APS Gets Approval To Stop Paying Customers For Solar Power Generation (flat fee, power lines)

[kell490]

Why should non solar users pay for solar users through tax credits and net metering. Tesla's system is impressive but what I have found with these things is the ROI will take 30 years to pay back if you have it installed by a solar company. I don't have a problem with the technology I do have a problem with the solar installers who charge double the system cost to install it they get away with that because they use the tax subsidies and net metering.

[Bummer]

Originally Posted by kell490

Why should non solar users pay for solar users through tax credits and net metering. Tesla's system is impressive but what I have found with these things is the ROI will take 30 years to pay back if you have it installed by a solar company. I don't have a problem with the technology I do have a problem with the solar installers who charge double the system cost to install it they get away with that because they use the tax subsidies and net metering.

Excellent point, Kell . . .

Also, from my very limited experience, many of these "roof atrocities" are anything but maintenance free and expense free for their promoted lifetime.

[ibarrio]

Originally Posted by 314guy

Patiently waiting on Tesla to help put these power companies out of business....

Yup, waiting for those solar roof tiles and battery storage packs. It is a game changer

People often vote against their own interest. There is no trickle down, corporations are not going to make you rich and the job they will give you is a low paying one.

[DrDog]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

Good news. There is no way they should pay retail to solar customers who get a free ride on the grid /infrastructure costs. Solar installers have been ripping customers off because the rest of APS customers are paying for their inflated prices. . I have nothing against solar, but it should have to stand economic muster without subsidies from those who choose not to have it.

The free ride on the grid argument is full of holes. If a solar owners excess electricity goes to the neighbors house then the grid is being saved ware and tear. If grid use determines your bill, then shouldn't people that live far from a power plant be required to pay more for grid use?

[DrDog]

Originally Posted by Bird Street

All of the "dark money" candidates were easily voted back in and then a few more with "R's" behind their names. The whole corporation commission is bought and paid for by APS, fair and square. You get what you vote for or maybe you don't vote at all. I'll just do the best I can. I'll make sure my house is energy efficient and buy thrifty appliances. One of my heart meds is $400./month. My SRP bill isn't that bad. I'm not going to wreck my roof with all those plastic solar panels.

A somewhat sour attitude. My solar system didn't wreck my roof and it saves me enough money each month that I could pay for your heart meds.

[lvmensch]

There is very high BS levels on this subject. It is certainly true that the utility should not pay unlimited amounts of retail credits to a roof top customer. But certainly any service displacing the users own needs should be credited at retail. And I would think any excess that could be easily utilized locally should be credited at some reasonable percentage of retail. Passed that compensation at the cost of the most expensive source the utility would utilize.

Going to be an interesting time. It now appears clear that in the desert SW the utilities can buy solar power at well less than the operating cost of their fossil fuel facilities. That creates an interesting problem. Basically the utility completely duplicates its base capability with solar and operates solar only when ever possible. And it changes the role of the utility base capability. Basically it becomes the night time and cloudy fill in. And it can likely do better with low capital cost/high operating cost facilities like gas turbines.

And this all gets better and more complicated as time goes on. Roof top will become very competitive in a very different way if the storage problem is even partially solved. Basically it will become cheap enough to produce power that even inefficient storage may be competitive. And then the utility has a real problem. The customers drop off and fast. And the remaining customers get nailed with the bill. And it gets expensive real fast. Soon you have no one left except those who cannot escape. And now what do we do about the power infrastructure.

Going to get really complicated...and pretty soon.

[jimj]

Originally Posted by kell490

Why should non solar users pay for solar users through tax credits and net metering. Tesla's system is impressive but what I have found with these things is the ROI will take 30 years to pay back if you have it installed by a solar company. I don't have a problem with the technology I do have a problem with the solar installers who charge double the system cost to install it they get away with that because they use the tax subsidies and net metering.

So you buy into the APS argument that they've NEVER shown any evidence to prove? Some marketing wonk came up with this winning argument though I've never seen evidence to back up their claims. Have you?
Let me ask you this, why should people who make something (in this case electricity) at their own expense be FORCED to give it to a company (and pay the highest tier charge just to give it to them) who then resell it at a profit?

To all the people who agree with APS let me lay this scenario out there.
You have solar that generates 110% + of your power but you have no storage so at times when you aren't producing you are drawing power and paying retail plus taxes/fees for it. Now then, at current credits you've generated enough power to sell back which pretty much covers what you've had to purchase from APS. Now remember that APS doesn't pay you the taxes or various fees they charge YOU so they're ahead there and they don't pay you the highest tier retail charge (from 12pm to 7pm) for the power even though that's when they're getting the power from your panels so again, they're ahead there. They ARE making money off the deal, just not enough to suit them and they see it getting worse long term unless they nip it in the bud now.

This is power they don't have to generate (generation YOU pay to maintain) so the only wear and tear you are responsible for is the wires from you to them which are paid for via fees and the offset from what they paid you to get the power and what they sell it to the public for.
One other thing to note, APS did NOT pay for some/much of the infrastructure. Every subdivision or building built pays for the infrastructure from transformers to lines. What APS may have paid for is the high tension lines from the substations to the area though not the whole cost of installation as some of that is laid off on developers needing the power.
What's ticked off APS is some of the public have become competitors in the power generation business and it's costing them profits THEY feel entitled to. They can't have that since at some point they'll not have the monopoly they've got now.

I'd imagine they'll be a huge campaign starting to put the brakes on any residential storage systems as that will really put a dent in their profit stream. Expect commercials showing batteries exploding and dire warnings of impending doom to your children from those evil storage devices coming to a TV near you!

We saw this kind of "anti-marketing" courtesy of the oil companies when hybrid cars (partially subsidized by the public) started up and we're seeing it from tobacco companies with Eciggs now.

[Messing About]

Originally Posted by DrDog

A somewhat sour attitude. My solar system didn't wreck my roof and it saves me enough money each month that I could pay for your heart meds.

As an interested potential buyer but very untrusting of Solar City's predatory leases, can I ask who you bought from, what it cost and what your summer bills from APS were?

[Messing About]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

There is very high BS levels on this subject.

And this all gets better and more complicated as time goes on. Roof top will become very competitive in a very different way if the storage problem is even partially solved. Basically it will become cheap enough to produce power that even inefficient storage may be competitive. And then the utility has a real problem. The customers drop off and fast. And the remaining customers get nailed with the bill. And it gets expensive real fast. Soon you have no one left except those who cannot escape. And now what do we do about the power infrastructure.

Going to get really complicated...and pretty soon.

Very well put...and I agree. When all of this is realized, the power wars (so to speak) will begin. There will be a huge "haves and have nots" scenarios. The cost of the solar panels will likely do another about face and start to climb upward, as demand to join the "haves" surges.

[snatale1]

Originally Posted by 314guy

Patiently waiting on Tesla to help put these power companies out of business....

Tesla needs power companies, not the other way around!