RKCRLR
Active Member
You can...Just not nearly enough....Clearly I can't make my own natural gas...
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Discussion: Is Tesla's new PV+PW strategy influenced by Planned Utility NEM Changes?
- Thread starter kengchang
- Start date
RKCRLR
Active Member
I'm not aware of any current regulation requiring you to have PG&E service. Where I live there a lot of people that are off-grid because they don't want to pay to have the lines run.
I paid $20K to have 3 poles put in when I built my house.
Probably true, but for someone who has service now, just do not see how money wise would ever make sense to disconnect.
skepticcyclist
Member
Are you allowed to go off grid? I can’t with SCE.Personally, with the rapid decrease in solar and battery costs, yes I think it would be more economical to do what you propose than paying monster fees to PG&E.
This is counter to common sense where a centralized power grid should be more cost effective than a completely de-centralized energy ecosystem where every home is not interconnected with one another. Only in California could the fees and poorly run utilities (the ones who demand a fair profit in spite of their inefficiency) exist to the extent it's even remotely more economical to be permanently off-grid than on-grid.
I think the worst impact of all these changes will be felt by homes that don't have the ability to add enough solar. Some homes simply don't have a good roof/pane for all this, so those homeowners will need to continue paying out-of-control prices with no option to break completely away. I wish I could add another 4 kWp of solar... but alas
RKCRLR
Active Member
What happens if you tell them to disconnect you, stop using power, and stop paying your bill?
skepticcyclist
Member
RKCRLR
Active Member
Interesting....So they can raise the price as high as the government will allow and the government will require you to pay it even if you don't want it or use it.
skepticcyclist
Member
My city and location requires us to be connected to our local electrical (SCE), gas (SoCalGas), and trash/water/sewer (the city). If we fail to sign up with any of these within a given time of obtaining residency we would be fined. Failure to sign and pay the fine would result in a lien for an owner or eviction for a tenant.
We can’t install our own well; we have to use the city water supply. We have to pay for water service even if we don’t use water. We have to pay for trash service even if we never put out trash to be picked up. We have to pay electrical connection even if we never use electricity. We have to pay gas service even if we replaced all appliances with electrical ones and don’t use gas at all. We pay for the service fees for these things as part of the general taxes for the whole community.
The only areas in the city that don’t have to are the more rural areas that don’t have to be connected. But they pay 5 figure permit fees just to do their own things as a way to discourage them from doing so.
Last edited:
Huh so it is illegal in California for a normal residential dwelling to be completely off grid... it’s something called Title 24. It’s Section 110.10 of the Code.
Here’s an Interesting read for someone with more free time. I spend all my free time hating on PG&E.
DJVoorhees
Member
DJVoorhees
Member
They wouldm have to recall nealy every politician they have, not sure Cali can be saved at this point.
Batteries. And the end of private utilities. I have the system so I know how they works and live in LADWP territory so I know how a “utility” as another part of the government works. The problem here is too much capitalism. You can’t expect private, capitalist utilities to happily organize their own destruction.
The grid has an existential threat when solar plus batteries are less expensive than the grid. That’s the case in anywhere where electricity is over about $16 cents per kWh now!
That’s at current prices and where it’s sunny with a sufficient size and orientation. Prices for home systems are only going down.
It’s not for us on this thread to figure out but people in multi unit homes or offices need a grid. In ten years the challenge will be what to do with the residential midday solar. Check out Australia as they reach 20% home solar. There was an article in the Australian Guardian yesterday that you might have to pay to export electricity to the grid.
The grid has an existential threat when solar plus batteries are less expensive than the grid. That’s the case in anywhere where electricity is over about $16 cents per kWh now!
That’s at current prices and where it’s sunny with a sufficient size and orientation. Prices for home systems are only going down.
It’s not for us on this thread to figure out but people in multi unit homes or offices need a grid. In ten years the challenge will be what to do with the residential midday solar. Check out Australia as they reach 20% home solar. There was an article in the Australian Guardian yesterday that you might have to pay to export electricity to the grid.
Title 24 is all of the building codes in California. You need to specify the Part (which Code) before specifying the section. The article references Part 6 (Energy Code) Section 110.10, which you can read here:
2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE, TITLE 24, PART 6 | ICC DIGITAL CODES
ICC Digital Codes is the largest provider of model codes, custom codes and standards used worldwide to construct safe, sustainable, affordable and resilient structures.
codes.iccsafe.org
Section 110.10 is "Mandatory Requirements for Solar Ready Buildings" I don't buy the analysis in the document you referenced. I read 110.10(c) as requiring a reserved pathway to a point of interconnection with an electrical service, rather than requiring the electrical service itself.
Cheers, Wayne
No matter what the codes are, there are very few folks I expect that are 100%!!!!!! off grid who are connected to, or can be connected to, utilities for basically free. The costs I have read are just nuts, unless your only choice was to pay for a bunch of power poles and transformers to reach a persons house.Title 24 is all of the building codes in California. You need to specify the Part (which Code) before specifying the section. The article references Part 6 (Energy Code) Section 110.10, which you can read here:
2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE, TITLE 24, PART 6 | ICC DIGITAL CODES
ICC Digital Codes is the largest provider of model codes, custom codes and standards used worldwide to construct safe, sustainable, affordable and resilient structures.
Section 110.10 is "Mandatory Requirements for Solar Ready Buildings" I don't buy the analysis in the document you referenced. I read 110.10(c) as requiring a reserved pathway to a point of interconnection with an electrical service, rather than requiring the electrical service itself.
Cheers, Wayne
I have no problem paying my "fair" share. But the say things like we are going to charge you 10 bucks a month per KW of solar just because it is one your house is nuts!!!! And we are only going to give you whole sale rate. Might as well consider taking the panels off?
It is required by some town and city ordinances to have electrical service to live in a dwelling. I know of 1 case where a home in the bay area went off grid right from the start.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
The homeowner had to do some serious oversizing (232 kWh!) to prove that the home would never use a generator as the primary power source, which I believe is also a requirement in Woodside.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
The homeowner had to do some serious oversizing (232 kWh!) to prove that the home would never use a generator as the primary power source, which I believe is also a requirement in Woodside.
I sure do not understand how he gets by during the winter. He may have lots of batteries, but am surprised the solar is so small. What am I missing?
Similar threads
