Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

SolarCity (SCTY)

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Kind of interesting...indirectly related to SolarCity.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-pollution-idUSKBN0UB1KB20151229
"With the machine-based learning we can do it very quickly."

The two tech rivals aren't just competing over government clients. Business clients - in particular renewable power generation companies - are another target, along with consumers. Already more than 30 solar farms in China are using IBM's forecasting technology, which can also help predict the availability of sunlight.

Cowen updated SCTY
http://www.streetinsider.com/Analyst+Comments/ITC+Impact+on+the+Solar+Industry+in+a+Nutshell+-+Cowen+(SUNE)+(FSLR)+(CSIQ)+(SCTY)/11181182.html

New/Old Solarcity Corp $55.00 $42.00
 
Last edited:

As a second derivative observation, a dip in residential PV installation volume was expected in a post-ITC environment as the economics in many states outside of CA and the Northeast didn't pencil out. Now that this is no longer the case, increased demand across the residential PV space should bode well for companies active in the residential PV supply chain, namely Enphase and SolarEdge, and the elevated competition is an issue worth monitoring for SolarCity.

This is an interesting thought. SolarCity may have avoided going into certain marginal states like Georgia out of concern for decline during ITC stepdown. This is no longer an issue, so we may see SolarCity move into a few new states this year.

It would be nice to hear this from Lyndon.
 
Short interest stood at 48.7% of the float as of Dec 26th. So looks to me like a decent group of shorts covered just after the ITC announcement, but there's still half the float out there. If Chanos is to be believed, folks of his mindset may even add to their short position in the first week of the year as shares become available.

This slightly lower short total will still trigger a massive squeeze at some point, no?
 
Swiss Oil Trader Vitol Biggest Buyer So Far for U.S. Shale Crude - Bloomberg Business

Vitol Group, which owns stakes in refineries from Belgium to the Persian Gulf to Australia, has agreed to buy two cargoes of U.S.-sourced crude, the first of which will be ready to sail as soon as Thursday. ConocoPhillips will supply the first tanker-load, made up of crude and a type of ultra-light oil known as condensate from wells in the Eagle Ford Shale formation in south Texas, according to a statement by the Houston-based company.

Overseas demand for U.S. crude is expected to remain muted because of a worldwide glut that has pushed oil prices to the lowest in more than a decade. A 64 percent surge in American oil production over the past five years driven by technological breakthroughs in shale drilling has compounded an oversupply from OPEC nations, Russia and other producers.
 
Will the Politics of “Net Energy Metering” drive SCTY’s Price Action?

California

On Tuesday December 15th California CPUC proposed a future net metering regime will preserving retail payments for residential rooftop PV.

Tuesday’s proposed decision, however, specifically declines to impose any demand charges, grid access charges, installed capacity fees, standby fees, or similar fixed charges on solar power residential customers. while the commission continues to evaluate the need for them. That’s a big victory for the solar industry, which has fought hard for keeping the retail rate.

Utilities reacted negatively to the CPUC proposal, which is open for public comments until Jan. 7, and could be voted on by the full commission as early as Jan. 28, 2016.

http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M156/K443/156443378.PDF

Arizona

The state of Arizona approved a monthly fee on rooftop solar customers in 2013. In doing so became one of the first states to challenge net metering. This fee reduces the savings which result from customer’s investing in clean energy technology.

A clean energy watchdog group, “Checks and Balances” has began a systematic inquiry into the Arizona Corporate Commission (the Public Utilities Commission of the State of Arizona). They are seeking to expose bias against the solar industry. The group launched an extensive investigation into Commissioner’s Bob Stump’s phone records, alleging his involvement in “dark money electoral schemes” and inappropriate ties with Arizona Public Service (APS), the largest utility in the state. A judge is currently reviewing thousands of text messages retrieved from Bob Stump’s cell phone.

In addition, a conflict-of-interest lawsuit has led to the resignation of Susan Bitter Smith, chairwoman of the Arizona Corporate Commission.

SolarCity disclosed earlier this month that it is a financial backer of the Checks and Balances Project.

Nevada

Sunrun is currently suing Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval for failing to comply with a public-records request showing communication between his office, utility regulators and NV Energy. The solar company claims that Sandoval’s close ties with the utility industry led to the recent repeal of retail-rate net metering in the state.

The Politics of Net-Metering

With over 190 countries uniting together at COP21 Paris to address climate change, the extension of the Investment Tax Credit, the presidential election in full swing, and over 40 states considering “net metering” policy changes, the politics of utility regulation should drive SCTY price action. The position of California’s CPUC looks to be squarely in favor of solar power and distributed generation. My hope is that it raises the bar for the rest of the country to follow.
 
Last edited:
Did you notice that in addition to the $35/month fixed charge, the credit drops to 2.6cents in 2020?

The issue is SolarCity's contracts are for 20 years. Over each of the 20years the contract should make sense for the consumer. NV Energy pricing in 2020, which is mere 4 years away is disastrous. The consumers will have to decide between defaulting on SolarCity vs paying roughly 1.5X to 2X for electricity (than the guy next door who doesn't have solar).

Of course, even people who bought their systems outright will be in the same predicament. If they paid in cash, their systems now have much longer payback periods than initially assumed, to a point where the system may not even pay for itself over it's life. If it's financed the consumer needs to pay the bank as usual in addition to paying a much higher electricity bill to NV energy than assumed earlier.

This will be a phenomenal deterrent for new consumers everywhere. If grid credits are not *guaranteed* over the lifetime of the system, then there is no guarantee that a solar system makes economic sense, because you really don't know what the future cashflow is. It doesn't matter what the procurement model is - PPAs, leases, financed or fully paid in cash. This is a huge setback for consumer side solar.

Once again, the magnitude of losses in NV itself are minuscular. NV in itself doesn't matter. The real issue is that this sets precedence and brings in a serious question for all consumers everywhere.

I hope I am wrong. I hope someone puts this in a better perspective.
 
Last edited:
Did you notice that in addition to the $35/month fixed charge, the credit drops to 2.6cents in 2020?

The issue is SolarCity's contracts are for 20 years. Over each of the 20years the contract should make sense for the consumer. NV Energy pricing in 2020, which is mere 4 years away is disastrous. The consumers will have to decide between defaulting on SolarCity vs paying roughly 1.5X to 2X for electricity (than the guy next door who doesn't have solar).

Of course, even people who bought their systems outright will be in the same predicament. If they paid in cash, their systems now have much longer payback periods than initially assumed, to a point where the system may not even pay for itself over it's life. If it's financed the consumer needs to pay the bank as usual in addition to paying a much higher electricity bill to NV energy than assumed earlier.

This will be a phenomenal deterrent for new consumers everywhere. If grid credits are not *guaranteed* over the lifetime of the system, then there is no guarantee that a solar system makes economic sense, because you really don't know what the future cashflow is. It doesn't matter what the procurement model is - PPAs, leases, financed or fully paid in cash. This is a huge setback for consumer side solar.

Once again, the magnitude of losses in NV itself are minuscular. NV in itself doesn't matter. The real issue is that this sets precedence and brings in a serious question for all consumers everywhere.

I hope I am wrong. I hope someone puts this in a better perspective.

Well, most solar panel owners are on average richer. So why not do what rich people do? Clog up the legal system with hundreds of thousands of lawsuit about the same thing.

Do what scientologists do.
 
Anything that affects solar users universally should not be a concern, that just builds up demand. Anything affecting only smaller more easily corrupted states should not be a concern. These little battles are going to go on constantly until entrenched fossil fuel interests have mostly divested.

And worry about anything past a couple years on the horizon is pointless, changes are happening MONTHLY.
 
SBenson.jpg


Solar by State.png


California's "proposed" Net Energy Metering will be voted on January 28th. Since California's solar market is at least ten times greater than Nevada's it will have a much greater impact. The proposal rejected any demand charges, grid access charges, installed capacity charges, standby fees, or similar fixed charges on Net Metering residential customers while the Commission is works on how, if at all, any such fees should be developed for residential customers.

While the CPUC is still considering input from the IOUs (Investor Owned Utilities), TASC (The Alliance for Solar Choice), SEIA (Solar Energy Industry Association), the Sierra Club and others, it is being reported with a positive spin by GTM Research and other pro solar media sources.

California is the 800 pound gorilla in the room.
 
Did you notice that in addition to the $35/month fixed charge, the credit drops to 2.6cents in 2020?

The issue is SolarCity's contracts are for 20 years. Over each of the 20years the contract should make sense for the consumer. NV Energy pricing in 2020, which is mere 4 years away is disastrous. The consumers will have to decide between defaulting on SolarCity vs paying roughly 1.5X to 2X for electricity (than the guy next door who doesn't have solar).

Of course, even people who bought their systems outright will be in the same predicament. If they paid in cash, their systems now have much longer payback periods than initially assumed, to a point where the system may not even pay for itself over it's life. If it's financed the consumer needs to pay the bank as usual in addition to paying a much higher electricity bill to NV energy than assumed earlier.

This will be a phenomenal deterrent for new consumers everywhere. If grid credits are not *guaranteed* over the lifetime of the system, then there is no guarantee that a solar system makes economic sense, because you really don't know what the future cashflow is. It doesn't matter what the procurement model is - PPAs, leases, financed or fully paid in cash. This is a huge setback for consumer side solar.

Once again, the magnitude of losses in NV itself are minuscular. NV in itself doesn't matter. The real issue is that this sets precedence and brings in a serious question for all consumers everywhere.

I hope I am wrong. I hope someone puts this in a better perspective.

The demand charge would still be crippling, and the fact that NV Energy uses their crony math to make everyone stay on the grid or pay Huget exit fees would be a problem. That being said , in 4 years net metering wool not be as large of an issue imo. With battery storage scaling up so quick we will in short time enter an Era where a power wall brings most solar homes to near 100 percent self consumption
 
Did you notice that in addition to the $35/month fixed charge, the credit drops to 2.6cents in 2020?

The issue is SolarCity's contracts are for 20 years. Over each of the 20years the contract should make sense for the consumer. NV Energy pricing in 2020, which is mere 4 years away is disastrous. The consumers will have to decide between defaulting on SolarCity vs paying roughly 1.5X to 2X for electricity (than the guy next door who doesn't have solar).

Of course, even people who bought their systems outright will be in the same predicament. If they paid in cash, their systems now have much longer payback periods than initially assumed, to a point where the system may not even pay for itself over it's life. If it's financed the consumer needs to pay the bank as usual in addition to paying a much higher electricity bill to NV energy than assumed earlier.

This will be a phenomenal deterrent for new consumers everywhere. If grid credits are not *guaranteed* over the lifetime of the system, then there is no guarantee that a solar system makes economic sense, because you really don't know what the future cashflow is. It doesn't matter what the procurement model is - PPAs, leases, financed or fully paid in cash. This is a huge setback for consumer side solar.

Once again, the magnitude of losses in NV itself are minuscular. NV in itself doesn't matter. The real issue is that this sets precedence and brings in a serious question for all consumers everywhere.

I hope I am wrong. I hope someone puts this in a better perspective.

Benson, I don't quite get your impulse to jump right to a default scenario with something like this.

Suppose you bought a Tesla with a loan thinking that it would save you money only to discover that the price of gasoline dropped after your purchase. Would you default on your loan?

Suppose you have SolarCity install a system on your home thinking that you would save money under the agreed upon terms of your PPA. Then your utility jacks up your rate. Would you default on your lease?

It makes no sense to me. We have all made financial decisions thinking that it would save us money, but then it does not work out that way. This happens. We experience frustration, even regret, but defaulting on our financial obligations and ruining our credit only makes matters worse. Even when home owners find the value of their home seriously below the value of their loan, most just keep paying the mortgage. Generally people only default when they are under serious financial distress such as losing a job or a major illness. People do not default simply because they regret losing money.

If I were a SolarCity customer in Nevada today, I would be pissed at NV Energy and the PUC. Indeed, I would feel very good about SolarCity because they are keeping true to their promise, while NV Energy is really trying to screw me. So what do I do? I start looking to SolarCity for help. I would want to see just how quickly they can install a Powerwall. I don't give a shirt how much it cost. I'm just angry enough with NV Energy to go off grid. I figure for $35/month I can get a Powerwall and a little backup generator and tell NV Energy to kiss my ass.

Sorry about the language. Just trying to channel what a true Nevadan would say. From what I hear they don't like getting screwed by the government or cronies.
 
The only problem with that is your not allowed to go off grid if your in Nevada. The casinos tried and they would be charged like 10 years worth of electricity to prevent other rate payers bills from going up. .. might be different for residential users but I doubt it. NV Energy seems to be run like the mafia
 
With the huge disconnect from the grid fee, me?, I'd just pick up and move out of Nevada, I'd be so pissed.

BTW, does anyone know what the disconnect from grid fee is for residential in Nevada?? I wonder if a person built a new house and never hooked up, they wouldn't be able to charge now would they.
 
With the huge disconnect from the grid fee, me?, I'd just pick up and move out of Nevada, I'd be so pissed.

BTW, does anyone know what the disconnect from grid fee is for residential in Nevada?? I wonder if a person built a new house and never hooked up, they wouldn't be able to charge now would they.

In one article I read where the casinos were protesting the fee they said to put it into context, NV Energy made more money last year then the entire Vegas strip. Crazy they claim this cost shift bs
 
With the huge disconnect from the grid fee, me?, I'd just pick up and move out of Nevada, I'd be so pissed.

BTW, does anyone know what the disconnect from grid fee is for residential in Nevada?? I wonder if a person built a new house and never hooked up, they wouldn't be able to charge now would they.
From what I gather, even new houses MUST be connected. It's insane fringe nonsense and won't last. If it does last, no one will go solar in NV and the demand will simply build until there is political momentum for reversal.

Also, there are more people within a 5 mile radius of where I sit in Philadelphia than live in the entire state of Nevada. Not a soul in Philadelphia or Southeastern PA has even really been approached yet about solar in any real fashion. We just got a great new governor who is a lock for an 8 years.....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.