I don't know of any statistics for this, but my gut tells me that the percentage is likely high in California with the locked in tax basis as that becomes a significant benefit the longer you stay. My first owned for 16 years and I'm 10 years into my second with no plans to move for the next 10.
-
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
Businesses have always ran under a different system. Like with health insurance, a business can write off everything paid while as an individual, you need what, 10% of AGI to even deduct a thing?
I think it's because businesses have $$, more tax lawyers, lobbyist and you can do more accounting tricks (put everything in Ireland and pay 0 tax even though 99% of your revenue is not from Ireland).
This is why things like simply taxing the rich doesn't always work easily since the rich will just pivot. If Elon Musk had hotel losses, maybe he'd not have to pay taxes now.
With tax laws, if you're low income, but very high net worth, you can probably qualify for CARE or those low energy prices and collect all the tax credits, unemployment because say you withdrew and had millions in income 1 year, then next year, make your income near $0 and not sell gains/assets. A lot of things are based on AGI.
charlesj
Active Member
My very good friend has such an above ground tank on his 5 acre lot not too far from here in the county. He states that the propane is very expensive, sold by the gallons. I tried to calculate it but couldn't.
Then you buy a large tank, not lease it. Not sure what building codes are.
He is considering solar but now I have to caution him on this.
Big companies that are investing in solar like Wal-Mart and Amazon have been submitting their appeal to the CPUC that any additional overhead/fixed-costs would deter them from helping contribute money in the future to hit California's green initiatives.
So that's the difference between Residential and Non-Residential. Residential is formed by coalitions like SEIA and CALSSA who represent private installers. Non-Residential is formed by companies that literally will say "we aren't investing if you screw with us."
These mega-corps pay finance people to run some numbers, show some spreadsheets, and talk about how this budget allocation for future rooftop solar on warehouses is getting canned unless the CPUC gives the non-residential folks favorable treatment.
There is no way for Residential to create a party of homeowners in the CPUC proceeding. Like even if You wanted to join the proceeding as an interested person who wants to buy a rooftop solar array in 2025, you would be blocked. The CPUC doesn't want to hear from you; they want to hear from "them."
So here's the irony. A mega corporation...
1) with billions of dollars of capital resources (cash + debt)
2) with a huge amount of available rooftop in California
3) with a huge amount of on-site consumption
4) with a huge amount of buying power to source cheap batteries
...
Requires that in order for their own economics to have a positive ROI, the grid access fee cannot be applied to them.
The CPUC needs to go screw right off if they can look a California homeowner in the face and say with confidence that their latest proposal is fair. But we know the CPUC is basically paid off by the IOU lobby and doesn't care about fairness at all.
Last edited:
charlesj
Active Member
charlesj
Active Member
One other thought about fairness just popped into my mind.
I live in a nice neighborhood with several doctors and professionals. No solar on their roofs.
Is it fair for me to subsidize them?
How many rich or upper middle class without solar? We will subsidize them in a way, no?
I live in a nice neighborhood with several doctors and professionals. No solar on their roofs.
Is it fair for me to subsidize them?
How many rich or upper middle class without solar? We will subsidize them in a way, no?
RKCRLR
Active Member
I live in the Sierra foothills and use propane for my stove top, tankless water heater, dryer, and my dual fuel heat pump/propane furnace. I mostly heat with the heat pump but use propane when it is really cold (it switches automatically) or the grid is down. I own a 500 gallon propane tank that I fill annually in summer (can only be filled to 80%) and use about 150-200 gallons a year. Propane is significantly cheaper in summer. The last time I filled up I paid $1.60/gal which equates to about $1.75/therm of natural gas.
Last edited:
RKCRLR
Active Member
I don't know if 49'R Propane (Diamond Springs) delivers there but they have an annual July sale.
charlesj
Active Member
I am pretty sure my friend mentioned over $2 per if not $3 here in Monterey area. There is no gas line by his property, hence he is looking to replace.
Now that you mention the volume, that 500 gal sound about right what he has, a huge tank, huge in my eyes.
RKCRLR
Active Member
I have paid close to $3/gal in the dead of winter.I am pretty sure my friend mentioned over $2 per if not $3 here in Monterey area. There is no gas line by his property, hence he is looking to replace.
Now that you mention the volume, that 500 gal sound about right what he has, a huge tank, huge in my eyes.
I have also paid close to $5/gal when refilling 5 gal containers.
"nonresidential NEM 2.0 customers have high fixed charges, minimum bills, and demand charges, which tend to lower the potential savings associated with investing in solar systems"
The $1.60/gallon and $3/gallon seems manageable. With the cold right now, I'm sure everyone's power bills, even with solar is rocketing up (mine is)...A 500 gallon tank for gas independence filled at $640-$1200 (80% for gas expansion I assume?) per year isn't great, but you'd be paying $200-$300/month for a few months right now to an IOU anyways.
With increased scale/purchases, maybe the prices won't be as bad and you can manage sales/deals (like in summer like you say). Question is if HOAs will allow a big propane tank in your backyard.
If anything, this is another possible option/thing to research if more discussions of going grid-less gains steam.
RKCRLR
Active Member
Yes, 80% is for expansion. My system is approaching 15 years old. I installed an 80% efficient furnace because my main heat source was the heat pump and the cost delta for a more efficient unit didn't justify the ROI. I could always install a more efficient unit it the ROI justifies it.
But I don't think propane will be the solution in the long run. The government will just increase the taxes on propane if they don't like people using it. Additionally, I believe propane is a byproduct of gasoline refinement. The less gasoline refined the less the availability of propane.
A HOA (and other entities) may object to propane if natural gas is available. But in many places natural gas isn't available and it is common for subdivisions to have propane tanks.
You may not want to literally quote this biased CPUC proposal for supporting material that claims the CPUC is not biased.
I can't tell why you want so badly for the CPUC to be above board with a sound proposal. You're a California homeowner and you don't represent the interests of the IOUs. Why would you naturally assume in favor of the agencies and IOU system that has proven time and time again to be corrupt?
The CPUC "lookback study" that they commissioned to draw the conclusion you copy-pasted was executed by Verdant.
The PCT is "a measure of the quantifiable benefits and costs to the consumer due to participation in NEM 2.0". Higher ratio means more benefit to the measured group.
Commercial and Residential PCT under NEM 2.0 were basically sitting on top of each other. We can disagree all day long whether this study is accurate (the SEIA and CALSSA have already tried). But if we assume this data is the basis for CPUC rulemaking for NEM 3.0... remember this: the higher commercial NEM 2.0 fixed cost burden for non-resi is offset by the fact that companies can deduct energy costs from their taxable income. Homeowners struggle to claim such a juicy benefit unless their home is also an place that generates revenue.
So yeah, why isn't the CPUC just smacking Air B&B homes with a $8 per kW per month fee for solar on rental properties and second homes? By all means, these revenue generating sites should be treated as businesses; these properties aren't really residential. They're discretionary money-makers. At the same time, maybe they should ask mega corporations to pay the $8 per kW per month fee too because they can easily afford it and have an avenue to pass a portion of those costs in their own business plans.
But the CPUC currently is lumping all residential into one giant category. And the only option most homeowners have to address these looming costs is to simply not install Solar or do some non-export plan like wwhitney has explained. Their willingness to significantly treat homeowners worse than Wal-Mart shows how easily corrupted the CPUC has become.
Last edited:
Will come down to whether Newsom wants to please the IOU unions or the 1.3 m solar owners.
My question is, can we have a non export plan, that would avoid the $8 fee? Based on my numbers, I would be better off with no export, and pay full retail for night time/winter usage etc. If all we get is a .05 discount, for me I would need to export 24,000 kwh to break even. That is unless I am not understanding the proposal correctly.
As discussed earlier in this thread, probably yes. Depending on what inverter hardware you currently have, you might need to install additional hardware to support non-export while grid-tied.
Cheers, Wayne
Thanks... This is worth looking into then, I would assume I would need batteries or different inverters. Hopefully some other options come to market if this is possible. Adding 2 batteries would get me down to only needing the grid in Dec/Jan except for extreme conditions. I have 4.5 years left of grandfathering under the new proposal, so have some time to dig in deeper.
It seems like the whole point of the $8/kW fee is for the IOUs to try to recover lost "revenue" due to generation and usage behind the meter. I don't think they're going to make it easy to have a non exporting grid tied system.
Similar threads
- Locked
