CPUC NEM 3.0 discussion

[h2ofun]

I've posted this a few times but people don't seem to interpret the language in the CPUC proposal the same as me.

Technically I can see an interpretation where the ESS also contribute to the kW in a "system". So, maybe a 10 kWp AC solar system with 2x Powerwall 2's (10 kW total for the two) would be a 20 kW system.

Consider my NEM2-MT interconnect agreement. It clearly lists my total system size as 6.7 kW of solar + 15.0 kW 3x PW2 = 21.7 kW total "facility". I would expect a NEM 3.0 person with a system identical as mine to pay PG&E 21.7 x $8.00 per month if this bogus proposal passes.

I asked Sunrun to submit my PTO application as a 6.7 kW system so PG&E wouldn't bump my total system size over 20 kW; which would require a higher tier of insurance coverage naming PG&E as an insured. PG&E countered immediately saying ESS is part of a system size and I need to update the form.

Edit: @h2ofun, does your PTO agreement list your system size as 32 kW or 57 kw (including 5x Powerwalls)?

I think we need to be ultra careful with how the CPUC and the IOUs ultimately enforce this. Unless someone expressly adds language to define what is a "residential customer's system", you should include the ESS in the size because the IOUs have set precedent that they interpret system size this way.

Quote from the CPUC propsal:

I believe it does, both solar and batteries

I am still wanting 100% clarity. What does the 15 years nem2 get? No 8 buck fee? Still get residential rate when sending back?

 

[h2ofun]

I read a good amount of the CPUC proposed decision. The proposed decision is fairly straight forward in my opinion. It is clear to the commission that NEM 2.0 solar customers are getting a rapid payback on their investment, and this cost is coming from customers that do not have solar. They are proposing changing the rate structure to increase the length of time of this payback and to more equitably align costs to customers.

" Our review of the current net energy metering tariff, referred to as
NEM 2.0, found that the tariff negatively impacts non-participating customers; is
not cost-effective; and disproportionately harms low-income ratepayers."

While I understand the frustration of a solar customer seeing their costs increase due to these changes, I wonder if the same solar customer considers the increased costs that the non-solar customers have had and what their level of frustration is.

Great, I will just see how I Can change my system so NONE of it ever goes back to PGE, so it looks like I have zero solar!!

 

[Zabe]

I believe it does, both solar and batteries

I am still wanting 100% clarity. What does the 15 years nem2 get? No 8 buck fee? Still get residential rate when sending back?

Based on Wayne's earlier post I believe the only change for NEM 2.0 is going from 20 years to 15 years. No 8 buck fee, still get residential rate when sending back. Your system should have paid for itself a few times over by 2035.

 

[sunwarriors]

While I understand the frustration of a solar customer seeing their costs increase due to these changes, I wonder if the same solar customer considers the increased costs that the non-solar customers have had and what their level of frustration is.

As a recent solar customer just this year, I think the whole plan/tactic by the CPUC/utilities is to bring class warfare into the equation. I'm a very late solar adopter already and have never felt solar customers were what caused my power bills going up. Being in CA, a lot of it was poor/wasteful mismanagement of the grid and lack of investment to prevent fires. Price increases are to recoup what they had to pay out in fines. We have all seen the reports of bonuses paid to PG&E execs, little invested in upkeep and various other deals.

Prices have been going up on energy since as long as I can remember, but the level of increase as a non-solar customer is nothing compared to the level of how solar owned people will be if this proposal is implemented in it's exact form. I sorta like the idea posted on reddit that everyone should just have a grid connection charge to maintain the grid, not only solar people. Forcing solar customers to pay the lion's share of that is a slap in the face, then they selling your generated power at full rates to a non-solar user, but compensate you 5c is kicking you when you are down, then changing terms to 15 years from 20 is further pissing on your grave.

There is also little/no protections I feel if they can push this through for anyone. If implemented, solar will be dead in CA since the payback is simply too long and the average home owner's stay in a home being as long as the payback means you're better off just not bothering and keep the cash.

I wonder if people can file a lawsuit if/after this passes.

 

[sunwarriors]

I would like to bring up the fact that PG&E rates have exploded since we purchased this home in 2008, I really doubt the rate tripled all because of solar users. Now, the city next to me, has their own city owned utility, guess what, their rate is less than half PG&E rates. Rates I keep kicking myself for not buying a house 2 blocks away, out of PG&E territory. So I really find it hard to believe its only because of people installing solar, and btw, the city next to me has lots of homes with solar. Not too mention all the new construction with solar etc... So if this passes, I would expect PG&E to lower rates? Yeah right, they are already looking at another 18% rate increase in 2023... Its all about the money "Ninety-eight sitting members of the California legislature took campaign money from the Pacific Gas and Electric Company".. So when it comes to anything California says about Global Warming, I am gonna have to call BS..

Like you say, it's all about PG&E getting what they can to recoup their losses from all the fires.

This is why some proposals that people push to say PG&E (or other utility) should be the one to do mass scale storage and sell it back to us is more efficient is a joke...

Why would anyone want to give them the keys to manage something that they have pretty much screwed up on already? They're all in it for the $$ since to them, it's just a job anyways and they're in it to get whatever $$ they can.

The whole point of solar/storage is getting independence from the utilities that are pushing this that they can manage it better. I really hope there is a massive pushback from this proposal.

The $8/kW really hurts people with bad (north) facing panels. Get much lower generation, still forced to pay the full fee.

 

[sunwarriors]

Based on Wayne's earlier post I believe the only change for NEM 2.0 is going from 20 years to 15 years. No 8 buck fee, still get residential rate when sending back. Your system should have paid for itself a few times over by 2035.

That difference in 5 years is going to cost $3240 more now. (assuming 8 kW system vs. paying monthly fees).

I think this proposal will just kill off the solar industry in CA due to the insane payback period pushing 16+ years. That can't be a good thing for global climate concerns or any goals of clean energy.

Is there anything positive for the environment with this deal (outside of $$ benefits for the utilities?)

 

[sunwarriors]

If $8/kW fee is the exact amount that should be paid by solar owners to make NEM 3.0 equitable to both solar and non-solar owners would that be fair?

I think if this is implemented, solar installs will die in CA so that means it was never equitable for solar owners anymore. It's too lopsided as worded. The deal is just too bad so how can that be a good thing or fair? Look at states which had massive changes to NEM and it completely ended the business. Is that what CA even wants?

These proposals never factors in what people had to pay to put these systems up. They just look at their low cost now, but ignore the 20-60k someone spent.

 

[sunwarriors]

They did a study, they found out solar customers on NEM 2.0 are not paying their fair share, they are trying to fix it. Is it perfect I am sure it is not. Is NEM 2.0 perfect, NO.

I am not blaming any of you personally for getting solar and trying to do something for the environment and to lower your power bill. I am just pointing out what the study says. I have powerwalls only. I am sure one of these days they will change the rates or charge me some capacity fee also.

I guess in the proposal, are you ok now suddenly paying $208/month to the utility for your powerwalls and $2496/year since I assume you have 2 PWs and can load shift and charge from the grid at a low price?

My guess is no and honestly, I think everyone just wants everyone else to foot the bill (you included). You think you'll be safe/protected so you spout these ideas of everyone not paying their share.

Sorta like Rand Paul...as long as it's someone else, it's a-ok with me:

Senator's aid request for tornado damage faces backlash

 

[sunwarriors]

I don't have a horse in this race so I don't really care if it is $/kW or import/export cost or any other rate structure.

I actually think you do if they consider all solar/storage as an energy system...Even without solar, everyone is connected because someone has to pay so as long as it's not you, most people are ok with someone else footing the bill.

 

[Zabe]

I actually think you do if they consider all solar/storage an energy system...Even without solar, everyone is connected because someone has to pay so as long as it's not you, most people are ok with someone else footing the bill.

You have no issue with non-solar footing your bill....

 

[skepticcyclist]

My city offers a local electrical service where they by electricity from SCE and customers pay a lower rate. They even have their own plans for Net Metering solar. I wonder if this proposal will affect this option as well? Pomona Choice Solar | Pomona Choice Energy

I'm not on this service because it just started as I was going through PTO and I didn't know a whole lot about it, so I opted out.

 

[holeydonut]

You have no issue with non-solar footing your bill....

I don’t buy class warfare BS red herring argument the IOU’s use. They fractured the voter base by making it a rich vs poor thing.

The real problem is PG&E being the worst run utility in the USA with astronomical energy costs. While they have failed to maintain infrastructure and reliability, they have succeeded in killing people at a felony level. PG&E should be asked to find efficiencies and smart deployment of capital before they ask others to fork over billions.

In the meantime, private residents have invested billions safely to get clean energy generation on their roofs.

Do you think “poor” people’s electricity prices are dropping if PG&E collects extra billions from “rich” new solar systems? No, rich and poor we’re all getting manipulated and repeatedly gas-lit by PG&E. Don’t fall for their BS.

 

[Zorg]

The major issue is that SCE/PGE are bloated and inefficient. If one is lucky enough to live in Truckee, one pays a flat 15c per KWh. Difference? They get their electricity from Nevada.

If I get the new proposal, it's a double whammy as electricity consumed is way more expensive than electricity exported and the flat fee per month. I could see one or the other as a way to charge solar panel owners for the grid fixed fee, but the double whammy is clearly designed to kill solar in CA, which it will. I got 14 years more on my system, so at least it'll be paid for.

The right way to do this should have been to simply reduce the export value of the NEM. It would encourage having batteries, which reduce the reliance on the grid, and would charge solar owners for their share of the grid upkeep. But tacking on a flat fee is just utter BS.

 

[Zorg]

I don’t buy class warfare BS red herring argument the IOU’s use. They fractured the voter base by making it a rich vs poor thing.

The real problem is PG&E being the worst run utility in the USA with astronomical energy costs. While they have failed to maintain infrastructure and reliability, they have succeeded in killing people at a felony level. PG&E should be asked to find efficiencies and smart deployment of capital before they ask others to fork over billions.

In the meantime, private residents have invested billions safely to get clean energy generation on their roofs.

Do you think “poor” people’s electricity prices are dropping if PG&E collects extra billions from “rich” new solar systems? No, rich and poor we’re all getting manipulated and repeatedly gas-lit by PG&E. Don’t fall for their BS.

The SJW argument is a red herring. PGE and SCE couldn't care less about social justice, but they had to wrap their argument into something that they could sell. So, voila, it's a class issue.

 

[getakey]

You have no issue with non-solar footing your bill....

I agree that NEM1/2 was too advantaged for home solar, but NEM3 swings too far the other way. PG&E has not maintained the grid. Their mismanagement should not be subsidized by solar or non-solar customers. One of the fires was caused by their equipment installed in 1920! There is no way new solar can have an ROI less than 20 years with that current proposal. Do you agree with that?

 

[wwu123]

My city offers a local electrical service where they by electricity from SCE and customers pay a lower rate. They even have their own plans for Net Metering solar. I wonder if this proposal will affect this option as well? Pomona Choice Solar | Pomona Choice Energy

I'm not on this service because it just started as I was going through PTO and I didn't know a whole lot about it, so I opted out.

That looks like your local CCA, many urban areas of California have one now. Their rates are often a bit lower, but then your utility SCE, SDGE, PGE tacks on a surcharge for your leaving them, which generally offsets any savings and brings the rates to within a penny of your utility. You can download the rate comparison from PCE and see all of this. Likely the CPUC proceedings won't impact much, as the big utilities are already getting all of their money from you from their distribution fees and their surcharges, and I thought the proceedings were about solar and storage, not CCA's.

The only main benefit at this point from CCA's is they often source cleaner energy, so PCE is generally NOT buying all their electricity from SCE alone (which would negate the whole point of CCA's), but generally more renewables. (And before anyone calls me out, yes all the electrons from all generators and sources are commingled on the grid, so no, the electrons from PCE can't be solely distributed to your home and not SCE's electrons, but they do go to someone's home, when you get some of SCE's...)

 

[h2ofun]

Based on Wayne's earlier post I believe the only change for NEM 2.0 is going from 20 years to 15 years. No 8 buck fee, still get residential rate when sending back. Your system should have paid for itself a few times over by 2035.

It is not clear to me either of these are true. Got to see the details, and then of course, what gets passed. Bottom line it will not be pretty for solar owners. The amount of money I spent for solar is NUTS. The amount of money I spent to go to 99% electric is nuts! If I had knows what I know now, I should not have done either of these! I did what was suggested, and now screwed. All these folks that have said need to go total electric in the house, and cars, well, what are they saying now? Pretty quiet.

 

[getakey]

the new CCA i

That looks like your local CCA, many urban areas of California have one now. Their rates are often a bit lower, but then your utility SCE, SDGE, PGE tacks on a surcharge for your leaving them, which generally offsets any savings and brings the rates to within a penny of your utility. You can download the rate comparison from PCE and see all of this. Likely the CPUC proceedings won't impact much, as the big utilities are already getting all of their money from you from their distribution fees and their surcharges, and I thought the proceedings were about solar and storage, not CCA's.

The only main benefit at this point from CCA's is they often source cleaner energy, so PCE is generally NOT buying all their electricity from SCE alone (which would negate the whole point of CCA's), but generally more renewables. (And before anyone calls me out, yes all the electrons from all generators and sources are commingled on the grid, so no, the electrons from PCE can't be solely distributed to your home and not SCE's electrons, but they do go to someone's home, when you get some of SCE's...)

in our area the CCA sources 55% of their power just from the Grid. They are less "green" than PG&E, but that fact is pretty well hidden

 

[wwhitney]

It is not clear to me either of these are true. Got to see the details,

The details are in my earlier post. If you don't believe my statement that "the only part of [the Order] that references NEM1 and NEM2 is item 12," you can look at the proposed decision yourself:

https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M430/K903/430903088.PDF

and then of course, what gets passed.

That, of course, may differ, but hopefully not for the worse.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[wwu123]

the new CCA i

in our area the CCA sources 55% of their power just from the Grid. They are less "green" than PG&E, but that fact is pretty well hidden

sure, that's why I used the words "not buying all" their electricity from SCE in the example, meaning some probably came from the local utility, some from other sources.