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

[mxp]

The CPUC Energy Division has issued a proposed decision approving PG&E's modified rate proposal, which grandfathers in customers already on the E-9 rate until at least the end of 2014. The proposed decision really doesn't say much, but it's being sent to everyone on the service list for comment. Since there were only 8 protests filed to the revised proposal, this is a done deal. The whole subject will be revisited by the CPUC in 2013 and 2014 as part of its next general rate review.

I did not receive any form of notification of this final decision. Can you point me to the URL link please?

Thanks.

http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/word_pdf/COMMEN ... 171370.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

My apologies if I sound overboard with this:

Is it worth the time and money to hire legal representation to fight for the implementation of indefinitely grandfathering in E-9 adopters?

[planet4ever]

My apologies if I sound overboard with this: Is it worth the time and money to hire legal representation to fight for the implementation of indefinitely grandfathering in E-9 adopters?

If you have solar panels, you may find that switching to E6 gives comparable savings to the old E9. If you don't have solar panels, spend the money on them, rather than giving it away to lawyers. I can almost guarantee that the long-term payout will be higher.

Ray

[hill]

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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . snip

It always irks me hearing the 30+kWh of energy tagged to gas. Factor in all the death & destruction (wars) related to its acquisition, cancers/respitory/health issues/death/retraning searching for new fields, drilling pumping refining pumping some more, shipping etc, and you end up with only 2/3 of that amount. Not so with electrons. sorry - off the soap box now.

[Thank you to oakwcj and Nekota for providing links.

It's been a while since I last checked this. I did receive an email today from another protester requesting the CPUC DELAY their decision supposedly to be published on August 13. He expressed an alternative to ask CPUC to wait for a rate calculator.

I suppose is this too little to late now?

Can you imagine what your rates would be if we actually paid enough so that the grid wasn't always in disrepair - to the point where summer days almost guarantee brown-outs? You don't see many people standing in line to pony up enough to fix things.
.

[Nubo]

...
Can you imagine what your rates would be if we actually paid enough so that the grid wasn't always in disrepair - to the point where summer days almost guarantee brown-outs? You don't see many people standing in line to pony up enough to fix things.
.

With PG&E's rates they should be using Silver wire.

[Nekota]

The CPUC Energy Division has issued a proposed decision approving PG&E's modified rate proposal, which grandfathers in customers already on the E-9 rate until at least the end of 2014. The proposed decision really doesn't say much, but it's being sent to everyone on the service list for comment. Since there were only 8 protests filed to the revised proposal, this is a done deal. The whole subject will be revisited by the CPUC in 2013 and 2014 as part of its next general rate review.

The CPUC has acted on the final resolution of E-4508 which establishes a new EV rate (no tiers) and grandfathers E9 untill end of 2014. I provide a link to a PDF of the document I received.

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B-80HT ... jhoMThzSzA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[mxp]

My apologies if I sound overboard with this: Is it worth the time and money to hire legal representation to fight for the implementation of indefinitely grandfathering in E-9 adopters?

If you have solar panels, you may find that switching to E6 gives comparable savings to the old E9. If you don't have solar panels, spend the money on them, rather than giving it away to lawyers. I can almost guarantee that the long-term payout will be higher.

Ray

I spoke to a friend recently who told me that the E-6 is now replaced with E-7 which is not as good at the E6. He was on E-6 for many years and was grandfathered in indefinitely.

[planet4ever]

I spoke to a friend recently who told me that the E-6 is now replaced with E-7 which is not as good at the E6. He was on E-6 for many years and was grandfathered in indefinitely.

You have that backwards. It is E-7 which is now closed to new customers, and E-6 that you can still switch to. Most people (at least those with sizable solar arrays) consider that E-7 was much better, because its peak hours were weekdays 12 noon to 6 PM, year round, while the E-6 peak hours are weekdays 1 PM to 7 PM, May through October only.

It may seem strange to think of peak hours as good, but PG&E pays you for excess power you transmit to their lines at the same rate as power they transmit to you, and on the same time schedule. Note that solar panels generate the largest part of their energy from 9 AM - 5 PM summer (9 AM - 3 PM winter). E-7 provides a better match between peak rates and times of highest solar array output.

Ray

[srl99]

The SMUD R-1 residential rate plan is 10c/kWH up to 700, then 17c/kWH. There's no excuse for the CPUC to continue allowing PG&E to overcharge it's customers. If you are a net generator, PG&E pays you 3c/kWH for your excess electricity - which they claim is their cost to acquire. Is the cost of providing service really higher in the dense Bay area than in the Sacramento region?

All of these PG&E residential rate plans are rearranging the deck chains on the Titanic for the benefit of the Iceberg. Check out the PG&E commercial rates for an eye opener.

Why does EV extend the peak hours until 9PM? Is this still really peak time on the grid? Most businesses should have closed their offices by then and the buildings gone into "overnight" HVAC programming. If you want to only reduce the price for EV charging then allow dual-meter adapters or sub-metering.

[planet4ever]

If you are a net generator, PG&E pays you 3c/kWH for your excess electricity - which they claim is their cost to acquire.

First let me emphasize that I am not a shill for PG&E, nor an apologist for their rates, nor do I have any business relationship with them apart from the services they provide to our home. I know their rates are high, significantly higher than SMUD or a number of other local providers in northern California.

My earlier statement is based on my nearly six years experience with E-6. I have solar panels on my roof, and use schedule E-6. Averaged over the year I am a net consumer of electricity, not a net generator. I typically see 4-6 months per year of net generation during peak periods, and I am credited for that generation at peak rates, always in excess of $0.25/kWh. I suppose it is possible that if I were a net generator on an annual basis they would have some fine-print rule that would reduce that to $0.03/kWh. If so, I have certainly not found it. Here is what I see in the PG&E NEMS tariff:

If the eligible customer-generator is a net generator, the net kWh generated shall be valued at the rate for the kWh up to the baseline quantity, with any excess kWh generated, valued at the rate for the appropriate tier level in which the equivalent kWh of usage would fall.

What is the basis for your assertion, srl99, that they really pay a small fraction of that amount?

Note: I am assuming home-scale solar or wind generation, not exceeding 30kW. I believe most home installations are significantly below that, typically closer to 5kW. Are you perhaps talking about large commercial installations? I haven't looked at the rates for those.

Ray

[srl99]

A home, vacant for a partial year (~2 kW solar)- ended up with a surplus of electricity to the grid. E-1 rate plan, which would have resulted in a check from PG&E. PG&E "paid" 3c/kWH (3.7c ??). They explained this as their "cost of acquiring electricity". Apparently, in years prior, they would not have paid for a net surplus.

Conclusion #1 - you don't _ever_ want to generate more than you use in your rate year. Conjecture #1 - that's quite a mark-up on their product. Request - lobby the CPUC to get PG&E's rates in line with other similar California providers (I'm not sure it needs to be Northern CA). There's a General Rate Case in 2014.

My earlier statement is based on my nearly six years experience with E-6. I have solar panels on my roof, and use schedule E-6. Averaged over the year I am a net consumer of electricity, not a net generator. I typically see 4-6 months per year of net generation during peak periods, and I am credited for that generation at peak rates, always in excess of $0.25/kWh. I suppose it is possible that if I were a net generator on an annual basis they would have some fine-print rule that would reduce that to $0.03/kWh. If so, I have certainly not found it. Here is what I see in the PG&E NEMS tariff:

If the eligible customer-generator is a net generator, the net kWh generated shall be valued at the rate for the kWh up to the baseline quantity, with any excess kWh generated, valued at the rate for the appropriate tier level in which the equivalent kWh of usage would fall.

What is the basis for your assertion, srl99, that they really pay a small fraction of that amount?

Note: I am assuming home-scale solar or wind generation, not exceeding 30kW. I believe most home installations are significantly below that, typically closer to 5kW. Are you perhaps talking about large commercial installations? I haven't looked at the rates for those.

Ray