Is Your State Next In The Battle Against Net Metering?

The Solar Energy Channel by Paradise Energy

Подписаться 6 тыс.

Просмотров 2,1 тыс.

50% 1

Do solar panel owners have an unfair advantage when it comes to shouldering the costs of maintaining and enhancing our utility grid?
Discover the reasons behind Idaho and California's termination of net metering and why other states are contemplating changes to their net metering agreements. In this video, Larry and Warren dive into what these net metering regulation changes mean for solar panel owners and the future of the solar industry.
If California's loss of 17,000 solar jobs is any indication, the future may not be as bright as we hope.
START YOUR SOLAR JOURNEY HERE
👉 Request your free custom solar quote: paradisesolarenergy.com/get-a...
📙 Download your solar buyer's guide: bit.ly/3uwMtsb
💻 Calculate your solar cost & ROI: bit.ly/42HK7TV
🔋 Calculate your battery system size and cost: bit.ly/3uGrS4w
0:00 Introduction
1:00 The War Against Net Metering
8:22 The Good News For Existing Solar Owners
12:02 California's Solar Industry Is In Crisis
17:16 Batteries Could Save The Day
********************************
Who are we?
Paradise Energy Solutions is a family-owned, full-service solar energy company. Since 2009, our team of 100+ solar experts has installed over 2,000 solar systems for businesses and homeowners throughout the mid-Atlantic region of the USA.
In addition to providing solar and battery system design and installation services, we have a team of solar maintenance technicians that diagnose and fix solar systems from small residential to large utility-scale systems and everything in between. Watch this video to learn more about who we are: • Discover what makes Pa...
Learn more:
Subscribe ▶ bit.ly/3qeirHu
Paradise Energy Solutions ▶ www.paradisesolarenergy.com/
Facebook ▶ / paradiseenergysolutions
Linkedin ▶ / paradise-energy-soluti...

Наука

Опубликовано:

23 июл 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 33

@thesolarenergychannel 5 месяцев назад

*START YOUR SOLAR JOURNEY HERE* 👉 Request your free custom solar quote: paradisesolarenergy.com/get-a-quote 📙 Download your solar buyer's guide: bit.ly/3uwMtsb 💻 Calculate your solar cost & ROI: bit.ly/42HK7TV 🔋 Calculate your battery system size and cost: bit.ly/3uGrS4w

@jazzfan7491 2 месяца назад

when talking about California nobody ever mentions that it's not "California" that cut back the payments, it's the Public Utility Commission, which sets rules for "investor-owned", meaning private, for-profit utilities that switched from NEM2 to the stingier NEM3. There are other large utilities in the state -- LA Dept. of Water and Power and Pasadena Water and Power are 2 of them -- which AREN'T controlled by the PUC and are still on NEM 2. It's true that most of the state switched to NEM 3, but it's not true that ALL of the state switched.

@MR_Garage 6 месяцев назад

Already low HAH! SRP in Arizona has been ripping us off for years at .281 cents per kWh. And they force us into paying for an extra meter which is not required, for THEIR data collection.

@edc1569 6 месяцев назад

I’m from the UK and I’m on an agile priced tariff, electricity is not a fixed cost product, sometimes the energy company pays me for using electricity other times the charge me 50cents (and this is capped). The idea you can use the grid as a seasonal battery is crazy - it doesn’t work like that.

@thesolarenergychannel 6 месяцев назад

Thankfully, that is not the case here in the US. At this point for us, it makes a lot more sense to use the grid as storage when comparing the cost/return vs. installing a battery system.

@firstbigbarney 22 дня назад

Utilities should only pay the avoided cost at the time of use... All solar should have 2 meters with ratchets and both should be TOU meters... Pay both ways at the current rate at time of use...

@tommcgrath5686 6 месяцев назад

Indiana maybe did not respect the existing net metering? I'm asking. Thanks

@LTVoyager 6 месяцев назад

As both a new solar owner and a board member of a distribution cooperative, I see both sides of this. The reality is that residential solar producers are being subsidized by other electric users and by other taxpayers. When I did the economic analysis for my system, I found that without net metering and without the 30% tax subsidy, the system made zero economic sense in northern PA. With just the 30% tax subsidy and no net metering, the system probably still makes sense, but the payback period approaches the useful life of the system. The reality is that the fixed monthly charge that electric companies charge simply doesn’t come close to covering their fixed costs to keep a line to a home. If this fixed charge was set appropriately and did cover the fixed costs, then no subsidy would be provided to residential solar producers as their fixed monthly cost would cover the fixed utility cost to keep the line connected. However, that isn’t the case since no state PUC will approve such a “correct” rate structure. The other sad fact is that many cooperatives are NOT grandfathering in existing systems, at least not in PA. I agree that is a mistake, but that is the reality. I assume you are aware of that.

@nlewis1111 6 месяцев назад

If I conserve energy by not running my AC, am I also 'being subsidized by other electric users and by other taxpayers'? If a family has their kids go off to college and they are suddenly using less electricity, are they also now 'being subsidized by other electric users and by other taxpayers'? You're telling me that people that are trying to do the right thing and use less electricity are the villains? In reality, the way we pay for electric service is regressive. The same base rate applies to all customers regardless of how much they utilize the system. Poor people pay the same as the super wealthy. Solar customers provide a service by lowering transmission and distribution costs and line losses (as do all conservation measures). In the extreme, imagine a system where homeowners and businesses all had solar and batteries and the grid wasn't needed. The homeowners and businesses paid for all of the system. Why should the utility get anything? A utility is a public service. As such, it should be paid for by public money like firefighters and police and the highway system. Maintained by public money.

@LTVoyager 6 месяцев назад

@@nlewis1111 No, because you aren’t using the grid as a free battery to store your generated electricity. This really isn’t a hard concept if you think about it just a minute. And if your local electric company only pays 6 cents for the electricity it buys from its primary generator, why should it pay you 14 cents for the electricity you generate?

@nathanlewisforcongress120 6 месяцев назад

@@LTVoyager It's not a 'free battery', you're giving them electricity that they don't have to transport over hundreds or thousands of miles. Keeping them from endless PUC meetings where they want to build more transmission, not needing workers and engineers. Course, as the article I posted points out, that's currently how they make their money, so they don't want the gravy train to stop. All the incentives are messed up.

@LTVoyager 6 месяцев назад

@@nathanlewisforcongress120 It absolutely is a free battery. You aren’t giving them electricity they need. In most parts of the country, electricity demand is greatest in the early morning and evening when solar produces little. Demand is less during midday and thus the value of electricity is not great during peak solar production time. When the electric company buys power from their G&T, they get the power for 6-9 cents delivered to them. You want them to pay you 14-20 cents AND you want to use their transmission lines for free. Why should the electric company pay you twice as much for electricity and provide you the lines to transmits it on and take it when they don’t need it? You are correct in that the incentives are all messed up. California finally woke up to this nonsense and corrected most of the “messed up” incentives with NEM 3.0. Other starts are sure to follow. The fair way to handle this is to have power companies buy power from residential solar producers at their avoided cost rate, which is basically the rate they would pay to buy the electricity from their main G&T company. This means that during periods of low demand, the price paid will be lower than during periods of high demand. And residential solar users are always free to disconnect from the grid and go off-grid if they feel the power company is ripping them off.

@nlewis1111 6 месяцев назад

@@LTVoyagerIf they had different incentives, they should absolutely want your electricity. In most places in the country, there is no excess solar in the afternoons. And if there was, the utilities should be helping people get storage. But even in California, they are going to need way more solar (and the associated storage). No reason to stop the train before it gets to the end of the track. They should want every house to have their own, so they don't have to build more transmission and fix those big power lines in inclement weather/fire. But those aren't their incentives. They get their money from these infrastructure projects. And, unfortunately, way too many utilities are making it extremely difficult to go offline. But I agree that people should absolutely be thinking about doing that to force the politicians hands. And you're barely using their transmission lines. The power is going to your neighbor's house. You are helping them (except for the screwed up incentives they have). You're missing which incentives are messed up. Read the article above. It would be nice if the public were actually the ones that were in charge, instead of the money men, but unfortunately, even in California, that's not the case.

@blainecelestaine4543 22 дня назад

The infrastructure argument is weak. Because the infrastructure is proportional to the producer. Relatively the solar producer a higher production cost and one customer. In Louisiana grandfathered accounts get $.12-.13 New accounts get$.19 expletive ridiculous. furthermore solar accounts are paying the base rate as any customer and very few have a zero bill. So actually they are paying for their own infrastructure and contributing to the utility company infrastructure as well

@vevenaneathna 3 дня назад

people with solar installations are improving the reliability of the grid and take loads off of the current infrastructure. transformers dont need to supply power and people with solar, especially batteries tend to load shift away from peak demand.

@ericlamideas 4 месяца назад

let's be real, utilities will do everything they can to fight the changing market. they will not lay down and just take it. history rhymes this has happened hundreds of times in the past in other industries. nature always runs its course. ultimately - solar prices need to come down substantially. the government incentives are great but always result in volatile frothy markets.

@JamesGreen-gv4yn 17 дней назад

A couple of items. The term net metering refers to the metering that measures the amount of electricity going to or from an installation. Using this to refer to a method of billing (1 to 1 kwh) is at best confusing. It would be nice if everyone stopped using the term this way. You touched on the connection fee that Idaho is increasing. This is the part of the bill that will always be charged and does not go away when you produce more than you use. At least in my state. If this is the amount that covers being connected to the grid, there is no excuse for saying these changes are used for maintaining the grid (unless there is no such fee). More likely is the transmission losses when sending power over the grid need to be taken into account. People seem to forget (or not understand) that power is lost in may ways. Transmission lines are not 100% efficient and we should not expect a power company to ignore that fact and cover the cost of the loss for us when allowing a customer with solar panels to send them power and get some portion of it back in return. Related item often overlooked when talking about installing batteries to keep the power on site in order to avoid the difference in these new changes. Batteries are also not 100% efficient. Depending on your situation and the power company in your area, this may or may not be a better deal. The benefit of having some power when the grid goes down is a different reason to install them.

@court2379 2 месяца назад

Lets be honest. Net netering is free loading off your neighborhood. Using the grid has a cost. The utilities have fixed costs, infrastructure, staff. If you produce solar they aren't generating revenue, but still have all the costs. So as a solar producer who is paying for all those costs when net metering? Your community does. As solar expands the utilities get less and kess revenue, but the costs remain the same. So they will have to raise rates. The rate changes are necessary to keep the grid operating. The only question I see is what are fair rates. It sounds like many utilities are trying to make it overly expensive.

@thesolarenergychannel 2 месяца назад

Yes, at the same time, the energy being sent back to the grid from solar is taking production demand off the utilities. We have to come to an economically beneficial solution for both sides.

@johnfitbyfaithnet Месяц назад

How valuable to the neighbors is it to reduce the chances of a brownout or blackout?

@court2379 Месяц назад

@@johnfitbyfaithnet That isn't very likely. Solar is producing at a time of lower demand and then falls off just as peak load happens.

@BrandonSorenson-fb3gg 2 месяца назад

This is why privatized utility companies make no sense. Power and gas should be supplied by either a state or municipality and remove the profit incentive to get accurate representation of these costs

@court2379 2 месяца назад

Grid connection is providing a service and that service has a cost. It is fair to need to pay for it. The only question is, how much is fair?

@thesolarenergychannel Месяц назад

Yes, you're correct. At the same time, the utility companies are benefiting from solar because it's reducing demand on the grid. Both need to be compensated fairly.

@court2379 Месяц назад

@@thesolarenergychannel Utilities only benefit to a finite point. It will vary by situation but guessing 10-20% of their capacity. Also avoiding additional expenses doesn't change that they still have the other fixed ones, so the benefit would be small. Maybe that is why the utilities allowed net metering at all though. Ultimately as solar gains in popularity they will have to charge more and more for what they sell, and non solar people will pay a disproportionate amount if solar customers aren't charged for the service they are getting. The high prices will drive more conversion to solar and the grid will fall apart. Particularly as batteries become less expensive. Australia is ahead of the US on this and is playing out there now. The US should study it and try to gain some wisdom from it. Whether it can be stopped or made to work better I don't know, but maybe the impact can be reduced.

@richardamick1690 Месяц назад

You have no good information. You're quoting the sierra club

@thesolarenergychannel Месяц назад

Please share your sources that disprove anything that we share in this video.

@charlespaine987 2 месяца назад

What about the utilities paying their fair share for your investment and maintenance on your property and equipment roi for them but not for you .corruption incarnate

@JamesGreen-gv4yn 17 дней назад

In the case of Solar, the utilities fair share for your investment is $0. You are the one that has to decide if it makes sense to you to spend that money to purchase and maintain a solar system.