The end of net metering

[1201]

Rooftop GT PV costs $3/W installed, amortizes out to $0.10/kWh over 20 years.
If utility credits $0.03 or $0.05/kWh for export, it is a net loss.

Requiring new homebuyers to pay for PV might have seemed like a good idea at the time, but since net metering was done away with, it constitutes theft from the individual and a gift to the utility.

I think the government has no right to order that - confiscation of private property without compensation for the public good. The courts likely won't agree; they haven't when it comes to landlord-tenant issues.

They pay residential owners what they pay per plants. It is what it is. As battery prices drop more people will buy them and stop exporting to the grid. This will actually ease the burden on the grid and help everyone- until solar prices drop way down and everyone disconnects from the grid. It's bound to happen.

Unfortunately solar in the u.s as a scam. Dirtier than sleazy used car sales. With the sales and financing schemes today it's more profitable to just stay in grid and forget solar altogether, for most people

 

[Ampster]

confiscation of private property without compensation for the public good.

I would argue it is not even for the public good. It benefits the investor Owned Utilities and their shareholders. Municipal Utilities like SMUD, Modesto Irrigation District and others, have less expensive rates. I do not know their Net Metering policies

 

[Ampster]

Unfortunately solar in the u.s as a scam. Dirtier than sleazy used car sales. With the sales and financing schemes today it's more profitable to just stay in grid and forget solar altogether, for most people

Solar itself makes a lot of sense. I agree the sales tactics of many installers are scams, expecially the constant barrage of "It will cost you nothing if your zip code starts with a 9" ads.

 

[Zwy]

Youre also paying now with more expensive dollars so the inflation thing is kind of a wash

Some people do not have any idea about how inflation affects buying power.

The only 2 times it is advantageous to have inflation is 1-if you borrowed and inflation is higher than the interest rate you are paying and the asset purchased holds value.

2-any asset purchased today that increases in value relative to inflation.

 

[1201]

Some people do not have any idea about how inflation affects buying power.

The only 2 times it is advantageous to have inflation is 1-if you borrowed and inflation is higher than the interest rate you are paying and the asset purchased holds value.

2-any asset purchased today that increases in value relative to inflation.

I don't think you get the full picture.

Something that cost $5k 10 years ago might be $10k today due to inflation, but your income today is more than 10 years ago also due to inflation.

With the price deflation of solar it might actually be more beneficial to wait

 

[venquessa]

The only 2 times it is advantageous to have inflation is 1-if you borrowed and inflation is higher than the interest rate you are paying and the asset purchased holds value.

It doesn't need to hold value. Unless you intend to dump it back for cash.

The part 90% of people completely miss is "opportunistic costs" and "offsets".

For example. "The solar power I generate is free".

This is cutting off about 60% of the real picture. If you didn't generate it you would have to pay for it. Thus it already has a positive financial value even though you receive nothing. It is not free either, there is capital investment and ROI etc. etc. But each kWh after commissioning is opportunistic gain.

Ignore this at your peril as a court will not.

On inflation. If banks don't lend they net -inflation on any asset real of offset they hold onto which is linked to cash. There fore they are desperate to lend it out. So desparate they will offer 0% finance in a hope to hook people into the fees and high interest after the sweetheart deal ends.

So I have been borrowing on 0% finance and investing it in electric generation equipment. The "net" on the surface is money leaving my account and my debt rising. When you incorporate the opportunistic costs and offset costs it's actually for a far, far, far higher return than any savings account or the EFTs I also keep savings in.

(I am not a financial advisor and this is not financial advise. At your own risk).

(Note, here, 1 kWh is about 40p at time of writing. Inflation is between 10% and 15%.)

 

[Zwy]

I don't think you get the full picture.

Something that cost $5k 10 years ago might be $10k today due to inflation, but your income today is more than 10 years ago also due to inflation.

If income does move with inflation. Real inflation adjusted wages have been declining for some time. The middle class will be gutted, there will only be 2 classes left in the end.

With the price deflation of solar it might actually be more beneficial to wait

What usually happens with deflation in an industry is some go bankrupt, others merge and consolidate. Deflation in an industry will only last as long as there is a competitive market.

 

[1201]

If income does move with inflation. Real inflation adjusted wages have been declining for some time. The middle class will be gutted, there will only be 2 classes left in the end.


What usually happens with deflation in an industry is some go bankrupt, others merge and consolidate. Deflation in an industry will only last as long as there is a competitive market.

The price of solar is projected to continue to drop sharply over the next 30 years

 

[DIYrich]

Rooftop GT PV costs $3/W installed, amortizes out to $0.10/kWh over 20 years.
If utility credits $0.03 or $0.05/kWh for export, it is a net loss.

Requiring new homebuyers to pay for PV might have seemed like a good idea at the time, but since net metering was done away with, it constitutes theft from the individual and a gift to the utility.

I think the government has no right to order that - confiscation of private property without compensation for the public good. The courts likely won't agree; they haven't when it comes to landlord-tenant issues.

Sunk costs are irrelevant.

Not "theft" from the homebuyers. Government can mandate whatever standards it wants for construction. Oh, you want to develop 100 acres, well, we have a 5% greenspace setaside requirement ... Here are all the set-backs requirements for each lot. yadda, yadda, yadda.

Actually, it is more "theft" from the utility. The government mandated to a PRIVATE utility that it has to buy the power from you.

 

[timselectric]

It's all intrusive.
I prefer less government.
Don't force me to do anything, unless it stops a Hazzard or annoyance for someone else.
If it only affects me, butt out.

 

[AntronX]

Actually, it is more "theft" from the utility. The government mandated to a PRIVATE utility that it has to buy the power from you.

Ok let's make a deal. Utility does not have to buy power from me while I am also not obligated to be their customer. But we can't have that apparently.

 

[fromport]

Rooftop GT PV costs $3/W installed, amortizes out to $0.10/kWh over 20 years.
If utility credits $0.03 or $0.05/kWh for export, it is a net loss.

The cost to buy energy is anywhere from 25 to 85 cents. If the customer eliminates that cost by using the sun to run his house (when he can) then the customer does not spend 25 cents to 85 cents because he spent 10 cents for the solar energy (up front). He is now 15 to 70 cents better off with solar than without. (during the time he can use the sun) That is not net loss!
ROI should be less than 20 years that way imo.

 

[cs1234]

Actually, it is more "theft" from the utility. The government mandated to a PRIVATE utility that it has to buy the power from you.

The idea that the utility is "private" and shouldn't be told/asked to do things by the government doesn't hold water. They gave up that right long ago through all the various kickbacks, subsidies, special legal considerations, etc..

 

[AntronX]

They gave up that right long ago through all the various kickbacks, subsidies, special legal considerations, etc..

They gave up that right when they made a deal with the government to become a legal monopoly. This is where the law that you cannot disconnect from the grid comes from.

 

[Hedges]

The cost to buy energy is anywhere from 25 to 85 cents. If the customer eliminates that cost by using the sun to run his house (when he can) then the customer does not spend 25 cents to 85 cents because he spent 10 cents for the solar energy (up front). He is now 15 to 70 cents better off with solar than without. (during the time he can use the sun) That is not net loss!

If you can use the power from PV rather than buying from utility, yes a big savings.
If you only need lights and A/C in the evening & night, use very little power when your PV array is producing, then the power you backfeed is credited at some small amount, below your cost to produce.

The government mandated putting in enough PV to supply the power your house consumes. Not the power it consumes while you're home. And even then, if A/C and fridge cycle on & off, you end up exporting (for a loss) then importing.

The government should not mandate that people buy more PV than they can put to practical use. Which was done in a round-about way, by mandating PV then changing the net-metering credits.

ROI should be less than 20 years that way imo.

I didn't pick 20 years as time to break even. Rather, a reasonable system life. Perhaps at 20 +/- years, the inverter will need replacement. Although original panels still worked, I realized new panels produced 50% more power in same area, and cost 10% as much, so makes sense to replace.

With net metering, break-even for a commercially installed system might be 5 years given prices in my area. By the end of 20 years, that gives 75% savings (ignoring time value of money). Using net present value or financing the system won't be as beneficial.

I use similar simple amortized approach to consider batteries, but they may reach cycle life sooner than that. Especially lead-acid.

Because DIY PV is so much cheaper than grid power, also cheaper than batteries, I do recommend over-producing. Even if you get little or no credit, it reduces how much grid power used. When peak rates of 3x off peak were moved to the evening, I said "don't buy batteries, just overbuild PV and export 3x as much power". Because I could add 2x the PV panels for same cost as buying a battery.

PG&E is trying to find ways to get money from us even if we don't buy power from them.

 

[cs1234]

They gave up that right when they made a deal with the government to become a legal monopoly. This is where the law that you cannot disconnect from the grid comes from.

I was filing that under "special legal considerations". Power distribution is something where monopoly status isn't unreasonable, we don't want hundreds of different powerlines stretched all over the place.

 

[AntronX]

Power distribution is something where monopoly status isn't unreasonable, we don't want hundreds of different powerlines stretched all over the place.

Oh it was very reasonable at a time when competition meant that you had to run duplicate wires. Nowadays it should not apply when competition is private solar that does not require redundant distribution lines. The law needs to be updated but I suspect utility co. will have none of that. There needs to be a strong lobby group created by private solar users. I think net metering will have to go away first before enough people will care.

 

[Hedges]

Unbundling of different transmission portions.
Costs less to transfer my power to neighbor on same side of transformer than across town, and that costs less than sending power from a distant power plant.

 

[DIYrich]

Unbundling of different transmission portions.
Costs less to transfer my power to neighbor on same side of transformer than across town, and that costs less than sending power from a distant power plant.

The last mile is the most expensive. There is also a cost for backup power.

 

[DIYrich]

Oh it was very reasonable at a time when competition meant that you had to run duplicate wires. Nowadays it should not apply when competition is private solar that does not require redundant distribution lines. The law needs to be updated but I suspect utility co. will have none of that. There needs to be a strong lobby group created by private solar users. I think net metering will have to go away first before enough people will care.

It is the one wire that allows you to transmit next door. There is a lot of expense to support that one wire, unless you can guarantee your neighbor 100% of their power needs 100% of the time.