incentive to those co-gens that provided more power back at peak times.

IMO finding a middle ground where the POCO and customer is happy should reduce some stress. Unfortunately in the end the POCO is trying to make as much money as possible and the customer is trying to save as much as possible. There will always be some type of conflict with the two different priorities.

[HX_Guy]

So here's another spin on this which I hadn't heard yet...

Someone on another forum said in Northern California, the POCO actually measures your Demand kW both on the consumption end AND the generation end, and uses the higher of the two for your bill.

Their logic is that they need to have the capacity to cover your max in case your solar is off-line or it's cloudy etc. Makes sense I hate to say it but wow, talk about no way to beat the system in that scenario.

SRP here locally is actually saying to mitigate demand, solar customers should face their panels to the west to help in the late afternoon sun when the AC's are cranking at max power or to supplement the system with batteries. So it does seem they are just monitoring your peak Demand from the actual grid, not the peak demand your house actually needs.

[thastinger]

Seems pretty simple to me...if the entire grid was solar everyone would go dark when a cloud came over, you have to pay for grid capacity. What you're witnessing is a simple swing in special interest money. The politicians sucked the PV industry dry and the PV industry sucked the tax payer dry, once there is no one left to pay, the environment changes back to how it should have been all along.

[HX_Guy]

As I understand it, SRP will only charge based on demand from the grid. Interestingly, my APS meter shows that demand number. Guess they thought ahead!

Here is an article that goes into quite a bit more detail not he SRP plan and also has input from APS. As you mentioned, APS does look it will go the same route...which in a sense is good, at least compared to charging per installed kW.

Quote from APS's parent company president/CEO...

"SRP's proposal includes several rate design principles that we have been advocating — primarily, better alignment of fixed and variable costs," he said. "While each utility may have a different rate structure, it is clear from the national discussion, and here in Arizona, that appropriately addressing the unfair cost shift and aligning the fixed and variable discrepancy are top priorities."

SRPs argument is that even if solar customers are not using the grid as much, they still need to have the demand available in case it's needed which is where their demand rate justification comes in. I guess I can buy into that, but how do they come up with the rates they are charging? Are they taking into effect the benefit the solar provides them in not needing to generate as much? I like how another state even took the carbon footprint into account when figuring out the benefit.

Speaking of the rates, not even sure how this $50 is being figured because it seems like it's a lot more than that to me. From the article, he average solar customer's peak demand of about 8 kilowatts will bring a demand fee of about $80. That will be offset a bit by charging solar customers less for the electricity they purchase. Finally, the basic service fee for solar customers will increase $12.50, to $32.50.

http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/2015/03/02/rooftop-solar-billing-issues-far-settled/24255847/

[HX_Guy]

Which meters shows it? The one before the AC disconnect or the main one in the service panel? Which number screen is it?

[Ian S]

The trueup thing in April would really suck and be unfair as I for one did calculations on my system size, ROI, etc based on the current system and being able to bank credits for the summer.

As for the SRP approach with Demand, at least there is a chance to make the fee as small as possible by not using a lot of power between say 4pm - 7pm. Prior to 4pm the system should cover more than is being used...

Unless of course SPR is using a meter that sees the usage prior to the service panel? Right now APS only sees net power being used from their grid...so if the house is using 5kW but the solar is producing 6kw, they see it as a 1kw production with no usage.

As I understand it, SRP will only charge based on demand from the grid. Interestingly, my APS meter shows that demand number. Guess they thought ahead!

[HX_Guy]

It doesn't make any sense and I don't think they'll try that approach again; much easier to go with SRP's scheme as the argument will be easier. And although they would grandfather existing installs, I suspect they'll nibble around the edges there too e.g. switch to an April trueup like SRP and apply it to all solar customers.

The trueup thing in April would really suck and be unfair as I for one did calculations on my system size, ROI, etc based on the current system and being able to bank credits for the summer.

As for the SRP approach with Demand, at least there is a chance to make the fee as small as possible by not using a lot of power between say 4pm - 7pm. Prior to 4pm the system should cover more than is being used...

Unless of course SPR is using a meter that sees the usage prior to the service panel? Right now APS only sees net power being used from their grid...so if the house is using 5kW but the solar is producing 6kw, they see it as a 1kw production with no usage.

[Sunking]

ATT doesn't already have an app tied into smart TVs nor does it produce a phone/table/OS to interface with them.

I am talking about 1 Gb/s Ehternet fiber service to your home, not an app or a device.

Google has bought dark fiber in KCY, Salt Lake City, Provo, Austin, Nashville, Charlotte, Raleigh, and Atlanta.

They are buying dark fiber laid in the late 90's and early 2000's by Worldcom that was never used. ATT already has the fiber, network, infrastructure, technology, manpower, 10 year head start, and most importantly free cash available. As of now CATV use to have the faster Internet service available of 50 Mb/s. Fiber is 1 Gb/s or 20 times the capacity. Google and ATT will carry Telephone, Internet, and streaming TV Networks. The big differences is internet speed, and Streaming TV network of your choice, and only what you want to pay for. If you only want 5 channels, that is all you pay for vs the take it or leave it packages SATV and CATV offers. Neither CATV or SATV can match Fiber bandwidth or service via microwave or Coax mediums.

What is ironic is the USA is far behind in communications technology Even Panama is ahead of the USA, I got fiber and would never go back to copper services.

[thastinger]

Personally I choose ATT to do that and beat Google out of it, and ATT is cheap right now and under valued.

ATT doesn't already have an app tied into smart TVs nor does it produce a phone/table/OS to interface with them.

[Ian S]

As was talked about in the other thread...at least SRP is doing this on a "use basis" so that you can A) minimize the fee's being charged by being careful with your use and B) if you don't use the grid (vacation?), then you don't get penalized.

What the hell is APS thinking with their model? They asked for $8.00/kW AC at the end of 2013 and only got approved for $0.70/kW but I'm sure they will try again. How does that model make any sense? What if I go away for a month or more and shut off my system, so I'm not using the grid at all?

It doesn't make any sense and I don't think they'll try that approach again; much easier to go with SRP's scheme as the argument will be easier. And although they would grandfather existing installs, I suspect they'll nibble around the edges there too e.g. switch to an April trueup like SRP and apply it to all solar customers.

[HX_Guy]

As was talked about in the other thread...at least SRP is doing this on a "use basis" so that you can A) minimize the fee's being charged by being careful with your use and B) if you don't use the grid (vacation?), then you don't get penalized.

What the hell is APS thinking with their model? They asked for $8.00/kW AC at the end of 2013 and only got approved for $0.70/kW but I'm sure they will try again. How does that model make any sense? What if I go away for a month or more and shut off my system, so I'm not using the grid at all?

[Sunking]

Not necessarily smart, mostly lucky timing and remembering "risk nothing, be nothing."

My Smart Man comment was referring to your exit strategy.

Yeah I gambled on Priceline and Amazon from proceeds of solar which was a very small holding at the time of some $10K so no big deal if I lost it. Safe gets you 3% gains in Money Markets which is really a loss when adjusted to inflation. You cannot get the big gains if you are not willing to take some risk. At the time I was pretty certain internet shopping was going to bring down brick and mortor establishments. Still kicking myself on not getting in on Google which still might be a good one if they pull off putting CATV out of business with their fiber to the house projects. Personally I choose ATT to do that and beat Google out of it, and ATT is cheap right now and under valued.

[J.P.M.]

Smart man. I sold all my Solar stocks in 2007, gambled on Priceline for $52/share. and Amazon. Still hanging on to both in Roth. Priceline alone is enough to retire on. Today those shares 8 short years later are at over $1200/share. Easy money. Amazon i bought in around $32/share and today sell for $380ish

Not necessarily smart, mostly lucky timing and remembering "risk nothing, be nothing."

[Sunking]

except for the ETF I own the solar stocks and some Tesla were all purchased dollar cost ave. method, 2d half, 2012 with unexpected pension buyout money. Exit strategy in process.

Smart man. I sold all my Solar stocks in 2007, gambled on Priceline for $52/share. and Amazon. Still hanging on to both in Roth. Priceline alone is enough to retire on. Today those shares 8 short years later are at over $1200/share. Easy money. Amazon i bought in around $32/share and today sell for $380ish

[J.P.M.]

Don't get caught holding the bag. I liquidated in 2007 just before the bust. Solar stocks are only worth 1/20 to 1/10th what they were in 2007. Most went bankrupted, more to follow. Get out while you still can.

except for the ETF I own the solar stocks and some Tesla were all purchased dollar cost ave. method, 2d half, 2012 with unexpected pension buyout money. Exit strategy in process.