CPUC NEM 3.0 discussion

[holeydonut]

Was going to mention the same thing. Even with cable/internet there are plenty of monopoly horror stories, but for power it's probably 10x worse. I'm in counties where you can pick other providers, but the powerlines and everything are very much still owned by PG&E (so billing is also handled by them). There is no escaping them unless you go offgrid completely, which is easier said than done (especially if you consider heating loads also and cutting off natural gas too).

The Cadillac example is ridiculously off given there are so many alternatives to buying a Cadillac (including used ones or even riding public transit or ridesharing) in comparison.

That and Cadillac has to actually give a damn to establish a value proposition so customers choose them instead of choosing another option.

PG&E just tells people to go off grid or pay them $$$$. Total BS that they aren't required to get better/efficient over time like every other normal business out there.

 

[jjrandorin]

Some posts were moved for either being politics or quoting posts with politics in them (as collateral damage).

 

[I’mWhat’sUp]

I was 1984’d censored. I’m headed for a reeducation camp. Wish me luck

 

[jjrandorin]

I was 1984’d censored. I’m headed for a reeducation camp. Wish me luck

If you find yourself typing "red state" " blue state" political figures, etc, yes that is what is going to happen, in escalating fashion actually.

 

[h2ofun]

If you find yourself typing "red state" " blue state" political figures, etc, yes that is what is going to happen, in escalating fashion actually.

Yep, in any of my groups I manage, politics come up, I just delete the posts, not move them

 

[sunwarriors]

It's not even politics or state issues, it's purely the IOUs. I think every non large IOUs in CA charges a lot less for their power even when they are literally 1 block over from the IOU. That clearly shows the problem.

When it's a for profit company setup to enrich shareholders/execs, they start doing stuff that's again, purely in those shareholder's interest, everyone else be damned.

Like cigarettes/healthcare, it's not a sustainable model I don't think when end goals are such a major conflict of interest.

 

[Zabe]

In the ultimate irony I bought a house with solar. It does not change my position on NEM 3. I don't really care if they change NEM and have some grid charges as I do understand that the grid needs to be paid for and is a benefit to everyone. There is not some massive benefit to the grid from a home having solar, there is a massive benefit to the homeowner from having solar due to the current NEM structure.

 

[holeydonut]

In the ultimate irony I bought a house with solar. It does not change my position on NEM 3. I don't really care if they change NEM and have some grid charges as I do understand that the grid needs to be paid for and is a benefit to everyone. There is not some massive benefit to the grid from a home having solar, there is a massive benefit to the homeowner from having solar due to the current NEM structure.

Assuming you didn't pay a premium on the home purchase related to the solar panels... you could just open the disconnect for the panels and stop your NEM PTO with your PoCo.

 

[skepticcyclist]

Assuming you didn't pay a premium on the home purchase related to the solar panels... you could just open the disconnect for the panels and stop your NEM PTO with your PoCo.

I have a feeling they won't do that.

 

[RKCRLR]

I have a feeling they won't do that.

If the CPUC imposes a fee structure in NEM 3 that makes it more cost effective for solar owners to not have solar then they need to have an easy way to allow decommissioning. As long as a solar system is operating properly it will probably be more cost effective to keep it going (unless they make it really bad). But if something breaks it may be more cost effective to decommission the system than to repair it.

 

[getakey]

If the CPUC imposes a fee structure in NEM 3 that makes it more cost effective for solar owners to not have solar then they need to have an easy way to allow decommissioning. As long as a solar system is operating properly it will probably be more cost effective to keep it going (unless they make it really bad). But if something breaks it may be more cost effective to decommission the system than to repair it.

I can see it now. Every new house requires Solar and every new owner decommissions it

 

[RKCRLR]

I can see it now. Every new house requires Solar and every new owner decommissions it

It would be interesting if they got to a point that if your house has solar that you are required to keep in maintained and connected.

 

[BGbreeder]

This is too good not to share; for all of you having issues with your utility, I, or rather John Oliver, give you "Reddy Kilowatt";

 

[ohmman]

This is too good not to share; for all of you having issues with your utility, I, or rather John Oliver, give you "Reddy Kilowatt";

Paging @Reddy Kilowatt

 

[Zabe]

Assuming you didn't pay a premium on the home purchase related to the solar panels... you could just open the disconnect for the panels and stop your NEM PTO with your PoCo.

That is a great idea!

No not really. I will just pay the per kw solar fee if that ever comes about. The system generates about 11/MW a year which at 0.31/kwh is about $3400, paying $720 of that to the PoCo doesn't seem like such a big deal.

 

[stopcrazypp]

That is a great idea!

No not really. I will just pay the per kw solar fee if that ever comes about. The system generates about 11/MW a year which at 0.31/kwh is about $3400, paying $720 of that to the PoCo doesn't seem like such a big deal.

With NEM 3.0 you are getting more like 0.04-0.06/kWh, which brings down your number to $440-$660. Then you pay a $720 fee on top.
Unless your usage aligns with your solar generation or you have a lot of storage, the numbers are going to be far worse than what you think.

If they are only doing the fixed fee and keeping the rates like NEM 2.0, the drop in solar interest would not be as much.

 

[Zabe]

With NEM 3.0 you are getting more like 0.04-0.06/kWh, which brings down your number to $440-$660. Then you pay a $720 fee on top.
Unless your usage aligns with your solar generation or you have a lot of storage, the numbers are going to be far worse than what you think.

If they are only doing the fixed fee and keeping the rates like NEM 2.0, the drop in solar interest would not be as much.

$440-$660 how do you get to that value? Are you taking every kWH of solar generation and sending it to the grid? That is more than a bit extreme. I believe the actual numbers for me and for most people would be much better than what you think.

 

[stopcrazypp]

$440-$660 how do you get to that value? Are you taking every kWH of solar generation and sending it to the grid? That is more than a bit extreme. I believe the actual numbers for me and for most people would be much better than what you think.

It's just doing the exact same math you are doing, except using $0.04-$0.06/kWh instead of $0.31/kWh.
Yes for most people, it'll be a number in between, but as I said, that depends on your usage aligning with solar generation or having storage. It's enough to make ROI on rooftop solar non-existent or not tolerable. If you are on NEM 2.0 already, you can make a judgement yourself by looking at your True-up (change any credits you get to be worth $0.05/kWh).

Keep in mind also NEM 3.0 requires you to switch to a TOU tariff, which means you may be paying a lot more for your usage (and the times your solar is generating may be at cheaper rates). Currently with NEM 2.0 it's still possible to use a non-TOU tariff, which for most people saves money (especially considering solar).

 

[holeydonut]

Lol Zabe thinks he’ll get market rates for his solar under NEM 3.0? No wonder he thought it was still an ok proposition. I guess he ignored every post we made about the ACC rate for exports.

I think it’s a bit hypocritical to bask in NEM 2.0 benefits, but then support policy changes that gatekeep/block future homeowners from similar benefit. Unfortunately pulling away the ladder after climbing up is a popular mentality.

 

[Zabe]

It's just doing the exact same math you are doing, except using $0.04-$0.06/kWh instead of $0.31/kWh.
Yes for most people, it'll be a number in between, but as I said, that depends on your usage aligning with solar generation or having storage. It's enough to make ROI on rooftop solar non-existent or not tolerable. If you are on NEM 2.0 already, you can make a judgement yourself by looking at your True-up (change any credits to get to be worth $0.05/kWh).

Keep in mind also NEM 3.0 requires you to switch to a TOU tariff, which means you may be paying a lot more for your usage (and the times your solar is generating may be at cheaper rates). Currently with NEM 2.0 it's still possible to use a non-TOU tariff, which for most people saves money (especially considering solar).

It would be somewhere in between though I would think that it would be far closer to the high end than the low end. It is pretty easy to program a thermostat to use the AC to cool the house in summer while the solar is producing.

NEM 2 already requires TOU rates at least in my service area as far as I am aware.