PG&E / CPUC - Non-Tiered Time Of Use Rates

[Nekota]

edatoakrun, does your bill look anything like this one?

I also just so happened to get my December E9A bill today and without access to the 11/01/11 tariff document I can't compare the rates since the online E9 tariff already has the changes set to go into effect on the first. However this is what I was billed for December:

Off Tier 1: 0.04457
Off Tier 2: 0.06186
Off Tier 3: 0.15715
Part Tier 1: 0.09394
Part Tier 2: 0.11123
Part Tier 3: 0.29131

According to the new tariff my next bill should look like the following:

Off Tier 1: 0.04680
Off Tier 2: 0.06495
Off Tier 3: 0.15786
Part Tier 1: 0.09864
Part Tier 2: 0.11679
Part Tier 3: 0.29679

My January PGE E9A bill came and matches your rate structure. I had a couple of days in December before the rate change for the new tariffs. I cross into Tier 4 so I can add a couple more values to your data set. The baseline credit was factored into the baseline rate.

Thru 31 December 2011
Winter Partial Peak Usage
T1:Baseline  @ $0.09394
T2:101-130% of Baseline @ $0.11123
T3:131-200% of Baseline @ $0.29131
T4:201-300% of Baseline @ $0.33131
Winter Off-Peak Usage
T1:Baseline Usage  @ $0.04457
T2:101-130% of Baseline @ $0.06186
T3:131-200% of Baseline @ $0.15715
T4:201-300% of Baseline @ $0.19715

Starting 1 January 2012
Winter Partial Peak Usage
T1:Baseline Usage @ $0.09864
T2:101-130% of Baseline @ $0.11679
T3:131-200% of Baseline @ $0.29679
T4:201-300% of Baseline @ $0.33679
Winter Off-Peak Usage
T1:Baseline Usage @ $0.04680
T2:101-130% of Baseline @ $0.06495
T3:131-200% of Baseline @ $0.15786
T4:201-300% of Baseline @ $0.19786

 

[oakwcj]

The CPUC's suspension of the advice letter ended on February 3, but it is still suspended. A quick scan of the suspended advice letters list discloses that some advice letters get stuck in limbo for years. Some of these sad letters have been suspended since 2007:

http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/adviceletters/al_suspend_e.htm

 

[Nubo]

In regards to sub-metering so that you can have a single service but isolate EV charging is on a MUCH slower track. The reason is not that this can't technically be done - it is agreeing on a protocol between utilities, smartmeters, EVs, billing systems, etc. PUC is calling for protocols to be submitted in June 2012. I'm guessing that pushes that out trials and market ready offering until 2013.

Oh boy, another wrinkle! :roll:

I'm looking at a quote for E9B install (assuming PG&E deem the service conductor adequate). I'm willing to accept a lengthy payback time but can somebody explain how sub-metering might work? Trying to understand if my E9B metering would be invalidated after a year, or if I might be able to sit tight for a year and get basically the same benefit? Is this something even remotely likely to happen in that short of a timeframe, given the glacial pace of PG&E and CPUC?

How would my smart meter know which kWH were coming from the LEAF?

 

[Deleted member 3147]

In regards to sub-metering so that you can have a single service but isolate EV charging is on a MUCH slower track. The reason is not that this can't technically be done - it is agreeing on a protocol between utilities, smartmeters, EVs, billing systems, etc. PUC is calling for protocols to be submitted in June 2012. I'm guessing that pushes that out trials and market ready offering until 2013.

Oh boy, another wrinkle! :roll:

I'm looking at a quote for E9B install (assuming PG&E deem the service conductor adequate). I'm willing to accept a lengthy payback time but can somebody explain how sub-metering might work? Trying to understand if my E9B metering would be invalidated after a year, or if I might be able to sit tight for a year and get basically the same benefit? Is this something even remotely likely to happen in that short of a timeframe, given the glacial pace of PG&E and CPUC?

How would my smart meter know which kWH were coming from the LEAF?

As I understand it, the EVSE itself would have a "revenue-grade" meter within it which would transmit to the utility on the same network as your smart meter. The utility back-end computers would subtract the EVSE meter from the smart meter readings to get the draw for the test of the house.

From what I'm hearing, all of this is still several years away, at least. More likely, in the short-term, is PG&E allowing meter bridges as LADWP is doing, to make installing a second meter cheaper.

 

[glemieux]

The CPUC's suspension of the advice letter ended on February 3, but it is still suspended. A quick scan of the suspended advice letters list discloses that some advice letters get stuck in limbo for years. Some of these sad letters have been suspended since 2007:

http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/adviceletters/al_suspend_e.htm

Does anyone know to whom we could talk to get an update on this? I called my the project manager that handled my second meter install and he didn't have any new information on it, although he was aware of it. Told me to check back from time to time...

 

[waitingforaleaf]

Looks like we finally have an update with regards to PG&E's proposed changes to the E-9 A/B rate. Today they filed advice letter, 3910-E-A. Major changes in this proposal include "grandfathering" current E-9 users until the end of 2014, but then eliminating E-9 entirely at the end of 2014 forcing customers to choose another electric rate schedule at that time.

They are also proposing a new "Schedule EV" with its own A/B options. Schedule EV is a non-tiered TOU rate with slightly lower prices as compared with the original 3910-E proposal and slightly better weekend hours (i.e. weekend peak rates from 3pm-7pm but off-peak for all other weekend hours).

I haven't had a chance to run this through the numbers game, but I'm enclosing a link below to the document (on Google Docs) for perusal from those interested in reading it. Protest deadline is May 29, 2012 for anyone wishing to file comments on this advice letter.

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B-NyRYp7gfwkZTRhNFVkQWNfbWM

 

[oakwcj]

PG&E appears to be punting. It's about a two-year punt. By grandfathering in those of us who filed protest letters, they're probably banking on much more muted opposition to the new EV rate, which will only be in effect until the CPUC does large scale rate revisions in 2014. PG&E says it will take them about six months to program their systems for the new EV rate, so I'm not sure why they're going through this exercise, except to establish a precedent for the 2014 fight. One interesting provision is a limit of 30,000 on customers on the EV rate. I can't believe that there will be that many EVs in PG&E's service area by the end of 2014.

In my case, I've had solar installed since the advice letter was suspended. My selfish interest is for very high peak rates and very low off-peak rates. The EV rate would compress the differential between peak and off-peak. Summer peak is roughly $.36 per kWh and offpeak is about $.10 per kWh. Winter peak [which doesn't exist under E-9] would be $.27 peak and $.10 off-peak. There are no baselines or tiers. They did eliminate the customer charge of $8.00 a month, but have substituted a minimum charge of $.15 a day.

I guess PG&E was told or realized that its initial proposal wasn't going anywhere, and they've opted to play a long game.

 

[mxp]

PG&E appears to be punting. It's about a two-year punt. By grandfathering in those of us who filed protest letters, they're probably banking on much more muted opposition to the new EV rate, which will only be in effect until the CPUC does large scale rate revisions in 2014. PG&E says it will take them about six months to program their systems for the new EV rate, so I'm not sure why they're going through this exercise, except to establish a precedent for the 2014 fight. One interesting provision is a limit of 30,000 on customers on the EV rate. I can't believe that there will be that many EVs in PG&E's service area by the end of 2014.

In my case, I've had solar installed since the advice letter was suspended. My selfish interest is for very high peak rates and very low off-peak rates. The EV rate would compress the differential between peak and off-peak. Summer peak is roughly $.36 per kWh and offpeak is about $.10 per kWh. Winter peak [which doesn't exist under E-9] would be $.27 peak and $.10 off-peak. There are no baselines or tiers. They did eliminate the customer charge of $8.00 a month, but have substituted a minimum charge of $.15 a day.

I guess PG&E was told or realized that its initial proposal wasn't going anywhere, and they've opted to play a long game.

Okay, this is getting complicated... strategy and all...

I recall previously, most of us rallied together and I assumed we were initially successful in our lobbying to buy us some time.

To be effective in the next round, what's the game plan to thwart this PG&E latest trickery??

Oh, I forget, they are probably watching this forum right?

 

[matth]

I guess PG&E was told or realized that its initial proposal wasn't going anywhere, and they've opted to play a long game.

To be effective in the next round, what's the game plan to thwart this PG&E latest trickery??

I agree that this is likely a stalking horse for their next round, so it is very important that everybody in the PG&E service area comment on this.

I'm more than a little puzzled by the limit of 30K for the new EV rate. PG&E has motivation, both from an operational standpoint, and regulatory drivers, to push TOU rates. Why limit the number of people who can be on it? And from a first blush look (I have not looked at other TOU rates), they're not terribly attractive.

I suspect this might also be a stalking horse for getting rid of tiers in general.

 

[Spies]

I haven't had a chance to run this through the numbers game, but I'm enclosing a link below to the document (on Google Docs) for perusal from those interested in reading it.

Thank you for doing this!

 

[JonathanMarshall]

I hope readers of this forum will keep an open mind about PG&E's new proposal for EV charging rates. A staffer for the Natural Resources Defense Council greeted the revamped proposal warmly - see http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/mbaumhefner/pge_proposes_new_improved_rate.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

I describe the proposal in a story on PG&E Currents at http://www.pgecurrents.com/2012/05/10/pges-proposed-electric-car-charging-rate-equates-to-%E2%80%98buck-a-gallon-gasoline%E2%80%99/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

For a copy of PG&E's advice letter, see http://www.pge.com/nots/rates/tariffs/tm2/pdf/ELEC_3910-E-A.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

 

[greenleaf]

So CPUC directed PG&E to simplify the schedules. But it looks like the number of different TOU periods actually remains the same as the existing schedules (I'm not comparing with the complicated one proposed earlier).

The one big disincentive is that the off-peak rates increased significantly (rates per kWh):

Winter
Current E9A tier one off-peak : $0.04680
New proposed : $0.09930 (212% increase)

Summer
Current E9A tier one off-peak : $0.03743
New proposed : $0.09712 (259% increase)

 

[oakwcj]

I hope readers of this forum will keep an open mind about PG&E's new proposal for EV charging rates. A staffer for the Natural Resources Defense Council greeted the revamped proposal warmly - see http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/mbaumhefner/pge_proposes_new_improved_rate.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

I describe the proposal in a story on PG&E Currents at http://www.pgecurrents.com/2012/05/10/pges-proposed-electric-car-charging-rate-equates-to-%E2%80%98buck-a-gallon-gasoline%E2%80%99/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

For a copy of PG&E's advice letter, see http://www.pge.com/nots/rates/tariffs/tm2/pdf/ELEC_3910-E-A.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

I agree that the new proposal is in most respects an improvement on the old one. However, it would still impose winter peak rates for the first time, although PG&E has utterly failed to provide any evidence of peak demand in the winter.

 

[oakwcj]

So CPUC directed PG&E to simplify the schedules. But it looks like the number of different TOU periods actually remains the same as the existing schedules (I'm not comparing with the complicated one proposed earlier).

The one big disincentive is that the off-peak rates increased by about 50%.

The simplification is the elimination of baselines and tiers. While I suppose that it is simpler to have summer and winter peak periods, it's also substantially more costly for consumers.

 

[greenleaf]

So CPUC directed PG&E to simplify the schedules. But it looks like the number of different TOU periods actually remains the same as the existing schedules (I'm not comparing with the complicated one proposed earlier).

The one big disincentive is that the off-peak rates increased by about 50%.

The simplification is the elimination of baselines and tiers. While I suppose that it is simpler to have summer and winter peak periods, it's also substantially more costly for consumers.

I updated my post. The off-peak increases are as follows (rates per kWh)

Winter
Current E9A tier one off-peak : $0.04680
New proposed : $0.09930 (212% increase)

Summer
Current E9A tier one off-peak : $0.03743
New proposed : $0.09712 (259% increase)

 

[greenleaf]

The simplification is the elimination of baselines and tiers.

OK, I missed that part.

 

[waitingforaleaf]

I updated my post. The off-peak increases are as follows (rates per kWh)

Winter
Current E9A tier one off-peak : $0.04680
New proposed : $0.09930 (212% increase)

Summer
Current E9A tier one off-peak : $0.03743
New proposed : $0.09712 (259% increase)

I don't believe that is a fair comparison to make as most households will exceed tier 1 from domestic usage alone. You would have to compare the averaged prices through the tiers used in order to make an actual comparison to the proposed EV rate. Likewise, the statement that it costs a "buck a gallon" to fill up the EV at off-peak hours disguises the fact that household electricity usage under the EV rate (during the peak and partial peak hours) is heavily increased for customers who normally do not exceed the first three tiers under E-9.

The EV rate (while better than the earlier proposed change to E9A) will still represent an increase in prices for lower usage customers, and the elimination of E-9 at the end of 2014 will likely guarantee that price increase.

 

[Spies]

Winter
Current E9A tier one off-peak : $0.04680
New proposed : $0.09930 (212% increase)

Summer
Current E9A tier one off-peak : $0.03743
New proposed : $0.09712 (259% increase)

This is an over simplification of the rates and is rather meaningless without also computing the changes of eliminating tiers and baselines. For example I could also compute the following:
Winter
Current E9A tier four off-peak : $0.20011
New proposed : $0.09930 (202% decrease)

Summer
Current E9A tier four off-peak : $0.20011
New proposed : $0.09712 (206% decrease)

Having said that however by eliminating baselines and tiers the incentive to conserve electricity is completely removed and thus shifts the burden from the heavy consumers subsidizing the light consumers to the light consumers subsidizing the heavy consumers. So the light consumers pay a substantial amount more while the heavy consumers pay less.

I have been on E9A for a long time myself and did a quick computation on how the latest proposed rates would impact me and I estimated it would be an increase of about 33% over the year. I am in territory X and I used 7,170 kWh over the past year at a cost of $764 and with the new rates it would be about $1,017 or more. Needless to say I plan to stay on the current E9A rate as long as I can.

 

[greenleaf]

Winter
Current E9A tier one off-peak : $0.04680
New proposed : $0.09930 (212% increase)

Summer
Current E9A tier one off-peak : $0.03743
New proposed : $0.09712 (259% increase)

This is an over simplification of the rates and is rather meaningless without also computing the changes of eliminating tiers and baselines. For example I could also compute the following:
Winter
Current E9A tier four off-peak : $0.20011
New proposed : $0.09930 (202% decrease)

Summer
Current E9A tier four off-peak : $0.20011
New proposed : $0.09712 (206% decrease)

Having said that however by eliminating baselines and tiers the incentive to conserve electricity is completely removed and thus shifts the burden from the heavy consumers subsidizing the light consumers to the light consumers subsidizing the heavy consumers. So the light consumers pay a substantial amount more while the heavy consumers pay less.

I have been on E9A for a long time myself and did a quick computation on how the latest proposed rates would impact me and I estimated it would be an increase of about 33% over the year. I am in territory X and I used 7,170 kWh over the past year at a cost of $764 and with the new rates it would be about $1,017 or more. Needless to say I plan to stay on the current E9A rate as long as I can.

I realized many people are not in tier one or two. Point taken.

 

[Spies]

Likewise, the statement that it costs a "buck a gallon" to fill up the EV at off-peak hours disguises the fact that household electricity usage under the EV rate (during the peak and partial peak hours) is heavily increased for customers who normally do not exceed the first three tiers under E-9.

I find the whole "buck a gallon" thing completely meaningless without context. To me its no different than saying the Chevy Volt gets 230 MPG.

EPA's own formula of 33.7 kWh of energy per refined gallon of gas would mean under the new rates one would be paying the equivalent of $3.27 a gallon summer off peak and $3.35 a gallon winter off peak. Better than todays gasoline prices but no where near $1 gallon.