Opinions on grid exporting/net metering. Poll included :)

[hwy17]

I think what this points out is there is huge variability on what is going on depending on where you live.. so some people can firmly believe one way based on what their experience is where they live and same person if they moved someplace else feel differently.

I can agree with that but I still think there are certain conceptual decisions that are just as worth making at low solar penetrations rather than later. Can you imagine if you found out your neighbor was paying a grandfathered water rate? And yet grandfathering has somehow become accepted in electric utilities. It's ridiculous I think.

 

[houseofancients]

I posted this in another thread as a response and it got me to wondering how every one really felt on this issue. Here's what I had posted :

---

I have what I'm sure is considered a weird stance on feeding power to the grid to probably 99% of this site and probably the world. I don't think we have the right to feed anything to the grid and I don't think we have the right to expect to be paid if we do feed to the grid.

The reason I look at it this way is if I take gas to the gas station they are not going to allow me to pump it back into their tanks and they are sure not going to pay me for it.

The water company isn't going to allow me to feed water back into the water system and they sure wouldn't pay me if I did.

So why should the power company be any different?

I enjoy saving power with my solar setup and I enjoy the lower bills and wouldn't mind making all of my power but I like remaining hooked to the grid in case something goes wrong or if I can't make enough for my needs. Expecting a business to support my efforts in savings or my hobby doesn't make much sense from a business stand point.

Now if they want to buy my excess power then sure. But I see people going postal power companies all the time reading things on the net with rates they are paying for back feeding etc which just doesn't seem right.

Now Alabama does have an issue right now with people being taxed for having solar power isn't to right. But I still think expecting the power company to have to buy my excess power just doesn't seem right either.

I look at it the entire opposite way..
They should buy excess power..
The fact that the powerco's haven't upgraded their infrastructure and are still using plants that cannot scale up and down with demand is their problem.
They have been more concerned with paying huge bonuses and shareholder payout than investing in their infrastructure, and have -0- incentive to change their ways unless forced

I am also if the opinion that, like health insurrance, power is a utility and therfor shouldn't be privatized, as for profit companies ( understandably) are only concerned with 1 thing, profit.
Power , like healthcare , isn't something one can do without

 

[rhino]

My underlying feeling is that in the long run we'd have a more reliable/efficient/democratic system if we had a more decentralized power grid as opposed to these single large power generation facilities controlled by powerful entities. It just seems like requiring power companies to purchase power from solar pushes us towards a decentralized system.

 

[hwy17]

Decentralization and the open market has generally lead to higher rates, not lower.

If you're in the unshaded part of this map, with a fully regulated utility, you probably pay lower rates:

https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/Presentation%20by%20Kevin%20Gunn%2C%20MO%20PSC.pdf

 

[Crowz]

I look at it the entire opposite way..
They should buy excess power..
The fact that the powerco's haven't upgraded their infrastructure and are still using plants that cannot scale up and down with demand is their problem.
They have been more concerned with paying huge bonuses and shareholder payout than investing in their infrastructure, and have -0- incentive to change their ways unless forced

I am also if the opinion that, like health insurrance, power is a utility and therfor shouldn't be privatized, as for profit companies ( understandably) are only concerned with 1 thing, profit.
Power , like healthcare , isn't something one can do without

Actually you do without power, medicine not so much. Now its debatable if you need "healthcare" but when you factor in diabetes and such its kinda required.

I worry about the government stepping into the power grid. Greed = motivation to improve at least with it comes to the "southern company" which is the parent company for alabama power which is what I have. The south east united states has one of the best power grids in the us in my opinion. They are ROLLING in money and they have to justify things with the public service commission and they do that by showing what they have spent on the grid. So its an incentive to put money back into the grid. We have VERY good service here. Storm outages are normally measured in minutes not hours or days. They have redundant systems for a good bit of the service. They come out and trim trees and other preventative measures to insure things work right.

Everyone always complains about cost and such bill wise around here but they wouldn't trade what we have with other places when asked.

So having the government taking over is not something I would want at all. They are not renowned for being reliable for much of anything

 

[rhino]

So having the government taking over is not something I would want at all. They are not renowned for being reliable for much of anything

There is a difference between government taking over something and having regulations. We wouldn't have breathable air (ignoring forest fires), "clean" waters, or even bald eagles today if it wasn't for government intervention.

 

[Hedges]

If a local regulation requires you to be grid connected then you should be able to sell at a profit back to the grid in my opinion. Also as another mentioned if new homes are required to have solar then you should be allowed to sell excess in my opinion.

California, new homes are required to be built with rooftop solar. That costs $3/W, vs. $1/W for utility scale power.
We will be paid about wholesale for power, but that is wholesale average around the clock, even though peak actual power consumption is in the afternoon when PV is still offsetting some of it.

Because we are required to spend 3x as much to install solar as what PV power plants cost, we should be credited 3x wholesale (time of production) rates.

Rooftop PV looked like a good deal for consumers when offsetting retail rates. But with Net Metering dead, that rooftop mandate should have been automatically cancelled. What would have been better all along would have been a required investment in a clean-energy mutual fund. Maybe with dividends in the form of utility bill credits. And the ability to buy/sell shares to right-size the production we own.

 

[Hedges]

I can agree with that but I still think there are certain conceptual decisions that are just as worth making at low solar penetrations rather than later. Can you imagine if you found out your neighbor was paying a grandfathered water rate? And yet grandfathering has somehow become accepted in electric utilities. It's ridiculous I think.

To encourage investment with a 20 to 40 year timeframe, long-term commitments must be made.
Our electric bill still contains "nuclear decommissioning charge", to let PG&E avoid losses from their prior investment in reactors.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

 

[DIYrich]

What's the difference between mandating solar panels vs mandating connection to sewer system (rather than septic system)?
There are tons of mandates to build (adequate paved parking, electrical code, fire codes, etc.).
You could argue that solar panels reduce long-term wildfire risk because local production of electricity reduces reliance upon transmission lines.

 

[Tulex]

Each power company/region is also going to have different scenarios. You can see this by the fact that some power companies pay and some don't. Here, we are 1:1 net metering. Also, there are and have been many programs to get people to reduce electric. I took advantage 15 years ago to have all my lights swapped out in my business for more energy efficient lights at half the cost of the lights themselves, and that was with them installing. They do this to not have to build more plants, which is way more expensive than the incentives. So, I can see why they encourage solar buy back.

 

[DIYrich]

I look at it the entire opposite way..
They should buy excess power..

I agree. They should buy at the avoided cost rate.

The fact that the powerco's haven't upgraded their infrastructure and are still using plants that cannot scale up and down with demand is their problem.

Peaking plants are expensive power. Baseload is cheaper power. Choose your poison.

They have been more concerned with paying huge bonuses and shareholder payout than investing in their infrastructure, and have -0- incentive to change their ways unless forced

If the Government is doing the regulations, then you can't blame the power companies.

I am also if the opinion that, like health insurrance, power is a utility and therfor shouldn't be privatized, as for profit companies ( understandably) are only concerned with 1 thing, profit.
Power , like healthcare , isn't something one can do without

I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help you. The government is doing the regulating/mandating, and you still don't like it.

 

[1201]

But if they are forced to pay above market rate for the power to subsidize those people who are overpaying for solar, it costs all that solar customer's neighbors more in higher rates to fund that.

What?

Who is forcing them to pay above market rate? PURPA says they must at least pay avoided cost rate and that is what everyone is switching to. If they are paying avoided cost it doesn't affect the neighbors.

Well it does affect them. As more and more people get solar with batteries, utilities will have to raise prices on those who do not have solar. I guess you think because of that solar should be illegal?

 

[hwy17]

I worry about the government stepping into the power grid. Greed = motivation to improve at least with it comes to the "southern company" which is the parent company for alabama power which is what I have. The south east united states has one of the best power grids in the us in my opinion.

That's a bit contradictory, as the south east has some of the greatest government control of their power grid.

 

[hwy17]

Who is forcing them to pay above market rate?

In Texas, maybe nobody I'm not familiar. In California, customers are getting export credits in the $.27-.50 range on NEM1 and 2. We are moving to ACC with NEM3 but there's an adder phase out with a bonus on top of ACC.

 

[hwy17]

As more and more people get solar with batteries, utilities will have to raise prices on those who do not have solar. I guess you think because of that solar should be illegal?

Grid defection does pose an existential risk to the grid and I think it will end with taxpayer support in the end. If we can do so early to keep grid costs low to discourage defection we will probably be better off, rather than trying to bail it out once it fails.

 

[DIYrich]

Well it does affect them. As more and more people get solar with batteries, utilities will have to raise prices on those who do not have solar. I guess you think because of that solar should be illegal?

A distribution system is primarily fixed cost. The cost does not vary with the power consumed on any particular day. Over the long-term, it is more related to peak power needs. The utility will shift from a consumption based charge to a fixed charge just to be connected to the grid.

 

[houseofancients]

Actually you do without power, medicine not so much. Now its debatable if you need "healthcare" but when you factor in diabetes and such its kinda required.

I worry about the government stepping into the power grid. Greed = motivation to improve at least with it comes to the "southern company" which is the parent company for alabama power which is what I have. The south east united states has one of the best power grids in the us in my opinion. They are ROLLING in money and they have to justify things with the public service commission and they do that by showing what they have spent on the grid. So its an incentive to put money back into the grid. We have VERY good service here. Storm outages are normally measured in minutes not hours or days. They have redundant systems for a good bit of the service. They come out and trim trees and other preventative measures to insure things work right.

Everyone always complains about cost and such bill wise around here but they wouldn't trade what we have with other places when asked.

So having the government taking over is not something I would want at all. They are not renowned for being reliable for much of anything

Ask Texas how well that privatization worked..

Here, the grid was gb owned up untill 2014, and stability has been gradually collapsing, and proces have complete skyrocketed..
If all is well, powerco's lace their managers and investeror hugely..
When so much as things go bad, they are the first to hold up their hand to the gov., While keeping their bonuses intact.

Absolutely disgusting

 

[ArthurEld]

I get to take back anything I feed into the grid. They settle up once a year and pay me a small amount for excess.
But that doesn't make much difference to me. It is valuable to have them store the electricity for me. I pay $30 a month to use the grid. Seems worth it.

 

[houseofancients]

I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help you. The government is doing the regulating/mandating, and you still don't like it.

That is the problem here..
Someone though "self regulation" really was the best option, because lobbyist told them so ( and probably paid them handsomely)

 

[1201]

A distribution system is primarily fixed cost. The cost does not vary with the power consumed on any particular day. Over the long-term, it is more related to peak power needs. The utility will shift from a consumption based charge to a fixed charge just to be connected to the grid.

Which is why it will become more expensive for non solar owners the fixed expense is spread across fewer people. And why we should stop adding solar , to not increase costs for our neighbors /s