California's PG&E Minimum Charge Increasing September '15

Well thank goodness I exceed $100 every month, I don't have to look at those minimums

 

That's the minimum. If your total for the NEM cost year is more than $120 it doesn't effect your true-up amount. In any case $66/year... big deal.

However, the cost of baseline electricity has gone up 2.66%. In my case that will be a whole $9 for the year.

 

Well since you are net zero you don't need PG&E... oops that won't work. So being the battery/buffer PG&E is providing a service. Or you could buy an expensive off gird system with a really big battery. Perhaps $10 a month isn't such a bad deal.

 

Great!....not. So far haven't received this letter from SoCal Edison, but I expect it any day.

I hear you. This is not the way to encourage people to conserve!

This (raising minimum rates) is going to push me to get completely off the grid with battery storage. Yes, I know it is not cost effective in the short term, but over the long run, will quickly pay for itself. My Solar City PV system will pay for itself in about 7 years at current rates. But as more and more users go solar, electric rates are sure to go up and the utility companies will try to find a way to charge solar users for electricity they produce on their own! Quite a scheme if you can get away with it, and the PUC seems willing to let them.

 

Your only choice is to go off grid since the connection to PG&E is such a problem and so expensive. I'm sure that will make your whole installation more economical... or not.

 

Short term, no. Long term, definitely yes. Relatively economical battery storage is close to fruition (google Solar City's power wall).

 

When you go off grid be sure to have the PG&E wires removed from your house. That way there will be no chance you ever have to pay a few dollars a year to PG&E. If something goes wrong with your system I'm sure the supplier will show up to fix it quickly and for no cost.

 

Note also that public utilities get first dibs on cheap legacy hydropower facilities. Up here, that makes fair comparisons of public vs private very difficult.

 

Yes, Solar City, per contract, will show up to fix it quickly at no cost. I don't know about other "fly by night" companies.

 

Maybe this new legislation will change some things for solar power generators such as yourself.

CA Climate-Change Bill Passed, Electric Utilities To Target Oil Industry

 

You say that almost like you don't know PG&E is selling that power to somebody else and making a profit from it.

 

Of course they are. It makes up for a small part of the larger profit they would have made from you without solar panels. That small profit helps pay for system maintenance so you will have a backup in case something goes wrong with your solar system. As discussed above if you don't want the backup you can cut the power lines and return their meter. Its the deal you made when you signed up for solar. If you didn't like the deal you should have forgotten solar and continued to pay large electric bills.

 

That's good to know. When off-grid systems are available for a reasonable cost I'll have to look at the Return-on-investment to see if its actually a good deal. It would have to be pretty cheap to replace my $200 to $300 annual electricity costs. My present system gives about an 8% ROI.

 

Well, that is certainly one way to look at it if you are an accountant. Or you can look at it as an investment in your grandchildren's future, regardless of the cost. It is your choice whether to put money in your pocket now, or protect the environment for generations to come.

 

That's a good thing to do if you can personally afford a few thousand dollars for possible future benefits. Some of we retired folks have to consider how to best use our resources to live today and for some unknown years ahead. I believe the ROI (sorry) would be better on broad based programs for significant reductions in carbon-based fuel use.