-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
More anti-Solar shenanigans :(
- Thread starter nwdiver
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Energy Environment Policy
Looks like Alabama is the new front in the war against the anti-solar forces of darkness.... If your utility is Alabama Power please speak up. Call your commissioner.
To Some Solar Users, Power Company Fees Are An Unfair Charge
Fun Fact: If SPS had won in NM the solar fee would currently be >$6/kW as opposed to $5/kW in AL.
To Some Solar Users, Power Company Fees Are An Unfair Charge
Fun Fact: If SPS had won in NM the solar fee would currently be >$6/kW as opposed to $5/kW in AL.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
YepHave to be completely off-grid since these fees are based on capacity not grid use
Can't you install the solar so it cannot back-feed to avoid the fee? Basically, the solar is off-grid but your batteries can charge from the grid if needed.Have to be completely off-grid since these fees are based on capacity not grid use
That's not how the fees are structured. They're charging you for using less electricity because you have solar. Back-feeding or not back-feeding is irrelevant. The 'justification' is that since the infrastructure is there to support you at night then they need to charge an extra fee for having solar. Only way to avoid it is to go off-grid.
Wow. That's so much worse than I thought. Instituting it as a kind of reverse demand fee is almost logical, but what they're doing is just money grubbing, plain and simple.
Here's what makes it SUPER-crazy.... Imagine you have 8kW in 'Bama so you're paying ~$40/mo to the local utility gestapo. You go on vacation. You miiiight get ~$0.03/kWh (cost avoided) for what you export. So you pay $40 for having solar... and get paid ~$30 for the excess energy you exported. You're literally paying them $10 for exporting energy to the grid for them to sell....... beyond insane.
Do they do any net metering at all, or is every kWh imported retail and every kWh exported wholesale? Some utilities also do net metering but settle every month. In those cases you cannot bank Summer production for Winter consumption.
Someone was kind enough to start aggregating the solar nonsense. This currently appears to only cover the SE. Hopefully they expand it. But in truth the SE is where most of the nonsense is anyway.
Rates of Solar
Rates of Solar
cpa
Active Member
Seems like everyone and his cousin refers to the 31st state as "Cali" these days. Just laziness and the current rage to limit texting and other avenues to the minimum number of characters. Guess I am showing my age!
It seems like NM is ground zero for anti-solar fees. Farmington passed a $7.28/kW fee in 2017. It's now being challenged by Vote Solar and Earth Justice in Federal Court. You can track the progress here.
Renewable advocates sue Farmington over solar fee
A generous donor is also matching donations to Vote Solar this month.
Renewable advocates sue Farmington over solar fee
A generous donor is also matching donations to Vote Solar this month.
Merrill
Merrill
We have the same problem in California and the non profit called Solar Rights Alliance is fighting the power companies.
How bad are their fees? 7.28/kW is BY FAR the worst I've seen. Even Rate 59 was 'only' the equivalent of ~$5/kW and in it's finally iteration was based on consumption AND production so if you weren't home for a month you didn't pay much. In Farmington you could be out of town for a month... use ~0kWh and if you have a 10kW system still pay ~$73 for having solar.
Merrill
Merrill
We do not have that fee yet and the last time Pacific Graft and Extortion tried to get it thru the CPUC it failed by 1 vote. Plus like NM the public was outraged and I’m sure they will try again, so that is what the SRA is trying to prevent. They do keep raising the delivery charges and use the same old BS line that solar customers are not paying their fair share because we get our power from the sun. Honestly I do not mind paying for my fair share of maintaining the infrastructure, but as you know from the last 3 years of fires that money went to the investors and CEO’s and not to maintain the infrastructure.
Similar threads
