Posted on 01/12/2022 10:18:30 AM PST by Vendome
Journalism at its best!
I’ll only go for an off-grid system.
I don’t want to pay twice for electricity.
If this cause economic grid collapse, so be it.
If it sounds too good to be true it usually is.
“Also there would be a “grid participation charge” of $8 per kilowatt on the solar systems of residential customers
Journalism at its best! “
I believe “per kilowatt” is correct, but still crappy journalism. “Per kilowatt of installed capacity” is what I think it is. Whether that’s 8 dollars a month, or a year, or once, the article does not say. That’s what makes it crappy.
“up to $48 per month”
I’m doing the same thing. as I understand it, has to be operational by 5/1/2022 to qualify under the current rules.
Planning for economic sustainability is not a Democratic strongpoint.
Solar panels on the roof are like a Gucci handbag on the end of an arm - a fashion statement.
Utilities were forced to pay inflated rates to solar panel owners by lawmakers and then pass those costs to other customers. Now they are proposing to pay the actual going rate for electricity.
California's investor-owned utilities have long argued that NEM puts a disproportionate amount of the fixed costs of the electricity system on customers who do not have a rooftop solar system—around $245 a year.
When you can take a $500-$800 down to a fixed and predictable $200 per month with no rate increase for 20 years, it’s not Gucci...
My monthly electric bill averages about $50/month here in Florida.
My usage is not typical.
If FPL expects me to pay $48/month for the privilege of having ugly solar panels on the roof, it won’t get it voluntarily.
Yeah, we have that in California and you “true up” at the end of the year.
I have a friend who has solar(had) on her roof and her true up was $6,000.
Turns out her solar system had failed with no realistic way to fix without incurring more out pocket costs to the tune of thousands.
It had been off for a couple of years so, she had the roof replaced and got a new solar system.
The company that installed it gave her a new bill of $251, no increase and informed her that the “true up” would be about $200-$300 based on her current usage, which indicated that without solar her bill would be 700-800 per month.
Yeah, most states energy costs are way less than CA.
In Oklahoma they have co-op electric all over the place and they are less than OGE.
If you live in Palo Alto, CA you pay less than most because they have their own power generation.
If PGE is going to resell that solar electricity for daytime electric vehicle charging (the optimal solution), it should pay the rooftop generator owners a reasonable share of the charges billed to the owners of the cars recharged.
PGE should not be able to claim that a mere 1kwh of electricity from Southern California Alternative Merchants at 3 cents/kwh justifies paying the rooftop owners the same 3 cents/kwh for many megawatts worth of car charging electricity billed to the car owners at 14 cents/kwh.
I have sunrun too.......however I think something like this is separate from anything you sign. So the state can change the rules on how much they give you. I heard Nevada did something like that and pissed off people who bought solar.
A little info on how the program works. I pay both sunrun and the local utility for electricity. The particular deal I have probably puts out about 90% of my yearly usage on my roof. Sunrun originally planned on more, but Commed said no. I live in IL so your mileage on that may vary.
Sunrun doesn’t actually give you electricity. You are paying a per month fee for the solar panels despite the language I was told to the contrary, this is how I see it working in practice. As far as com ed is concerned, I own the solar panels.
My yearly billing cycle starts Jan 1. Which is a terrible time to produce electricity. I will actually over pay for the next few months than if I didn’t have sunrun at all. I will pay for electricity from both sunrun and com ed. On my bill I will get a net meter credit that is almost the same as the buy price (per KWH). However, your local bill has delivery charges along with a dozen other things. So my bill will be slightly reduced for the next few months. As the days get longer and the earth tilts us more towards the equator the solar panels will generate more and more KWH every month. If the pattern holds like last year I will have several months where the panels produce more than I consume. Even to the point where my bill gets zeroed out with commed (it pays for all the ancillary charges and taxes too). If I have excess credits they are banked and applied to future bills. I think my first year of install I had 4 months of zero bills with com ed. Last year, my second year, only 3 months of zero bills.
Honestly I’m not sure I’m saving anything right now as I’m totally confused how net metering works. When the sun is shining and I have excess juice to sell......do I use it first and only the extra is sold back? Or is it all sold back and I’m always buying juice from com ed, even when the sun shines brightly. I’d have to grab 12 months of bills and compare them before I got the solar panels installed.
Regardless I think the deal is good for me as the price to sunrun is fixed for 20 years. I’m almost certain the local utility company will raise rates very soon. I live in a blue state and most certainly they will want to add more and more charges for this and that.
“her bill would be 700-800 per month”
Is that for “hot as hell” Bakersfield or Palmdale or coastal cool Santa Monica?
In my youth, California beckoned with low heating & cooling costs.
I don’t see how any company can have a capital cost much lower than what my bank pays me on CDs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.