CPUC NEM 3.0 discussion

[BGbreeder]

I was curious and went to look at PG&E's earnings report for the last quarter. Unfortunately it isn't broken out between residential and commercial customers, so for a worst case analysis I am using the 4.8 million residential accounts + 0.6M commercial accounts number that they publish and lump them together as 5.4M accounts. Commercial numbers should be larger than residential, so this is a worst case for just us residential people.

• Electric Revenue - $3,690M = $227.78/month/account
• Cost of Electricity -$780M = $48.15/month/account
• Operating & Maintenance $2,291 = $141.42/month/account

In the case of the operating and maintenance portion it isn't split between electric and natural gas, so you can't assign it all to electric.

• Natural Gas Revenue = $1,428M = 27.9% of Total revenue
• Cost of Natural Gas = $359M = 31.5% of cost of electric + NG

So taking a swag I will say that the operating and maintenance is split 70% electric to 30% natural gas. This would take the electric portion from $141.42/month/account down to $98.99/month/account. How much of that should be a fixed fee? I think maybe 50%, so that would be $49.50/month. Realistically this should maybe be 25-30% lower with commercial accounts paying a significantly more than a single residential account.

Awesome!

Thanks! I think that we agree on the grid costs being WAG in the ballpark of $140-$190ish, on an average account basis that was computed two very different ways. (I am ok with a grid cost estimate of $190/mo.) I also agree that the actual number might get scaled down when commercial is billed at a different "grid fee" rate(s), recognizing that a barbershop and a data center have very different grid loads and stresses.

Good enough to start with as far as I am concerned. I was just trying to point that expecting Hawaiian HECO $26/mo rate was perhaps not reflective of the California realities.

All the best,

BG

 

[charlesj]

Man, I've spoken with 6 solar shops. None of them will touch an existing install to add new panels. My Enphase 3C Envoy has open spots for 2 more home runs, and my wiring can support the extra current from 12 more panels and IQ7+ micros.

But these "certified Enphase installers" all say Enphase doesn't make modular equipment. So if I want more solar with IQ7+, I need a second Envoy. They said once I provisioned my Envoy for the 23 panels currently connected to it... that's it. No more current can be aggregated at the Envoy. Like whut.

I dunno about ya'll but I think PG&E may have won this one. I can't charge my EV from solar; need to charge the EV from PG&E's super awesome grid.

Call Enphase directly and ask.

 

[holeydonut]

Call Enphase directly and ask.

I have... Enphase has referred me to 6 installers who all told me they couldn't add any more micros to my existing system. They will only add new panels, new micros, all hooked up to a new Envoy. And they would tie it to my MSP (bypassing my TEG2 and existing ESS system).

BTW, wwhitney has informed me that conductors have an extra 125% of continuous load requirement. So my existing #8 AWG cannot support the extra micros. My previous statement that my existing conductors can handle the increased PVGen was a false statement.

Holeydonut = wrong. wwhitney = right. 35 total Enphase IQ7+ at 1.21A each will be 42.35A. But then you have to apply a 125% multiplier so that makes the system need conductors that support at least 53A. And that would be #6.

 

[Southpasfan]

I was curious and went to look at PG&E's earnings report for the last quarter. Unfortunately it isn't broken out between residential and commercial customers, so for a worst case analysis I am using the 4.8 million residential accounts + 0.6M commercial accounts number that they publish and lump them together as 5.4M accounts. Commercial numbers should be larger than residential, so this is a worst case for just us residential people.

• Electric Revenue - $3,690M = $227.78/month/account
• Cost of Electricity -$780M = $48.15/month/account
• Operating & Maintenance $2,291 = $141.42/month/account

In the case of the operating and maintenance portion it isn't split between electric and natural gas, so you can't assign it all to electric.

• Natural Gas Revenue = $1,428M = 27.9% of Total revenue
• Cost of Natural Gas = $359M = 31.5% of cost of electric + NG

So taking a swag I will say that the operating and maintenance is split 70% electric to 30% natural gas. This would take the electric portion from $141.42/month/account down to $98.99/month/account. How much of that should be a fixed fee? I think maybe 50%, so that would be $49.50/month. Realistically this should maybe be 25-30% lower with commercial accounts paying a significantly more than a single residential account.

There it is.

Someone else did the math. No average rate payer/voter and I would bet very few politicians, including the ones who just voted on this latest bill, understand that the cost of the electricity is a fraction of everyone's bill.

That's why rooftop solar is even an economic option. It produces electricity at a higher price than the actual cost of electricity, but at a lower cost than the electricity plus the grid.

Its the same for any conservation method, since the grid is paid for by volumetric pricing, any action which reduces consumption is an existential crisis for a IOU.

The answer is not to chisel a few more bucks out of solar ratepayers, nor a few more bucks out of all ratepayers. The per rata cost of the grid is more than many peoples bills.

 

[BGbreeder]

There it is.

Someone else did the math. No average rate payer/voter and I would bet very few politicians, including the ones who just voted on this latest bill, understand that the cost of the electricity is a fraction of everyone's bill.

That's why rooftop solar is even an economic option. It produces electricity at a higher price than the actual cost of electricity, but at a lower cost than the electricity plus the grid.

Its the same for any conservation method, since the grid is paid for by volumetric pricing, any action which reduces consumption is an existential crisis for a IOU.

The answer is not to chisel a few more bucks out of solar ratepayers, nor a few more bucks out of all ratepayers. The per rata cost of the grid is more than many peoples bills.

Hence the challenge in making the sausage...

 

[charlesj]

I have... Enphase has referred me to 6 installers who all told me they couldn't add any more micros to my existing system. They will only add new panels, new micros, all hooked up to a new Envoy. And they would tie it to my MSP (bypassing my TEG2 and existing ESS system).

BTW, wwhitney has informed me that conductors have an extra 125% of continuous load requirement. So my existing #8 AWG cannot support the extra micros. My previous statement that my existing conductors can handle the increased PVGen was a false statement.

Holeydonut = wrong. wwhitney = right. 35 total Enphase IQ7+ at 1.21A each will be 42.35A. But then you have to apply a 125% multiplier so that makes the system need conductors that support at least 53A. And that would be #6.

Interesting as the IQ7+ can have 13 such panels and inverters on a 20A breaker per Enphase. If you already have 23, that takes 2 20A breakers. The new string of 12 panels you want would be a 20A breaker, number 3.
You could add 3 more to existing system if there is space on roof, but you'd have to add that Enphase cable and wire it into existing cable. It may need removal of a panel to add railing and wire.
I will check Enphase as there is a box that takes 4 20A breakers for 4 segments.
Your existing wire from your existing bix may not be able to carry the current for 3 20A .

 

[holeydonut]

Interesting as the IQ7+ can have 13 such panels and inverters on a 20A breaker per Enphase. If you already have 23, that takes 2 20A breakers. The new string of 12 panels you want would be a 20A breaker, number 3.
You could add 3 more to existing system if there is space on roof, but you'd have to add that Enphase cable and wire it into existing cable. It may need removal of a panel to add railing and wire.
I will check Enphase as there is a box that takes 4 20A breakers for 4 segments.
Your existing wire from your existing bix may not be able to carry the current for 3 20A .

Yeah at one point I had a design with 37 total panels. 13x on one string, 12x on another, and 12x facing Northwest. PG&E crapped on this and knocked me down to 23 panels which was 110% my previous annual demand. This resulted in 13x on one string, 10x on the second, and no third string.

To your point, Enphase kind of limits each string of micros to 13x and the Envoy accepts up to 4 strings each with a 20A breaker. The combined Envoy with all 4 strings fully utilized maxes out at 52 total micros.

Nobody is going to add 2 more panels to my existing 10x string. I can't get up there because I'm lame and my wife thinks I'll fall to my death.

The two guys at Enphase that I've been communicating with have so far failed to find anyone with expertise up on a roof that will also take on this smallish 12 panel addition. So their entire East Bay Northern California distribution network has zero installers who will do the thing that PG&E insists was "easy" when I was trying to get my original system oversized in anticipation of a Tesla and EVSE. PG&E was like "just add panels later! It's easy!"

I hate PG&E. Jerks.

 

[charlesj]

Yeah at one point I had a design with 37 total panels. 13x on one string, 12x on another, and 12x facing Northwest. PG&E crapped on this and knocked me down to 23 panels which was 110% my previous annual demand. This resulted in 13x on one string, 10x on the second, and no third string.

To your point, Enphase kind of limits each string of micros to 13x and the Envoy accepts up to 4 strings each with a 20A breaker. The combined Envoy with all 4 strings fully utilized maxes out at 52 total micros.

Nobody is going to add 2 more panels to my existing 10x string. I can't get up there because I'm lame and my wife thinks I'll fall to my death.

The two guys at Enphase that I've been communicating with have so far failed to find anyone with expertise up on a roof that will also take on this smallish 12 panel addition. So their entire East Bay Northern California distribution network has zero installers who will do the thing that PG&E insists was "easy" when I was trying to get my original system oversized in anticipation of a Tesla and EVSE. PG&E was like "just add panels later! It's easy!"

I hate PG&E. Jerks.

You live too far from me. What is your roof pitch? Is there room for the 3 extra panels?
I wonder if it is the job size why they don't want to deal with it plus permitting with city and PG&E, most likely.
Or you wanted to do the expansion in the dark.

 

[holeydonut]

You live too far from me. What is your roof pitch? Is there room for the 3 extra panels?
I wonder if it is the job size why they don't want to deal with it plus permitting with city and PG&E, most likely.
Or you wanted to do the expansion in the dark.

I think it's 6/12 ... the problem is the roof with solar is atop a 2nd story vaulted ceiling. So you'd be like 30' above the ground (which is why there's no way my dumb-azz is going up there to do any work).

The guys that did my original racking said they could have easily fit 2 more panels on my second string (to make it 12 panels instead of 10). They even asked why I didn't have the two panels in the design since it's wasting prime solar space on my roof not having those two panels there. Did you know I hate PG&E? Yeah I hate PG&E.

The 12 panels facing Northwest are a suboptimal array... but I needed that azimuth to offset EV charging for just 1 vehicle.

You know the worst part of PG&E, is they kept saying they were doing this restriction on solar sizing "to protect me." They kept telling me Sunrun was a bad company and trying to sell me too much solar and ESS. They kept saying Sunrun wasn't trustworthy and Sunrun didn't have my best interest in mind.

No, **** YOU PG&E. There's only one monopoly here that doesn't have my goddamn best interest in mind. And that's PG&E. PG&E sucks.

 

[charlesj]

.... Did you know I hate PG&E? Yeah I hate PG&E.

...

No, I didn't. Thanks for sharing.


ps. 6/12 is getting steep. I installed on my 4/12, helped roofing a buddy's roof that was 5/12, doable but not fun.

 

[STS-134]

Wow, I figured it was pretty hot today, and its only $100, with $150 projected for tomorrow. I have never seen $500 but I will take your word for it.

Right now, real time price:

I'll bet we see some > $500 prices due to energy, not congestion, this weekend.

 

[dailo]

What happens if demand goes above capacity? They just need to buy more power elsewhere or do all the lights turn off?

 

[Redhill_qik]

What happens if demand goes above capacity? They just need to buy more power elsewhere or do all the lights turn off?

Rolling blackouts to reduce the demand to keep the grid up.

 

[STS-134]

Wow, I figured it was pretty hot today, and its only $100, with $150 projected for tomorrow. I have never seen $500 but I will take your word for it.

...aaaand $500 has just been exceeded by 4 times.

 

[gene]

Announcement​

On August 25, 2022, the Commission adopted a decision extending the statutory deadline in this proceeding to August 27, 2023.

496643309 - 1 -
ALJ/KHY/mph Date of Issuance 8/26/2022
Decision 22-08-043 August 25, 2022
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Order Instituting Rulemaking to Revisit
Net Energy Metering Tariffs Pursuant to
Decision 16-01-044, and to Address
Other Issues Related to Net Energy
Metering.
Rulemaking 20-08-020
ORDER EXTENDING STATUTORY DEADLINE
Summary
This decision extends the statutory deadline in this proceeding until
August 27, 2023.
1. Background and Justification
The Commission initiated Rulemaking 20-08-020 on August 27, 2020 to
develop a successor tariff to the net energy metering tariff pursuant to the
requirements of Assembly Bill 327 (2013, Perea). Pursuant to Public Utilities
Code Section 1701.5(b), the November 19, 2020 Joint Assigned Commissioner’s
Scoping Memo and Administrative Law Judge Ruling Directing Comments on Proposed
Guiding Principles noted the complexity of the issues to be resolved in this
proceeding and established a statutory deadline of 24 months, i.e.,
August 27, 2022, for the proceeding to be completed.
Following a series of workshops in early 2021, the serv

 

[sunwarriors]

An update from IntentionalFuturist on reddit. I tend to just see his updates to breakdown a bit what's going on. AB 2143 seems pretty bad?

https://www.reddit.com/r/solar/comments/x8mwyy

 

[getakey]

some more info

California needs to move on from net metering, advocates, industry and utility leaders say

Although helpful to jump-start the solar industry, net metering has begun to interfere with the state’s broader climate goals, panelists agreed at the RE+ conference in Anaheim.

www.utilitydive.com

 

[eisenb11]

I don’t see why it’s so complicated. NEM 2.0 forced you into a TOU plan which already encourages adding a battery unit because of the huge cost discrepancy between on and off-peak rates. If they’re so worried about payback and equity then, IMHO, they should have a scaled payback structure where the homeowner is compensated at the tiered retail rate until they hit net-zero. Then all energy that goes into the grid after that is either purchased for wholesale rates or just nothing. That gets the solar homeowner a decent ROI, further encourages the purchase of storage systems since you’re not significantly rewarded for overproducing which helps offset peak grid use / provides resilience, and the “free” energy donated to the utility is theirs to sell for profit. Ideally, they would use this “free” money to lower rates, at least during solar generating periods, which would then provide equity for those who can’t afford or can’t purchase a solar system for whatever reason... Win-win.

 

[h2ofun]

I don’t see why it’s so complicated. NEM 2.0 forced you into a TOU plan which already encourages adding a battery unit because of the huge cost discrepancy between on and off-peak rates. If they’re so worried about payback and equity then, IMHO, they should have a scaled payback structure where the homeowner is compensated at the tiered retail rate until they hit net-zero. Then all energy that goes into the grid after that is either purchased for wholesale rates or just nothing. That gets the solar homeowner a decent ROI, further encourages the purchase of storage systems since you’re not significantly rewarded for overproducing which helps offset peak grid use / provides resilience, and the “free” energy donated to the utility is theirs to sell for profit. Ideally, they would use this “free” money to lower rates, at least during solar generating periods, which would then provide equity for those who can’t afford or can’t purchase a solar system for whatever reason... Win-win.

what does one do in the winter if one has an all electric house? Folks who has gas heating do not think about this

 

[eisenb11]

what does one do in the winter if one has an all electric house? Folks who has gas heating do not think about this

Can you elaborate on what the issue is? My NEM idea doesn't preclude this scenario. If they have an electric house, they're still covered under their solar investment until they hit net-zero. Keep in mind that they might not have enough panels or battery-storage to hit net-zero so their solar system may only just reduce, not eliminate, their electric bill.