Is solar power still worth it under Duke Energy's proposed net metering changes? (credit, house)

[inner_outer_440]

I am looking into adding solar panels to my home and with current net metering rules (assuming annual 5% Duke Energy price hikes) I can expect to break even within 10 years. The one thing holding me back from pulling the trigger are Duke Energy's proposed net metering changes, which have made it through most of the steps and are awaiting approval and implementation by the NC Utilities Commission.



Current Net Metering:

• $14/mo fixed rate (regardless of power usage)
• $0.12/kWh for power consumption in 2023
• $0.12/kWh credit for excess power generation
• Excess credits reset on May 31st every year

Proposed "Bridge Rate":

• $28/mo fixed rate + $10/mo surcharge to avoid "Time of Use" billing
• $0.12/kWh for power consumption in 2023
• $0.03/kWh credit for excess power generation
• Excess credits do not reset
• Bridge Rate expires in 2037 and all solar owners must switch to a "Time of Use" plan

When I did the math, the new Bridge Rate adds 3.5 years to the breakeven period and guarantees a minimum bill of nearly $40, which is almost half of what I am paying currently on my standard power bill with the budget billing even payments plan.


Is it even worth messing with solar at this point?


Sources:

https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/du...r-net-metering
https://www.wfae.org/energy-environm...r-rule-changes

[Sherifftruman]

I believe they included a phase out period for current customers of like 10 years. Not sure when you would have to have a system installed to be on that deal though but worth checking.

If the new rate was going to apply, you can still get benefits of solar, but it would mean you and the solar company would need to be more thoughtful in system design. Off the top of my head, I would assume you would go two ways. Either have a slightly smaller system to make sure you were only offsetting your own power use, or go with a larger system and install batteries.

Then you will essentially be getting a 12 cent rate for each kwh you generate. (well, a bit less if you consider the cost of the batteries amortized over each kwh pulled from them. )

You could also be more careful about usage. You would want to be doing high power use things during the peak of the day, when solar production is highest, to avoid generating excess power. (charging an electric vehicle, running AC v setting it back, baking, laundry, etc. This would be great for people who work from home rather than going into an office)

Also, with a battery system, you would have the potential benefit of using it for backup power so the extra cost does buy that benefit as well.

[wizard-xyzzy]

My guess: in 20 years or so, we will see in-home energy management systems that feed grid power, in-home solar power (including battery storage), and in-home emergency generation into the home distribution circuits. A computer will dynamically select which circuits are powered from which source. In this scenario, there is no net metering because there is no backflow from the home systems into the grid. All your excess capacity goes into your battery. You'd also have the option to recharge your battery from the grid, using offpeak rates.

[king john IV]

"Is it even worth messing with solar at this point?"

it could be.

1. if your objective is independence of the grid.
2. if your electrical needs remain stable or drop.
3. if your neighbors (HOA?) do not mind.

it might not be.

1. essentially, it will cost much more in the near term.
2. a hail storm, hurricane, ice storm, etc. might destroy your panels.
3. if you decide to sell your house with "outdated" solar panels installed.

[NYC2RDU]

I did the math on this last year and my break even point was conservatively 10-12 years, but more likely closer to 15-17 years. If we paid cash for the system, it would cost ~$18K, my average electric bill is around $100 per month (which will further drop when my son moves out later this year).

Although my wife made an impassioned plea regarding reducing our carbon footprint as a means to convince me to commit, I'm at a stage of life where I need to make responsible financial decisions and I simply can't justify the cash outlay. Plus when you factor in that if I leave the $18K in investment accounts, over the same 15 year period the break even gets pushed much further out.

I think it works for many, just not all.

[cheapdad00]

Originally Posted by NYC2RDU

I did the math on this last year and my break even point was conservatively 10-12 years, but more likely closer to 15-17 years. If we paid cash for the system, it would cost ~$18K, my average electric bill is around $100 per month (which will further drop when my son moves out later this year).

Although my wife made an impassioned plea regarding reducing our carbon footprint as a means to convince me to commit, I'm at a stage of life where I need to make responsible financial decisions and I simply can't justify the cash outlay. Plus when you factor in that if I leave the $18K in investment accounts, over the same 15 year period the break even gets pushed much further out.

I think it works for many, just not all.

This is a great point as I doubt there is any other investment a person would undertake knowing the payback was 15 years.

[inner_outer_440]

Duke Energy Progress is asking state regulators for a 20% rate hike over the next three years for grid maintenance and upgrades. Duke Energy Carolinas is asking for a 18% rate hike over the next three years for rising fuel costs. Those of us living in Wake County are in the overlapping territory which means we might get hit by both rate hikes??? It's ridiculous how they want to blatantly rip off their ordinary customers while also making it difficult to transition to self generated power at a reasonable rate...



Source (DEP): https://www.wral.com/duke-energy-to-...hike/20762921/
Source (DEC): https://abc11.com/duke-energy-subsid...lity/12719725/

[SFspiderman]

No, you wouldn't get hit by both hikes. You have either Carolinas or Progress, which continue to operate semi-independently since Duke acquired CP&L/Progress a decade ago.

And they always ask for a big rate hike and then the state approves a smaller one.

[wizard-xyzzy]

SFspiderman is correct about non-overlapping service areas. And, of course, the northern 20% of Wake County land area is served by Wake EMC.

If the regulators had granted every rate increase that Duke Energy and its predecessors had asked for, we'd be paying a dollar a kilowatt-hour by now.

[paytonc]

Originally Posted by inner_outer_440

Duke Energy Progress is asking state regulators for a 20% rate hike over the next three years for grid maintenance and upgrades

Which would improve the case for solar panels, since the cost of the avoided electric load is going to increase.

I'd also be curious (and will be asking around) about whether the higher prices makes load-balancing via solar + batteries more cost effective. Batteries are currently rather expensive, but it's hard to put a price on Duke's lack of reliability.