Electric Bill Happiness

[mzwibel]

About the same time I got my Leaf, I got a 4.6 kw solar system put on my townhome. It took a while for SCE to get the billing correct with my TOU metering. This was the first month everything was correct. Here are the results:

Last year same time period - SCE bill $208 and change

I drove about 1300 miles on the Leaf in the last billing period.

This months SCE bill - 74 cents (which is taxed and fees) and a $38 CREDIT

I am happy. I am friggin ecstatic

I live in Cypress by the way .....

 

[highcountryrider]

Awesome! :mrgreen:

 

[fooljoe]

About how much that 4.6kw cost you, if you don't mind me asking? And what company did you go with? I'm near Cypress and thinking about getting solar next year, although probably 4.6kw is overkill for me. So far my SCE bills have been about $80 with the Leaf, up only about $20 from the pre-Leaf era with about 1000 miles/month driving

I might've gotten solar right away except if I did most of the tax credits would go to waste, with the $7500 credit for the Leaf eating up most of my 2011 taxes. I guess I'm just too poor for solar.

 

[CJF]

Glad to hear it!

Now if we could only get SCE to actually cut us a check for the credit balance of the account THAT would be great. We installed a 10kW system last year and have a $1k credit so far....but that was without the car so I suspect that this year we should have a lower credit amount.

It is amazing that the Southern California Edison (SCE) folks don't know how the Time-of-Use (TOU) system works. The first month we converted to TOU with the newly installed multifunction digital meter, they came out and read our meter and correctly charged us for the energy we used, but conveniently forgot to credit us twice that amount which represented what we excess produced and uploaded to the grid... When I called them on it, it was as if they had never heard of such a thing, what two separate readings from one meter, one for production and one for consumption? After two months and a revised/corrected bill they got it straight.

I am still amazed with all the different rates that are used to calculate the total bill. The one that stands out is the peak time of use in which SCE actually pays the consumer to use electricity and thus when we are a net excess producer of energy they actually charge us for production of energy that we are selling back to them.

I know it sounds crazy but its true and I have the bills to prove it. If anyone out there understands the reasoning behind this rate plan please let me know.

Cheers,

Corey

 

[Boomer23]

I am still amazed with all the different rates that are used to calculate the total bill. The one that stands out is the peak time of use in which SCE actually pays the consumer to use electricity and thus when we are a net excess producer of energy they actually charge us for production of energy that we are selling back to them.

I know it sounds crazy but its true and I have the bills to prove it. If anyone out there understands the reasoning behind this rate plan please let me know.

Cheers,

Corey

Corey, with due respect, that's not actually true. If you examine SCE's billing scheme, they count the amount of net energy that we both use and that we produce to place our charges and credits into Tier 1 or Tier 2 of their plans, but they CREDIT us for the net generated energy when they calculate the bill. In other words, your total net energy used and generated dictates the rate Tier, but then SCE multiplies that rate factor by a negative number equal to the kWh that you net generated in that time of use period. In fact, for Summer bills, the very fact that they use your net generated energy to push more of your production into Tier 2 is what gives you your large CREDIT of 55 cents per kWh for Peak energy generation. If they didn't add our generated energy to our energy used, or if they subtracted our energy generation from our energy used for Tier placement, we'd mostly be in Tier 1 and then the credits would be much smaller for our net generation, 19 cents instead of 55 cents. I have similar bills to examine, though my PV system is half yours in size.

This is all covered ad nauseum in the SCE thread under Regional Discussions, Utilities.

 

[CJF]

I am still amazed with all the different rates that are used to calculate the total bill. The one that stands out is the peak time of use in which SCE actually pays the consumer to use electricity and thus when we are a net excess producer of energy they actually charge us for production of energy that we are selling back to them.

I know it sounds crazy but its true and I have the bills to prove it. If anyone out there understands the reasoning behind this rate plan please let me know.

Cheers,

Corey

Corey, with due respect, that's not actually true. If you examine SCE's billing scheme, they count the amount of net energy that we both use and that we produce to place our charges and credits into Tier 1 or Tier 2 of their plans, but they CREDIT us for the net generated energy when they calculate the bill. In other words, your total net energy used and generated dictates the rate Tier, but then SCE multiplies that rate factor by a negative number equal to the kWh that you net generated in that time of use period. In fact, for Summer bills, the very fact that they use your net generated energy to push more of your production into Tier 2 is what gives you your large CREDIT of 55 cents per kWh for Peak energy generation. If they didn't add our generated energy to our energy used, or if they subtracted our energy generation from our energy used for Tier placement, we'd mostly be in Tier 1 and then the credits would be much smaller for our net generation, 19 cents instead of 55 cents. I have similar bills to examine, though my PV system is half yours in size.

This is all covered ad nauseum in the SCE thread under Regional Discussions, Utilities.

Hello Boomer,

What I am referencing in the bill is the first line of the Delivery charges for Summer On Peak Lvl 1. For this past month this was a minus 228 kWh for us, meaning we excess produced 228 kWh of power and that was sold back to SCE at a rate of -$0.02541 for a total of $5.79. This results from a negative kWh being multiplied by a negative rate charge which results in a positive charge on our bill. So my understanding of this is that in exchange for our excess production of 228 kWh in the month at this tariff rate we were CHARGED by SCE for our electrical production. I completely agree with you that we have a significant increase in the other tariff rates that obviously make up for this very small charge. But my understanding of reading this bill is that on Lvl 1 of Summer On Peak IF we were consuming energy then SCE would credit us for using energy and if we produced energy during this period we are CHARGED for producing it.

If this is not your understanding from this line on the bill, please help me out as I just don't understand why a utility company such as SCE would PAY the consumer to use their energy at any time, or in our case, charge a customer for producing power and feeding back into the grid. :?



Your rate: TOU-D-TEV
Billing period: Jul 28 '11 to Aug 26 '11 (29 days)
Delivery charges

Energy-Summer On Peak
Lvl 1 (1% to 130% of bsln) -228 kWh x -$0.02541 $5.79
Lvl 2 (more than 130%) -487 kWh x $0.31404 -$152.94

Energy-Summer Off Peak
Lvl 1 (1% to 130% of bsln) 17 kWh x $0.06103 $1.04
Lvl 2 (more than 130%) 37 kWh x $0.17478 $6.47

Energy-Summer Sup Off Pk
Lvl 1 (1% to 130% of bsln) 140 kWh x $0.05789 $8.10
Lvl 2 (more than 130%) 297 kWh x $0.10962 $32.56
DWR bond charge -224 kWh x $0.00505 -$1.13

 

[garygid]

You Cypress-area folks might want to join our LEAF-Gathering this coming Saturday (10 Sep) morning at the Hometown Buffet in Cerritos (just East of 605, South St exit).

If you do, please bring your electrical bill (and maybe a few copies for those interested).

 

[onlyjaymoo]

CJF,

You're absolutely correct -- it's crazy and true. For SCE, on the summer time rates, there is a (small) portion of the first "few" kWh's of Tier 1 on-peak usage that is actually a credit back to the customer for use. Since we are pretty much always netting out *negative* for on-peak, we actually have to pay due to the straight-up math involved.

You can see this "crediting rate" on the detailed rate plan at this link:

http://www.sce.com/NR/sc3/tm2/pdf/CE324.pdf

Notice that Summer Season, On-Peak, Level 1 (up to 130% of baseline) is actually (0.02036), which indicates a credit of 2cents per kWh consumed. Since our net production is a negative number against that credit, we essentially are paying 2cents per kWh to sell that portion of our generation back to SCE.

NuTz!

 

[mzwibel]

I did not buy the panels. I leased them $0 down from Solar City. For the first year, my monthly lease is less then $100.

I think that is a good deal.

I have been to 2 of the meetings at the Nissan in Cerritos.

 

[CJF]

CJF,

You're absolutely correct -- it's crazy and true. For SCE, on the summer time rates, there is a (small) portion of the first "few" kWh's of Tier 1 on-peak usage that is actually a credit back to the customer for use. Since we are pretty much always netting out *negative* for on-peak, we actually have to pay due to the straight-up math involved.

You can see this "crediting rate" on the detailed rate plan at this link:

http://www.sce.com/NR/sc3/tm2/pdf/CE324.pdf

Notice that Summer Season, On-Peak, Level 1 (up to 130% of baseline) is actually (0.02036), which indicates a credit of 2cents per kWh consumed. Since our net production is a negative number against that credit, we essentially are paying 2cents per kWh to sell that portion of our generation back to SCE.

NuTz!

I know that this issue is very small in the grand scheme of things but my frustration comes from a lack of understanding of WHY this is occurring. I'm sorry but this rate runs counter intuitive to me and I'm just attempting to understand why this was done by some very smart people.

All I can say with absolute authority is that there is a lot I don't know.... This is just one of the things that I don't understand but I fully believe that there is a very rational reason that this was done and I'm just frustrated that I can't figure that reason out and so far no one at the SCE Net metering office has been able to clue me in.

Cheers,

Corey

 

[CJF]

CJF,

You're absolutely correct -- it's crazy and true. For SCE, on the summer time rates, there is a (small) portion of the first "few" kWh's of Tier 1 on-peak usage that is actually a credit back to the customer for use. Since we are pretty much always netting out *negative* for on-peak, we actually have to pay due to the straight-up math involved.

You can see this "crediting rate" on the detailed rate plan at this link:

http://www.sce.com/NR/sc3/tm2/pdf/CE324.pdf

Notice that Summer Season, On-Peak, Level 1 (up to 130% of baseline) is actually (0.02036), which indicates a credit of 2cents per kWh consumed. Since our net production is a negative number against that credit, we essentially are paying 2cents per kWh to sell that portion of our generation back to SCE.

NuTz!

I hate to bring this up...but when we look at page 2 of the TOU-D-TEV rate tariff .PDF you correctly referenced and which we are operating under, you will see the rate of (0.02036) however, on my actual bills for Summer On Peak Lvl 1 the rate is actually -$0.02541. Again, just more stuff I don't understand... :?

 

[TonyWilliams]

I got a $469.11 electric bill, and a shut off notice for 5pm on 9 Sept 11.

I called and they're "looking into" the 1.4 MWh that I provided them during the month.

 

[CJF]

I got a $469.11 electric bill, and a shut off notice for 5pm on 9 Sept 11.

I called and they're "looking into" the 1.4 MWh that I provided them during the month.

Tony,

We will be waiting for the rest of the story.....

 

[Boomer23]

I am still amazed with all the different rates that are used to calculate the total bill. The one that stands out is the peak time of use in which SCE actually pays the consumer to use electricity and thus when we are a net excess producer of energy they actually charge us for production of energy that we are selling back to them.

I know it sounds crazy but its true and I have the bills to prove it. If anyone out there understands the reasoning behind this rate plan please let me know.

Cheers,

Corey

Corey, with due respect, that's not actually true. snip ---

Hello Boomer,

What I am referencing in the bill is the first line of the Delivery charges for Summer On Peak Lvl 1. For this past month this was a minus 228 kWh for us, meaning we excess produced 228 kWh of power and that was sold back to SCE at a rate of -$0.02541 for a total of $5.79. This results from a negative kWh being multiplied by a negative rate charge which results in a positive charge on our bill. So my understanding of this is that in exchange for our excess production of 228 kWh in the month at this tariff rate we were CHARGED by SCE for our electrical production. I completely agree with you that we have a significant increase in the other tariff rates that obviously make up for this very small charge. But my understanding of reading this bill is that on Lvl 1 of Summer On Peak IF we were consuming energy then SCE would credit us for using energy and if we produced energy during this period we are CHARGED for producing it.

If this is not your understanding from this line on the bill, please help me out as I just don't understand why a utility company such as SCE would PAY the consumer to use their energy at any time, or in our case, charge a customer for producing power and feeding back into the grid. :?



Your rate: TOU-D-TEV
Billing period: Jul 28 '11 to Aug 26 '11 (29 days)
Delivery charges

Energy-Summer On Peak
Lvl 1 (1% to 130% of bsln) -228 kWh x -$0.02541 $5.79
Lvl 2 (more than 130%) -487 kWh x $0.31404 -$152.94

I get your point, Corey. My June/July bill shows a charge of $5.06 for this line item. But since my total bill was a credit of $85, I ignored it. We have noticed this and chatted about it at some of our local group meetings, and I chalk it up to the vagaries of the PUC/SCE negotiated agreements and legalities, and then SCE applying those agreed rules to our net metering rate plans without much thought being given to the logic of this part of the calculation. I see it as a small fact of life with TOU rates, and not really worth my time to worry about, as long as the big picture is as favorable as it is.

 

[xtremeflyer]

Your rate: TOU-D-TEV
Billing period: Jul 28 '11 to Aug 26 '11 (29 days)
Delivery charges

Energy-Summer On Peak
Lvl 1 (1% to 130% of bsln) -228 kWh x -$0.02541 $5.79
Lvl 2 (more than 130%) -487 kWh x $0.31404 -$152.94

I get your point, Corey. My June/July bills shows a charge of $5.06 for this line item. But since my total bill was a credit of $85, I ignored it. We have noticed this and chatted about it at some of our local group meetings, and I chalk it up to the vagaries of the PUC/SCE negotiated agreements and legalities, and then SCE applying those agreed rules to our net metering rate plans without much thought being given to the logic of this part of the calculation. I see it as a small fact of life with TOU rates, and not really worth my time to worry about, as long as the big picture is as favorable as it is.

It's actually very simple and makes perfect sense.. This portion of the bill is "Delivery Service".. so even though you Generated the electricity, it still costs SCE money to Deliver that energy and is passing that small cost on to you. At the end of the day the generation costs/savings are so much higher that doesn't really matter in the long run.

 

[CJF]

Your rate: TOU-D-TEV
Billing period: Jul 28 '11 to Aug 26 '11 (29 days)
Delivery charges

Energy-Summer On Peak
Lvl 1 (1% to 130% of bsln) -228 kWh x -$0.02541 $5.79
Lvl 2 (more than 130%) -487 kWh x $0.31404 -$152.94

I get your point, Corey. My June/July bills shows a charge of $5.06 for this line item. But since my total bill was a credit of $85, I ignored it. We have noticed this and chatted about it at some of our local group meetings, and I chalk it up to the vagaries of the PUC/SCE negotiated agreements and legalities, and then SCE applying those agreed rules to our net metering rate plans without much thought being given to the logic of this part of the calculation. I see it as a small fact of life with TOU rates, and not really worth my time to worry about, as long as the big picture is as favorable as it is.

It's actually very simple and makes perfect sense.. This portion of the bill is "Delivery Service".. so even though you Generated the electricity, it still costs SCE money to Deliver that energy and is passing that small cost on to you. At the end of the day the generation costs/savings are so much higher that doesn't really matter in the long run.

Hello xtremeflyer,

As was previously stated, this is a very small part of the big picture and I recognize that fact and fully appreciate the "good deal" of TOU for those of us that have solar. But the "big picture" is the sum of all the small parts and this is one of those small parts that I just don't understand and I'm honestly still looking for someone to help explain it to me.

I don't know that I can agree with your rationalization of this line item: <<It's actually very simple and makes perfect sense.. This portion of the bill is "Delivery Service".. so even though you Generated the electricity, it still costs SCE money to Deliver that energy and is passing that small cost on to you. At the end of the day the generation costs/savings are so much higher that doesn't really matter in the long run.>>

If your rationale is correct for the less than .01% of SCE customers that are net producers of electricity, then the reverse must also be true for those that only consume electricity. So that would mean the majority of consumers that operate under this pricing tariff are actually being paid for the delivery of their electrical service. Does that pass the sniff test?

No wait... What a great deal....we need to expand on this idea. The utility company pays the consumer to consume the product. I like; in fact i like it alot!

I feel like an idiot for spending the big bucks and putting in solar.... we should all just lobby to expand this portion of the TOU rate tariff. :roll:

On a serious note....I really am interested in knowing WHY this is...Thanks in advance to anyone that can help shed some light on this! :lol:

Cheers,

Corey

 

[garygid]

Stupid software, and they can get away with it?

 

[planet4ever]

Hello xtremeflyer,

As was previously stated, this is a very small part of the big picture and I recognize that fact and fully appreciate the "good deal" of TOU for those of us that have solar. But the "big picture" is the sum of all the small parts and this is one of those small parts that I just don't understand and I'm honestly still looking for someone to help explain it to me.

I don't know that I can agree with your rationalization of this line item: <<It's actually very simple and makes perfect sense.. This portion of the bill is "Delivery Service".. so even though you Generated the electricity, it still costs SCE money to Deliver that energy and is passing that small cost on to you. At the end of the day the generation costs/savings are so much higher that doesn't really matter in the long run.>>

If your rationale is correct for the less than .01% of SCE customers that are net producers of electricity, then the reverse must also be true for those that only consume electricity. So that would mean the majority of consumers that operate under this pricing tariff are actually being paid for the delivery of their electrical service. Does that pass the sniff test?

While I wouldn't go as far as xtremeflyer and say "it makes perfect sense", I can see that there is a contorted logic behind it. Your electricity is, at least in theory, going through their transformer and down their wires. Later it may go through another transformer and out to another house. Both those transformers and all those wires need maintenance, and they usually go bad in the middle of a terrible storm. Maybe they should call it a "pickup and delivery charge", but there is potentially a cost to them for your generation and also for the other customer's use.

Now, once we get past the "in theory" and "potentially" and start looking at "in reality", I suspect none of the electrons spewing out of your meter onto their line ever get as far as a transformer. Instead they end up in your neighbor's house, metaphorically* speaking. So I think in practice it is a stupid charge. But if you had a large open field in your back yard, and covered it with solar panels, you could indeed turn the theory into reality, and the utility wants to be covered for that case.

Ray

* metaphorically, because the EEs would probably point out that this is AC, so most of the electrons are just bouncing back and forth 60 times a second and not going much of anywhere.

 

[CJF]

Hello xtremeflyer,

As was previously stated, this is a very small part of the big picture and I recognize that fact and fully appreciate the "good deal" of TOU for those of us that have solar. But the "big picture" is the sum of all the small parts and this is one of those small parts that I just don't understand and I'm honestly still looking for someone to help explain it to me.

I don't know that I can agree with your rationalization of this line item: <<It's actually very simple and makes perfect sense.. This portion of the bill is "Delivery Service".. so even though you Generated the electricity, it still costs SCE money to Deliver that energy and is passing that small cost on to you. At the end of the day the generation costs/savings are so much higher that doesn't really matter in the long run.>>

If your rationale is correct for the less than .01% of SCE customers that are net producers of electricity, then the reverse must also be true for those that only consume electricity. So that would mean the majority of consumers that operate under this pricing tariff are actually being paid for the delivery of their electrical service. Does that pass the sniff test?

While I wouldn't go as far as xtremeflyer and say "it makes perfect sense", I can see that there is a contorted logic behind it. Your electricity is, at least in theory, going through their transformer and down their wires. Later it may go through another transformer and out to another house. Both those transformers and all those wires need maintenance, and they usually go bad in the middle of a terrible storm. Maybe they should call it a "pickup and delivery charge", but there is potentially a cost to them for your generation and also for the other customer's use.

Now, once we get past the "in theory" and "potentially" and start looking at "in reality", I suspect none of the electrons spewing out of your meter onto their line ever get as far as a transformer. Instead they end up in your neighbor's house, metaphorically* speaking. So I think in practice it is a stupid charge. But if you had a large open field in your back yard, and covered it with solar panels, you could indeed turn the theory into reality, and the utility wants to be covered for that case.

Ray

* metaphorically, because the EEs would probably point out that this is AC, so most of the electrons are just bouncing back and forth 60 times a second and not going much of anywhere.

Hello Ray,

I do appreciate the fact that as a net producer of power I should be paying for the infrastructure needed to get that power to others. I get that and agree with it.

My inability to comprehend this line item in my bill is based on the fact that SCE is PAYING customers to CONSUME power under this rate plan. It is this very simple fact that apparently, at least to me, defies logic (but I know must have a rational explanation) that I just don't get and I'm hoping that someone out there will help me understand.

Thanks again.... :?

Corey

 

[TonyWilliams]

I got a $469.11 electric bill, and a shut off notice for 5pm on 9 Sept 11.

I called and they're "looking into" the 1.4 MWh that I provided them during the month.

Tony,

We will be waiting for the rest of the story.....

I guess they called my bluff, and shut the power off for all of southern California (ya, I know LA thinks they are "it", but I'm referring to the real southern California) and some of Arizona.

They were about an hour early though !!!