Edison installed a time of use meter yesterday at my home...

No offense to HILL personally, but how dumb is it that he is force to waste energy just so he doesn't "give it away" to the utility.
( Although one could argue that if the utility paid for part of the PV system through rebates, or if the government issued a tax credit for it then "giving something back" might be in order instead of just wasting it!)

It seems as a matter of public policy we need to encourage efficiency rather that waste. As I have always said, using Pv solar to power a hugely inefficient house doesn't make much sense. In the Pv world, we suggest conservation first, followed by a bit more conservation, and finally some more conservation, and then PV.

 

Icarus, I think Hill's point wasn't that he is 'wasting' electricity generated to avoid losing it to the power company - more like he and his family is indulging themselves a bit, since it's no loss to them if they do, and no gain if they don't.

Heck, more solar panel owners ought to show off this way! More people would be inclined to invest in solar, if they knew that they could have christmas lights, etc.

 

Perhaps, as I am wont to do, I phrased it badly. My point wasn't directed at Hill, but more at the policy of net metering, and how it seems to penalize those with excess capacity.

The issue is in fact quite complicated. Utilities that are required to purchase excess power at peak market price, have little incentive to promote PV solar. Why for example should they be expected to pay you say $.15kwh for every kwh you produce (retail) even if they could buy it on the open market sometimes for $.05? The reality is that PV as currently configured into the grid serves as a small peak load buffer for the utility and therefore it is cheaper for the utility to pay with is in essence a premium for your production. What isn't covered is the cost of delivery and overhead selling this way.

So a customer that is in essence forced to "waste power" by being frivolous (once again, not directed at Hill) instead of having that power available for a more useful load, is indeed waste full. I personally think that some formula that includes time of day/peak/off peak load based pricing, along with some equitable form of net metering is the best incentive for folks to invest in PV.

Like I said in the previous post, there is no free lunch. Our energy choices have costs, financial and other. If some of these costs are born by others (utility rebates/tax credits etc) then perhaps there should be some return on that public investment as well.

I do understand the point that no one will invest in PV (especially larger PV) if there is no reasonable pay back. If I use 5 kwh/day, I would not design a system that, on average produces 10kwh/day if I am only going to get "paid" for the 5 kw. But I don't think it is reasonable that the utility pay retail for every PV kwh produced. I think in order for PV to be truly competitive, we need to remove the subsidies from other energy sources, cost that in many cases will only be paid by future generations. (Fossil fueled plants for example, whose carbon emissions are not now being accounted for!)

So, encourage your governments/utilities to make Pv as cost effective as possible and invest in it as you can, but realize that unless we pay the real cost of our energy choices, AND we don't waste what we do use, we are not going going to solve the environmental issues of "cheap power"

 

It is interesting to note that the installed cost of grid Tie PV solar has come down significantly in the past year or so, now nearing ~$5/watt. This has been largely due to the collapse of demand as a result of the world wide recession. It will be curious to see what happens going forward. In fact there are beginning to be some signs that the Pv market is recovering.

 

I do go back to Hill's earlier post about having a 2000kwh surplus.

Once again not wishing to offend personally,(because I do get it!) but to illustrate a point. The 2000kw surplus that you are struggling to "use up" so that you don't have to "give it" to the utility is silly. Waste is still waste. If you have surplus, the idea of wasting it, instead of "donating" it to the grid for other public good (CO2 reduction/lower overall utility bills for every one etc) is a much better use of the resource.

That 2000kw surplus represents nearly 200 days worth of my average use in my grid tied house, or nearly 6 years worth of power in my off grid house! The point being here, that to use up energy recklessly just because you are not "getting paid" is, in essence part of the same problem of no one "wanting to pay" for things that are required as a society.

Now granted, you did make the investment in PV solar (to which I congratulate you!) but at some level the larger society helped you with that investment, both through direct subsidy from the utility, or tax treatment from state/local/federal governments and indirectly from R&D over the years from public (and private) universities etc.

My point is that if we accept that energy issues have real consequences (global warming deniers not withstanding) such as security both financial and social, peak oil etc, then solutions will inevitably come with some sacrifice. The sad truth is that it is historically the poor that sacrifice (in some real way) more than those with more.

So instead of "wasting" your surplus power with uneeded (perhaps unappreciated) X-mas lights, space heat for garages! etc your 2000kw surplus could off set the use of someone who can't afford PV solar.

You could then sleep at night knowing that you are indeed part of the solution. You could then take some of that good will, and lobby your local utility/PUC/regulatory agency to come up with a more equitable way of paying you for your surplus.

I do, again contend that even if you "gave" the 2000kw back, it would represent ~$300 worth of power @ .15/kwh. The idea that your local utility provides you with 24/7/365 grid power sun or shadow, all for a net cost of $0, is a pretty good bargain! Even if you gave them the $300 worth of power it is still a pretty good deal for the 24/ nature of the deal. (I don't know if your utility charges a monthly basic service charge just to have a meter, mine doesn't)

So don't think I am some high and mighty saint wanna be. The fact is that it would piss me off too, to have too give away power, but I think the picture is much bigger than me.

Icarus

 

Icarus, no offense taken. And as Rae Vynn says ... it's in part, 'splurging' after living frugally ... so we can see how much we CAN save for future EV use. We use the excess after 6PM, and as early as 4AM ... so we are using the excess 'off-peak' ... so it doesn't strain the grid. It's like over ripe tomatoes ... use 'em up or they go to waste.

 

No worries,

Icarus

 

oh! I wanted to address one other thing:

What's wrong with incentives . . . it seems to me they level the playing field all sorts of ways:

You want to get re-elected? Beter incentivize hydrogen research with 100's of millions, so the auto industry corporate heads will sponsor your campaign.

You want petro dollar corporate heads to fund your campaign? Better keep THEIR industry afloat. More military please. Gotta keep the persian gulf safe.


Point is, a few thousand bucks put into OUR PV owner's pockets, compared to buying more subs, aircraft carriers, and stealth bombers (not to mention soldier re-training when they step on road side bombs, or get shot with heat seaking missles while landing at airports we maintain) ... well, it's pale in comparison.

:focus:

Best to post a picture of your meter. There's a ton of them.
.

 

Don't forget - the fossil fuel industry gets tons of incentives in the way of tax credits. Remove those and the playing field gets a lot more even.

 

It depends on your billing with the power company. With PG&E, our meter shows a "total usage" screen and an "peak usage" screen. Both were set to 50,000 initially. After the first day, (it was summer) both screens were below 50,000 (for example) 49990 and 49985. What that meant was that (overall) we generated 10 kwh surplus for the day and generated 15 kwh surplus between noon and six pm. We used a total of 5 kwh before noon and after 6 pm combined <hence why the total usage was -10 kwh).

After 2+ years with the system, we're at something like 49,800 and 46,500 overall. So in 2+ years, we've generated a net 200 kwh more than we've used and during onpeak hours, more than 3500 kwh more than we've used.

You should see you electric bill drop to $8 and change per month with TOU, due to fees that you can't escape.

 

Hill,

Nothing is wrong with incentives, and indeed I am a great supporter of well designed/implemented incentives. A tax credit or grant for grid tie Pv is a great way of solving a number of issues, stimulate local economy, reduce fossil fuel load, stimulate R&D in PV etc.

My point, however poorly stated was that because one gets an incentive, the net payoff is faster for the one that invests in the Pv and that is a good thing. In the specific case cited, you (Hill) have generated more PV kwh in the last calendar year than you have consumed, leaving your net metering with the utility in essence owing you for that power. The nature of your contract with utility essentially forces you to "give" that power away.

With your net metering contract, you get paid the retail price for power every kwh you generate. You buy power at retail during those times when you are using more than you generate, at night for example. The net/net in the year is that could have a zero bill in any given year, but never a negative bill. The bottom line is for a number of reasons it is a hell of a deal for you, even if you have to "give" some power away once in a while.

The reason it is such a good deal is that you are buying at retail, and selling at retail prices. The utility is selling at retail, but also buying at retail, with no chance for markup of that retail price. So the utility in simple terms, loses money on every kwh they buy from you. Not only are they not making any mark up on your kwhs, they are not even covering the simple overhead. (Granted, there is plenty of value to the utility to have Pv on line, in that they don't have to build other peak load generating capacity for example).

So the deal is, the utility doesn't cover it's overhead, AND they may have shelled out some grant to you to put this system on line. Personally, given all of that, I don't think it is reasonable that they buy back all the power you generate at retail, over and above what you use.

So, what is wrong with incentives? Nothing! I think that as a matter of public policy encouraging small scale grid tie PV is a great thing. From a Corporate point of view, incentivizing Pv MAY make sense if it allows the utility to reduce it's peak load costs. If however if they provided all their customers with Pv (with some of it being paid by the utility) and they have to pay retail for every kwh produced by that Pv, it wouldn't be long before they go broke. The reason the utility can make money is it can buy or produce power at a lower price than they can sell it.

Those of us who live off grid (myself ~6 months/year) realize the incredible resource the grid is. Grid power is incredibly cheap when you consider that they have to generate it, send it to me, keep the lights on when the wind blows and the snow falls, keep the voltage and the freq regulated to keep my electronics from frying, all for ~$.10-.20 kwh. A bargain by most any calculus.

My off grid system, ~500 watts, provides enough power for us to draw ~1kwh/day. This simple system, if I had bought it off the shelf would cost ~$3-4000, including the PV, batteries, inverter, charge controllers, back up charger and generator. Add to that expense, count on replacing a $600 battery bank (ours is tiny by most standards) every 5-7 years. You realize real soon what a bargain the grid really is.

Icarus

 

Just as a side note,

We are seeing raw PV panel prices lower than they have ever been. I now have a source for name brand panels under $1/watt, down from nearly $3 a year ago.

Icarus

 

Oh, but that's changing at the end of the year, in CA. Remember? New legislation will force our CA electric utilities (all counties) to pay for surplus ... so even those $8 in 'chump-change' taxes will be zero'd out ... and maybe even a check com'n our way.

 

That would be nice. Each of the last 2 years, we had a $200+ credit on our electric bills by our true up period. It would have been nice to offset the $100 of "fees" that we pay to have electricity + have another $100 to offset our gas use.....but not crucial. I do take the stance that we are covering all our electrical use and contributing a small amount (300 kwh) towards the grid....and hopefully that means 300 kwh less coal produced energy.

Hill won't be running 3x garage heaters when he gets his plug in vehicle (sometime in the future) because that'll be energy he's not putting into the tank!

 

I know that wholesale prices are under $2/watt now these days. Retail prices, add 50-75%.

Installed prices are in the low-mid $5/watt range for a whole system.

 

As they say, prices subject to change without notice. There is a reputable retailer in Florida whose price TODAY IS $1.74 PER WATT for grid tie UL listed Pv panels. Other name brands as low as 1.74-2.24/watt. Remember, these are raw panel prices, by the pallet load fob florida.

I don't want to link here, but if you IM me I can send you the link. (I have no affiliation with these guys, but I have bought some stuff from them in the past).

Just before Christmas, these $1.74/watt panels were under $1.

Icarus

 

We used to use a $10/watt turn key for grid tie, but now it is closer to ~$5. The larger the system the cheaper the per watt price. I chuckle to think that first panel(s) I bought 15 years ago (still going strong) cost me nearly $10/watt for just the panel.