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

Well that's significantly different than looking at only the Return On Investment. You CAN afford a PV solar system. Solar City has several different plans that make it economically feasible for everyone.......if you care to check it out. Solar City offers every user a $500 referral fee for every system they sell to a referral. I would be more than happy to pass that $500 directly to you if you buy their system. That is how committed I am to investing in our grandchildren's future.

 

While SolarCity does have a bit of operations in my state (Washington), one of their reps has been quoted as saying their leasing program is not economically viable here.

I've also heard several statements that leased systems have been a liability when selling a home. Some potential buyers are unwilling to take on the lease obligations, and want the seller to buy out the lease first. Does anyone here know of any specifics either way?

Obligatory disclosure: I am a retiree with a wholly owned DIY net-zero system.

 

I have a nice solar system saving me $1000/year in electricity costs. Any larger investment for long term good deeds is not appropriate for me.

 

That doesn't make a lot of sense. What buyer wouldn't want to take on a $50/mo lease in order to save themselves $100/mo in electricity cost? If a lease payment is more than the net savings in electricity, then a PV system is not appropriate for you.

that works too

Oh, your postings gave me the impression you did NOT have a PV system, my fault. Good, that works too. But since you say your system is undersized for your needs because you still spend $200 to $300 per year (about $20/mo) on electricity, you could spend $2000 for two more panels, reduce your electric costs to $0, and increase your ROI to around 9%!

 

Your neighbors only get charged that 33 cents a kWh during peak hours if they have exceeded their Tier 1, 2, and 3 allowances towards the end of the month. In fact, Tier 4 has now dropped to 32 cents a kWh as of September 1st. PG&E is also in the middle of revising their E1 rate schedule and eventually will only have two rate tiers for E1 instead of the current 4 tiers. The most recent proposal from PG&E was that Tier 1 eventually will be 19.5 cents per kWh and Tier 2 23.5 cents per kWh sometime in 2017.

It should be noted that

1) The current muli-tier rate structure was in response to the Energy crisis of 2001. Prior to that we didn't have a multi-tier system.
2) The reforming of the current residential rate structure is mandated by AB 237 which was passed in 2013. So it's not like PG&E
came up with this on their own. SCE and SDG&E are also implementing this.

As to the $60 a year increase, yes, it sucks. But it is relatively minor, and we as solar users do need to help pay for the upkeep of the transmission infrastructure, which includes all the neighborhood level stuff. The past couple of years we've had to walk away from a $50 to $100 monetary credit because of a) the minimum connection charge, and b) the excess energy credits we accumulated in the last two months of our true-up period. But I've gone from paying PG&E an average of 3 grand a year to paying them less than a $100 per year for electricity. Our solar lease is only $105 a month. So that means I'm saving $1700 or so a year. I can afford to pay them an extra $5 a month to not have to pay them $250 a month...

 

A very fair analysis, thank you. I just look forward to the day when I can go completely off grid.

 

I should correct myself, prior to 2001, there was a sort of multi-tier system. You had a base rate which was 11.5 cents a kWh, and when you exceeded some amount at that tier, it then was 13.3 cents a kWh. There were no other tiers or surcharges until May 2001, when the 5-tier system came into existence, at least within PG&E's territory.

 

Despite living on the coast with it's milder temps and no A/C to run, we hit the top Tier every month before we put Solar on the roof. Average family of four. Our average charge per kWh was 28 cents or more, sometimes hitting 34 cents. Inland customers, especially those in your area, have a baseline that is nearly twice that of us on the coast (13.8 kWh per day versus 7 kWh per day). And having lived in a sunny climate where A/C was a necessity, I don't begrudge you that extra baseline amount.

PG&E still has to maintain the local grid, and we do affect the local grid with our generation and consumption. PG&E, SCE and SDG&E all wanted to add a fixed charge to everyone's bill, starting at $5 and increasing to $10 in 2017. This was in addition to charges for actual usage. Thankfully the PUC told them no and instead instituted the minimum bill charge.

But remember, the $10 a month they are now charging us is applied as a credit at the end of the true-up period, just as the $5 fee was earlier. So if at the end of the true-up period we owe PG&E $120 for all the electricity we consumed, our true-up bill ends up being zero. And depending upon how wet the winter is this year, it's quite possible that winter production will be very very very low and we could end up owing money to PG&E. Our first true-up period had us owing PG&E about $60 when all was said and done. Last year we owed $5. This year we walked away from a $59 NEM credit. Sucks to be us.

 

One could always sell their gasser, buy an EV to get their $120 back. And not pay for gas. Win/Win, I say.

Those Nissan Leafs are so cheap for a 3 to 4 years old car.

 

Heh! Nice idea...

We're hoping that Tesla makes good on their promise of a 2017 delivery date for the Model 3, and actually hits the target price. The PiP will then become my wife's daily driver...