received EV -> EV2 transition letter [Discussion: CA Rate plans and PV or PV+Storage]

[holeydonut]

I forget the date, but if you got solar in the past, and are on NEM1, you get 20 years, so no tou change I believe

Grandfathering for NEM tariffs, NBCs, and process is 20 years.
This means someone who is on NEM 1.0 and paying that $2.00 per month NBC or whatever will keep paying that for many years even after NEM 2.0 or NEM 3.0 come in (assuming AB1139 doesn't pass).

Grandfathering for TOU structures (not the $ per kWh; just the fundamental structure) is 5 years.
This means someone on NEM 1.0 but with the E-6 TOU had 5 years of benefit before they will be forced to switch to E-TOU-C or EV2. That is why @astrob made this thread. The grandfathering they had on the EV plan is ending so they're being pushed to EV2.

There is no grandfathering for TOU $ per tier/structure/time-slot.
This means someone on NEM 1.0 but EV2-B was hit with that recent increase that brought Summer Peak up to $0.56 per kWh. And presumably this will go up again once PG&E is authorized to increase their "revenue" again to match their crazy cost base.


Edit: And I hope it's not lost by now that I view the TOU gamesmanship as the true way PG&E makes its "fair share" from people. I know the prevailing common knowledge from just a few years ago was that PG&E paid for the fair share of residential solar by using NBCs and interconnection fees. But to me, messing with TOU is where they can force someone to pay more $ even if hey were grandfathered into the old NEM. And of course AB1139 would just kick that messy Jenga puzzle over and force everyone with rooftop solar into one big bucket without any of the grandfathering on NEM or TOU carrying over. That's why I hope more people write their local reps.

 

[h2ofun]

Grandfathering for NEM tariffs, NBCs, and process is 20 years.
This means someone who is on NEM 1.0 and paying that $2.00 per month NBC or whatever will keep paying that for many years even after NEM 2.0 or NEM 3.0 come in (assuming AB1139 doesn't pass).

Grandfathering for TOU structures (not the $ per kWh; just the fundamental structure) is 5 years.
This means someone on NEM 1.0 but with the E-6 TOU had 5 years of benefit before they will be forced to switch to E-TOU-C or EV2. That is why @astrob made this thread. The grandfathering they had on the EV plan is ending so they're being pushed to EV2.

There is no grandfathering for TOU $ per tier/structure/time-slot.
This means someone on NEM 1.0 but EV2-B was hit with that recent increase that brought Summer Peak up to $0.56 per kWh. And presumably this will go up again once PG&E is authorized to increase their "revenue" again to match their crazy cost base.

Yep, they are on NEM1, tiered, non TOU, and will fight to keep it for 20 years.

 

[holeydonut]

Yep, they are on NEM1, tiered, non TOU, and will fight to keep it for 20 years.

I'm pretty sure JJrandorin will be forced to some TOU rate plan in a year or so regardless if AB1139 passes or not.

 

[aesculus]

I forget the date, but if you got solar in the past, and are on NEM1, you get 20 years, so no tou change I believe

But that have plenty of tricks up their sleeve. I was GF for NEM1 too, but not for EV1. So I could pick if I had an app for new solar within the target that would force NEM2. I choose EV1 over EV2 even though I could have stayed on NEM 1 with EV2. I thought (think?) that EV1 is a better payout than EV2, especially with PWs and being able to manage your consumption times.

 

[holeydonut]

I did, but I dont think it is going to help ( I dont have much faith in stuff like that making a difference).

Yeah, I agree with you... politics is basically driven by special interest groups and money. But, it's the system we have and it works better than most systems out there. So even if it feels inconsequential, it's still good to hear your participated

I left a note with my local assemblywoman that basically said...

Lorena Gonzalez says residential solar harms disadvantaged residents. But Lorena provided no numbers supporting her claim other than a CPUC finding that indicated a wealth gap between people with solar and without. For the same reason highways do not harm people without cars, I have not seen any evidence to suggest existing NEM policies cause quantifiable harm that must result in the complete re-building of rate/tax structures affecting those with residential solar systems.

However, AB1139 will "require that a customer-generator ... be transferred to the replacement tariff no later than 5 years from the date that customer first received service..."

So, let's calculate what this means to the affected homeowner. First, let's say the average home in California that has solar will produce a modest 5,000 kWh per year. The EIA estimates an average household in California uses 6,500 kWh energy per year. Since we do not know what NEM 3.0 will look like or what future utility rates will be, we can simply look at PG&E's current NEM 1.0 vs 2.0 and E-TOU-B vs E-TOU-C.

NEM 2 has non-bypassable charges (NBCs) of $0.025 per kWh of solar production that was not in NEM 1. This will impact the 5,000 kWh energy produced.

E-TOU-C has average energy costs that are $0.05 per kWh higher than E-TOU-B. This is because Summertime off-peak is essentially the same between the two programs. Peak costs increase and Winter costs increase under the newer plan. This will impact the 6,500 kWh energy consumed.

This example homeowner that is migrated today will see...
Their recurring NBC increase is approximately $150 per year ($0.025 x 5,000).
Their annualized energy costs outside of NBC increase is approximately $325 per year ($0.05 x 6,500).

This does not consider the proposed NEM 3.0 NBCs and future rate plans that will result in even higher impact. Also, consider Gonzalez believes the typical home with solar uses above-average resources because of a wealth gap. If this were the case, the impact would be even higher.

This is a minimum $475 per year of higher costs for an average homeowner who had carefully budgeted, planed, and purchased a solar system under the previous ruleset. Such costs will cause real harm to the over 200,000 residential solar customers in California who sought to help the state achieve it's clean energy goals.

 

[astrorob]

this discussion is pretty interesting, thanks to all for contributing.

my perception of the NEM stuff and tariffs is that it was all designed to be horrendously complex so that the IOUs can make little tweaks here and there to dial in whatever profit they think they need. i feel like they are coming for us (solar owners) since PGE especially needs money to pay for all the wildfire damage. the CPUC is likely completely outmatched in all of this stuff since the IOUs can afford to pay big $$ for really smart people and lawyers/lobbyists to get stuff over on the CPUC.

one thing i didn't realize is that non-TOU rates were available to me in late 2015 when i installed my PV system. one installer i talked to really touted EV-A since i had an EV, and there were no tiers on EV-A. for a variety of reasons i never had a smart meter until the PV system was installed, so i couldn't model any TOU vs. non-TOU plans, and i just took his word for it. it sounds like this may have been a mistake (though my true-ups have been in the +/- $200 range with an outlier here and there, so i can't complain too much - was paying something like $3500 per year before that.)

 

[miimura]

this discussion is pretty interesting, thanks to all for contributing.

my perception of the NEM stuff and tariffs is that it was all designed to be horrendously complex so that the IOUs can make little tweaks here and there to dial in whatever profit they think they need. i feel like they are coming for us (solar owners) since PGE especially needs money to pay for all the wildfire damage. the CPUC is likely completely outmatched in all of this stuff since the IOUs can afford to pay big $$ for really smart people and lawyers/lobbyists to get stuff over on the CPUC.

one thing i didn't realize is that non-TOU rates were available to me in late 2015 when i installed my PV system. one installer i talked to really touted EV-A since i had an EV, and there were no tiers on EV-A. for a variety of reasons i never had a smart meter until the PV system was installed, so i couldn't model any TOU vs. non-TOU plans, and i just took his word for it. it sounds like this may have been a mistake (though my true-ups have been in the +/- $200 range with an outlier here and there, so i can't complain too much - was paying something like $3500 per year before that.)

EV-A really was better for solar + EV customers. You got like double the EV kWh for every kWh you generated. EV2-A does not give you that benefit any more because the bulk of your generation is Off-Peak too. It is extremely unlikely that anyone has negative Peak or Part-Peak net usage without batteries.

 

[h2ofun]

EV-A really was better for solar + EV customers. You got like double the EV kWh for every kWh you generated. EV2-A does not give you that benefit any more because the bulk of your generation is Off-Peak too. It is extremely unlikely that anyone has negative Peak or Part-Peak net usage without batteries.

But if you just a solar/battery with no EV, what is best?

 

[miimura]

But if you just a solar/battery with no EV, what is best?

It really depends on your usage pattern. The defining feature of an EV is that it has very high consumption that can be scheduled very easily. Heating and cooling is probably the largest household load but it is not easy to shift completely into Off-Peak hours. If you are a significant net kWh consumer and are certain to owe money at true-up, you probably want EV2-A because it has the lowest Off-Peak rate. Shifting solar with Battery energy can prevent you from consuming Peak kWh from the grid. However, if you have a large solar system and are close to zero annual net kWh and cannot avoid winter heating costs during Peak, then you probably want a plan with lower cost differentials between Peak and Off-Peak. Even though the costs are higher Off-Peak, you are earning bigger credits for your solar generation and the unavoidable Peak usage is closer to the same price.

 

[jjrandorin]

It really depends on your usage pattern. The defining feature of an EV is that it has very high consumption that can be scheduled very easily. Heating and cooling is probably the largest household load but it is not easy to shift completely into Off-Peak hours.

I think this part about EVs gets overlooked sometimes (that its likely the largest home load one would have that can be pretty much controlled to be "when you want to do it" in a reasonable fashion.

All the stuff that @holeydonut is saying that PGE is putting out as propaganda, like having coldcuts for dinner, or washing clothes at midnight, or "dealing with it" related to heating and cooling, really are not that changeable when it comes down to it.

Once someone makes all the "regular" changes like swapping incandescent bulbs for LEDs, putting up curtains, and replacing an old appliance with a more energy efficient one when it fails, there really isnt that much more "change" a person can make to their electricity use profile.

Its hot when its hot, then you need AC, and its cold when its cold, and you need heating. Pre cooling / pre heating are not super different from just leaving the temp set to some temperature, etc.

I mentioned this before I think but in normal times, when I drive my EV to work and back, the energy it uses pretty much matches my home energy usage (so my EV uses as much electricity to go to work and back as my home does to "run" 24 hours).

Unlike my home however, I can pretty much completely control when I charge my EV. I personally dont have an incentive to charge it at a specific time, but I have it set at 3am to 3:30 am because its nicer to the grid, and because that means it drains my battery down to its reserve shortly before the sun comes back up.

I have gotten 2 mailings from SCE regarding PSPS, and how they are "trying to mitigate the historic situation". I just got an email for a web based workshop on "what to do during PSPS and how SCE is helping YOU!".

I see these, and then go out to my garage and look at the 2 powerwalls hanging on my garage wall and think "even though there was no real ROI, especially since I am not on a TOU plan, I LOOOVE these @#!$@!$ things!"

 

[holeydonut]

I think this part about EVs gets overlooked sometimes (that its likely the largest home load one would have that can be pretty much controlled to be "when you want to do it" in a reasonable fashion.

All the stuff that @holeydonut is saying that PGE is putting out as propaganda, like having coldcuts for dinner, or washing clothes at midnight, or "dealing with it" related to heating and cooling, really are not that changeable when it comes down to it.

BTW, I know people here think I'm exaggerating about the cold cuts and line drying clothes; or turning your TV to dim-mode. But remember I was on the phone with PG&E's "energy experts" in 2019 when I was asking about my energy bill. I used to get all their mailers and "Energy House Call" newsletters with their advice. Their advisors literally told me to sit in the dark until 8pm and eat cold sandwiches because every little bit helps.


Below are some real PG&E documents for your review.

https://www.pge.com/pge_global/common/pdfs/rate-plans/rate-plans/time-of-use/ETOUA.pdf

Incorporate stove-free dinners. Whether it’s leftovers, grilling, or working cold meals into the week, there are several ways to enjoy dinner without using your electricity

Plan a mini-marathon of your favorite shows. Late night is a perfect time to unwind and catch up on your favorite TV shows. Watch pre-recorded shows after 8 p.m. to have fun while saving money.

Energy Usage & Tips

How to reduce energy usage in the workplace and how to reduce energy usage at home.

www.pge.com

Hang laundry outside. Take advantage of late sunsets and warm evenings to bypass your dryer and let your clothes air-dry.

If possible, enjoy an afternoon at the pool, park or local library. You can also go to a community cooling center.

Challenge everyone in the household to gather around one television a few days each week, and turn off the others.

Use your clothes dryer for consecutive loads. The built-up heat means less energy spent.

Levitra For Cheap, Cheapest Kamagra In Uk, Kamagra 800 - Energyhousecalls Cheap Pills Online

Levitra for cheap. Cheapest kamagra in uk. Kamagra 800. Best offers. Best quality.

www.energyhousecalls.com

Adjusted TV settings can reduce power use by 5 – 20%. New televisions are originally set to look best on the showroom floor. However, these bright display modes are often unnecessary for your home and use a considerable amount of energy.

 

[astrorob]

yeah that's absurd. when i went on EV i decided i'd try to wash the dishes overnight and sort of half-heartedly do laundry outside of peak hours, but overall i decided i wasn't going to emulate living in a 3rd-world country, acting as though the electricity was out for most of the day...

i guess we don't use our cars very much even before the pandemic hit. EV2 was a lose until i installed powerwalls, even with a plug-in prius and a model 3.

 

[Redhill_qik]

Yeah, I agree with you... politics is basically driven by special interest groups and money. But, it's the system we have and it works better than most systems out there. So even if it feels inconsequential, it's still good to hear your participated

I left a note with my local assemblywoman that basically said...

Lorena Gonzalez says residential solar harms disadvantaged residents. But Lorena provided no numbers supporting her claim other than a CPUC finding that indicated a wealth gap between people with solar and without. For the same reason highways do not harm people without cars, I have not seen any evidence to suggest existing NEM policies cause quantifiable harm that must result in the complete re-building of rate/tax structures affecting those with residential solar systems.

However, AB1139 will "require that a customer-generator ... be transferred to the replacement tariff no later than 5 years from the date that customer first received service..."

So, let's calculate what this means to the affected homeowner. First, let's say the average home in California that has solar will produce a modest 5,000 kWh per year. The EIA estimates an average household in California uses 6,500 kWh energy per year. Since we do not know what NEM 3.0 will look like or what future utility rates will be, we can simply look at PG&E's current NEM 1.0 vs 2.0 and E-TOU-B vs E-TOU-C.

NEM 2 has non-bypassable charges (NBCs) of $0.025 per kWh of solar production that was not in NEM 1. This will impact the 5,000 kWh energy produced.

E-TOU-C has average energy costs that are $0.05 per kWh higher than E-TOU-B. This is because Summertime off-peak is essentially the same between the two programs. Peak costs increase and Winter costs increase under the newer plan. This will impact the 6,500 kWh energy consumed.

This example homeowner that is migrated today will see...
Their recurring NBC increase is approximately $150 per year ($0.025 x 5,000).
Their annualized energy costs outside of NBC increase is approximately $325 per year ($0.05 x 6,500).

This does not consider the proposed NEM 3.0 NBCs and future rate plans that will result in even higher impact. Also, consider Gonzalez believes the typical home with solar uses above-average resources because of a wealth gap. If this were the case, the impact would be even higher.

This is a minimum $475 per year of higher costs for an average homeowner who had carefully budgeted, planed, and purchased a solar system under the previous ruleset. Such costs will cause real harm to the over 200,000 residential solar customers in California who sought to help the state achieve it's clean energy goals.

I'm not sure if I agree with all of the numbers here, but more importantly I don't think that the right approach is to focus on the increased cost for solar owners. Instead I would suggest that the focus be on the benefit that distributed solar and especially solar+ESS offers to all of California.

The reason for the higher TOU rates from 4-9pm is the increased demand. The incremental cost of electricity at this peak usage is much higher drives up the generation cost component and the IOUs need to increase their grids to meet the peak demand.

Residential solar owners have paid upfront to add generation to the entire grid and are doing so at a higher cost per kWh than a large scale generator. We are removing demand from the grid which reduces the need for the IOU to pay $$$ for the incremental need and we export to our neighbors further reducing the need to buy the $$$ kWh plus the need for higher capacity long distance high voltage lines.

We aren't parasites feeding off of non-solar users we are directly supporting keeping rates low for everyone.

 

[astrorob]

by the way, a guy in my neighborhood spends a lot of time on solar education and he posted this to his mailing list today:

If any of you are sufficiently interested and inclined to want to voice your concerns about changes to the NEM program, here are some suggestions:

1. Here is the link to the CPUC’s home webpage: Welcome to the California Public Utilities Commission.
2. Here is a link to the page that describes the NEM proceeding currently underway with links to further information: Residential Rate Reform / R.12-06-013, including a link at the bottom to a particular person who can update you on the latest information and stage of the proceeding.
3. Subscribe to the document service provided by the CPUC where they will send you copies of the documents filed in the proceeding so that you can see the schedule for hearings, what all the parties are proposing, and the judge’s rulings, etc. Go to this website and set up your subscription service http://subscribecpuc.cpuc.ca.gov/. It is free. The proceeding in question is called Progress on Residential Rate Reform (PRRR) Residential Rates OIR (R.12-06-013).
4. Here is a link to a general discussion of Net Energy Metering (NEM) with various links to more information: Net Energy Metering.
5. Contact the Public Advisor: e-mail: [email protected]; phone 1-866-849-8390
6. Show up and testify at a hearing. And/or submit written comments.

 

[holeydonut]

I'm not sure if I agree with all of the numbers here, but more importantly I don't think that the right approach is to focus on the increased cost for solar owners. Instead I would suggest that the focus be on the benefit that distributed solar and especially solar+ESS offers to all of California.

The reason for the higher TOU rates from 4-9pm is the increased demand. The incremental cost of electricity at this peak usage is much higher drives up the generation cost component and the IOUs need to increase their grids to meet the peak demand.

Residential solar owners have paid upfront to add generation to the entire grid and are doing so at a higher cost per kWh than a large scale generator. We are removing demand from the grid which reduces the need for the IOU to pay $$$ for the incremental need and we export to our neighbors further reducing the need to buy the $$$ kWh plus the need for higher capacity long distance high voltage lines.

We aren't parasites feeding off of non-solar users we are directly supporting keeping rates low for everyone.

Yeah, I'm just trying to give my lawmaker some argument to make around real harm to real constituents. Which I hope is more useful than the "Solar Rights Alliance" (SRA) where they just sound like a reverse Fox News bit in their boilerplate plea for lawmakers to stop the bill.

Some points from the boilerplate that the SRA sends out:

"It'll kill roof top solar".... absolutions like this are so easy for some bush leaguer like Gonzales to refute. AB1139 won't kill anything. It just makes the cost prohibitive for residential solar around the fair share argument. Gonzales will literally blame the decrease in solar demand on the people who only wanted solar because it was subsidized. She'll blame the wealthy homeowners on not paying for solar now that the fees are "fair".

"This saves everyone money, but also cuts utility profits. That's what this is all about". Again, is the SRA not paying attention? The Utilities have long argued they are guaranteed a profit no matter what. So with current rules, any legislation in favor of or against solar is neutral to PG&E's profits. Gonzalez knows this, and will easily blast an argument around the profit motive. What is in play is this concept: When a customer pays for Solar with Sunrun or Powerwalls with Tesla, they're lining the pockets of Sunrun and Tesla's stakeholders. PG&E still makes the same profit, but the stakeholders interested in PG&E's investment make less. The SRA should focus the conversation that PG&E wants less rooftop solar because their special interests want access to PG&E's investment dollars instead of having millions of Americans investing in their own homes.

"AB 1139 is based on utility misinformation". Goddamnit SRA. Why bring up an argument that cannot be proven? Gonzales has the upper hand because she got to cast the first fake news about how disadvantaged people are harmed by rooftop solar. All she has to do to refute this accusation is say "it's not misinformation".

Anyway, when you write a lawmaker, the key is to actually give them an argument or position to take. Like give them stats about what has happened in other states/countries that nixed NEM rules. Give them some numbers. Give them some facts. They may not listen, but if they do at least your message has some use or actionable point behind it. With the combined smartness of people on TMC, I'm sure we can come up with better arguments than what the SRA came up with. So please use your logic and write your lawmakers. The more approaches the better.

BTW, I think I underestimated the number of homes with solar on their roofs... I thought it was in the low hundred of thousands but it's actually like 1 mm.

 

[BGbreeder]

It really depends on your usage pattern. The defining feature of an EV is that it has very high consumption that can be scheduled very easily. Heating and cooling is probably the largest household load but it is not easy to shift completely into Off-Peak hours. If you are a significant net kWh consumer and are certain to owe money at true-up, you probably want EV2-A because it has the lowest Off-Peak rate. Shifting solar with Battery energy can prevent you from consuming Peak kWh from the grid. However, if you have a large solar system and are close to zero annual net kWh and cannot avoid winter heating costs during Peak, then you probably want a plan with lower cost differentials between Peak and Off-Peak. Even though the costs are higher Off-Peak, you are earning bigger credits for your solar generation and the unavoidable Peak usage is closer to the same price.

I do get it that we all live in a developed country, and want to live "normally" without regard to peak pricing. PG&E suggestion to watch prerecorded shows is just laughable. I also understand leaker plants and the issues with late in the day "peak" usage having the highest marginal cost to utilities. Batteries are definitely one solution to help eliminate demand peaks.

There is a product, Ice Bear, that was basically a hot tub filled with copper AC coils and a small Freon pump. It was an add on to a central AC, and I think is now offered with the AC as a drop in. The AC would run off peak and freeze a block of ice in the tub. The ice would then be used to cool the Freon during on peak hours and provide cooling for very little cost (just running the small Freon pump). The concept is used commercially at places like Stanford University to cool enormous amounts of water overnight to provide chilled water during the day. (Their prior system used ice, but someone did the math and realized it took more energy to make ice (it's colder).

I haven't run the numbers to see if it makes sense in a retrofit, but might make sense in a replacement situation. YMMV, of course. We don't use enough AC to make it worthwhile except in a replacement scenario, and even then, I am not sure it would pencil out compared with a heat pump.

All the best,

BG

 

[holeydonut]

FWIW, I just stumbled upon this link. I don't know why this didn't come up when I was searching for TOU rate detail before.

Electric Rates

www.pge.com

You'll have to download each Excel and drop the info into some other chart/graph, but this should let you see the ever-evolving rates.

Just eyeballing it,
Peak Summer EVA rates have gone from $0.49 to $0.56 between May 1, 2019 and March 1, 2021. That's an increase of 14.3%.
Peak Summer EVA premium over off-peak during that same timeframe went from $0.36 to $0.42. That's an increase of 16.7%.

Bottom line, I hope you can fit enough solar on your roof to massively over-produce to cover your home and/or EV charging. As PG&E moves everyone to TOU rates, you'll keep seeing rates go up on an absolute basis, and the peak-premium keep widening as well.

If you can't get solar, then you're going to get whacked hard by the PoCo unless you start eating cold cuts for dinner and turning off your AC at 4pm.

 

[miimura]

FWIW, I just stumbled upon this link. I don't know why this didn't come up when I was searching for TOU rate detail before.

Electric Rates

www.pge.com

You'll have to download each Excel and drop the info into some other chart/graph, but this should let you see the ever-evolving rates.

Just eyeballing it,
Peak Summer EVA rates have gone from $0.49 to $0.56 between May 1, 2019 and March 1, 2021. That's an increase of 14.3%.
Peak Summer EVA premium over off-peak during that same timeframe went from $0.36 to $0.42. That's an increase of 16.7%.

Bottom line, I hope you can fit enough solar on your roof to massively over-produce to cover your home and/or EV charging. As PG&E moves everyone to TOU rates, you'll keep seeing rates go up on an absolute basis, and the peak-premium keep widening as well.

If you can't get solar, then you're going to get whacked hard by the PoCo unless you start eating cold cuts for dinner and turning off your AC at 4pm.

When I got my first EV in the Spring of 2013, I was on the E-9A rate schedule. In the Summer, solar would drive me down into Tier 1 and my EV charging only cost $0.03855/kWh. Tier 1 generation earned me $0.31083/kWh for all my solar after 2pm. That is 8X the kWh from solar to my EV. Ah, those were the days.

 

[holeydonut]

When I got my first EV in the Spring of 2013, I was on the E-9A rate schedule. In the Summer, solar would drive me down into Tier 1 and my EV charging only cost $0.03855/kWh. Tier 1 generation earned me $0.31083/kWh for all my solar after 2pm. That is 8X the kWh from solar to my EV. Ah, those were the days.

Yeah, something clearly went full-on broken with PG&E in the last decade. I fully expect that if I simply stayed as a "no-solar or ESS" customer with PG&E, that my $500-ish electricity bill in the hot summer months would be over $1,000 in just a matter of 5 or so years. And that's without an EV.

They are just skyrocketing their rates (for people who aren't disadvantaged on CARE or FERA), plus imposing really stiff TOU penalties for people who use energy in the normal "peak" curve.

 

[Oceanwolf]

I am trying to model the economics of adding a battery or two and moving to EV-2A. Thoughts?

For me it wasn't even economics, the public safety power shutdowns are the reason. I use 13kw a day, my solar produce 26kw so I should be off the grid for a long time with my 2 PWs. Winter with snow, that is a different discussion, I can hold for a day or two after that the generator needs to come out.