Is there any problem with getting way more solar than needed (in PG&E territory)?

[paladaxar]

I'm in San Jose getting our transmission from PG&E (and generation from SJCE).

We just moved into our house, so we don't know exactly how much electricity we'll need throughout the year.

But regardless of how much we need right now, we want to get WAY more than we need to be "future proof" (to be able to add possibly multiple EV chargers, maybe a heat pump, electric water heater, etc).

One estimate that we got was that about 4.5kW would cover 100% of our needs (we used about 600kW in the last month with the AC running a lot). We want to max out our (south facing) roof and get about 11.2kW with 2 powerwalls.

My question is: Will PG&E have a problem with that? Will we be able to get on NEM 2.0 with that system and be able to sell lots of electricity back (I know it's only 5c/kWh right now...but it's on the rise fast). And if we keep over producing (possibly for years), would they ever kick us out of the NEM program for having way more solar than we are using? I think I remember reading somewhere that one of the requirements to be eligible for NEM (and NSC) is to have enough solar to cover "only 100% of your need". But I'm not sure if that's just a suggestion or a rule that they use to kick people out of the program.

Some people may want to respond with "just ask PG&E"...but honestly I trust people here with real life experience (and lots of hours researching these things) more than phone reps at PG&E...not that they're trying to lead people astray, they just often less informed than the actual community who uses the things they are trying to help with.

 

[BGbreeder]

To me "multiple EV" implies substantial loads. Historically, telling PG&E that you plan to add one or more electric vehicles as a reason to ramp up has been sufficient, and planning to add a heat pump would also do it. I would run the numbers on how far you think that you will drive, and how much you think that you will use the heat pump, and then consider how independent you want to be in say, January, when there isn't much solar energy available.

Good luck,

BG

 

[h2ofun]

I sure would get written approval before I did something like that. I have heard of folks having to remove panels when not approved

 

[holeydonut]

To me "multiple EV" implies substantial loads. Historically, telling PG&E that you plan to add one or more electric vehicles as a reason to ramp up has been sufficient, and planning to add a heat pump would also do it. I would run the numbers on how far you think that you will drive, and how much you think that you will use the heat pump, and then consider how independent you want to be in say, January, when there isn't much solar energy available.

Good luck,

BG

Unless you get the same A-hole I got and he wants to see the EV before allowing more solar capacity.

 

[aesculus]

Unless you get the same A-hole I got and he wants to see the EV before allowing more solar capacity.

I don't know if it's still true but I had to give PG&E my VIN for the Tesla before I could sign up for EVA.

 

[miimura]

I don't know if it's still true but I had to give PG&E my VIN for the Tesla before I could sign up for EVA.

This is totally inconsistent. Many people don't have to provide any proof of EV ownership, myself included. Also, getting approved for solar based on increased future usage for charging an EV is a completely separate issue from being admitted to a particular "EV charging" rate schedule.

 

[getakey]

I don't know if it's still true but I had to give PG&E my VIN for the Tesla before I could sign up for EVA.

i did too, but that was several years ago

 

[BGbreeder]

PG&E required me to move to EVA-2; no VIN request, just an or else.

 

[funkadelic]

Our system (solar roof) was oversized based on our existing usage, but we did note that we would likely add a hot tub + another EV at some point. Also didn't mention that we'd probably go heat pump and hybrid elec water heater as well. no problems getting the PTO from PG&E in early 2021

edit: to be more specific, our roof generated around 15MWh/year, when we used maybe 12MWh/year

 

[paladaxar]

I sure would get written approval before I did something like that. I have heard of folks having to remove panels when not approved

Woah, someone had to actually remove panels that had already been installed?? Was that in PG&E territory?

 

[roblab]

No one ever "approved" my solar panels. I have about 11 kw worth with 30 on the roof and 36 on the ground behind the house, easily visible from the road that runs just below them. Never a peep from PG&E, ever. I had heard that I was supposed to get them approved in Napa, but I never did that, either, figuring I'd do it if I had to, and I never had to.

I had never heard of anyone having to "remove" any panels, and I find that hard to believe. That's like telling me I can't have energy efficient appliances. It's just dumb.

 

[holeydonut]

No one ever "approved" my solar panels. I have about 11 kw worth with 30 on the roof and 36 on the ground behind the house, easily visible from the road that runs just below them. Never a peep from PG&E, ever. I had heard that I was supposed to get them approved in Napa, but I never did that, either, figuring I'd do it if I had to, and I never had to.

I had never heard of anyone having to "remove" any panels, and I find that hard to believe. That's like telling me I can't have energy efficient appliances. It's just dumb.

Sunrun told me about the problems of oversizing my array causing a need to remove panels as well. There's two stages of the PTO form... the installer has to submit a draft and greenbutton data up front to move into the next step of PTO. When Sunrun submitted my PV+ESS sized at 120% of my previous annual consumption PG&E's interconnection team stopped my system it. I asked Sunrun to make sure the box was checked indicating I was going to buy an EV soon, and Sunrun said PG&E still rejected it.

When they called the PG&E interconnection team, they were told unless I had the EV + Charger already, then the checkbox on the form wouldn't apply. Since I had neither in my house at the time, Sunrun said I was SOL and was capped at 110%.

I asked Sunrun to just install the solar panels anyway because what's the worst the can happen? And they said some homeowners have failed PTO after passing inspection. And PG&E can forces Sunrun to take the offending panels back off the roof. PG&E is allowed this under the massive Rule 21 Tariff rules. I'll be damned if I can find that specific language in there, but Sunrun absolutely refused to go over the 110% that their calculator allowed under Rule 21. I think PG&E uses the CSI EPBB (AESC) calculator instead of PVWatts to estimate annual production given the system layout.

I asked Sunrun to submit that all my panels faced North instead of South to get a lower annual production estimate (since my solar was going to be fully paid instead of PPA'd I had no production guarantee). But they told me to stop gaming the system lololol.

Edit, here's my original link where Sunrun let me submit for 120% sizing because to them it's normal to over-size. But then PG&E surprised all of us when they started crapping all over my system.

PS. I didn't hate PG&E too much in the beginning, but now I really hate PG&E.

CSI EPBB Calculator - Standard PV Calculator

Electric Rule 21: Generating Facility Interconnections

www.cpuc.ca.gov

 

[jjrandorin]

No one ever "approved" my solar panels. I have about 11 kw worth with 30 on the roof and 36 on the ground behind the house, easily visible from the road that runs just below them. Never a peep from PG&E, ever. I had heard that I was supposed to get them approved in Napa, but I never did that, either, figuring I'd do it if I had to, and I never had to.

I had never heard of anyone having to "remove" any panels, and I find that hard to believe. That's like telling me I can't have energy efficient appliances. It's just dumb.

There are lots of people who dont file taxes too, or dont claim things on their taxes they should, or claim things they shouldnt. If one person makes an incorrect claim on their taxes and gets away with it, it doesnt mean everyone else who tries the same thing would get away with it.

 

[jboy210]

Unless you get the same A-hole I got and he wants to see the EV before allowing more solar capacity.

Rent/Borrow one and take a picture in front of your house. Blur the license plate and tell them you're a street racer and don't want anyone getting your plate number.

 

[holeydonut]

Rent/Borrow one and take a picture in front of your house. Blur the license plate and tell them you don't want anyone getting your plate number.

Sunrun wouldn't submit the PTO pre-app to PG&E if I did that.

Sunrun sends people to your house to do a pre-build assessment, take photos, and fly a drone over your house to send to their designers. Too bad Vines wasn't one of their designers. Ugh.

 

[jboy210]

No one ever "approved" my solar panels. I have about 11 kw worth with 30 on the roof and 36 on the ground behind the house, easily visible from the road that runs just below them. Never a peep from PG&E, ever. I had heard that I was supposed to get them approved in Napa, but I never did that, either, figuring I'd do it if I had to, and I never had to.

I had never heard of anyone having to "remove" any panels, and I find that hard to believe. That's like telling me I can't have energy efficient appliances. It's just dumb.

Yeah, that sounds really wrong. You could take up arc/mig/tig welding as a hobby (we did that at my parent's house). Or you could turn into a back to nature type that lives in a yurt in the backyard. None of their business.

 

[Redhill_qik]

No one ever "approved" my solar panels. I have about 11 kw worth with 30 on the roof and 36 on the ground behind the house, easily visible from the road that runs just below them. Never a peep from PG&E, ever. I had heard that I was supposed to get them approved in Napa, but I never did that, either, figuring I'd do it if I had to, and I never had to.

I had never heard of anyone having to "remove" any panels, and I find that hard to believe. That's like telling me I can't have energy efficient appliances. It's just dumb.

I have a hard time believing this unless the panels were installed a pre-NEM 1.0. Are you getting NEM billing and an annual true-up? If so, then your installer file the interconnect agreement and PG&E approved the installation. If the panels are not tied to the grid and PG&E doesn't need to approve.

There are safety reasons behind the approval as too much solar can overload the local transformers, this could be based on your individual house or multiple in the neighborhood that are serviced by the same transformer(s).

 

[Redhill_qik]

I'm in San Jose getting our transmission from PG&E (and generation from SJCE).

We just moved into our house, so we don't know exactly how much electricity we'll need throughout the year.

But regardless of how much we need right now, we want to get WAY more than we need to be "future proof" (to be able to add possibly multiple EV chargers, maybe a heat pump, electric water heater, etc).

One estimate that we got was that about 4.5kW would cover 100% of our needs (we used about 600kW in the last month with the AC running a lot). We want to max out our (south facing) roof and get about 11.2kW with 2 powerwalls.

My question is: Will PG&E have a problem with that? Will we be able to get on NEM 2.0 with that system and be able to sell lots of electricity back (I know it's only 5c/kWh right now...but it's on the rise fast). And if we keep over producing (possibly for years), would they ever kick us out of the NEM program for having way more solar than we are using? I think I remember reading somewhere that one of the requirements to be eligible for NEM (and NSC) is to have enough solar to cover "only 100% of your need". But I'm not sure if that's just a suggestion or a rule that they use to kick people out of the program.

Some people may want to respond with "just ask PG&E"...but honestly I trust people here with real life experience (and lots of hours researching these things) more than phone reps at PG&E...not that they're trying to lead people astray, they just often less informed than the actual community who uses the things they are trying to help with.

IMHO, the proposed 4.5kW of panels in San Jose would not be enough to cover the typical house needs. Plugging in 4.5kW placed due south in San Jose into the PVWatts calculator returns an estimate of 7,533 kWh annually. If you have a very efficient house with conservative use of light sources at night and gas appliances and heating then that might just cover it, but only just.

The current PG&E interconnect agreement, form 79-1193, allows for 3.0 kWh * building square feet if there isn't 12 months of service. There is also a field to indicate that you are planning to increase your annual usage that can filled in to support the system size that you go with.

Most people will say to put on as much as you can and if you can get this done before NEM 3.0 is finalized I agree with that. If NEM 3.0 is passed before your system is installed then your might be on the hook for additional fees for the larger system that you might not need.

 

[jjrandorin]

I have a hard time believing this unless the panels were installed a pre-NEM 1.0. Are you getting NEM billing and an annual true-up? If so, then your installer file the interconnect agreement and PG&E approved the installation. If the panels are not tied to the grid and PG&E doesn't need to approve.

There are safety reasons behind the approval as too much solar can overload the local transformers, this could be based on your individual house or multiple in the neighborhood that are serviced by the same transformer(s).

Im pretty sure that roblab was his own installer (DIY / self install) and just didnt file anything. No idea on billing, that would be up to him to share or not share, but he has mentioned before that he did his own install.