Best PG&E Rate Plan

[Kbra]

I understand that will be a business decision at the time. The reason that PG&E charges more at peak hours is due to the demand. If solar will be able to provide more production then the demand will be easier to be met and PG&E should reduce its price. It may not be a peak period anymore. It is hard to tell how it will play out. Best way is to go off grid by using power wall. 5 years from now, who knows.

The shift in peaks is already shifting. It has to be a slow process or people will freak. Peak user demand is early morning when people wake and late evening when people get home. That's in general opposite of when solar is peaking. There is efforts to work on more energy storage but that's a lot of storage for a state. Hydro is probably one of our best bets for capacity and longevity so I'm sure the state will block adding much more of that. And like someone else pointed out as they shift the peak pricing it will impact those with net metering. The pricing will start to reflect the demand curve but those with solar will benefit less from their feedback to the grid. Damned if you do, Damned if you don't.

There's a reason why so few people are "off the grid." It's not as easy as it sounds.

What we really need is a large dependable steady baseload source. Wonder what that may be.

 

[SFOTurtle]

To a degree they should have that right. They dont necessarily need/want your power in the middle of the day.

If that's the case, why is the EV-A peak rate $0.445/kWh at peak, which is generally in the middle of the day, or at least in the middle of the afternoon?? And that number has increased slowly each of the three years I've been on the EV-A plan. It was less than 40 cents two years ago, and I'm sure a year from now it will be even higher than 44.5 cents. If PG&E doesn't want to pay me that rate for generating excess power, then why should it be allowed to charge me that crazy high rate if there is no correlation with actual demand. Just a plain and simple money grab on the utility's part if they don't want to respect the spirit of Net Metering.

 

[EV-lutioin]

EV-A is awesome, with my 5K solar array I am in the red for the summer after putting 6000 miles on the MX! (admittedly, some of those miles were supercharger miles)

 

[ohmman]

If that's the case, why is the EV-A peak rate $0.445/kWh at peak, which is generally in the middle of the day, or at least in the middle of the afternoon?? And that number has increased slowly each of the three years I've been on the EV-A plan. It was less than 40 cents two years ago, and I'm sure a year from now it will be even higher than 44.5 cents. If PG&E doesn't want to pay me that rate for generating excess power, then why should it be allowed to charge me that crazy high rate if there is no correlation with actual demand. Just a plain and simple money grab on the utility's part if they don't want to respect the spirit of Net Metering.

They've shifted EV-A to be a little more reasonable with respect to the (duck) load curve, shown below. Sorry, the x-axis labels must be a separate graphic. Source is here.

I wouldn't be surprised if they shift it even further towards the evening. Things don't really pick up until 4pm. I'll take this opportunity to reiterate - if you can mount your panels west-facing, those are going to result in a shorter ROI than south-facing panels, despite generating less over the course of the year. And I think they're going to get more valuable in that direction since most capacity is installed south-facing.

I don't have as cynical an attitude toward the utilities as some (all?) of you do. I truly do think they're in a difficult situation - whether or not they put themselves in it is beside the point. We all need and share the grid, and not everyone in our community has solar. It's not a simple business model, especially when you're a decoupled utility like PG&E.

 

[FlatSix911]

Annual PG&E true up bill of $420 for the year ... $35/month with Solar PV and EV charging on E-6 TOU plan

 

[Kbra]

If that's the case, why is the EV-A peak rate $0.445/kWh at peak, which is generally in the middle of the day, or at least in the middle of the afternoon?? And that number has increased slowly each of the three years I've been on the EV-A plan. It was less than 40 cents two years ago, and I'm sure a year from now it will be even higher than 44.5 cents. If PG&E doesn't want to pay me that rate for generating excess power, then why should it be allowed to charge me that crazy high rate if there is no correlation with actual demand. Just a plain and simple money grab on the utility's part if they don't want to respect the spirit of Net Metering.

PG&E doesnt get that money. CPUC makes money on the energy usage. PG&E gets its cut to maintain the infrastructure. Not to say money isnt made along that path but as far as what is profited from your rate they are on a fixed rate from the CPUC. And like other said the Solar community wants those number to go up to make more on their solar system output. And PG&E hasnt met the state goals for Solar yet but its coming. PG&E does get to pass the cost of generation on to you, the user though. So as we keep shifting to more expensive options like solar and wind your bill goes up too.

 

[Kbra]

If that's the case, why is the EV-A peak rate $0.445/kWh at peak, which is generally in the middle of the day, or at least in the middle of the afternoon??

Looks like your Peak time is right when they start hitting the hard ramp up for power demand. 2-9PM Maybe thats why...

 

[Merrill]

They've shifted EV-A to be a little more reasonable with respect to the (duck) load curve, shown below. Sorry, the x-axis labels must be a separate graphic. Source is here.

I wouldn't be surprised if they shift it even further towards the evening. Things don't really pick up until 4pm. I'll take this opportunity to reiterate - if you can mount your panels west-facing, those are going to result in a shorter ROI than south-facing panels, despite generating less over the course of the year. And I think they're going to get more valuable in that direction since most capacity is installed south-facing.


View attachment 193976

I don't have as cynical an attitude toward the utilities as some (all?) of you do. I truly do think they're in a difficult situation - whether or not they put themselves in it is beside the point. We all need and share the grid, and not everyone in our community has solar. It's not a simple business model, especially when you're a decoupled utility like PG&E.

I guess my problem is that they are not truthful in their marketing, they tell you to go solar and that they are concerned about the environment and want everyone to use less energy. The reality is all they want to do is make more money. Just be truthful with want you are really doing.

 

[ohmman]

Here's another (dated but relevant) opinion on west-facing solar.

Are Solar Panels Facing the Wrong Direction?

 

[ecarfan]

Here's another (dated but relevant) opinion on west-facing solar.
Are Solar Panels Facing the Wrong Direction?

Thanks for the link. My 9.8kWh worth of panels all face south, but I still have room on my roof to easily add at 8 panels facing due west, unshaded. Something to consider for the future!

 

[EV-lutioin]

Here's another (dated but relevant) opinion on west-facing solar.

Are Solar Panels Facing the Wrong Direction?

Wouldn't a combination of both south and west-facing panels be the best configuration?

 

[Oceanwolf]

Let's not forget PG&E need to provide electricity to the commercial world too, that is defining the peak period. By telling the residential customers to shift consumption to later in the day, they are creating supply bandwidth.

 

[SFOTurtle]

My point is that it doesn't make a lot of sense for PG&E to charge EV-A folks 44.5 cents/kWh -- I mean, just say that out loud -- as some kind of penalty to EV owners to discourage any use during the supposedly peak hours, and then turn around and complain about buying back that power at the same rate for those of us who have solar. They shouldn't be able to have it both ways. If there truly isn't peak demand and PG&E doesn't really need the energy created by solar panels because it has plenty of energy already, then what's the justification for charging us 44.5 cents/kWh -- that's like four times the rate that most other people are charged -- for the same power?

Just trying to cover costs doesn't justify that kind of a penalty. So then PG&E shouldn't complain if they have to reimburse us for the same power generation, right?

And I do wish I could have put some panels facing West, but there are two huge oak trees right in the way that make that impractical.

 

[Scrith]

I'm about $400 ahead with 3 months to go on an EV-A plan with a 3.95kWh SunPower system in a 4BR house in Redwood City, CA with two EVs (Model X 90 and a Mercedes B-Class). So far EV-A is working quite well for me (I owed $20 at last year's true-up using the E-6 plan, which prompted the switch to EV-A).

 

[FlatSix911]

I'm about $400 ahead with 3 months to go on an EV-A plan with a 3.95kWh SunPower system in a 4BR house in Redwood City, CA with two EVs (Model X 90 and a Mercedes B-Class). So far EV-A is working quite well for me (I owed $20 at last year's true-up using the E-6 plan, which prompted the switch to EV-A).

I am still on the E-6 rate plan (now closed) and am interested in the EV-A plan.
Do you have a comparison of your plans that you can share?
I posted mine above with a 4kWh PV solar system. Thanks

 

[SFOTurtle]

I'm about $400 ahead with 3 months to go on an EV-A plan with a 3.95kWh SunPower system in a 4BR house in Redwood City, CA with two EVs (Model X 90 and a Mercedes B-Class). So far EV-A is working quite well for me (I owed $20 at last year's true-up using the E-6 plan, which prompted the switch to EV-A).

Wow, that's impressive. Do you charge your cars at work? We also have a 4BR house and just started with a 5 kW system here in late July and also have two EVs. We rarely us the AC (ran for a total of 3-4 hours on 3 different days this summer) and do all of our laundry off peak if we can, but still I'm expecting to pay around $250 at true-up time next July. Damn those attic fans and energy to force the heat around the house in winter!

 

[dennis]

The key to EV-A is that it is not tiered. In my area the base rate is for 11 kWh/day. At 2x usage you are paying 3x base per kWh on all of the non-EV TOU plans like E-6. I saved a considerable amount of $$ when I moved to EV-A because almost all of my net consumption was off peak and it went from $.30 to $.10 per kWh.

 

[ohmman]

The key to EV-A is that it is not tiered. In my area the base rate is for 11 kWh/day. At 2x usage you are paying 3x base per kWh on all of the non-EV TOU plans like E-6. I saved a considerable amount of $$ when I moved to EV-A because almost all of my net consumption was off peak and it went from $.30 to $.10 per kWh.

And this is the balance that I think @SFOTurtle is overlooking. With EV-A, you choose a high peak rate in exchange for a fixed very low off-peak rate; this really benefits those of us who have the huge bulk of our consumption tied up in charging our cars. There are options for those who want a lower mid-day peak rate, but the compromise is different.

I think EV-A was at least partially thought up as a way to incentivize EV customers to time their charging after 11pm. PG&E wasn't counting on people (like me) with large arrays to sell at their peak. That flips the economics back to the consumer's favor.

 

[aesculus]

PG&E wasn't counting on people (like me) with large arrays to sell at their peak.

Give them time, they will.

 

[Kbra]

My point is that it doesn't make a lot of sense for PG&E to charge EV-A folks 44.5 cents/kWh -- I mean, just say that out loud -- as some kind of penalty to EV owners to discourage any use during the supposedly peak hours, and then turn around and complain about buying back that power at the same rate for those of us who have solar. They shouldn't be able to have it both ways. If there truly isn't peak demand and PG&E doesn't really need the energy created by solar panels because it has plenty of energy already, then what's the justification for charging us 44.5 cents/kWh -- that's like four times the rate that most other people are charged -- for the same power?

Just trying to cover costs doesn't justify that kind of a penalty. So then PG&E shouldn't complain if they have to reimburse us for the same power generation, right?

And I do wish I could have put some panels facing West, but there are two huge oak trees right in the way that make that impractical.

The rate is high because they want to encourage you to not use power during that time. As the duck curve shows there's a hard ramp up in demand for power during your peak window. That's solar coming off line and gas having to come back.