-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
CPUC NEM 3.0 discussion
- Thread starter jjrandorin
- Start date
skepticcyclist
Member
Clarification, this is not a state rate. It is PG&E only. California has over 20 different utility service providers, and that doesn't even count coops and community choice services. San Diego Gas and Electric is even higher. I believe it is now the highest in the nation.
We have SoCal Edison, which is the second largest in the state. It too is expensive not not near as high as SDG&E and PG&E. LA City uses uses DWP
I guess one way to help pad the ROI numbers is to keep jacking the prices up 
If you want to start your day off on a sour note, check out this link.
www.cbs8.com
Reporter asks is $9Bn profits fair? Response is “but think of the value you’re getting!”
Reporter asks if being smarter with capital investments is in ratepayer interests. Response is “but think of the value you’re getting!”
CBS 8 sits down with SDG&E Sr. Executive to discuss rising costs, frustrated customers
No question was off limits when Shannon Handy with CBS 8 sat down with Scott Crider, SDG&E Sr. VP of Customer Services and External Affairs.
www.cbs8.com
Reporter asks is $9Bn profits fair? Response is “but think of the value you’re getting!”
Reporter asks if being smarter with capital investments is in ratepayer interests. Response is “but think of the value you’re getting!”
I found it an interesting read. Was surprised to learn that electricity and gas has no markup in CA, it's sold at 'cost'. (yeah, that means cost accountants can have fun.) Instead, state law requires taht the utilities make a "return based upon the amount of pipes and wires that you're actually building for the system."If you want to start your day off on a sour note, check out this link.
CBS 8 sits down with SDG&E Sr. Executive to discuss rising costs, frustrated customers
No question was off limits when Shannon Handy with CBS 8 sat down with Scott Crider, SDG&E Sr. VP of Customer Services and External Affairs.
Reporter asks is $9Bn profits fair? Response is “but think of the value you’re getting!”
Reporter asks if being smarter with capital investments is in ratepayer interests. Response is “but think of the value you’re getting!”
He handled the $9bn question poorly, since it is based on the total company profits, which includes SoCal Edison, a Texas subsidiary, and LNG ops. The CEO should have just shifted to and explained SDG&E's profits since that was the focus of the interview. He also should have been able to explain why SDG&E has the highest rates in the state. If underground lines costs more -- and they do -- then tell folks how many cents that adds to the rates vs other state utilities taht have fewer underground lines. If SDG&E has been more aggressive with renewables or battery storage -- and higher costs? -- just say so and how much more they add to local rates, if any. How much extra does wildfire mitigation add to rates? If the local governments have accelerated the time line for carbon free -- 2035 -- and other have not....
They have to know why they are the highest in the state. Why is San Diego much higher than neighboring Orange County (and SoCal Edison, another Sempra subsidiary)?
If I was the interviewer, I would have lead with those questions.
I guess one way to help pad the ROI numbers is to keep jacking the prices up
Yeah at the rate energy prices are shooting up, even without SGIP I think water-fun-guy's system + HVAC overhaul will pay itself back in like 7 years.
I paid PG&E over a 12 month period $4,500 before I got solar. If I apply today's published E-1 energy rates and tiered per-therm NG to those retroactive bills, it'd be about $5,500.
If I take the general rate case submissions from PG&E (which assume a certain growth of total costs; not just commodity prices). and apply those future rates it comes out to like $7,000 by 2025. There are so many homeowners that fail to qualify for CARE that will just get nuked by these rates.
Dihydrogen-monoxide-dude was paying like $10,000 a year before solar... so he's basically printing money like the Fed over there. But once NEM 2.0 ends PG&E will probably repo his house with all the fees they'll slap him with so he pays his fair share.
I love watching my ROI improve with each price hike, while I sweat in the winter in my 74 degree house.
@h2ofun's jokes aside, higher rates do indeed improve the ROI for new solar installs, which seems like something that's going to backfire once again. This is why they want that $8/installed kW or similar. Rising electricity rates and dropping PV rates mean that ROI gets shorter and shorter and incentivizes more and more people to offset their consumption. Which means that the utilities must raise rates again, which makes it even more financially sensible for an even lower income base to install.. and it keeps going.
Please leave a public comment to PG&E's general rate case application.
apps.cpuc.ca.gov/c/A2106021
Compared to the baseline 2022 starting year, the proposed revenue increases during the 4 year GRC would be:
2023: +$3.56 Bn (+18% in the first year)
2024: +$4.49 Bn
2025: +$5.08 Bn
2026: +$5.46 Bn
That's $18.59 Bn without a single shred of cost cutting on their part to actually try to achieve more efficient operations. PG&E has convinced (bribed) the CPUC where our "regulators" believe that PG&E is running as efficiently as possible and there is no fat to trim. Total. Bullshit.
To support this revenue growth, they're jacking up energy rates to obscene levels. +18% revenue growth for a utility in year 1 (again, that's revenue growth unrelated to the changes in commodity and energy prices). By the 4th year of the GRC the costs are up +25% for Electric and +45% for Natural Gas.
This is Double digit CAGR growth for a GODDAMN PUBLIC UTILTY. And the IOUs have the gall to blame solar customers to be the problem? PG&E should be tasked to shed $1 Bn of opex before they get another goddamn dollar of revenue.
Rate payers are the proverbial frog in the pot coming up to a simmer (or maybe rolling boil) and the IOUs are blaming residential solar for the heat.
My Real-World calculations based on 1 KW of my 6KW system running since 2015 producing a yearly output of 1,968.33 KWh, under the new credit offered of $0.041 / KWh, will result in a bill credit of only $80.70. The cost per year per KW to be hooked up at $8.00 / KW, gives a yearly bill of $96.00 per system KW. That's a loss of ($15.30) per system KW per year. I have a 6 KW system, and my yearly bill has averaged about $100.00. Under this new proposal, I will see an added bill of $91.80. The system will never pay for itself. Adding more capacity won't be more profitable, and most homes rooves can't support enough panels to help offset the decrease of credit paid under the new plan. This insult is in addition to the fact that since my system will never pay a positive towards my billed usage, I will have to pay the same rates as a non-solar household. In this area, it runs over $5,000.00 per year. (average of $416.76 per month) That's what my neighbors pay. My impact of this new plan is an increase of more than if I didn't have solar at all. This violates the promises made by the State to reward us with purchasing a $14,000.00 system (material only, I installed it myself) to help out our State and ourselves, since the State won't allow the utilities to build any new generation plants. New homes are being mandated to include solar panels, raising the cost of the home, and the electric bill to the utility. If the utilities want all the profit, they can pay to install and maintain solar on people's homes.
Your usage of $0.041/kWh is incorrect in this calculation as that is only for the energy that you export. Most of that 1,968 kWh per 1kW of PV would be used by the home and not be exported.
I have to make a lot of assumptions as you didn't include all of your information. First, since your annual bill is less than $100 I am assuming that you are a net generator and that this is just the MDC charges. I will guess that you are generating 12.5% more than what use and your house consumes 10,498 kWH while your 6kW array is generating 11,810 kWh (1,312 kWh overage)
First, let's assume without ESS that you can only use 45% of that amount that is generated or 5,315 kWh (11,810 * 45%) at a blended summer/winter/off-peak/peak of $0.35 kWh that eliminates $1,860 from your bill. You then get the $0.041 for the 55% or 6,495 kWh (11,810-5,315) that you exported for a credit of $266. Now you get the $8.00/month/kW (BTW this should be your invertor rating not the PV rating as that is what is on the Interconnect Agreement form) which would be an extra fee of $576. So $1,860 + $266 - $576 gets you to $1,550 savings and that $14,000 cost would have a payback period of 9.0 years for a non-self install that might be $21,000 ($3.50 per W) you would have a 13.5 year payback.
Now, let's assume that you add ESS and now you can use 75% of the amount that you generate or 8,858 kWh (11,810 * 75%) a higher blended rate of $0.38 as you are covering all of the peak periods during the summer which eliminates $3,366 from your bill. You then get the $0.041 for the 25% or 2,952 kWh (11,810-8,858) that you exported for a credit of $121. Still the same $8.00/month/kW fee which comes to $576. So $3,366 + $121 - $576 = $2,911. The cost is another $10,000 with the battery so the non-self install goes to $31,000 and the payback period is 10.6 years.
Assuming zero things break, which we know will not happen
Pretty much all solar/storage systems have 10-year warranties at least. Many components have 15-25 year warranties.
So hopefully you break even financially before 10-years and things start breaking out of warranty.
FWIW, my system is coming up on 12 years now without any issues.
My PV system of AstroPower panels and Trace inverter with lead-acid batteries installed in 2000 worked fine until 2015 when the inverter developed a problem. At that point no repair service was available, so I diagnosed and fixed the problem myself -- it turned out to be corrosion where the fine wire of the secondary in a current-sense transformer was soldered to the pin. The system continued to work fine then until 2019 when the output dropped in half because some of the panel strings were no longer delivering as much current as they should. That plus a requirement to re-roof triggered an order for the Tesla Solar Roof that was installed this past November.
OK, now @h2ofun is going to chide me that this system won't last as long.
OK, now @h2ofun is going to chide me that this system won't last as long.
I know how I would bet
Hydro-Homie and Lotus-Elise-Driver should have a planned get together in 2037 so they can lament losing NEM 2.0 grandfathering and the troubles of a failing Tesla Solar Roof. Fun times all around. I'll bring the disconnects.
The plus side is we'll be able to charge our EV's by the lake.
Similar threads
- Locked
