Cheburashka
Active Member
How true is it that NEM 2.0 will be grandfathered? Is this 100% guaranteed? The utility guy on a webinar I attended made it sound like they are trying to switch people from NEM 2.0 to NEM 3.0 as well.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
California Utilities Plan All Out War On Solar, Please Read And Help
- Thread starter gene
- Start date
What I read stated all could be revisited, NEM1 and NEM2. In politics, nothing is in stone if one follows the money. But, the best beat is any new or adding to PV would force a NEM3, like adding to a NEM1 system forces at NEM2 now
Except that utilities have made promises in the past that will be grandfathered (at least SDG&E did for NEM1). Expect lots of class action lawsuits if they are trying to change that.
so what, lawyers make lots of money and no way one could guess who wins. Again, all I said was nothing is 100% guaranteed
Thanks, Grunk.
While, as I said, I don't work on NEM issues for the CPUC, I can say that many (if not all) of these issues are being considered in one form or another. Whether they'll be adopted is not for me to say, but that they're part of the discussion is a critical step. And it really does help if you call in to a Commission meeting and talk about these issues during public comments - I'm serious when I say the Commissioners genuinely listen.
I linked to the wrong NEM page before (though that one has lots of relevant info) - this link is the official NEM Rulemaking page. Also, here's the white paper commissioned by the CPUC discussing potential successors to NEM 2.0.
And if you're genuinely interested in the NEM 3 proposals, there are workshops presenting them today (3/23) and tomorrow (3/24) that anyone can attend virtually.
Finally, I understand the concern about the utilities' proposals, but please understand that those are THEIR proposals; they are NOT the final CPUC proposal. Whatever the final decision is, it will involve an extensive examination of the EIGHTEEN different proposals submitted by various parties, evidentiary hearings, and lots of opportunities for public comment (literally every other Thursday at Commission meetings and via written submission if you wish to go into more detail). And it never hurts to talk to your state representatives about this either to find out where they stand on the subject.
Would written comments from someone who doesn't live in California get read by commissioners and/or staff? Or should I try to join between 4:05 and 4:30 Wednesday? What's the format - 3 minute comment, with no expectation of interaction from commissioners? (I'm more used to talking in Olympia to the WA UTC.)
There is much you can do from out of state to help out. I suggest you join this zoom meeting and ask your questions there: Welcome! You are invited to join a meeting: The gameplan to defend California solar. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email about joining the meeting.
If you have the time to call in on Wednesday, you should try, though with the small window of time and increased interest in this subject you may have trouble beating others to the microphone. The Commission will absolutely read written comments from someone out-of-state as there's a recognition that California's policies often influence what other states may consider for their own NEM/Solar policies, and of course being out-of-state doesn't mean your ideas/concerns can't apply to CA solar policy. To submit written comments, I would follow these guidelines put together by the CPUC's Public Advisor's Office (phone # and email at the bottom of that page).
And if they want to do monthly true-up, than they should pay us the same rates for the surplus power we provide to the grid as they want to charge us for the power we use when our systems fall short. Basic fairness.
The whole point of them wanting to do monthly true-up is to only pay Net Surplus Compensation for any month that you over produce kWh. They are not interested in fairness.
I’m a fan of solar, but pretending it relieves the need for the very infrastructure it relies on and thus shouldn’t share in the cost is just misguided.
Fact is, solar does relieve stress on the infrastructure and we already pay delivery charges, and hook up charges above and beyond what we use. You do in Arizona as well. If you have solar, simply read your bill.
I’m pretty familiar with my bill. Transmission expenses are only 10 to 20% of the bill as they are in most areas. The towers and wires can’t go away just because there is distributed generation at noon, if there is only minimal generation at 6 pm when energy usage is still at or near peak levels. Wires are sized to peak use so lessening usage during some hours doesn’t lessen need for or cost of wires if still needed at night. Again, I like solar and think it’s part of our future, but I also understand what it is and isn’t. Solar replaces primarily fuel type costs. It doesn’t do a lot to ease need for wires or capacity so those costs probably shouldn’t be shifted to others as is usually the case with NEM. Anybody who truly understands how solar interacts with an energy grid is probably familiar with what solar does to transmission costs when there are significant amounts of it. There is almost always discussion of the need to build bigger transmission lines to find somewhere to ship the excess solar to when it exceeds needs of the grid. Look at your solar production at noon during a sunny spring day. It will likely be several times your usage during those hours. During those hours your utilities are curtailing many of their own solar plants and paying others to take the excess solar they don’t need at those times and also crediting NEM customers for the generation that costs them money to dispose of. These explain some of the cost shifts and they will continue to be real and expand if we don’t acknowledge them. Everything I share is easily discoverable in public information and can be verified with minimal research if people know where to look and use data rather than headlines and opinions to help their understanding. Let me know if you’d like a source for anything I shared.
Hmm...you just signed up today to make these comments...interesting...........
Last edited:
please explain this for me anyway so I can understand better how solar interacts with the energy grid from your point of view.
i’m aware of my POV
I have only had solar PV since 1999, almost 22 years, the first 19.5 generating 11% of my needs and the last 2.5 140% of my needs
I welcome additional education always
from what i could tell, my transmission costs were less to move electrons 50 _feet_ as opposed to the around _100,000_ ft (roughly 15-20 or so miles) from the generation plant on the Potomac or other ones since electrons are fungible.
(essentially zero marginal transmission cost)
from whom? the off gridders used “dump loads”
you _are_ famiar with the amounts of energy and electricity presently wasted?
(rejected energy)
(i have been mildly active and studied renewables since the mid 1960’s, worked with computers and biotechnology )
what do you do for a living? just curious
a casual look at below graphic gives a rough 2% from solar at best, though if you go back 10+ years it was a minuscule amount enough to be ignored
what will that graph look like in 10 years when solar and wind are a far larger proportion? The utilities 100 year steady revenue stream is rapidly attenuating
Last edited:
mspohr
Well-Known Member
You don't need transmission to ship excess solar. Where would you ship it? Perhaps to someplace where they also have an excess of solar?
You need storage and demand management.
Transmission is only needed in our outdated energy grid with large fossil fuel plants. Distributed generation wind, solar, storage doesn't need long distance transmission.
The utilities are attempting to hold back this sea change by charging for unnecessary transmission and charges for excess production when they should be investing in storage and demand management.
Regarding signing up a few days ago to post, I apologize if it appears opportunistic. I own a Tesla and have another on order. I frequently read comments in this and other forums, it’s just this is my first time commenting which caused me to have to register. I engaged here because a friend forwarded me this link as we were discussing this very topic the other day when discussing the pros and cons of rooftop solar and I was speculating that the trend of utility proposals will accelerate in the future. Not trying to attack anybody, just highlight some of the less understood or appreciated dynamics. Market tends to eventually align with the data.
Similar threads
