Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

CPUC Nem 3.0 discussion as it relates to Energy Products

holeydonut

Active Member
Supporting Member
Jun 27, 2020
3,668
3,185
East Bay NorCal
Obviously, it's not feasible in urban areas where folks don't have enough land to pull off the Propane tank, generator, 4-5 PW and a ton of solar, so it's a moot point for most Californians. That being said, if you stop paying your IOU, don't they simply disconnect you? All in all, it's most likely not financially interesting to do so, but the pleasure derived from telling PGE to pound sand is close to priceless. :)


I know you're being sarcastic, but no, PG&E doesn't just disconnect you for non-payment. They'll keep accruing fees and a liability that they will just send to collections if you keep not-paying.
 
I wonder if we can disconnect electricty, but keep the gas connection? It's on a different meter anyways. If you can get NG, you can hook up a generator and you're covered for no sun, long cloudy weeks.

If NG won't work, then you're going to have to buy some propane tank which might not be allowed if you have a tough HOA...I think if this NEM3.0 passes, more people will do things to see what can work or is possible.

I wouldn't mine adding a small generator to my system for cloudy days and just fire it up during the day to last the night (no idea how long/loud that'd be).

I find it annoying that they would do things to change things that are already in place (the 20 > 15 year thing).

I hope energytoolbase has a good summary soon to view.
 

Zorg

Active Member
Oct 24, 2017
2,426
2,305
Fremont, ca
At this point, it may only be feasible on new builds where one never requires a connection in the first place, though that may be an issue with getting the certificate of occupancy.
I know you're being sarcastic, but no, PG&E doesn't just disconnect you for non-payment. They'll keep accruing fees and a liability that they will just send to collections if you keep not-paying.
 

holeydonut

Active Member
Supporting Member
Jun 27, 2020
3,668
3,185
East Bay NorCal
I wonder if we can disconnect electricty, but keep the gas connection? It's on a different meter anyways. If you can get NG, you can hook up a generator and you're covered for no sun, long cloudy weeks.

If NG won't work, then you're going to have to buy some propane tank which might not be allowed if you have a tough HOA...I think if this NEM3.0 passes, more people will do things to see what can work or is possible.

I wouldn't mine adding a small generator to my system for cloudy days and just fire it up during the day to last the night (no idea how long/loud that'd be).

I find it annoying that they would do things to change things that are already in place (the 20 > 15 year thing).

I hope energytoolbase has a good summary soon to view.


I checked my HOA docs and there is a CC&R excluding ADUs, basketball hoops, and ugly mailboxes... but they don't seem to have a provision for one of these bad boys.

 

h2ofun

Active Member
Aug 11, 2020
4,132
1,073
auburn, ca
I am in a "neighborhood" (track home). Even if I wanted to grid defect, I cant get enough solar to do so. Of course it depends on usage, etc, but in order to have enough solar to run a home in the winter, you have to have WAAY more than you would need in the summer. Even @h2ofun doesnt have enough for his winter needs, for example, for full grid defection (but he probably has a better way to get there than most of us, most likely, with land, lake etc).

Im on NEM 1, installed in late 2015, PTO'd in March of 2016, so under these new guidelines it sounds like I would be good till 2031 instead of 2036.

On a somewhat related but separate note, I expect that CA will try to do something similar with taxing EVs on registration, because a large portion of revenue comes from gas tax, and we are not paying that but still using the roads (and causing wear and tear on roads, as they state).

Trying to take my own needs out of it for a moment (which is very hard to do, admittedly), I dont know whats "right" or "fair". I dont feel like its "fair" to punish people for doing what was encouraged (getting solar, buying EVs), but I also dont know whats "fair" about paying for grid usage. The problem the utilities face is, the people who were paying the most for Electricity in this state (always in highest tier for example) were heavily incentivized to get solar because of that.

Then, they went from paying the utility 100s and 100s a dollars a month, to basically nothing, after install of solar (those that could afford to install solar). Their "most profitable" people turned into "No revenue at all" people. I used to pay 400+ dollars a month for electricity during the summer, and 200 ish a month during the winter, pre solar. I now pay $10 a month during the summer (which I net generate) and like $1 a month during the winter, when I net consume and pull back what I put in. My net yearly true up is less than $100.

I personally think this is fine, as I have very little impact on my local grid any longer, especially since I got powerwalls, but the utility sees me as lost revenue, I am sure (and thinks that I am not paying "my fair share" to upkeep the grid).

I dont know what the answer is. Even though I am born and raised in this state, and never lived outside it for any real length of time other than "months long" job re locations, I was always planning to move "somewhere else" when I reach my retirement years. Not sure where that is, frankly. This just helps solidify that decision for me, and I will start planning as such.
Yep, with a 99% electric home, which since most have gas heat, they have no idea what it really means to be off grid.

In the summer my 30K solar does like 180kwh per day. With these storms, I do 10khw in a day. With my heaters on, christmas lights, etc., I use about 60 kwh per day. Imagine the array size I would have to have to be able to produce solar for my total winter electrical needs. Impossible!!
 
I read the .05kwh starts after law sign in for everyone, NEM2 included. Not after 15 years
I don't believe that's correct. My understanding:

- Current NEM1 and NEM2 customers have their tariff's validity retroactively reduced from 20 years to 15 years after PTO.
- People can sign up for the current NEM2 (with 15 year validity) until (at most) 120 days after the proposal is adopted.
- Thereafter, new NEM customers will temporarily go on NEM2 but will be moved to the Net Billing Tariff once the IOUs get their billing software updated, could be a year or more later. This temporary NEM2 might have some other differences, I don't recall from my quick scanning of the proposal.

Cheers, Wayne
 

h2ofun

Active Member
Aug 11, 2020
4,132
1,073
auburn, ca
I don't believe that's correct. My understanding:

- Current NEM1 and NEM2 customers have their tariff's validity retroactively reduced from 20 years to 15 years after PTO.
- People can sign up for the current NEM2 (with 15 year validity) until (at most) 120 days after the proposal is adopted.
- Thereafter, new NEM customers will temporarily go on NEM2 but will be moved to the Net Billing Tariff once the IOUs get their billing software updated, could be a year or more later. This temporary NEM2 might have some other differences, I don't recall from my quick scanning of the proposal.

Cheers, Wayne
I tried to find the review a person had posted saying this, but could not find. So it is to me just not 100% clear.
 

holeydonut

Active Member
Supporting Member
Jun 27, 2020
3,668
3,185
East Bay NorCal
I think changing the Retail Credit to Avoided Cost credit of $.05/kWh is a bigger impact than the $8/kW capacity charge
I don't see how any new system under NEM3 could have an ROI less than 20 years


Agreed, I think someone paying today's rates for solar but getting a NEM 3.0 system would be screwed.

If this NEM 3.0 goes in the way the CPUC has currently written with the ACC rate for exports and monthly fixed fee, I think the prices of residential solar would have to come down by at least 25% to even be economically viable for new customers to feel confident they're making a reasonably sound purchase decision.

The irony is that PG&E thinks the regular solar customers can just "be more efficient" to find the way to reduce consumer solar prices.

But PG&E themselves could never be asked to "be more efficient" because they're the IOU and have guaranteed profit.
 

Zorg

Active Member
Oct 24, 2017
2,426
2,305
Fremont, ca
Yep, with a 99% electric home, which since most have gas heat, they have no idea what it really means to be off grid.

In the summer my 30K solar does like 180kwh per day. With these storms, I do 10khw in a day. With my heaters on, christmas lights, etc., I use about 60 kwh per day. Imagine the array size I would have to have to be able to produce solar for my total winter electrical needs. Impossible!!
True, but on a dry winter day, you should be cranking 70-80KWh per day. Reality is that at this point, it's impossible to be relying 100% on the sun/wind. Maybe flow batteries, gravity based systems will work at the utility level for long duration energy storage.
 

getakey

Active Member
Jan 28, 2020
2,046
798
95762
What are these items?
The yare proposing a new "connection fee" of $8/kW solar capacity per month. So if you have a 10 kW system, you will pay $80/month to PG&E to support the Grid.
The cost avoidance rate is what they will replace your excess generation which is currently paid at Retail rates. That means instead of getting paid at Peak rates, you only get $.05/kWh. A huge difference. It would make PW rate arbitration worthless
 
  • Informative
Reactions: sunwarriors
The yare proposing a new "connection fee" of $8/kW solar capacity per month. So if you have a 10 kW system, you will pay $80/month to PG&E to support the Grid.
The cost avoidance rate is what they will replace your excess generation which is currently paid at Retail rates. That means instead of getting paid at Peak rates, you only get $.05/kWh. A huge difference. It would make PW rate arbitration worthless

Wow, that's really bad. Good way to kill off all solar like Hawaii/Nevada. Would this new fee, 5c for excess apply to NEM1.0/2.0 folks?

This has nothing balanced/promoting clean energy. It's totally lopsided that it's like "Why bother?" for anyone looking at solar at these terms.
 

getakey

Active Member
Jan 28, 2020
2,046
798
95762
Wow, that's really bad. Good way to kill off all solar like Hawaii/Nevada. Would this new fee, 5c for excess apply to NEM1.0/2.0 folks?

This has nothing balanced/promoting clean energy. It's totally lopsided that it's like "Why bother?" for anyone looking at solar at these terms.
unclear if it will apply to NEM1/2 until after grandfather expires
But grandfather in those plans is changed from 20 to 15 years
 

holeydonut

Active Member
Supporting Member
Jun 27, 2020
3,668
3,185
East Bay NorCal
The yare proposing a new "connection fee" of $8/kW solar capacity per month. So if you have a 10 kW system, you will pay $80/month to PG&E to support the Grid.


Don't forget that the reason this is a flat $ per month on the size of the system is because PG&E has seen the developments in other countries.


The policies in some sun-soaked places basically resulted in the concept that turning off their solar array at noon time could be smarter than to leave the system on. It's because the homeowner's export value is actually worth less than the fee they got smacked with for that export.

PG&E solved this issue by simply saying every homeowner has their own IOU-mandated fixed cost basis to overcome... a magical $8 per kW for the privilege of the rooftop solar system existing. This means each homeowner will leave their solar system on, because even if they are only getting $0.05 per kWh of export at noon, that's still better than $0. The homeowner needs the generation and will be incentivized to leave the system running.

How absolutely mind bogglingly STUPID is this when you say it out loud? The regular homeowner is already paying for their own fixed costs of putting all the solar and ESS on their effing house! Now they have to pay an outrageously high disproportionate fee to pay for PG&E's fixed costs too?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hiddensolar

jjrandorin

Moderator, Model 3, Tesla Energy Forums
Moderator
Nov 28, 2018
17,562
23,577
Riverside Co. CA
Don't forget that the reason this is a flat $ per month on the size of the system is because PG&E has seen the developments in other countries.


The policies in some sun-soaked places basically resulted in the concept that turning off their solar array at noon time could be smarter than to leave the system on. It's because the homeowner's export value is actually worth less than the fee they got smacked with for that export.

PG&E solved this issue by simply saying every homeowner has their own IOU-mandated fixed cost basis to overcome... a magical $8 per kW for the privilege of the rooftop solar system existing. This means each homeowner will leave their solar system on, because even if they are only getting $0.05 per kWh of export at noon, that's still better than $0. The homeowner needs the generation and will be incentivized to leave the system running.

How absolutely mind bogglingly STUPID is this when you say it out loud? The regular homeowner is already paying for their own fixed costs of putting all the solar and ESS on their effing house! Now they have to pay an outrageously high disproportionate fee to pay for PG&E's fixed costs too?


You know... it almost appears here like you dont like PGE or something..... /e ducks and runs for cover 🤣

Kidding aside, it does all sound very punitive.
 
How absolutely mind bogglingly STUPID is this when you say it out loud? The regular homeowner is already paying for their own fixed costs of putting all the solar and ESS on their effing house! Now they have to pay an outrageously high disproportionate fee to pay for PG&E's fixed costs too?

This is something that article and probably all the IOU don't add or mention much. You don't install solar/batteries for $0. Not like anyone suddenly went from $400/month and now, we should be happy with $80-$100/month. Most put $20-$60k so it's just insulting how this initial (hopefully it's changed massively) proposal is.

From the article, it said they would still save only $70 less than before. If this monthly thing affects everyone, I can expect my cost for that alone to jump up to ~$800 minimum.

I suppose if the IOU wants to give us tens of thousands back to make everyone whole, they may have a case (and now, watch rates get raised by some crazy amount), but even then, I think if we could, we would all choose to go off-grid completely if we can and just find other tech to deal with non-sunny days. I wonder if cities can build their own NG lines outside of utilities. Running out for diesel/propane filling (actually, we used to have a cabin with this so maybe this is not too bad) is sorta a hassle. We all know how easy it is to get fuel during a weather crisis :).

You can add comments here:
 
Last edited:

About Us

Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.

Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


SUPPORT TMC
Top