Backwards

[David Weaver]

If I understood an earlier post from Shawn, his electricity rates are around $0.36/kwh. That is 4 times the cost where I live. I can see why his setup might break even in just a few years. I have done a feasibility study for my own situation and the numbers aren't even close. It would be a losing investment for me, even if power rates go up 25%.

It's 15-17 cents or so here, and we probably only have half the sun that southern cal does (just looked it up, we do have about half of the potential BTU or watts per day), and more hail. I haven't seen a lot of solar arrays, except for some on the eastern side of the state (school districts, etc, having them installed through grants on unused property, etc). They also seem to be popular on mennonite farms near where my wife grew up. Not on the majority of them or anything, but in a higher % than they are placed in general. But those farms are hooked into the grid.

[David Weaver]

The reverse power being counted as normal usage was something I found out about online.

Is that, by the way, due to lack of capability of the meter, or is it an issue where legal permission has been granted for the meter to operate that way? We don't have smart meters here, or not in my immediate area, at least, and if they are only optional, I'll never have one.

[Shawn Pixley]

Tiered rate stuctures are designed to promote conservation. Around here, the various energy companies find it difficult to build new generating facilities. Because of that and the capital investment required for the new generating plants, they are somewhat more embracing of alternative / clean energy.

There are three types of meters that I know about: simple & non-reversing, reversing - net metering, and Smart meters. The smart meters allow central throttling of usage during power shortages. You may opt-out of smart meters for a fee.

The central reality is threefold. We need to reduce electricity demand. We need to transition to cleaner electricity generation (especially away from coal). We need to have a distribution model that is geared to ensuring that electricity is where and when you need it. Many smaller generating facilities help by reducing the need for expanded central arteries. Producing electricity close to where it is used helps significantly. Only when consumers and utility companies are aligned in a long-term view will this become mainstream. Solar is not the only answer but merely one of the answers.

[Greg Peterson]

Exactly. When we have no need for the grid, then there will be no need for a rational system compensating the people who own and operate the grid (and anyone who has provided them equity or purchased debt so they could do it). In the meantime, the grid still needs to be maintained and nobody is going to do it for free. Trying to "stick it" to "big companies" rationale is just another veiled version of "it's OK if I make money, and I get to decide what level of it is OK, but it's not OK for someone else to".

I like to believe I have no problem compensating people for providing me with a service. Otherwise, I shouldn't be using such a service because I wouldn't want to work for free, either. That's our short term situation. I also don't like to compensate people for a service I don't use, and that's more of a long term issue with the grid - probably (our prospects for solar where I am are poor, and even worse for wind).

Maybe instead of being required to pay for energy sent to the grid, the utility company receives this free so as to offset possible or likely power generating upgrades.

I'm not interested in sticking it to anyone, but I do not trust the energy sector to quietly allow their revenue to be diminished.

Some accomodation to encourage adaption of sustainable energy should be made. Rates are going to increase regardless, the sooner we start migrating the better.

[Rick Potter]

Hey Shawn,

Congrats on the new system. Mine has been in for one year now, and we are using less than we produce. I got a Plug-in electric Ford C-Max in November and I am still using less than we produce. The next bill will be our yearly reckoning, and we are anxious to see how we do. The current bill shows us having about $500 of power in the bank. I hope they allow us to just bank it, rather than paying us for it. If they pay for it, it will be at 3 cents, not the 13 cents they would charge. I don't really care, as long as I am breaking even.

Our projected payoff is 4 1/2 years, and we are running a bit ahead of that schedule.

Rick Potter

[Scott Shepherd]

Our projected payoff is 4 1/2 years, and we are running a bit ahead of that schedule.

Rick Potter

Is that a 4 1/2 year payoff with you paying the full price, or a 4 1/2 year payoff and part of it was paid for through tax breaks or tax credits? I've not seen any reports of payoffs that quickly without someone else picking up part of the tab for it all.

[Brian Elfert]

yearly reckoning, and we are anxious to see how we do. The current bill shows us having about $500 of power in the bank. I hope they allow us to just bank it, rather than paying us for it. If they pay for it, it will be at 3 cents, not the 13 cents they would charge. I don't really care, as long as I am breaking even.

I think more and more electric utilities will start paying wholesale rates for solar power instead of retail rates most pay now. I'm assuming this utility is paying the wholesale rate which makes sense.

[Shawn Pixley]

Hey Shawn,

Congrats on the new system. Mine has been in for one year now, and we are using less than we produce. I got a Plug-in electric Ford C-Max in November and I am still using less than we produce. The next bill will be our yearly reckoning, and we are anxious to see how we do. The current bill shows us having about $500 of power in the bank. I hope they allow us to just bank it, rather than paying us for it. If they pay for it, it will be at 3 cents, not the 13 cents they would charge. I don't really care, as long as I am breaking even.

Our projected payoff is 4 1/2 years, and we are running a bit ahead of that schedule.

Rick Potter

Rick,

Thanks! I am glad to hear that yours is working well. Are you with SCE, PG&E or someone else? With SCE, we are allowed to keep rolling it over from my read of the terms. The only problem with rolling it over (beyond the disparity in rates) would be that you couldn't use the money to to pay the various fees.

So far, with two days worth of data, we generate ~42 KWh per day. Our average consumption over the last 12 months is 27 KWh per day. So we are stocking up the excess to offset the lower generating days in the winter. We got the wireless monitoring and Solar Edge Dashboard Software up yesterday. It is pretty slick.

Electric vehicles don't really pay off in a tiered structure unless you have Solar or an alternative recharging station. We may look into that in the future, but our current cars are pretty fuel efficient. Given that we have replaced 4 appliances and installed solar in the last 6 months, that would be down the path a bit.

[Rick Potter]

Shawn,
We are with SCE, and we have no intention to get a separate metering system for the car, as we plug it in whenever we pull into the garage, to keep it charged up. It also has a gas motor, but we haven't fueled up since January (I think). It goes about 20 miles at a time on juice, which works out pretty well for our use.

Scott,
That 4 1/2 year payoff is including all incentives, it is for the actual money we spent. We live in an area where we get plenty of year round sun, and our roof is situated correctly to get the most benefit from the sun, so we are in a sort of best case scenario for the system. My Aunt, 91, died two years ago and left us just enough to get the system, and we figured this was a meaningful way to invest the money. We think of her generosity every time we open the electric bill.

Rick Potter

[Scott Shepherd]

That 4 1/2 year payoff is including all incentives, it is for the actual money we spent. We live in an area where we get plenty of year round sun, and our roof is situated correctly to get the most benefit from the sun, so we are in a sort of best case scenario for the system. My Aunt, 91, died two years ago and left us just enough to get the system, and we figured this was a meaningful way to invest the money. We think of her generosity every time we open the electric bill.

Rick Potter

That's my point, without incentives, it's not worth doing, which means it's not very good at replacing any other source of power. It is when someone else paid for 1/2 of it through incentives, but when you have to shell it all out of your own pocket, it's not the value everyone hopes it will be.

[Shawn Pixley]

That's my point, without incentives, it's not worth doing, which means it's not very good at replacing any other source of power. It is when someone else paid for 1/2 of it through incentives, but when you have to shell it all out of your own pocket, it's not the value everyone hopes it will be.

Your argument is valid given current pricing of energy. However, when energy prices rise as they eventually must, it will less and less valid. Solar is not the only answer but should be included in a broad spectrum of alternative energy choises. The incentives do not represent 50% of the costs, but closer to 15-20% which then gives you the necessary information to perform a rudimentary senstitivity analysis. Solar works for our climate. Geothermal work in some locales. Wind or tidal energy are other choices. Those who only take a short-term view of issues have the same attitudes as those who overfish the ocean, over-log an environment, or other some such actions.

Given an ever increasing demand for energy and the inevitable shortage and price increases for fossil fuels, alternative energy will become an advantage. Those who wait for the obvious before starting anything will be well behind when they will be forced to change. When did Noah build the ark? Before the flood, before the flood.

[Dave Sheldrake]

We had one of the Green Part reps drop by a week or so ago promoting safer sustainable energy from Geo-Thermal, I asked her what the party position was on Nuclear and she looked at me in abstract horror."But Chernoybl, 3 Mile Island, Fukushima, we can't possible agree with anything nuclear"
She shot off rather quick when I pointed out geothermal is caused by the breakdown of U233 (itself an isotope of Th232 with a half life of 14 billion years)

cheers

Dave

[Art Mann]

Your argument is valid given current pricing of energy. However, when energy prices rise as they eventually must, it will less and less valid. Solar is not the only answer but should be included in a broad spectrum of alternative energy choises. The incentives do not represent 50% of the costs, but closer to 15-20% which then gives you the necessary information to perform a rudimentary senstitivity analysis. Solar works for our climate. Geothermal work in some locales. Wind or tidal energy are other choices. Those who only take a short-term view of issues have the same attitudes as those who overfish the ocean, over-log an environment, or other some such actions.

Given an ever increasing demand for energy and the inevitable shortage and price increases for fossil fuels, alternative energy will become an advantage. Those who wait for the obvious before starting anything will be well behind when they will be forced to change. When did Noah build the ark? Before the flood, before the flood.

The problem today is that there is no combination of renewable sources of energy now available that will even come close to replacing fossil fuels at a national level. The technology simply isn't ready yet. The inevitable outcome of the government effort to reduce carbon dioxide emissions is that we are going to have to accept a lower standard of living -- much, much lower.

[Chris Padilla]

I have had solar panels on my roof for almost 2 years now. I was presented with the model of: no money down, pay a yearly 2.9% increasing rate (for 20 years) per kWh that my panels produce. I started at $0.24/kWh and in June, I'll have my second rate hike. They own and fully warrant the panels...I simply rent them. Like Shawn, I'm in California (Northern) and we pay our electricity in tiers. The solar companies CAN make money (and I SAVE money) only if my electrical use puts me into the tier 3, 4, and 5 categories. I can pretty much guarantee that PG&E (Pacific Gas & Electric) will increase their tier 3-5 rates at a much faster rate than 2.9% per year...if history is any indication. I have a pool that I run that puts me into these tiers during the warmer months. I do have passive solar heating for the pool water (black PVC panels on the roof...opposite the solar panels). I also recently installed a heat pump electric water heater that replaced a gas one. Finally, I'm working on installing a hot water recirculation pump.

This model doesn't work for everyone. My next door neighbor has a very large oak tree in his front yard. It shades his house too much and they can't make enough electricity via the solar panels to make this work for him and them.

[Chris Padilla]

The problem today is that there is no combination of renewable sources of energy now available that will even come close to replacing fossil fuels at a national level. The technology simply isn't ready yet. The inevitable outcome of the government effort to reduce carbon dioxide emissions is that we are going to have to accept a lower standard of living -- much, much lower.

Such a pessimistic view!! Technology, like it always has, shall help pave the way!! Have faith! Now I'm not saying the gov't efforts in the carbon footprint arena is the way but at least something is being done.