Merrill
Merrill
This is why everyone should support Solar Rights Alliance, go to there web site and join they have helped in keeping monopolies like Pacific Graft and Extortion from screwing solar customers.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
If you're California, the economics in favor of a solar solution will likely get worse soon
- Thread starter holeydonut
- Start date
- Status
Rate arbitrage is using the PWs to shift the rate schedules. You charge PW at off peak or should and power house from PW during peak. You are netting the difference in rates as a benefit.
You cannot send electricity from PW to grid, but by Powering house from PW during peak, you are maximizing the solar credit back to the grid
You cannot send electricity from PW to grid, but by Powering house from PW during peak, you are maximizing the solar credit back to the grid
aesculus
Still Trying to Figure This All Out
Regarding sending power back to the grid outside of production. See this thread
Dumping Excess Power During Peak Period
The TL/DR version is it is now permissible technically but there is no way to do this in the PWs and a rate structure has not been approved. Who knows when or if it every will be. And if they do allow it there is high likelihood they will find some loophole to make it worthless.
Dumping Excess Power During Peak Period
The TL/DR version is it is now permissible technically but there is no way to do this in the PWs and a rate structure has not been approved. Who knows when or if it every will be. And if they do allow it there is high likelihood they will find some loophole to make it worthless.
There's a difference between Net Metering and Time of Use. What you're saying (charging less during the day and more at night) will happen to all solar customers regardless of NEM 1.0, 2.0, or 3.0.
Socal Edison has already shifted what hours relate to "peak" periods to later in the afternoon and changed prices during the day for NEM 1.0 and NEM 2.0 customers.
From my understanding, NEM is to guarantee 20 years on the compensation structure, but has nothing to do with peak/off peak periods or specific pricing of what they can charge during those periods.
NEM 1.0 = Retail pricing for generation Credits.
NEM 2.0 = Retail price minus "non-bypassable charges" for generation credits.
NEM 3.0 = from my understanding, paves way to move away from "retail" or includes new variable tariffs to further reduce generation credits.
At least for Socal Edison, the only grandfathering we get is to stay on our originally selected TOU for at 5 years from PTO. After that, they can and will start to shift customers from the old TOU-D-A, TOU-D-B, EV1, etc to the newer and less solar favoarble TOU 4-9, 5-8 or PRIME schedules.
There's a difference between Net Metering and Time of Use. What you're saying (charging less during the day and more at night) will happen to all solar customers regardless of NEM 1.0, 2.0, or 3.0.
Socal Edison has already shifted what hours relate to "peak" periods to later in the afternoon and changed prices during the day for NEM 1.0 and NEM 2.0 customers.
From my understanding, NEM is to guarantee 20 years on the compensation structure, but has nothing to do with peak/off peak periods or specific pricing of what they can charge during those periods.
NEM 1.0 = Retail pricing for generation Credits.
NEM 2.0 = Retail price minus "non-bypassable charges" for generation credits.
NEM 3.0 = from my understanding, paves way to move away from "retail" or includes new variable tariffs to further reduce generation credits.
At least for Socal Edison, the only grandfathering we get is to stay on our originally selected TOU for at 5 years from PTO. After that, they can and will start to shift customers from the old TOU-D-A, TOU-D-B, EV1, etc to the newer and less solar favoarble TOU 4-9, 5-8 or PRIME schedules.
Yeah, I'm kind of co-mingling the NEM and TOU polices together.
Yes, NEM 2.0 introduced more one time and recurring fees. But I think one important distinction you are missing in your list is that NEM 2.0 required all PV customers (who weren't grandfathered into NEM 1.0) to be on a TOU rate plan. And this rate plan informed what the homeowner "deposited" to the grid with excess PV minus what they "cashed-out" once the sun set.
But one key element was that under NEM 2.0, the TOU structures themselves had to be broad enough to allow a reasonable balance of deposits and withdraws. I think California's most popular TOU had "peak time" from 3pm to 8pm under NEM 2.0. So a household had a reasonable shot at generating what it used over a 12 month period and have the energy sort of net out.
But under NEM 3.0; not only will a TOU plan still need to be used, the utility can now require a very unfavorable interpretation of the deposit vs cash-out. So while a theoretical net metering is happening under NEM 3.0; it's a much worse interpretation than NEM 2.0. There will be many more homeowners who generate what they produce over a 12 month period that will still see true-up bills since their usage cost more than their generation credit.
So to me, the worsening of NEM 3.0 is directly linked to how the utilities can abuse the TOU rates, plan-hours, and red tape.
If you can take care of your home’s utility needs and not pull from the grid that in itself is still pretty good. We ourselves are not going into this to make money. The wildfire PSPS situation here was the final motivating factor to jump on board along with our EVs.
So you guys are saying this will likely be like water conservation? Do too well at it as a homeowner/business and like East Bay MUD they’ll say they need to raise rates because they aren’t generating enough money to run operations otherwise
??
So you guys are saying this will likely be like water conservation? Do too well at it as a homeowner/business and like East Bay MUD they’ll say they need to raise rates because they aren’t generating enough money to run operations otherwise
??
Context is important.
Rooftop solar costs are plummeting, with Tesla solar leading the way at only $1.49/Watt after tax credits. https://www.tesla.com/energy/design
Cheap solar plus high California electricity rates means it will be the rare California household that won't save money by installing solar, regardless of net metering policy.
If you like donating money to your favorite utility monopoly, then solar is not for you. For almost every other homeowner in California, solar is the way to go.
Rooftop solar costs are plummeting, with Tesla solar leading the way at only $1.49/Watt after tax credits. https://www.tesla.com/energy/design
Cheap solar plus high California electricity rates means it will be the rare California household that won't save money by installing solar, regardless of net metering policy.
If you like donating money to your favorite utility monopoly, then solar is not for you. For almost every other homeowner in California, solar is the way to go.
We are essentially doing cost avoidance. But, this different than in other countries. As I understand it, they can suck up solar energy and put it in their Powerwalls. And then sell those kWh in their PowerWall back into the grid at peak times and get the paid/credited based on the current high rate.
MXLRplus
Active Member
The CPUC has already allowed a shift in the highest rate window to devalue solar production of commercial customers. Our commercial TOU highest tariff now starts at 4pm, instead of noon. The hours of the highest solar production are bumped to the cheapest TOU tier.
And you did not read a word about in our State Government announcements or the media. It is move by the utility to essentially seize a portion of their customer's solar production.
I think the new plan is called the New Green Steal?
And you did not read a word about in our State Government announcements or the media. It is move by the utility to essentially seize a portion of their customer's solar production.
I think the new plan is called the New Green Steal?
This seems to be coming to the US - earlier in the thread somebody posted that CA may be starting down this road, and there are existing programs in New England that pay customers to discharge their PWs at peak times. There are certainly some challenges with creating these programs, and the details will be critical (is it optional or required to discharge, what are the rates, when does this happen, etc.) but it makes sense to allow this as the next step if and as solar generation is high enough.
Wow I didn’t realize they already started to skew the TOU rates for NEM 2.0 commercial customers like this.
The worst part about the utilities gaming the mandatory TOU in their favor is they blame the customer for fault if the customer observes they’re not getting the savings advertised before.
PG&E will gaslight the customer by saying “just manage your (or your tenants) energy use better” instead of acknowledging PG&E is the one screwing the situation in their favor.
It’d be too obvious if PG&E only charged NBC’s, so they bury their “fair share” shenanigans in sneaky changes to the TOU periods and rates. It’s sad to see even NEM 2.0 users aren’t safe from this.
I am still grandfathered in for TOU-D-A until next year I think. I thought I could kept TOU-D-A for 20 years... but that's not the case. So in a year or 2, my NEW 2.0 solar production will be selling at the lowest rate anyway... how would that be different than NEM 3.0?
Have not closely read all the posts, but my interconnection agreement with PG&E back in 2018, and the associated tariffs PG&E published, did not prohibit grid export of energy from Powerwall that was generated from solar. The only restriction was basically "your total grid export for the year must not exceed what our billing system models your solar system could produce during the year." What is lacking is Powerwall support to do easily do generation time shifting.
A CPUC decision a year or two ago established that with Energy Storage, you can choose to either (a) charge it only from on site generation--then export to the grid is unregulated or (b) charge it possibly from the grid--then instantaneous export to the grid must not exceed instantaneous generation.
Cheers, Wayne
A CPUC decision a year or two ago established that with Energy Storage, you can choose to either (a) charge it only from on site generation--then export to the grid is unregulated or (b) charge it possibly from the grid--then instantaneous export to the grid must not exceed instantaneous generation.
Cheers, Wayne
NEM 3.0 will have many more “non bypass-able charges” or NBC’s than NEM 2.0. So folks will see higher recurring tariffs and probably more up front cost during PTO.
I believe residential NEM 2.0 would still keep more favorable TOU rates than 3.0 though. There are many existing NEM 2.0 customers who are in solar leases and were generally sold solar assuming a certain level of savings versus what they experienced before.
I hope the TOU tiers don’t get overhauled on NEM 1.0 or NEM 2.0 customers where peak daylight time is significantly decreases. Homeowners will get pinched with higher than expected true up bills since their production in daytime won’t match the value of their usage after dusk. This mandatory TOU gamesmanship is where the utility can stick it to the PV-only homeowners.
Of course PG&E will probably just blame the unsuspecting homeowner for having light bulbs, cooking dinner, or watching prime time TV.
I hate the "non bypass-able charges". I am actually producing more energy than I used (not just money wise.. it is kWh wise), but I still have to pay those charges. Once my TOU-D-A ran out and be forced to switch to TOU-D-4pm-9pm, I will be in the negative money wise on top of the non-bypassable. I will be selling at $0.25/kWh with the sunlight and using during day/evening averaging around $0.30 to $0.35/kWh.
I thought your comment about this a few months ago covered the clean energy exporting situation pretty well. Some/Most interconnect agreements are non-export (at least with PG&E) even if your energy source is renewable and not some other generator.
And the Tesla Powerewall (and I believe all other batteries for sale in the USA) are set up as a non-exporting.
So while your particular interconnect agreement could allow clean-energy exports, a homeowner would still need workaround to push clean energy to the grid at a specified time. I feel like this isn't really a pragmatic thing for most homeowners, although I'm curious if your hack was actually successful.
Can Powerwall charge from solar and export to the grid?
Last edited:
This has already happened. I am on NEM 1.0 due to my solar installed in 2012. I was enrolled in E-9A then elected to jump to EV-A, then was kicked out into EV2-A. The move to EV2-A drastically devalued my solar production before 3pm. For people without Powerwalls, this is a huge hit. In my case, the impact is not that significant because I can absorb almost all my solar in the batteries and use that energy later during the more expensive TOU periods. However, this is only true because I have a pretty small solar system. Any solar that I add (above 1.0kW CEC AC) would kick me out of NEM 1.0 and would likely only be worth Off-Peak price. That makes it much harder to justify expanding my solar array.
RKCRLR
Active Member
I haven't seen the requirement for new construction to have solar mentioned in this thread. That will drive a glut of solar power during the day. I wonder if they are going to start throttling solar production during the day if they have excess capacity and no way to store it.
They just need to buy more Tesla PowerPack to store all the solar power for a few hours and then feed it back into the grid during the peak.
Shift the solar power to match usage. That is so simple use dumb homeowners can figure it out.
- Status
Similar threads
