CPUC NEM 3.0 discussion

[black knight 3]

quick question, for those of us grandfathered in to NEM 2.0: are we grandfathered to stay at NEM 2.0 but not able to avoid the monthly $8 per KW surcharge? Apologies in advance if question is redundant and has been already answered. I could not find a previous answer.

 

[gene]

Even more interesting is the fact that NEM 3.0 won't even affect LA. They're under LADWP.

It took place in LA in front of the CPUC office.

 

[sunwarriors]

The other problem with this is that it gives the utilities a convenient villain - those “wealthy solar brats”. It would have the possibility of publicly validating the policy, especially if it causes brownouts.

One thing I noticed about the rally is that it was smart to call out NEM3.0 as a destroyer of jobs. Installs drying up means a lot of laid off workers in CA. Politicians look very bad when jobs are gone and a whole industry is decimated because of 1 bad policy. They need to keep any future NEM plan viable for the non wealth solar brats as you call it to keep working.

This will hopefully, make any future NEM plan more balanced at least. I think going along with this and the ripple effects will have any voted out of office.

Wanted to add that if this passes as is, I think Tesla and other companies may develop a mode to go non-export and to fight this. I think instead of tons of batteries and waiting for V2H, hooking up generators is an added option for backup as well. NG costs are insane too now though.

 

[EVDRVN]

Yeah, I feel like the only way the 1,000,000+ residential solar generators can get their point across that their combined investments is actually worth more than the $0.03 per kWH avoided cost calculator (and stupid fixed costs) is to wait until the hottest day in Summer. And they collectively turn off their solar arrays at 4pm.

Of course the SEIA and CALSSA cannot coordinate such an event since it's probably illegal. And whatever grassroots way homeowners could plan this would also give the IOUs and CAISO enough lead time to just get standby peaker plant natural gas generation and some pricey imports teed up from neighboring states. They'll pass this emergency scramble to procure energy back to rate payers anyway.

But it will create a huge media storm and get lots of attention. We can do a secret list like a flash mob

 

[skepticcyclist]

It took place in LA in front of the CPUC office.

Ahhh. Got it. Thanks

 

[wwu123]

I'm just reading parts of the Proposed Decision directly for the first time now. In addition to $8/kw fee and the reduced rate for export, I think I'm reading that only a certain set of designate rate plans are eligible for the "successor tariff" under NEM 3.0. Currently for PG&E, it says of existing rate plans, only EV2-A is currently eligible. There is mention of a five year grandfathering of existing rate plan, not sure when the period would start, but regardless that would be long gone by the time NEM1/2 transition to NEM3.

As I reading this part correctly? For relatively miserly electricity sippers like myself, just transitioning from E-1 or E-TOU-C to EV2-A alone would cost about $400 more per year, or 50% more annually. That's irrespective of all the other NEM3 changes.

 

[h2ofun]

If a homeowner curtails solar production in the summertime, they may solve a "daily NEM cycle", but that means they'd be hosed on their annual cycle. Imagine a home needing 12,000 kWh per year (excluding EV charging). In the NEM 1.0 and NEM 2.0 days, it was somewhat reasonable to put enough solar on a normal rooftop (I am excluding outlier monster sized arrays like H2ofun) for a homeowner to generate 12,000 kWh in a given year. Maybe 8,000 kWh would be generated in the Spring/Summer, but only 4,000 kWh in the Fall/Winter.

Since the energy generation and use wouldn't net out each month, it required an annual true up where Summertime banking was cashed in during the Winter.

I think a home that still relies on natural gas for cooking and heat may care about this issue less simply because that home's electricity use also decreases in the winter time. But homes that converted to all electric because they were trying to be good Californians would get hosed hard if they simply stopped generating in the Summer rather than bank useful NEM credits.

yep, like me

 

[h2ofun]

That... really sucks for homes that have electric heating. Since homes will be on time of use plans (excluding Medical Baseline and CARE), they'll get absolutely destroyed by winter time heating bills that don't conform well to the normal peak/non-peak curve. RIP.

Time to put in those wood fireplace inserts...

Edit, so yeah, even if you do export to the grid in the summertime, you're probably only getting $0.00 to $0.03 per kWh under NEM 3.0. So you're basically losing nothing by just turning off your solar array once your ESS is full and try to avoid that $8 per month per kW fee. NEM 3.0 is total trash.

yep, that is my thoughts

 

[h2ofun]

Vines addressed this in his answer, but let me expand on it:

It's a question of how the Gateway/Poweralls can communicate with the solar inverters. If there's an out-of-band (separate communications channel) way for them to speak to each other, that both support, then absolutely that would be possible. I believe that's the case with the PW+, for example, where the Gateway and the solar inverter are integrated in the same (upper) box.

Failing that, the only way for the Gateway to communicate with the solar inverters is in band, via the AC waveform. When the whole system is on the grid, the Gateway/Powerwalls have no control over that, the Powerwalls are just grid-following inverters. While when the Gateway disconnects from the grid, the Powerwalls now run in grid forming mode, and have control over the AC waveform. They can force the solar inverters to shutoff by shifting the frequency of the AC waveform they are generating.

Cheers, Wayne

Yep, maybe some new hardware also. I expect someone smart will come up with a solution.

 

[yblaser]

I'm just reading parts of the Proposed Decision directly for the first time now. In addition to $8/kw fee and the reduced rate for export, I think I'm reading that only a certain set of designate rate plans are eligible for the "successor tariff" under NEM 3.0. Currently for PG&E, it says of existing rate plans, only EV2-A is currently eligible. There is mention of a five year grandfathering of existing rate plan, not sure when the period would start, but regardless that would be long gone by the time NEM1/2 transition to NEM3.

As I reading this part correctly? For relatively miserly electricity sippers like myself, just transitioning from E-1 or E-TOU-C to EV2-A alone would cost about $400 more per year, or 50% more annually. That's irrespective of all the other NEM3 changes.

Yes, that is the way I read it. The only motivation I can attribute to the requirement for a "highly differentiated time-of-use" rate plan is to encourage paired storage. I don't know why they would single out solar customers for this punitive incentive to adopt ESS as it would seem it is more broadly applicable.

 

[ucmndd]

quick question, for those of us grandfathered in to NEM 2.0: are we grandfathered to stay at NEM 2.0 but not able to avoid the monthly $8 per KW surcharge? Apologies in advance if question is redundant and has been already answered. I could not find a previous answer.

So long as you are grandfathered you maintain the NEM 2.0 terms. The $8/kw tax would start at the end of your grandfathering when you are transitioned to NEM 3.0.

 

[h2ofun]

So long as you are grandfathered you maintain the NEM 2.0 terms. The $8/kw tax would start at the end of your grandfathering when you are transitioned to NEM 3.0.

Until they vote, who knows

 

[ucmndd]

Until they vote, who knows

Well yeah, sure. They've already proven they're not above retroactively changing terms.

 

[Zorg]

In a non export situation, I guess that one could double the PV (space permitting) on the roof to offset more in the winter (assuming enough PW). It's wasteful, but that could be the cheapest way to do it.

 

[tomuo]

Need one of these ICE making HVACs to soak up any extra solar in summer.

Ice-Powered Air Conditioning is on the Way | HVAC

particularly if you’re interested in sustainable, eco-friendly technologies—then you’ve probably read a bit about ice-powered air conditioning.

valleycomfortheatingandair.com

 

[arnolddeleon]

Assuming this passes what are the bets on how PG&E will charge me given I have

10 kW system, PTO is 20 years ago but they don't seem to have it in their records (long story)
2 kW system but they have it as 3 kW system 14 years ago (probably related to the long story above)
4 kW system that is less than a year old
plus 3 Powerwalls (2 PTO in 2018 and 1 in 2021)

Do I start getting charged for the 10 kW system immediately since it is past 15/20 years? But they forgot about it? Do I chance it or should I just replace the system assuming that I would get new 15 year clock (instead of paying "the solar tax" put the money to better use).

Do I start getting charged for 7 kW immediately since that is what they have on record and my first PTO was 20 years ago?

Do I start getting charged for the 3 kW in 2023 because that is oldest system they have "on record"?

Do I not get charged all till 2036 when my newest system is 15 years old? What will they charge me then?

That's not even all the possibilities.

 

[BGbreeder]

Ah, OK, then the GW must sense the phase angle and communicate that to the PWs, as the inverters in the PWs can't see the grid. It would be interesting to see oscilloscope traces of the AC voltage waveform during various transitions.

Cheers, Wayne

Like @miimura, I believe the switch happens at zero current, when the phases are matched. (For wear and tear on your power electronics, you would always want to switch when there is zero current.) I think matching the phase angle would be an absolute requirement, because otherwise you would have significant transients from anything that has an inductor or capacitor in it. A resistance heater or Edison bulb won't have much of an issue with a change in phase angle, but pretty much anything else that I can think of is going have issues. (Motors, power supplies, LED lights, CFL lights...)

For us, switching back to grid is never noticeable. Switching from the grid is invariably an audible "thunk" from the Gateway. (Perhaps because it waits for a portion of a cycle to detect the drop out and then has to switch into a pre-existing house load?)

All the best,

BG

 

[stopcrazypp]

I just saw Tesla's email about this and sent in the messages under Tesla Engage using their system. Also sent in a separate public comment myself in the CPUC public comment section. I don't have Tesla Energy, but my home has solar panels. With my system size and low electricity usage (pretty much all of my major appliances are still on gas, which unknowingly turned to be a blessing as I was going to switch them to electric to take more advantage of NEM), the tax would mean it would actually would cost me more money to own my system than if I didn't have it, much less recoup the costs. I see a lot of comments being made to the same effect.

This proposal is a very quick way to kill home solar and makes zero sense when California is trying to be a renewable energy leader. Tesla is saying it's the highest tax in the entire nation, even higher than anti-renewable states. It makes zero sense for California to adopt. Hopefully CPUC listens to the public and not the utility lobby.

I have been looking on how to retrofit energy storage to handle power outages (that Tesla no longer offers a storage only option sucks) and I guess with these new changes, I will have to even figure a way to turn my solar system to totally off-grid to avoid the monthly taxes. Maybe have a subpanel of loads that run off solar and battery normally and then have ATS that uses the grid as "backup".

 

[h2ofun]

I just saw Tesla's email about this and sent in the messages under Tesla Engage using their system. Also sent in a separate public comment myself in the CPUC public comment section. I don't have Tesla Energy, but my home has solar panels. With my system size and low electricity usage (pretty much all of my major appliances are still on gas, which unknowingly turned to be a blessing as I was going to switch them to electric to take more advantage of NEM), the tax would mean it would actually would cost me more money to own my system than if I didn't have it, much less recoup the costs. I see a lot of comments being made to the same effect.

This proposal is a very quick way to kill home solar and makes zero sense when California is trying to be a renewable energy leader. Tesla is saying it's the highest tax in the entire nation, even higher than anti-renewable states. It makes zero sense for California to adopt. Hopefully CPUC listens to the public and not the utility lobby.

I have been looking on how to retrofit energy storage to handle power outages (that Tesla no longer offers a storage only option sucks) and I guess with these new changes, I will have to even figure a way to turn my solar system to totally off-grid to avoid the monthly taxes. Maybe have a subpanel of loads that run off solar and battery normally and then have ATS that uses the grid as "backup".

Yes, your comment cost more than if you did not have the system is clearly what they do not understand. I could see an option could be it might be cheaper to remove than keep down the road.

 

[slcasner]

For us, switching back to grid is never noticeable. Switching from the grid is invariably an audible "thunk" from the Gateway. (Perhaps because it waits for a portion of a cycle to detect the drop out and then has to switch into a pre-existing house load?)

When switching from the grid the Gateway is just opening its contactor to isolate from the grid. The connection between the house load and the PV and battery sources is just wires and circuit breakers where current is already flowing (but increases).