NewEnergyNews: INSTALL SOLAR PANELS & BE A POWER PRODUCER?

NewEnergyNews

Gleanings from the web and the world, condensed for convenience, illustrated for enlightenment, arranged for impact...

While the OFFICE of President remains in highest regard at NewEnergyNews, this administration's position on climate change makes it impossible to regard THIS president with respect. Below is the NewEnergyNews theme song until 2020.

The challenge now: To make every day Earth Day.

YESTERDAY

  • TODAY’S STUDY: How Get The Stacked Values Of Battery Storage
  • QUICK NEWS, October 16: Worse Than ‘The New Normal’; New Energy To The Rescue; How Rooftop Solar Cuts Everybody’s Power Bills
  • THE DAY BEFORE

  • Weekend Video: Bloomberg To Colbert – New Energy Is The Answer
  • Weekend Video: Global New Energy Keeps Coming On
  • Weekend Video: The Long Reach Of New Energy
  • THE DAY BEFORE THE DAY BEFORE

  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-Why Geoengineering Has Comes With Big Risks
  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-The Immense Potential Of Ocean Wind
  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-The Best Place To Build New Energy Is China – Survey
  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-Japan’s Mitsubishi Sees EV Price Beating Gas Cars
  • THE DAY BEFORE THAT

    THINGS-TO-THINK-ABOUT THURSDAY, October 12:

  • TTTA Thursday-Big Work Now Ahead On Climate Change
  • TTTA Thursday-New Energy Ready To Take Over In The New South
  • TTTA Thursday-How The Ocean Can Store New Energy
  • TTTA Thursday-Indiana Nun Fights For Solar
  • AND THE DAY BEFORE THAT

  • ORIGINAL REPORTING: New Hampshire Makes A New Energy Compromise That was ‘Worth It’
  • ORIGINAL REPORTING: Survey Shows Utilities Expect New Energy Expansion
  • THE LAST DAY UP HERE

  • TODAY’S STUDY: Why Big Buyers Buy New Energy
  • QUICK NEWS, October 10: Why Tariffs On Solar Will Backfire On The President; Private Sector Seizes Wind Opportunity; The EV Boom Needs 1000s More Plugs
  • --------------------------

    --------------------------

    Founding Editor Herman K. Trabish

    --------------------------

    --------------------------

    click image for more info about the Sunstock Solar Festival

    Research Associate and Contributing Editor Jessica R. Wunder

    --------------------------

    --------------------------

    --------------------------

    Some details about NewEnergyNews and the man behind the curtain: Herman K. Trabish, Agua Dulce, CA., Doctor with my hands, Writer with my head, Student of New Energy and Human Experience with my heart

    email: herman@NewEnergyNews.net

    -------------------

    -------------------

      A tip of the NewEnergyNews cap to Phillip Garcia for crucial assistance in the design implementation of this site. Thanks, Phillip.

    -------------------

    Pay a visit to the HARRY BOYKOFF page at Basketball Reference, sponsored by NewEnergyNews and Oil In Their Blood.

  • ---------------
  • TODAY AT NewEnergyNews, October 17:

  • TODAY’S STUDY: Global Nuclear Now
  • QUICK NEWS, October 17: Top 5 Climate Change Solutions; EVs To Lead By 2030; Diversity In Solar

    Monday, April 28, 2008

    INSTALL SOLAR PANELS & BE A POWER PRODUCER?

    Chris Bellizzi ran his air conditioning more than he normally would, more than he needed to, in Summer 2007. Why? Because he didn’t want utility PG&E to profit from the free electricity his home solar installation was sending it.

    Bellizi: "If you owe them, you've got to send them a check...If they owe you, they'll pocket it."

    California’s Assembly is considering a change to its “net metering” law, AB1920, that would change Bellizzi’s situation, the first such U.S. provision to do so. It would allow home power producers to do more than just wind their electricity bills to zero, as most net metering provisions allow. It would require the utilities to pay for excess electricity home systems send to the grid. Sounds only fair, right?

    PG&E, one of California’s biggest utilities and biggest boosters of solar energy, opposes AB1920. So does The Utility Reform Network (TURN), an important ratepayer advocate. Why?

    For interesting reasons that reveal how hard it is to make good legislation and how hard it is to create good incentives.

    PG&E contends that the payments from the utilities to system owners like Bellizzi would come out of the pockets of their other ratepayers. Since solar system owners are usually more affluent than non-owners, it would constitute a sort of unfair subsidy by those who can’t afford solar for those who can. PG&E also objects to AB1920 letting city-owned utilities off the hook on this.

    TURN points out that California already subsidizes home solar energy installations through its
    Million Solar Roofs program (aka California Solar Initiative, aka SB1). Because of that measure, solar system owners are being “paid” at a premium rate (25 to 30 cents/kilowatt-hour) for their power instead of the normal (9 to 10 cents/kilowatt-hour) rate - until their meters wind back to zero.

    Opponents of the measure suggest that if system owners want to even the rules, the state ought to even the rates as well.

    Marcel Hawiger, TURN staff attorney: "Homeowners who generate excess electricity should be paid fairly for that electricity, but shouldn't be subsidized a third time by the rest of the ratepayers, who already fund generous subsidies for rooftop solar…"

    Assembly Jared Huffmann (D-San Rafael), the AB 1920 author, and
    Environment California think differently. Dan Jacobson, legislative director, Environment California: "We should take away any disincentives there are…We don't expect this to be a huge moneymaker…This will only help to pencil out solar a little faster."

    Seems like Huffman might need to head back to the legislation drawing board to iron out some of the complications. He might need to keep his calculator handy.


    California would shift the profits to the power producers. (click to enlarge

    Cashing in on your solar savings; Bill would force utilities to pay for excess power
    Matt Nauman, April 12, 2008 (San Jose Mercury News)

    WHO
    California Assemblyman Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael); Chris Bellizzi, California homeowner and home solar system owner; California utility PG&E (Keely Wachs, spokesman); The Utility Reform Network (TURN) (Marcel Hawiger, staff attorney); Environment California (Dan Jacobson, legislative director)

    If the consumer owns the power, it seems like the consumer ought to get paid for it. (click to enlarge)

    WHAT
    AB 1920, a bill before the California Assembly that would increase payments to solar system owners from utilities.

    WHEN
    - AB1920, introduced by Huffmann, is presently working its way through the legislative process.
    - AB 1969 was enacted in 2007 to allow solar system owners to choose from categories for reimbursement.

    An alternative idea is to put the expense and metering costs on the utility. (click to enlarge)

    WHERE
    - California would be the first state to require payment to home solar system owners.
    - Michigan, Minnesota, Rhode Island and other states are considering such measures.

    WHY
    - The California Solar Initiative and other existing laws, the size of a solar system is limited to proportions consistent with the building it is built for, preventing the likelihood of significant electricity overproduction.
    - Current provisions allow solar and wind system owners to wind their bills all the way back to zero but not to become “power producers” by earning money from their systems.
    - Only 7% of California PG&E solar system owners generate excess kilowatt-hours.
    - PG&E objects to money going from its non-solar system owners to its solar system owners and it objects to having city-owned utilities excluded from the same rules it would have to follow and the same expenses it would have to bear.

    It’s the 21st century – do you know where YOUR meter is? (click to enlarge)

    QUOTES
    Assembly Jared Huffmann (D-San Rafael): "If they generate surplus power beyond their own energy needs, that's a gift to the utility…There's no compensation…This bill for many people will improve the economics…"

    1 Comments:

    At 10:49 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    I just installed solar panels on my home in 2007 and find myself with a substantial case of overproduction. This should be a good thing. But instead, I wonder why I should generate all this free energy to Sempra during peak demand hours when they don't compensate me? They pay for other sources of energy, why not the individual homeowner? This could be a win/win situation for all parties and that might encourage more homeowners to invest in solar! As it stands it will probably take 10 years for me to break even on the cost. If the utility compensated for the excess production maybe the breakeven could be reduced to 6 or 7 years. Don't we all want to see more clean energy? Global warming is the real deal...help encourage us all to do our part! As it stands, I guess I'll just turn the system off once my solar production will cover my full year of consumption.

     

    Post a Comment

    << Home