Lets say there two houses. One is a zero energy house without solar and storage and the other is a standard home with solar and storage. And they both consume the same amount of energy from the grid at the same times.
What is the logic in charging the house with solar and storage more than the zero energy house? Why isn't this question being brought into the mix?
Not sure what you mean... the IOUs want the zero energy house to keep paying zero because there is zero happening at the house. But, they want your PV+ESS house to pay way more NBCs than what is currently being paid under NEM 1.0 and NEM 2.0. Because there are occupants of this second home who are using electricity. And, as long as the PV+ESS house remains grid tied, the IOUs say the occupants of the PV+ESS need to pay pay pay pay for the mismanaged grid.
The law allows PG&E and CASIO the right to waste whatever the CPUC allows and to pass those charges/fees as revenue (either revenue to the IOU directly, or revenue to the CASIO operator for generation).
But the law doesn't protect the PV+ESS owner who is grid tied.