CPUC NEM 3.0 discussion

[taphil]

Former governor has a very well written article/opinion piece in the NYT today.​

Opinion | Schwarzenegger: We Put Solar Panels on 1 Million Roofs in California. That Win Is Now Under Threat.

Removing incentives to encourage homeowners to install solar panels is a bad idea.

www.nytimes.com

​

​

Schwarzenegger: We Put Solar Panels on 1 Million Roofs in California. That Win Is Now Under Threat.​

"When I was California’s governor, we set a goal in 2006 of putting solar panels on one million roofs across the state. Skeptics said it couldn’t be done, but with bipartisan support in the State Legislature, California met its goal in 2019...

"The state now has 1.3 million solar rooftops generating roughly 10,000 megawatts of electricity — enough to power three million homes. And more are being added every week. Roughly two-thirds of those rooftops are on houses and businesses; the rest are on government buildings.

"But this hard-earned and vitally important accomplishment is now under threat. The California Public Utilities Commission is considering a plan that would make it too costly for many Californians to embrace solar power. A decision could come as soon as Jan. 27.

"The plan is complicated and has some good features, like creating funds to encourage homeowners and businesses with solar to add batteries for storage and to help bring solar power to poor and polluted communities.

"But it would also include a new monthly “grid participation charge” that would average an estimated $57 a month for solar customers. People who power their homes with fossil fuels wouldn’t pay this. So let’s call it what it is: a solar tax....

"California should do more to incentivize clean energy in lower-income areas. And the state should be promoting the installation of a million batteries to store the energy that the solar panels capture. That’s how we can truly democratize energy. But adding a tax and removing incentives will hurt the solar market, and making solar more expensive for everyone does nothing to help our most vulnerable....

"California has been hit hard in recent years by the changing climate, with record droughts and catastrophic wildfires. That’s another reason this proposal makes no sense; we should be pulling out all the stops to slow global warming. California is already so far behind on meeting its 2030 climate goals that the state isn’t projected to hit them until 2063. And our 2050 goals? We are on track to reach them by 2111....

"This is just another case of the big guys — the investor-owned utilities — fighting for themselves and hurting people who have invested or want to invest in solar panels...

"Incentives matter when creating a new energy infrastructure. In Nevada, for instance, the state’s rooftop solar adoption rate plummeted 47 percent in the year after the state’s public utilities commission made solar more expensive for consumers by adding higher fixed costs on net-metering customers and reducing the price paid to customers for the excess energy they generate. A public outcry compelled the Nevada Legislature to reverse the changes, and more people started putting solar panels on their rooftops again. It’s common sense.

"In areas of California outside the utility commission’s control, we have already seen what happens when policies ratchet up rooftop solar costs. When the Imperial Irrigation District in Imperial Valley abandoned net metering in July 2016, residential solar installations declined 88 percent over the next two years as measured by added megawatts. The Turlock Irrigation District ended net metering at the beginning of 2015; within two years, annual residential solar installations declined 74 percent. Sacramento, sadly, is about to see this happen too."

 

[holeydonut]

Here's another good rebuttal from Dr. Ahmad Faruqui. Covers most of the points we've discussed here.
https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M440/K090/440090638.PDF

Dr. Faruqui is willing to doxx himself by submitting his comments to the CPUC. His name, address, email, etc are made available in his CPUC comment. I guess he believes that strongly about fixing the NEM 3.0 PD.

Another interesting thing is that if you look up his home address, he doesn't have solar on his roof. Wacky.



Here's the summary list of his 10 concerns as I understand them:

1) Rooftop solar + batteries in homes helps everyone. Making solar more expensive will discourage ESS since solar is a gateway to ESS adoption at the residential level.

2) He disagrees with the NEM 2.0 payback calculation. Believes it is more like 7-9 years instead of the 3-4 years claimed by the IOUs. He believes a short-ish ROI is necessary for consumers to adopt expensive initiatives. Also, he believes the $2.38 cost per watt (I guess before incentives) is not supported by data.

3) The $8 per KW per Month (on top of the fixed fee) is discriminatory and a rare precedent with IOU's in the USA.

4) The cost shift argument (rich vs poor) is a red herring.

5) Utilities have argued they can install large-scale solar cheaper than the $ per watt for residential. But he believes the construction costs of centralized utility solar vs residential solar is not valid. BTM residential solar has up front costs with nominal recurring costs for maintenance. But utility scale centralized solar has significant operational and maintenance costs in addition to the construction cost. Plus, utility scale generation requires expensive transmission investment and on-going maintenance.

6) The NEM 3.0 PD goes against the innovative nature and mindset of California.

7) Residential solar effectively reduces demand. Both in the home generating the energy and the local neighborhood. Just like reduced energy use from EE is considered a benefit– not a cost shift. Investment in solar that reduces demand from our overstressed grid should also be encouraged, not penalized. (note, Zabe confirmed this by identifying the residential solar causes the CAISO to see a reduction of demand)

8) The NEM 3.0 PD goes against the mandate for new housing to have solar on their roofs.

9) The rate structures and fees proposed in the current PD are so complex that an average customer in California will have difficulty assessing the economics of rooftop solar and storage. Complexity is a deterrent that will undermine California’s policy goals.

10) Hundreds of Thousands of individuals have voiced concerns about the NEM 3.0 PD. The public has spoken on the side of preserving a distributed energy future in the state. In a functioning democracy, the government has to pay heed to the voice of the people


Edit, Dr. Faruqui has also added this 11th concern (separate letter to the CPUC). Ironically, he views the stated NEM 3.0 PD as inherently unequal. Since the people affected by NEM 3.0 are those lower income that could not afford solar under NEM 1.0 and 2.0.

********************************

Early adopters of solar technology were mostly upper-middle class and wealthier consumers, able to invest tens of thousands of dollars in expensive new emerging technologies, followed by homeowners with good credit who could lease systems based on the expected electricity bill savings. Today’s new solar customers are working and middle-class families whose finances do not allow them to make speculative investments with long payback periods. The Market Transition Credit is an ineffectual, untested, and temporary mechanism that will do little to blunt the impact of the fees on these consumers. The Proposed Decision would deny equitable treatment to lower-income consumers who want to secure a more reliable and affordable power source, while also doing the right thing for our planet.

 

[sunwarriors]

Nice to see the Terminator chime in...It really shows simply eliminating net metering to nothing alone (like other states) will kill solar already. You don't even need the $8 solar tax to kick people when they are down. The problem is still the whole structure of energy costs. We use less, utilities suffer. They raise basic minimum rates now to make up for it so they now punish you for conserving energy and being more energy concious. Cycle repeats, you now go solar/ESS/use even less and they keep raising your rates...It's not sustainable probably.

I also don't agree with the whole utility mass storage thing much. Transmission is expensive and distributed energy just makes common sense to generate energy where people use it.

Say we hypothetically all use 0 energy, they are all completely out of business. I'm wondering since they are quasi government mandated already, if maybe a better solution is just to make them consumer owned or a non-profit or something. It'll probably never happen, but publicly traded for profit utilities sounds like an oxymoron.

Batteries seem to be a very hard sell still for a lot of people. They are insanely expensive compared to say, an EV car battery that is much larger and if you look at all the various forums/reddit/messages, folks I talk to, if your power is pretty stable, it's very hard to pencil out energy storage at all. It's a nice dream for a lot of people, but do others here know folks IRL that even has storage?

I agree the less well off will probably not do storage at all. The costs are too high honestly and most folks are renting so that's a non-starter. Since they rent, they also don't even drive an EV so less need as well for solar. Getting solar alone is tough enough and why you see people get PPAs or other no cost solar options.

There is a lot of public critism of the NEM3.0 PD so it'll be interesting to see how it's updated in 10 days?

I wanted to add that I DO NOT want the utilities or CA to administer any kind of energy storage thing at all...SGIP is horrid to go through/deal with. Not sure what's the best process, but deducting from it our taxes seems so easy. The CA CVRP is also so slow/delayed.

 

[holeydonut]

Batteries seem to be a very hard sell still for a lot of people. They are insanely expensive compared to say, an EV car battery that is much larger and if you look at all the various forums/reddit/messages, folks I talk to, if your power is pretty stable, it's very hard to pencil out energy storage at all. It's a nice dream for a lot of people, but do others here know folks IRL that even has storage?

I agree the less well off will probably not do storage at all. The costs are too high honestly and most folks are renting so that's a non-starter. Since they rent, they also don't even drive an EV so less need as well for solar. Getting solar alone is tough enough and why you see people get PPAs or other no cost solar options.

Interestingly I just had a neighbor stop by and ask why I went with 3 Powerwalls. She had been researching Solar + ESS on her own, and obtained quotes from a few companies (Tesla Energy being one of them). She said she didn't understand the benefit of ESS beyond backing up a fridge for a few hours in the event of an earthquake. The sales pitch didn't make sense to her and she wanted to ask me why I put in the batteries. Little did she realize I really hate PG&E.

Anyway, as I spoke with her, it began to be clear to me that the way solar + ESS is sold to average homeowners (eg, ones that do not sign up for accounts on TMC) is completely jacked up.

To paraphrase her situation... she had these weird concepts planted in her head after talking to "experts".

1) ESS was only for backup purposes; and probably best suited for a fridge and a few critical lights
2) She did not know anything about TOU shifting even though PG&E convinced her to sign up for EV2A
3) No joke, she's currently an EV2A customer that has no solar and no powerwalls. She couldn't figure out why her electricity costs almost doubled since converting to EV2A even though she barely drives her EV. She was actually pissed that it seemed more expensive to drive an EV than a ICE.
4) She did not know how converting from gas heating to electric could help address her $500 gas heating bill last month (total PG&E bill was almost $1,000 maybe because of those shiny Christmas lights powered by EV2A energy).
5) She thought her Tesla would soon be able to help put energy back into the house in the event of an outage (I dunno who told her this)
6) She didn't now about NEM 3.0 coming around the horizon so the clock was ticking

I didn't have enough time to really get into the specifics of her budget and priorities to know exactly what she should do next. Like the ideal-perfect-decision is probably unaffordable or is unobtainable due to supply constraints. But I do hope she can at least get solar-only before NEM 3.0 kicks in.

 

[sunwarriors]

Interestingly I just had a neighbor stop by and ask why I went with 3 Powerwalls. She had been researching Solar + ESS on her own, and obtained quotes from a few companies (Tesla Energy being one of them). She said she didn't understand the benefit of ESS beyond backing up a fridge for a few hours in the event of an earthquake. The sales pitch didn't make sense to her and she wanted to ask me why I put in the batteries. Little did she realize I really hate PG&E.

Anyway, as I spoke with her, it began to be clear to me that the way solar + ESS is sold to average homeowners (eg, ones that do not sign up for accounts on TMC) is completely jacked up.

To paraphrase her situation... she had these weird concepts planted in her head after talking to "experts".

1) ESS was only for backup purposes; and probably best suited for a fridge and a few critical lights
2) She did not know anything about TOU shifting even though PG&E convinced her to sign up for EV2A
3) No joke, she's currently an EV2A customer that has no solar and no powerwalls. She couldn't figure out why her electricity costs almost doubled since converting to EV2A even though she barely drives her EV. She was actually pissed that it seemed more expensive to drive an EV than a ICE.
4) She did not know how converting from gas heating to electric could help address her $500 gas heating bill last month (total PG&E bill was almost $1,000 maybe because of those shiny Christmas lights powered by EV2A energy).
5) She thought her Tesla would soon be able to help put energy back into the house in the event of an outage (I dunno who told her this)
6) She didn't now about NEM 3.0 coming around the horizon so the clock was ticking

I didn't have enough time to really get into the specifics of her budget and priorities to know exactly what she should do next. Like the ideal-perfect-decision is probably unaffordable or is unobtainable due to supply constraints. But I do hope she can at least get solar-only before NEM 3.0 kicks in.

I think your example is why there is so much anti-battery speak on most forums/discussions. You have your hate of PG&E, I have my distrust in utilities in general and simply want more 'Control' and ToU time shifting. It was honestly a bit hard enough to convince my spouse to even get batteries, but with mostly stable power here, outages aren't that big of an issue for us currently so it's hard to say it's 'worth' it. Still, freak weather now all the time so boils down to where we all want to 'waste' our $$. Like a lot of you folks waiting for your 1st power outage after your PW install, I'm still waiting.

Outside of the folks here, I'd say 95% don't bother following any of this stuff. My solar installer didn't even know about NEM3.0 till I mentioned it and that's his livelihood. Even then, I'm sure all the folks here knows more than most installers since we spend too much of our time on it.


On V2H/V2H, I was just watching that insideevs podcast and Tom mentioned about the F150 EV that Ford folks said people needed some 320 Amp service to get this. That's pretty much a non-starter for 95%, maybe more of homes in America. That's going to be a pie in the face moment if they don't figure that out since it's so hyped up.

 

[getakey]

Interestingly I just had a neighbor stop by and ask why I went with 3 Powerwalls. She had been researching Solar + ESS on her own, and obtained quotes from a few companies (Tesla Energy being one of them). She said she didn't understand the benefit of ESS beyond backing up a fridge for a few hours in the event of an earthquake. The sales pitch didn't make sense to her and she wanted to ask me why I put in the batteries. Little did she realize I really hate PG&E.

Anyway, as I spoke with her, it began to be clear to me that the way solar + ESS is sold to average homeowners (eg, ones that do not sign up for accounts on TMC) is completely jacked up.

To paraphrase her situation... she had these weird concepts planted in her head after talking to "experts".

1) ESS was only for backup purposes; and probably best suited for a fridge and a few critical lights
2) She did not know anything about TOU shifting even though PG&E convinced her to sign up for EV2A
3) No joke, she's currently an EV2A customer that has no solar and no powerwalls. She couldn't figure out why her electricity costs almost doubled since converting to EV2A even though she barely drives her EV. She was actually pissed that it seemed more expensive to drive an EV than a ICE.
4) She did not know how converting from gas heating to electric could help address her $500 gas heating bill last month (total PG&E bill was almost $1,000 maybe because of those shiny Christmas lights powered by EV2A energy).
5) She thought her Tesla would soon be able to help put energy back into the house in the event of an outage (I dunno who told her this)
6) She didn't now about NEM 3.0 coming around the horizon so the clock was ticking

I didn't have enough time to really get into the specifics of her budget and priorities to know exactly what she should do next. Like the ideal-perfect-decision is probably unaffordable or is unobtainable due to supply constraints. But I do hope she can at least get solar-only before NEM 3.0 kicks in.

I don't see how on EV2A, driving her EV is more expensive than ICE unless she is not charging during Off Peak.

 

[holeydonut]

I think your example is why there is so much anti-battery speak on most forums/discussions. You have your hate of PG&E, I have my distrust in utilities in general and simply want more 'Control' and ToU time shifting. It was honestly a bit hard enough to convince my spouse to even get batteries, but with mostly stable power here, outages aren't that big of an issue for us currently so it's hard to say it's 'worth' it. Still, freak weather now all the time so boils down to where we all want to 'waste' our $$. Like a lot of you folks waiting for your 1st power outage after your PW install, I'm still waiting.

Outside of the folks here, I'd say 95% don't bother following any of this stuff. My solar installer didn't even know about NEM3.0 till I mentioned it and that's his livelihood. Even then, I'm sure all the folks here knows more than most installers since we spend too much of our time on it.


On V2H/V2H, I was just watching that insideevs podcast and Tom mentioned about the F150 EV that Ford folks said people needed some 320 Amp service to get this. That's pretty much a non-starter for 95%, maybe more of homes in America. That's going to be a pie in the face moment if they don't figure that out since it's so hyped up.

Yep, I hated PG&E so I wanted batteries. But it wasn't until I poked more on TMC that I learned people have been wanting homeowners to get PV+ESS for a while for the distributed energy (DER) approach. Like even though I hated PG&E, in theory I was helping them by installing PV+ESS. I felt conflicted inside hah.

Regarding the F150, there's a cool thread about it here. I don't know if TMC allows cross-posting of other car forums, but this is very interesting. The 120 percent rule is the new hotness hah. Edit: the 320A for F150 Lightning V2H/V2G is referenced in the infographic from Ford below.

Updated Ford Intelligent Backup Power page (no longer) details 320-Amp Home Service o_O

[EDIT: As of 1/26/2022 the Ford website no longer indicates the requirement for 320-amp service, but recommends you consult an electrician for home requirements instead! This is much more reasonable.] Based on recent updates to the Intelligent Backup page...

www.f150gen14.com

Some of the owners think if you had a 125A service but upgraded to a 200A rated main panel busbar (but keeping the service entry 125A), you could theoretically stay within the 120 percent rule. What they're saying actually sounds a lot like the trash I had to deal with on my own PV+ESS install. Where the sum of my PG&E service size + the sum of all the ESS exporting at maximum + solar generating at peak kWp AC were additive when interpreting whether my busbar would tolerate things per the 120 percent rule.

I wonder how all this headache inducing stuff will work for an EV + ESS to do V2H or V2G hah.

 

[holeydonut]

I don't see how on EV2A, driving her EV is more expensive than ICE unless she is not charging during Off Peak.

It's because your peak time energy usage almost doubles. It's almost $0.60 per kWh versus like $0.30 under E-TOU-C.

If you took the EV out of the equation for a second... her normal home energy bill will go up like 50% under EV2A assuming she still cooks, cleans, does-laundry, watches TV, etc at the old times.

But of course charging an EV also causes the energy bill to go up. So when comparing electricity bills from pre-EV2A and post-EV2A, her electricity bill doubled. She called to ask what was going on; PG&E blamed all of the doubling on the EV. So in her mind, it was costing an extra $150 to charge an EV; while her gasoline costs were like $100 a month.

But in reality, it's more like half of the energy bill increase is EV2A TOU pricing on normal house stuff, and the other half is the kWh her Tesla took from the grid during off-peak.

TBH, I'm surprised there are not people on the normal car subforums here on TMC complaining about how expensive it is to charge their cars when they switch to EV rate plans.

 

[ucmndd]

I don't see how on EV2A, driving her EV is more expensive than ICE unless she is not charging during Off Peak.

@holeydonut ’s response covered it all, but EV2-A is a truly terrible rate if you don’t drive a lot or can’t shift basically all of your consumption off peak. You need a LOT of EV charging in a month before the “cheap” off peak energy makes up for the sky-high peak rates.

 

[holeydonut]

@holeydonut ’s response covered it all, but EV2-A is a truly terrible rate if you don’t drive a lot or can’t shift basically all of your consumption off peak. You need a LOT of EV charging in a month before the “cheap” off peak energy makes up for the sky-high peak rates.

I think you and I understand this, but PG&E isn’t telling a random 55 year old lady about the TOU slamboni. PG&E just told her the ev2A was designed for EV owners.

 

[Vines]

Yep, I hated PG&E so I wanted batteries. But it wasn't until I poked more on TMC that I learned people have been wanting homeowners to get PV+ESS for a while for the distributed energy (DER) approach. Like even though I hated PG&E, in theory I was helping them by installing PV+ESS. I felt conflicted inside hah.

Regarding the F150, there's a cool thread about it here. I don't know if TMC allows cross-posting of other car forums, but this is very interesting. The 120 percent rule is the new hotness hah. Edit: the 320A for F150 Lightning V2H/V2G is referenced in the infographic from Ford below.

Updated Ford Intelligent Backup Power page (no longer) details 320-Amp Home Service o_O

[EDIT: As of 1/26/2022 the Ford website no longer indicates the requirement for 320-amp service, but recommends you consult an electrician for home requirements instead! This is much more reasonable.] Based on recent updates to the Intelligent Backup page...

www.f150gen14.com

View attachment 756810


Some of the owners think if you had a 125A service but upgraded to a 200A rated main panel busbar (but keeping the service entry 125A), you could theoretically stay within the 120 percent rule. What they're saying actually sounds a lot like the trash I had to deal with on my own PV+ESS install. Where the sum of my PG&E service size + the sum of all the ESS exporting at maximum + solar generating at peak kWp AC were additive when interpreting whether my busbar would tolerate things per the 120 percent rule.

I wonder how all this headache inducing stuff will work for an EV + ESS to do V2H or V2G hah.

What a weird requirement to make V2G happen, that you must have a 400A service? I suspect they don't want to sell this very much if that is the basic requirement.

 

[h2ofun]

What a weird requirement to make V2G happen, that you must have a 400A service? I suspect they don't want to sell this very much if that is the basic requirement.

I have a 400 amp service, but two breakers. Does anyone in a house have a raw 400 amp breaker and service?

 

[Vines]

I have a 400 amp service, but two breakers. Does anyone in a house have a raw 400 amp breaker and service?

You are talking about the difference between a "True 400A" vs a "2x200A" service panel.

I suspect that either style would work. Most true 400A service panels can take a 200A branch circuit breaker on the distribution bus.

When designing a backup system it's usually easier to use a 2x200A style, to avoid issues with the 120% rule as there is no busbar on the one 200A main breaker only connection.

 

[Southpasfan]

Interestingly I just had a neighbor stop by and ask why I went with 3 Powerwalls. She had been researching Solar + ESS on her own, and obtained quotes from a few companies (Tesla Energy being one of them). She said she didn't understand the benefit of ESS beyond backing up a fridge for a few hours in the event of an earthquake. The sales pitch didn't make sense to her and she wanted to ask me why I put in the batteries. Little did she realize I really hate PG&E.

Anyway, as I spoke with her, it began to be clear to me that the way solar + ESS is sold to average homeowners (eg, ones that do not sign up for accounts on TMC) is completely jacked up.

To paraphrase her situation... she had these weird concepts planted in her head after talking to "experts".

1) ESS was only for backup purposes; and probably best suited for a fridge and a few critical lights
2) She did not know anything about TOU shifting even though PG&E convinced her to sign up for EV2A
3) No joke, she's currently an EV2A customer that has no solar and no powerwalls. She couldn't figure out why her electricity costs almost doubled since converting to EV2A even though she barely drives her EV. She was actually pissed that it seemed more expensive to drive an EV than a ICE.
4) She did not know how converting from gas heating to electric could help address her $500 gas heating bill last month (total PG&E bill was almost $1,000 maybe because of those shiny Christmas lights powered by EV2A energy).
5) She thought her Tesla would soon be able to help put energy back into the house in the event of an outage (I dunno who told her this)
6) She didn't now about NEM 3.0 coming around the horizon so the clock was ticking

I didn't have enough time to really get into the specifics of her budget and priorities to know exactly what she should do next. Like the ideal-perfect-decision is probably unaffordable or is unobtainable due to supply constraints. But I do hope she can at least get solar-only before NEM 3.0 kicks in.

Ugh. Instead of the proposal we are all having to screw around arguing with, how about just force utilities to charge one rate per kwh hour?

Sure, they would have to adjust for the cost of energy throughout the day, but once you know what that is, I mean, so what? Its only a couple of cents per kwh.

Sure, you have to drop the ridiculous notion that an entire state worth of people can somehow conserve electricity during peak times. Why do I say ridiculous? Well, the average person does not have the faintest idea how many kw they are using at any given moment, since the don't have the tesla app. Once you have the Tesla app, you realize its running a couple or really major draws, and if one of them is A/C you can't really cut that anyway.

What do you get? Well, you get alot more transparency in pricing, because the utilities don't get to play hide the ball with their charging structures.

Second, much of this NEM argument goes away because if the IOUs get free energy at X per kwh and can sell it at X then giving you a credit at X is not such a big deal to them, at least not as big of a deal until rooftop solar has to be actually curtailed at noon, which is a ways away.

Third hopefully when consumers don't have to spend their energy minutes figuring out whether they are being screwed by rate structures they will actually focus on the cost of electricity v. the cost of the grid and its upkeep.

Fourth, straight one to one charging and credits at least allows you to discovery the three phases of solar. And this should be first, but by putting solar without ESS you are solving, maybe one or two of three environmental problems. First, you are moving your own use to 100% renewable when your system is producing, Second, during the time you are exporting, you are exporting 100% renewable. Hopefully then you realize that even though you are getting a credit, when you pull back from the grid you might be pulling from a gas peaker plant.
And it then dawns on you that with ESS, to the extent you pull from your own batteries charged by the sun, that you have gone as completely renewable as you can. Which should accelerate the adoption of ESS systems, both large and small.

 

[Vines]

I am somewhat hopeful in seeing several articles supporting the reforms to the current PD.

We went to make some noise on Thursday and it seemed to work! I really hope that they come to some reasonable middle ground and I think a fair solution is to have every customer pay a fair share of the grid upkeep costs, just like for every other generation source.

 

[dipper]

Hopefully Newsom can do something about it. At least he is aware of potential anger from his supporters. There are a lot of his supporters with solar panels.

 

[sunwarriors]

It's because your peak time energy usage almost doubles. It's almost $0.60 per kWh versus like $0.30 under E-TOU-C.

If you took the EV out of the equation for a second... her normal home energy bill will go up like 50% under EV2A assuming she still cooks, cleans, does-laundry, watches TV, etc at the old times.

But of course charging an EV also causes the energy bill to go up. So when comparing electricity bills from pre-EV2A and post-EV2A, her electricity bill doubled. She called to ask what was going on; PG&E blamed all of the doubling on the EV. So in her mind, it was costing an extra $150 to charge an EV; while her gasoline costs were like $100 a month.

But in reality, it's more like half of the energy bill increase is EV2A TOU pricing on normal house stuff, and the other half is the kWh her Tesla took from the grid during off-peak.

TBH, I'm surprised there are not people on the normal car subforums here on TMC complaining about how expensive it is to charge their cars when they switch to EV rate plans.

This is why I didn't even go on an EV plan or ANY ToU plan until I was forced to after getting solar. Sorta funny seeing posts that so and so power company suggests this plan in their comparison, but it's more expensive than your existing one.

I just used L1 and charged anytime of the day. Ahh, good ole days of not thinking when I use power.

 

[Zorg]

Happy to report that I produced and consumed around 11,000KWh last 12 months, and only have to pay $110 for it. Screw PG&E

 

[Zabe]

Happy to report that I produced and consumed around 11,000KWh last 12 months, and only have to pay $110 for it. Screw PG&E

Another perfect example of why NEM 3 is coming.

 

[holeydonut]

Happy to report that I produced and consumed around 11,000KWh last 12 months, and only have to pay $110 for it. Screw PG&E

My MIL has been living with us for the past 12 months. She's basically paid $100 to keep a refrigerator and fan going for 365 days at her old address. So she hasn't been paying PG&E either. Screw PG&E.

I'm thinking PG&E is going to ask her to pony up since her house didn't pay a fair share of fixed costs.