"To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is 'subsidized,'" Young wrote. "It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers."
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
Frank is spot-on with this analysis. His is the correct paradigm for analyzing this "problem".
The real issue is that utilities know that net-metering will continue to grow, and they see their market share declining.
JBK
________________________________ From: ec-bounces@osenergy.org ec-bounces@osenergy.org on behalf of frank young fyoung@mountain.net Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2015 1:06 PM To: wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' Subject: [EC] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
"To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is 'subsidized,'" Young wrote. "It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers."
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
The attached Bloomberg Business article notes that solar and wind have reached critical mass in "capacity" and, as a result, will be dispatched by PJM in precisely the "death spiral" manner described initially in the Edison Electric Institute's 2013 study of "Disruptive Challenges," which identified solar panels as the existential threat to centrally distributed electricity.
In short, the game is up; it's already too late for fossil fuels to choke the solar/wind baby in its crib. The effort to thwart development of alternative fuels by throwing up road blocks to net metering is now, unmistakably, doomed.
The article notes that:
For the first time, widespread adoption of renewables is effectively lowering the capacity factor for fossil fuels. That's because once a solar or wind project is built, the marginal cost of the electricity it produces is pretty much zero—free electricity—while coal and gas plants require more fuel for every new watt produced. If you're a power company with a choice, you choose the free stuff every time.
It’s a self-reinforcing cycle. As more renewables are installed, coal and natural gas plants are used less. As coal and gas are used less, the cost of using them to generate electricity goes up. As the cost of coal and gas power rises, more renewables will be installed.
Most of the decline in capacity factors is due to expensive "base-load plants that are being turned on less because of renewables," according to BNEF analyst Jacqueline Lilinshtein. Plants designed to come online only during the highest demand of the year, known as peaker plants, play a smaller role. In either case, the end result is that coal-fired and gas-fired electricity is becoming more expensive and the profits less predictable.
The opposite is true of wind and solar, as well as new battery systems that can be paired with renewables to replace some peaker plants. Wind power, including U.S. subsidies, became the cheapest electricity in the U.S. for the first time last year , according to BNEF. Solar power is a bit further behind, but the costs are dropping rapidly, especially those associated with financing a new project.
[I]t's remarkable that in every major region of the world, the lifetime cost of new coal and gas projects are rising considerably in the second half of 2015, according to BNEF. And in every major region the cost of renewables continues to fall.
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 3:43 PM, James Kotcon jkotcon@wvu.edu wrote:
Frank is spot-on with this analysis. His is the correct paradigm for analyzing this "problem".
The real issue is that utilities know that net-metering will continue to grow, and they see their market share declining.
JBK
*From:* ec-bounces@osenergy.org ec-bounces@osenergy.org on behalf of frank young fyoung@mountain.net *Sent:* Tuesday, October 6, 2015 1:06 PM *To:* wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' *Subject:* [EC] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
“To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is ‘subsidized,’” Young wrote. “It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers.”
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
I am reminded of an article last year which suggested that the free market has a name for a company that does not provide what their customers want, it is called "bankrupt". Only with a monopoly would utilities be able to survive by forcing onto customers a product that they would not choose. Smart utilities have already recognized this and are finding market mechanisms to make a profit by serving customers with what the clean energy that customers want. Fossil fuel-based utilities may win some battles over net metering by using their considerable political clout, but the very fact that they are even fighting their most progressive customers means they have already lost the war.
But these utilities can do a lot of damage on the way down, so please keep up the good work.
Jim Kotcon
________________________________ From: William V. DePaulo, Esq. william.depaulo@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, October 8, 2015 4:11 PM To: James Kotcon Cc: frank young; wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; WV Chapter Energy Committee Subject: Re: [EC] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
The attached Bloomberg Business article notes that solar and wind have reached critical mass in "capacity" and, as a result, will be dispatched by PJM in precisely the "death spiral" manner described initially in the Edison Electric Institute's 2013 study of "Disruptive Challenges," which identified solar panels as the existential threat to centrally distributed electricity.
In short, the game is up; it's already too late for fossil fuels to choke the solar/wind baby in its crib. The effort to thwart development of alternative fuels by throwing up road blocks to net metering is now, unmistakably, doomed.
The article notes that:
For the first time, widespread adoption of renewables is effectively lowering the capacity factor for fossil fuels. That's because once a solar or wind project is built, the marginal cost of the electricity it produces is pretty much zero—free electricity—while coal and gas plants require more fuel for every new watt produced. If you're a power company with a choice, you choose the free stuff every time.
It’s a self-reinforcing cycle. As more renewables are installed, coal and natural gas plants are used less. As coal and gas are used less, the cost of using them to generate electricity goes up. As the cost of coal and gas power rises, more renewables will be installed.
Most of the decline in capacity factors is due to expensive "base-load plants that are being turned on less because of renewables," according to BNEF analyst Jacqueline Lilinshtein. Plants designed to come online only during the highest demand of the year, known as peaker plants, play a smaller role. In either case, the end result is that coal-fired and gas-fired electricity is becoming more expensive and the profits less predictable.
The opposite is true of wind and solar, as well as new battery systems that can be paired with renewables to replace some peaker plants. Wind power, including U.S. subsidies, became the cheapest electricity in the U.S. for the first time last year , according to BNEF. Solar power is a bit further behind, but the costs are dropping rapidly, especially those associated with financing a new project.
[I]t's remarkable that in every major region of the world, the lifetime cost of new coal and gas projects are rising considerably in the second half of 2015, according to BNEF. And in every major region the cost of renewables continues to fall.
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.commailto:william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.comhttp://www.passeggiata.com
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 3:43 PM, James Kotcon <jkotcon@wvu.edumailto:jkotcon@wvu.edu> wrote:
Frank is spot-on with this analysis. His is the correct paradigm for analyzing this "problem".
The real issue is that utilities know that net-metering will continue to grow, and they see their market share declining.
JBK
________________________________ From: ec-bounces@osenergy.orgmailto:ec-bounces@osenergy.org <ec-bounces@osenergy.orgmailto:ec-bounces@osenergy.org> on behalf of frank young <fyoung@mountain.netmailto:fyoung@mountain.net> Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2015 1:06 PM To: wvec-board@yahoogroups.commailto:wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.commailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' Subject: [EC] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
“To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is ‘subsidized,’” Young wrote. “It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers.”
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
_______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC@osenergy.orgmailto:EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
Ooooh, so I'm subsidized. I'm beginning to feel less guilty for not going solar.
At $20 - $25 a month, my bill must be lower than the average. This is despite the fact that I have the full complement of electric appliances - freezer, fridge, water heater, washer, drier (just the motor, the fuel is propane), and various electronics (computer, printer, radios, microwave), even a 220 water pump in the well. I did get energy efficient appliances over the last few years, which lowered my bill noticeably.
The only thing I don't have is electric heat, although I do use those oil-filled space heaters in the bathroom and office occasionally. Oh, and I don't have a TV or a coffee maker (use a hand grinder and manual drip).
Does anyone know how this compares with the charge for hooking to the grid with net metering?
From: WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:06 PM To: wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' Subject: [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
"To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is 'subsidized,'" Young wrote. "It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers."
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
__._,_.___
_____
Posted by: "frank young" fyoung@mountain.net
_____
.
mailto:fyoung@mountain.net?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20char ges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20 Reply to sender
.
mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher% 20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20 Reply to group
.
.
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/conversations/topics/27179;_y lc=X3oDMTM1YnJxNmFvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxN zcEbXNnSWQDMjcxNzkEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4BHRwY0lkAzI3M Tc5 Messages in this topic (1)
Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West Virginia's natural resources
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJjZms4ajJxBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkA zEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDZ2ZwBHN0aW1lAzE0NDQxNTExO Dg- Image removed by sender. Yahoo! Groups
. https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html Privacy . mailto:WVHCBOARD-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe Unsubscribe . https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/ Terms of Use
.
Image removed by sender. Image removed by sender.
__,_._,___
I have to say I'm just slightly sympathetic to the elec companies in this one. Net metering customers DO use the distribution system with the expenses that entails.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Beth Little blittle@citynet.net wrote:
Ooooh, so I’m subsidized. I’m beginning to feel less guilty for not going solar.
At $20 - $25 a month, my bill must be lower than the average. This is despite the fact that I have the full complement of electric appliances – freezer, fridge, water heater, washer, drier (just the motor, the fuel is propane), and various electronics (computer, printer, radios, microwave), even a 220 water pump in the well. I did get energy efficient appliances over the last few years, which lowered my bill noticeably.
The only thing I don’t have is electric heat, although I do use those oil-filled space heaters in the bathroom and office occasionally. Oh, and I don’t have a TV or a coffee maker (use a hand grinder and manual drip).
Does anyone know how this compares with the charge for hooking to the grid with net metering?
*From:* WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:06 PM *To:* wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' *Subject:* [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
“To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is ‘subsidized,’” Young wrote. “It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers.”
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
__._,_.___
Posted by: "frank young" fyoung@mountain.net
•
Reply to sender <fyoung@mountain.net?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
Reply to group <WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
•
Messages in this topic https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/conversations/topics/27179;_ylc=X3oDMTM1YnJxNmFvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEbXNnSWQDMjcxNzkEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4BHRwY0lkAzI3MTc5 (1)
Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West Virginia's natural resources
[image: Image removed by sender. Yahoo! Groups] https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJjZms4ajJxBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDZ2ZwBHN0aW1lAzE0NDQxNTExODg-
• Privacy https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html • Unsubscribe <WVHCBOARD-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms of Use https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
.
[image: Image removed by sender.] [image: Image removed by sender.]
__,_._,___
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
Jim
I do NOT agree. The utilities are just clinging to the 19th Century concept of large central plants and the inefficient long long lines of a power grid.
It’s the 21st century.
I can make the better case for generating power where and when its needed. It makes more sense financially for the economy, the efficiency of electric power generation (drastically reducing the current line losses), and obviously by dramatically reducing greenhouse gas emissions which we must do NOW...not in the future.
Huge central plants are as obsolete as horse and buggies, which were the means of transportation when they were invented. They made sense then...but are a Neanderthal today.
And of course we cannot transition to all clean, renewable distributed power over night, but we must accelerate that transition if we are to keep the planet from having a fatal fever...and I am committed to preventing that even though at 83 I may not see it get there...but I do not want it to for my grandchildren and theirs.
And the scientific literature is quite clear...the data overwhelming...we are on a very dangerous course of climate change...or climate disruption as I prefer to call it.
the utilities are pure and simple trying to protect their profits at your expense.
And if you’d like to see what a progressive utility is doing, go to the SMUD* web page and link into their solar energy program...a 20+ year success story of transitioning form a large central plant concept to distributed power making their customers their partners. (*Sacramento Municipal Utility District.)
From: Jim Sconyers Sent: Friday, October 09, 2015 1:46 PM To: Beth Little Cc: WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com ; WVEC ; WV Chapter Energy Committee Subject: Re: [EC] [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
I have to say I'm just slightly sympathetic to the elec companies in this one. Net metering customers DO use the distribution system with the expenses that entails.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Beth Little blittle@citynet.net wrote:
Ooooh, so I’m subsidized. I’m beginning to feel less guilty for not going solar.
At $20 - $25 a month, my bill must be lower than the average. This is despite the fact that I have the full complement of electric appliances – freezer, fridge, water heater, washer, drier (just the motor, the fuel is propane), and various electronics (computer, printer, radios, microwave), even a 220 water pump in the well. I did get energy efficient appliances over the last few years, which lowered my bill noticeably.
The only thing I don’t have is electric heat, although I do use those oil-filled space heaters in the bathroom and office occasionally. Oh, and I don’t have a TV or a coffee maker (use a hand grinder and manual drip).
Does anyone know how this compares with the charge for hooking to the grid with net metering?
From: WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:06 PM To: wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' Subject: [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
“To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is ‘subsidized,’” Young wrote. “It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers.”
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
__._,_.___
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by: "frank young" fyoung@mountain.net
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1)
Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West Virginia's natural resources
Visit Your Group
• Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
.
__,_._,___
_______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
You seem to have missed my point. If John Q is a net-meter electric customer, he generates part of his elec at home, decentralized etc. All good. But he also buys some of his elec from AEP or FirstEnergy, which he couldn't do unless they had the juice to send him and the means to send it. Talking here about today, why they're maybe justified in asking Mr. Q to pay for making it possible to buy elec from them.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Allan Tweddle allantweddle@msn.com wrote:
*Jim*
*I do NOT agree. The utilities are just clinging to the 19th Century concept of large central plants and the inefficient long long lines of a power grid.*
*It’s the 21st century.*
*I can make the better case for generating power where and when its needed. It makes more sense financially for the economy, the efficiency of electric power generation (drastically reducing the current line losses), and obviously by dramatically reducing greenhouse gas emissions which we must do NOW...not in the future.*
*Huge central plants are as obsolete as horse and buggies, which were the means of transportation when they were invented. They made sense then...but are a Neanderthal today.*
*And of course we cannot transition to all clean, renewable distributed power over night, but we must accelerate that transition if we are to keep the planet from having a fatal fever...and I am committed to preventing that even though at 83 I may not see it get there...but I do not want it to for my grandchildren and theirs.*
*And the scientific literature is quite clear...the data overwhelming...we are on a very dangerous course of climate change...or climate disruption as I prefer to call it.*
*the utilities are pure and simple trying to protect their profits at your expense.*
*And if you’d like to see what a progressive utility is doing, go to the SMUD* web page and link into their solar energy program...a 20+ year success story of transitioning form a large central plant concept to distributed power making their customers their partners. (*Sacramento Municipal Utility District.)*
*From:* Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com *Sent:* Friday, October 09, 2015 1:46 PM *To:* Beth Little blittle@citynet.net *Cc:* WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com ; WVEC wvec-board@yahoogroups.com ; WV Chapter Energy Committee EC@osenergy.org *Subject:* Re: [EC] [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
I have to say I'm just slightly sympathetic to the elec companies in this one. Net metering customers DO use the distribution system with the expenses that entails.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Beth Little blittle@citynet.net wrote:
Ooooh, so I’m subsidized. I’m beginning to feel less guilty for not going solar.
At $20 - $25 a month, my bill must be lower than the average. This is despite the fact that I have the full complement of electric appliances – freezer, fridge, water heater, washer, drier (just the motor, the fuel is propane), and various electronics (computer, printer, radios, microwave), even a 220 water pump in the well. I did get energy efficient appliances over the last few years, which lowered my bill noticeably.
The only thing I don’t have is electric heat, although I do use those oil-filled space heaters in the bathroom and office occasionally. Oh, and I don’t have a TV or a coffee maker (use a hand grinder and manual drip).
Does anyone know how this compares with the charge for hooking to the grid with net metering?
*From:* WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:06 PM *To:* wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' *Subject:* [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
“To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is ‘subsidized,’” Young wrote. “It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers.”
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
__._,_.___
Posted by: "frank young" fyoung@mountain.net
•
Reply to sender <fyoung@mountain.net?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
Reply to group <WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
•
Messages in this topic https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/conversations/topics/27179;_ylc=X3oDMTM1YnJxNmFvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEbXNnSWQDMjcxNzkEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4BHRwY0lkAzI3MTc5 (1)
Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West Virginia's natural resources
[image: Image removed by sender. Yahoo! Groups] https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJjZms4ajJxBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDZ2ZwBHN0aW1lAzE0NDQxNTExODg-
• Privacy https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html • Unsubscribe <WVHCBOARD-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms of Use https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
.
[image: Image removed by sender.] [image: Image removed by sender.]
__,_._,___
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
-- Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com 304.698.9628
Remember, Mother Nature bats last.
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
BUT THESE CHARGES, FOR RECEIVING JUICE, ARE THE SAME AS ANY CUSTOMER AND NET METERING CUSTOMERS ALREADY PAY THIS EXACT SAME AMOUNT.....THEY DONT GET JUICE FREE....UNLESS THEY GIVE MORE BACK THAN THEY TAKE
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com wrote:
You seem to have missed my point. If John Q is a net-meter electric customer, he generates part of his elec at home, decentralized etc. All good. But he also buys some of his elec from AEP or FirstEnergy, which he couldn't do unless they had the juice to send him and the means to send it. Talking here about today, why they're maybe justified in asking Mr. Q to pay for making it possible to buy elec from them.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Allan Tweddle allantweddle@msn.com wrote:
*Jim*
*I do NOT agree. The utilities are just clinging to the 19th Century concept of large central plants and the inefficient long long lines of a power grid.*
*It’s the 21st century.*
*I can make the better case for generating power where and when its needed. It makes more sense financially for the economy, the efficiency of electric power generation (drastically reducing the current line losses), and obviously by dramatically reducing greenhouse gas emissions which we must do NOW...not in the future.*
*Huge central plants are as obsolete as horse and buggies, which were the means of transportation when they were invented. They made sense then...but are a Neanderthal today.*
*And of course we cannot transition to all clean, renewable distributed power over night, but we must accelerate that transition if we are to keep the planet from having a fatal fever...and I am committed to preventing that even though at 83 I may not see it get there...but I do not want it to for my grandchildren and theirs.*
*And the scientific literature is quite clear...the data overwhelming...we are on a very dangerous course of climate change...or climate disruption as I prefer to call it.*
*the utilities are pure and simple trying to protect their profits at your expense.*
*And if you’d like to see what a progressive utility is doing, go to the SMUD* web page and link into their solar energy program...a 20+ year success story of transitioning form a large central plant concept to distributed power making their customers their partners. (*Sacramento Municipal Utility District.)*
*From:* Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com *Sent:* Friday, October 09, 2015 1:46 PM *To:* Beth Little blittle@citynet.net *Cc:* WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com ; WVEC wvec-board@yahoogroups.com ; WV Chapter Energy Committee EC@osenergy.org *Subject:* Re: [EC] [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
I have to say I'm just slightly sympathetic to the elec companies in this one. Net metering customers DO use the distribution system with the expenses that entails.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Beth Little blittle@citynet.net wrote:
Ooooh, so I’m subsidized. I’m beginning to feel less guilty for not going solar.
At $20 - $25 a month, my bill must be lower than the average. This is despite the fact that I have the full complement of electric appliances – freezer, fridge, water heater, washer, drier (just the motor, the fuel is propane), and various electronics (computer, printer, radios, microwave), even a 220 water pump in the well. I did get energy efficient appliances over the last few years, which lowered my bill noticeably.
The only thing I don’t have is electric heat, although I do use those oil-filled space heaters in the bathroom and office occasionally. Oh, and I don’t have a TV or a coffee maker (use a hand grinder and manual drip).
Does anyone know how this compares with the charge for hooking to the grid with net metering?
*From:* WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:06 PM *To:* wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' *Subject:* [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
“To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is ‘subsidized,’” Young wrote. “It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers.”
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
__._,_.___
Posted by: "frank young" fyoung@mountain.net
•
Reply to sender <fyoung@mountain.net?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
Reply to group <WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
•
Messages in this topic https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/conversations/topics/27179;_ylc=X3oDMTM1YnJxNmFvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEbXNnSWQDMjcxNzkEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4BHRwY0lkAzI3MTc5 (1)
Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West Virginia's natural resources
[image: Image removed by sender. Yahoo! Groups] https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJjZms4ajJxBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDZ2ZwBHN0aW1lAzE0NDQxNTExODg-
• Privacy https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html • Unsubscribe <WVHCBOARD-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms of Use https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
.
[image: Image removed by sender.] [image: Image removed by sender.]
__,_._,___
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
-- Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com 304.698.9628
Remember, Mother Nature bats last.
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
-- Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com 304.698.9628
Remember, Mother Nature bats last.
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
As Frank was quoted in his Gazette story, this "subsidy" is inherent in the concept of setting an average cost for electricity. No one is paying the exact cost of their share of the grid. Instead, as a public utility, electricity is offered to everyone at the same rate, regardless of whether the utility has to string a long line or a short one to that neighborhood. The complexities of trying to estimate each nickel and dime of costs for each customer would make the book-keeping significantly more expensive than the energy, so "in the public interest" the PSC sets rates to minimize the total costs. Asking a net metering customer to assume costs for the distribution grid, without insisting that the utilities also fully analyze and incorporate the benefits that the net-metering customer offers to the grid, is a blatant attempt to restrict this renewable generation.
I'll pay my share of the distribution grid costs when the utilities incorporate the true cost of carbon emissions and other pollutant impacts in their rates. The utilities are using this grid cost argument solely to suppress a competing energy source (because they already have a large capital investment in coal), not because they are concerned about accurately assigning costs and benefits to every customer.
JBK
Full disclosure: I expect to be a net-metering customer before Christmas, so I am biased by being one who would be expected to pay any such fees.
________________________________ From: ec-bounces@osenergy.org ec-bounces@osenergy.org on behalf of William V. DePaulo, Esq. william.depaulo@gmail.com Sent: Friday, October 9, 2015 2:36 PM To: Jim Sconyers Cc: WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; WVEC; WV Chapter Energy Committee Subject: Re: [EC] [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
BUT THESE CHARGES, FOR RECEIVING JUICE, ARE THE SAME AS ANY CUSTOMER AND NET METERING CUSTOMERS ALREADY PAY THIS EXACT SAME AMOUNT.....THEY DONT GET JUICE FREE....UNLESS THEY GIVE MORE BACK THAN THEY TAKE
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.commailto:william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.comhttp://www.passeggiata.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Jim Sconyers <jimscon@gmail.commailto:jimscon@gmail.com> wrote: You seem to have missed my point. If John Q is a net-meter electric customer, he generates part of his elec at home, decentralized etc. All good. But he also buys some of his elec from AEP or FirstEnergy, which he couldn't do unless they had the juice to send him and the means to send it. Talking here about today, why they're maybe justified in asking Mr. Q to pay for making it possible to buy elec from them.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Allan Tweddle <allantweddle@msn.commailto:allantweddle@msn.com> wrote: Jim
I do NOT agree. The utilities are just clinging to the 19th Century concept of large central plants and the inefficient long long lines of a power grid.
It’s the 21st century.
I can make the better case for generating power where and when its needed. It makes more sense financially for the economy, the efficiency of electric power generation (drastically reducing the current line losses), and obviously by dramatically reducing greenhouse gas emissions which we must do NOW...not in the future.
Huge central plants are as obsolete as horse and buggies, which were the means of transportation when they were invented. They made sense then...but are a Neanderthal today.
And of course we cannot transition to all clean, renewable distributed power over night, but we must accelerate that transition if we are to keep the planet from having a fatal fever...and I am committed to preventing that even though at 83 I may not see it get there...but I do not want it to for my grandchildren and theirs.
And the scientific literature is quite clear...the data overwhelming...we are on a very dangerous course of climate change...or climate disruption as I prefer to call it.
the utilities are pure and simple trying to protect their profits at your expense.
And if you’d like to see what a progressive utility is doing, go to the SMUD* web page and link into their solar energy program...a 20+ year success story of transitioning form a large central plant concept to distributed power making their customers their partners. (*Sacramento Municipal Utility District.)
From: Jim Sconyersmailto:jimscon@gmail.com Sent: Friday, October 09, 2015 1:46 PM To: Beth Littlemailto:blittle@citynet.net Cc: WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.commailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com ; WVECmailto:wvec-board@yahoogroups.com ; WV Chapter Energy Committeemailto:EC@osenergy.org Subject: Re: [EC] [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
I have to say I'm just slightly sympathetic to the elec companies in this one. Net metering customers DO use the distribution system with the expenses that entails.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Beth Little <blittle@citynet.netmailto:blittle@citynet.net> wrote: Ooooh, so I’m subsidized. I’m beginning to feel less guilty for not going solar. At $20 - $25 a month, my bill must be lower than the average. This is despite the fact that I have the full complement of electric appliances – freezer, fridge, water heater, washer, drier (just the motor, the fuel is propane), and various electronics (computer, printer, radios, microwave), even a 220 water pump in the well. I did get energy efficient appliances over the last few years, which lowered my bill noticeably. The only thing I don’t have is electric heat, although I do use those oil-filled space heaters in the bathroom and office occasionally. Oh, and I don’t have a TV or a coffee maker (use a hand grinder and manual drip). Does anyone know how this compares with the charge for hooking to the grid with net metering?
From: WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.commailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.commailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:06 PM To: wvec-board@yahoogroups.commailto:wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.commailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' Subject: [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
“To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is ‘subsidized,’” Young wrote. “It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers.”
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102 __._,_.___ ________________________________ Posted by: "frank young" <fyoung@mountain.netmailto:fyoung@mountain.net> ________________________________ Reply via web posthttps://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/conversations/messages/27179;_ylc=X3oDMTJwcXJrYmM0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEbXNnSWQDMjcxNzkEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDcnBseQRzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4?act=reply&messageNum=27179
•
Reply to sender mailto:fyoung@mountain.net?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20
•
Reply to group mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20
•
•
Messages in this topichttps://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/conversations/topics/27179;_ylc=X3oDMTM1YnJxNmFvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEbXNnSWQDMjcxNzkEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4BHRwY0lkAzI3MTc5 (1)
Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West Virginia's natural resources Visit Your Grouphttps://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJkcm5zcG9tBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEc2VjA3Z0bARzbGsDdmdocARzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4 [Image removed by sender. Yahoo! Groups]https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJjZms4ajJxBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDZ2ZwBHN0aW1lAzE0NDQxNTExODg- • Privacyhttps://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html • Unsubscribemailto:WVHCBOARD-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe • Terms of Usehttps://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
.
__,_._,___
_______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC@osenergy.orgmailto:EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
-- Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.commailto:jimscon@gmail.com 304.698.9628tel:304.698.9628
Remember, Mother Nature bats last.
________________________________ _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC@osenergy.orgmailto:EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
-- Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.commailto:jimscon@gmail.com 304.698.9628tel:304.698.9628
Remember, Mother Nature bats last.
_______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC@osenergy.orgmailto:EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
Of course in deregulated states a customer DOES pay separately for distribution. On Oct 9, 2015 3:38 PM, "James Kotcon" jkotcon@wvu.edu wrote:
As Frank was quoted in his Gazette story, this "subsidy" is inherent in the concept of setting an average cost for electricity. No one is paying the exact cost of their share of the grid. Instead, as a public utility, electricity is offered to everyone at the same rate, regardless of whether the utility has to string a long line or a short one to that neighborhood. The complexities of trying to estimate each nickel and dime of costs for each customer would make the book-keeping significantly more expensive than the energy, so "in the public interest" the PSC sets rates to minimize the total costs. Asking a net metering customer to assume costs for the distribution grid, without insisting that the utilities also fully analyze and incorporate the benefits that the net-metering customer offers to the grid, is a blatant attempt to restrict this renewable generation.
I'll pay my share of the distribution grid costs when the utilities incorporate the true cost of carbon emissions and other pollutant impacts in their rates. The utilities are using this grid cost argument solely to suppress a competing energy source (because they already have a large capital investment in coal), not because they are concerned about accurately assigning costs and benefits to every customer.
JBK
Full disclosure: I expect to be a net-metering customer before Christmas, so I am biased by being one who would be expected to pay any such fees.
*From:* ec-bounces@osenergy.org ec-bounces@osenergy.org on behalf of William V. DePaulo, Esq. william.depaulo@gmail.com *Sent:* Friday, October 9, 2015 2:36 PM *To:* Jim Sconyers *Cc:* WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; WVEC; WV Chapter Energy Committee *Subject:* Re: [EC] [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
BUT THESE CHARGES, FOR RECEIVING JUICE, ARE THE SAME AS ANY CUSTOMER AND NET METERING CUSTOMERS ALREADY PAY THIS EXACT SAME AMOUNT.....THEY DONT GET JUICE FREE....UNLESS THEY GIVE MORE BACK THAN THEY TAKE
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com wrote:
You seem to have missed my point. If John Q is a net-meter electric customer, he generates part of his elec at home, decentralized etc. All good. But he also buys some of his elec from AEP or FirstEnergy, which he couldn't do unless they had the juice to send him and the means to send it. Talking here about today, why they're maybe justified in asking Mr. Q to pay for making it possible to buy elec from them.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Allan Tweddle allantweddle@msn.com wrote:
*Jim*
*I do NOT agree. The utilities are just clinging to the 19th Century concept of large central plants and the inefficient long long lines of a power grid.*
*It’s the 21st century.*
*I can make the better case for generating power where and when its needed. It makes more sense financially for the economy, the efficiency of electric power generation (drastically reducing the current line losses), and obviously by dramatically reducing greenhouse gas emissions which we must do NOW...not in the future.*
*Huge central plants are as obsolete as horse and buggies, which were the means of transportation when they were invented. They made sense then...but are a Neanderthal today.*
*And of course we cannot transition to all clean, renewable distributed power over night, but we must accelerate that transition if we are to keep the planet from having a fatal fever...and I am committed to preventing that even though at 83 I may not see it get there...but I do not want it to for my grandchildren and theirs.*
*And the scientific literature is quite clear...the data overwhelming...we are on a very dangerous course of climate change...or climate disruption as I prefer to call it.*
*the utilities are pure and simple trying to protect their profits at your expense.*
*And if you’d like to see what a progressive utility is doing, go to the SMUD* web page and link into their solar energy program...a 20+ year success story of transitioning form a large central plant concept to distributed power making their customers their partners. (*Sacramento Municipal Utility District.)*
*From:* Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com *Sent:* Friday, October 09, 2015 1:46 PM *To:* Beth Little blittle@citynet.net *Cc:* WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com ; WVEC wvec-board@yahoogroups.com ; WV Chapter Energy Committee EC@osenergy.org *Subject:* Re: [EC] [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
I have to say I'm just slightly sympathetic to the elec companies in this one. Net metering customers DO use the distribution system with the expenses that entails.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Beth Little blittle@citynet.net wrote:
Ooooh, so I’m subsidized. I’m beginning to feel less guilty for not going solar.
At $20 - $25 a month, my bill must be lower than the average. This is despite the fact that I have the full complement of electric appliances – freezer, fridge, water heater, washer, drier (just the motor, the fuel is propane), and various electronics (computer, printer, radios, microwave), even a 220 water pump in the well. I did get energy efficient appliances over the last few years, which lowered my bill noticeably.
The only thing I don’t have is electric heat, although I do use those oil-filled space heaters in the bathroom and office occasionally. Oh, and I don’t have a TV or a coffee maker (use a hand grinder and manual drip).
Does anyone know how this compares with the charge for hooking to the grid with net metering?
*From:* WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:06 PM *To:* wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' *Subject:* [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
“To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is ‘subsidized,’” Young wrote. “It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers.”
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
__._,_.___
Posted by: "frank young" fyoung@mountain.net
•
Reply to sender <fyoung@mountain.net?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
Reply to group <WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
•
Messages in this topic https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/conversations/topics/27179;_ylc=X3oDMTM1YnJxNmFvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEbXNnSWQDMjcxNzkEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4BHRwY0lkAzI3MTc5 (1)
Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West Virginia's natural resources
[image: Image removed by sender. Yahoo! Groups] https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJjZms4ajJxBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDZ2ZwBHN0aW1lAzE0NDQxNTExODg-
• Privacy https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html • Unsubscribe <WVHCBOARD-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms of Use https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
.
[image: Image removed by sender.] [image: Image removed by sender.]
__,_._,___
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
-- Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com 304.698.9628
Remember, Mother Nature bats last.
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
-- Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com 304.698.9628
Remember, Mother Nature bats last.
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
There is another aspect of this debate...and while I know I am repeating myself to many of you...here goes...
As many of you know, I am originally from Ontario.
And as CEO & Founder of an emerging aerospace manufacturing firm, I am with colleagues, and 15 Angel investors, on track to produce an innovative system for the airlines of the world that will reduce their carbon footprint. And I have invested everything I can personally, so I am dedicated to taking action...not just talk.
And we are disrupting a complacent global industry that has ignored the increasing demands to address climate change...until now.
That said, and in contrast to the complacent AEP’s, there are electric utility firms that are accepting the challenges that the climate change crisis demands. Not everyone has the “cling to the past”, or “there’s a war on coal” attitude.
Ontario examined the real cost of coal fired power back in 2005, and determined renewable energy was cheaper when you add the horrific costs and very real external costs of health care and the environment directly attributable to coal. So they embarked on a program to shut down all their coal fired power plants, and completed it by the fall of 2014...and were able to lower their utility rates. (Ontario used to be Arch Coal’s biggest customer!)
So much for the argument that renewables will raise utility rates. Read about it at www.ieso.ca.
And I recently read that all of Canada is now without any coal fired power plants, and there are more jobs in renewable energy than in fossil fuels there...in spite of the Tar Sands Oil push by the Harper Conservative Government.
And in this country, there is another solar success story. One is the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, or “SMUD”. I urge all of you, if you have not already from my earlier rants, to go to www.smud.org., scroll down to “Wondering if solar is right for you?”
SMUD executives recognized 30 years ago that they were not going to be able to keep up with the demand for power as the Sacramento are kept growing...so they developed a strategic plan to make their customers their partners in expanding their power capacity by structuring a leasing program to install solar cells on churches, shopping centers and multi and single family residences.
From everything I have been able to read, it’s a solid success.
I simply ask the question...”Why not here?”
Ok, yes I know why the coal industry and the AEPs will answer that...but what about all of us...where is the groundswell of demand and rabble rousing in every PSC and Legislative hearing to get a change in attitude? And make PROGRESS to addressing the very real threat of climate change while accelerating the transition to renewable energy!
At my age, I’m tired of being nice to these “keep my profits safe” opponents.
Your good thoughts?
Allan
From: Allan Tweddle Sent: Friday, October 09, 2015 2:20 PM To: Jim Sconyers ; Beth Little Cc: WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com ; WVEC ; WV Chapter Energy Committee Subject: Re: [EC] [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed onrooftop solar customers
Jim
I do NOT agree. The utilities are just clinging to the 19th Century concept of large central plants and the inefficient long long lines of a power grid.
It’s the 21st century.
I can make the better case for generating power where and when its needed. It makes more sense financially for the economy, the efficiency of electric power generation (drastically reducing the current line losses), and obviously by dramatically reducing greenhouse gas emissions which we must do NOW...not in the future.
Huge central plants are as obsolete as horse and buggies, which were the means of transportation when they were invented. They made sense then...but are a Neanderthal today.
And of course we cannot transition to all clean, renewable distributed power over night, but we must accelerate that transition if we are to keep the planet from having a fatal fever...and I am committed to preventing that even though at 83 I may not see it get there...but I do not want it to for my grandchildren and theirs.
And the scientific literature is quite clear...the data overwhelming...we are on a very dangerous course of climate change...or climate disruption as I prefer to call it.
the utilities are pure and simple trying to protect their profits at your expense.
And if you’d like to see what a progressive utility is doing, go to the SMUD* web page and link into their solar energy program...a 20+ year success story of transitioning form a large central plant concept to distributed power making their customers their partners. (*Sacramento Municipal Utility District.)
From: Jim Sconyers Sent: Friday, October 09, 2015 1:46 PM To: Beth Little Cc: WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com ; WVEC ; WV Chapter Energy Committee Subject: Re: [EC] [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
I have to say I'm just slightly sympathetic to the elec companies in this one. Net metering customers DO use the distribution system with the expenses that entails.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Beth Little blittle@citynet.net wrote:
Ooooh, so I’m subsidized. I’m beginning to feel less guilty for not going solar.
At $20 - $25 a month, my bill must be lower than the average. This is despite the fact that I have the full complement of electric appliances – freezer, fridge, water heater, washer, drier (just the motor, the fuel is propane), and various electronics (computer, printer, radios, microwave), even a 220 water pump in the well. I did get energy efficient appliances over the last few years, which lowered my bill noticeably.
The only thing I don’t have is electric heat, although I do use those oil-filled space heaters in the bathroom and office occasionally. Oh, and I don’t have a TV or a coffee maker (use a hand grinder and manual drip).
Does anyone know how this compares with the charge for hooking to the grid with net metering?
From: WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:06 PM To: wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' Subject: [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
“To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is ‘subsidized,’” Young wrote. “It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers.”
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
__._,_.___
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by: "frank young" fyoung@mountain.net
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1)
Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West Virginia's natural resources
Visit Your Group
• Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
.
__,_._,___
_______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
JIM - BOTH AEP AND FIRST ENERGY ADMITTED, IN MEETINGS WITH PSC'S NET METERING TASK FORCE, THAT -- ASIDE FROM INITIAL HOOKUP WHICH NET METERING CUSTOMERS ALREADY PAY FOR -- THERE WERE NO, ABSOLUTELY NO AS IN Z E R O EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH NET METERING CUSTOMERS BEING ON THE NET.....NONE, NIENTE, NADA, RIEN.......GOOS EGGS....ZILCH......NUTTIN BILL
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com wrote:
I have to say I'm just slightly sympathetic to the elec companies in this one. Net metering customers DO use the distribution system with the expenses that entails.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Beth Little blittle@citynet.net wrote:
Ooooh, so I’m subsidized. I’m beginning to feel less guilty for not going solar.
At $20 - $25 a month, my bill must be lower than the average. This is despite the fact that I have the full complement of electric appliances – freezer, fridge, water heater, washer, drier (just the motor, the fuel is propane), and various electronics (computer, printer, radios, microwave), even a 220 water pump in the well. I did get energy efficient appliances over the last few years, which lowered my bill noticeably.
The only thing I don’t have is electric heat, although I do use those oil-filled space heaters in the bathroom and office occasionally. Oh, and I don’t have a TV or a coffee maker (use a hand grinder and manual drip).
Does anyone know how this compares with the charge for hooking to the grid with net metering?
*From:* WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:06 PM *To:* wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' *Subject:* [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
“To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is ‘subsidized,’” Young wrote. “It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers.”
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
__._,_.___
Posted by: "frank young" fyoung@mountain.net
•
Reply to sender <fyoung@mountain.net?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
Reply to group <WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
•
Messages in this topic https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/conversations/topics/27179;_ylc=X3oDMTM1YnJxNmFvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEbXNnSWQDMjcxNzkEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4BHRwY0lkAzI3MTc5 (1)
Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West Virginia's natural resources
[image: Image removed by sender. Yahoo! Groups] https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJjZms4ajJxBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDZ2ZwBHN0aW1lAzE0NDQxNTExODg-
• Privacy https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html • Unsubscribe <WVHCBOARD-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms of Use https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
.
[image: Image removed by sender.] [image: Image removed by sender.]
__,_._,___
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
-- Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com 304.698.9628
Remember, Mother Nature bats last.
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
Doesn't make sense. If they (elec companies) stop paying to maintain the system, John can't get his juice. Only makes sense if all that maintenance cost is rolled into the initial hook-up charge. On Oct 9, 2015 2:34 PM, "William V. DePaulo, Esq." < william.depaulo@gmail.com> wrote:
JIM - BOTH AEP AND FIRST ENERGY ADMITTED, IN MEETINGS WITH PSC'S NET METERING TASK FORCE, THAT -- ASIDE FROM INITIAL HOOKUP WHICH NET METERING CUSTOMERS ALREADY PAY FOR -- THERE WERE NO, ABSOLUTELY NO AS IN Z E R O EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH NET METERING CUSTOMERS BEING ON THE NET.....NONE, NIENTE, NADA, RIEN.......GOOS EGGS....ZILCH......NUTTIN BILL
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com wrote:
I have to say I'm just slightly sympathetic to the elec companies in this one. Net metering customers DO use the distribution system with the expenses that entails.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Beth Little blittle@citynet.net wrote:
Ooooh, so I’m subsidized. I’m beginning to feel less guilty for not going solar.
At $20 - $25 a month, my bill must be lower than the average. This is despite the fact that I have the full complement of electric appliances – freezer, fridge, water heater, washer, drier (just the motor, the fuel is propane), and various electronics (computer, printer, radios, microwave), even a 220 water pump in the well. I did get energy efficient appliances over the last few years, which lowered my bill noticeably.
The only thing I don’t have is electric heat, although I do use those oil-filled space heaters in the bathroom and office occasionally. Oh, and I don’t have a TV or a coffee maker (use a hand grinder and manual drip).
Does anyone know how this compares with the charge for hooking to the grid with net metering?
*From:* WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:06 PM *To:* wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' *Subject:* [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
“To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is ‘subsidized,’” Young wrote. “It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers.”
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
__._,_.___
Posted by: "frank young" fyoung@mountain.net
•
Reply to sender <fyoung@mountain.net?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
Reply to group <WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
•
Messages in this topic https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/conversations/topics/27179;_ylc=X3oDMTM1YnJxNmFvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEbXNnSWQDMjcxNzkEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4BHRwY0lkAzI3MTc5 (1)
Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West Virginia's natural resources
[image: Image removed by sender. Yahoo! Groups] https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJjZms4ajJxBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDZ2ZwBHN0aW1lAzE0NDQxNTExODg-
• Privacy https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html • Unsubscribe <WVHCBOARD-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms of Use https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
.
[image: Image removed by sender.] [image: Image removed by sender.]
__,_._,___
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
-- Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com 304.698.9628
Remember, Mother Nature bats last.
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
no, it doesn't make sense, because all of the maintenance charges are calculated as part of the base fee spread over all customers. those maintenance fees are not a result of net metering customers, and to the extent that they have any impact on maintenance net metering customers reduce maitenance cost by sending juice the shortest possible distance to the nearest customer. and they already pay it.
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com wrote:
Doesn't make sense. If they (elec companies) stop paying to maintain the system, John can't get his juice. Only makes sense if all that maintenance cost is rolled into the initial hook-up charge. On Oct 9, 2015 2:34 PM, "William V. DePaulo, Esq." < william.depaulo@gmail.com> wrote:
JIM - BOTH AEP AND FIRST ENERGY ADMITTED, IN MEETINGS WITH PSC'S NET METERING TASK FORCE, THAT -- ASIDE FROM INITIAL HOOKUP WHICH NET METERING CUSTOMERS ALREADY PAY FOR -- THERE WERE NO, ABSOLUTELY NO AS IN Z E R O EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH NET METERING CUSTOMERS BEING ON THE NET.....NONE, NIENTE, NADA, RIEN.......GOOS EGGS....ZILCH......NUTTIN BILL
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com wrote:
I have to say I'm just slightly sympathetic to the elec companies in this one. Net metering customers DO use the distribution system with the expenses that entails.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Beth Little blittle@citynet.net wrote:
Ooooh, so I’m subsidized. I’m beginning to feel less guilty for not going solar.
At $20 - $25 a month, my bill must be lower than the average. This is despite the fact that I have the full complement of electric appliances – freezer, fridge, water heater, washer, drier (just the motor, the fuel is propane), and various electronics (computer, printer, radios, microwave), even a 220 water pump in the well. I did get energy efficient appliances over the last few years, which lowered my bill noticeably.
The only thing I don’t have is electric heat, although I do use those oil-filled space heaters in the bathroom and office occasionally. Oh, and I don’t have a TV or a coffee maker (use a hand grinder and manual drip).
Does anyone know how this compares with the charge for hooking to the grid with net metering?
*From:* WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:06 PM *To:* wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' *Subject:* [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
“To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is ‘subsidized,’” Young wrote. “It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers.”
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
__._,_.___
Posted by: "frank young" fyoung@mountain.net
•
Reply to sender <fyoung@mountain.net?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
Reply to group <WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
•
Messages in this topic https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/conversations/topics/27179;_ylc=X3oDMTM1YnJxNmFvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEbXNnSWQDMjcxNzkEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4BHRwY0lkAzI3MTc5 (1)
Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West Virginia's natural resources
[image: Image removed by sender. Yahoo! Groups] https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJjZms4ajJxBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDZ2ZwBHN0aW1lAzE0NDQxNTExODg-
• Privacy https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html • Unsubscribe <WVHCBOARD-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms of Use https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
.
[image: Image removed by sender.] [image: Image removed by sender.]
__,_._,___
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
-- Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com 304.698.9628
Remember, Mother Nature bats last.
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
Now Bill..... Maintenance cost IS result of net meterers, when they draw power from the grid. Net meterers are NOT sending juice the shortest possible distance, when they draw power from the grid. Did you forget that net meterers do get some of their power from the grid? On Oct 9, 2015 2:45 PM, "William V. DePaulo, Esq." < william.depaulo@gmail.com> wrote:
no, it doesn't make sense, because all of the maintenance charges are calculated as part of the base fee spread over all customers. those maintenance fees are not a result of net metering customers, and to the extent that they have any impact on maintenance net metering customers reduce maitenance cost by sending juice the shortest possible distance to the nearest customer. and they already pay it.
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com wrote:
Doesn't make sense. If they (elec companies) stop paying to maintain the system, John can't get his juice. Only makes sense if all that maintenance cost is rolled into the initial hook-up charge. On Oct 9, 2015 2:34 PM, "William V. DePaulo, Esq." < william.depaulo@gmail.com> wrote:
JIM - BOTH AEP AND FIRST ENERGY ADMITTED, IN MEETINGS WITH PSC'S NET METERING TASK FORCE, THAT -- ASIDE FROM INITIAL HOOKUP WHICH NET METERING CUSTOMERS ALREADY PAY FOR -- THERE WERE NO, ABSOLUTELY NO AS IN Z E R O EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH NET METERING CUSTOMERS BEING ON THE NET.....NONE, NIENTE, NADA, RIEN.......GOOS EGGS....ZILCH......NUTTIN BILL
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com wrote:
I have to say I'm just slightly sympathetic to the elec companies in this one. Net metering customers DO use the distribution system with the expenses that entails.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Beth Little blittle@citynet.net wrote:
Ooooh, so I’m subsidized. I’m beginning to feel less guilty for not going solar.
At $20 - $25 a month, my bill must be lower than the average. This is despite the fact that I have the full complement of electric appliances – freezer, fridge, water heater, washer, drier (just the motor, the fuel is propane), and various electronics (computer, printer, radios, microwave), even a 220 water pump in the well. I did get energy efficient appliances over the last few years, which lowered my bill noticeably.
The only thing I don’t have is electric heat, although I do use those oil-filled space heaters in the bathroom and office occasionally. Oh, and I don’t have a TV or a coffee maker (use a hand grinder and manual drip).
Does anyone know how this compares with the charge for hooking to the grid with net metering?
*From:* WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:06 PM *To:* wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' *Subject:* [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
“To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is ‘subsidized,’” Young wrote. “It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers.”
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
__._,_.___
Posted by: "frank young" fyoung@mountain.net
•
Reply to sender <fyoung@mountain.net?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
Reply to group <WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
•
Messages in this topic https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/conversations/topics/27179;_ylc=X3oDMTM1YnJxNmFvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEbXNnSWQDMjcxNzkEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4BHRwY0lkAzI3MTc5 (1)
Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West Virginia's natural resources
[image: Image removed by sender. Yahoo! Groups] https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJjZms4ajJxBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDZ2ZwBHN0aW1lAzE0NDQxNTExODg-
• Privacy https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html • Unsubscribe <WVHCBOARD-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms of Use https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
.
[image: Image removed by sender.] [image: Image removed by sender.]
__,_._,___
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
-- Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com 304.698.9628
Remember, Mother Nature bats last.
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
THEY PAY ALL OF THE COST OF OBTAINING JUICE FROM THE GRID, THE SAME AS ANY OTHER RETAIL CUSTOMER...
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com wrote:
Now Bill..... Maintenance cost IS result of net meterers, when they draw power from the grid. Net meterers are NOT sending juice the shortest possible distance, when they draw power from the grid. Did you forget that net meterers do get some of their power from the grid? On Oct 9, 2015 2:45 PM, "William V. DePaulo, Esq." < william.depaulo@gmail.com> wrote:
no, it doesn't make sense, because all of the maintenance charges are calculated as part of the base fee spread over all customers. those maintenance fees are not a result of net metering customers, and to the extent that they have any impact on maintenance net metering customers reduce maitenance cost by sending juice the shortest possible distance to the nearest customer. and they already pay it.
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com wrote:
Doesn't make sense. If they (elec companies) stop paying to maintain the system, John can't get his juice. Only makes sense if all that maintenance cost is rolled into the initial hook-up charge. On Oct 9, 2015 2:34 PM, "William V. DePaulo, Esq." < william.depaulo@gmail.com> wrote:
JIM - BOTH AEP AND FIRST ENERGY ADMITTED, IN MEETINGS WITH PSC'S NET METERING TASK FORCE, THAT -- ASIDE FROM INITIAL HOOKUP WHICH NET METERING CUSTOMERS ALREADY PAY FOR -- THERE WERE NO, ABSOLUTELY NO AS IN Z E R O EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH NET METERING CUSTOMERS BEING ON THE NET.....NONE, NIENTE, NADA, RIEN.......GOOS EGGS....ZILCH......NUTTIN BILL
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com wrote:
I have to say I'm just slightly sympathetic to the elec companies in this one. Net metering customers DO use the distribution system with the expenses that entails.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Beth Little blittle@citynet.net wrote:
Ooooh, so I’m subsidized. I’m beginning to feel less guilty for not going solar.
At $20 - $25 a month, my bill must be lower than the average. This is despite the fact that I have the full complement of electric appliances – freezer, fridge, water heater, washer, drier (just the motor, the fuel is propane), and various electronics (computer, printer, radios, microwave), even a 220 water pump in the well. I did get energy efficient appliances over the last few years, which lowered my bill noticeably.
The only thing I don’t have is electric heat, although I do use those oil-filled space heaters in the bathroom and office occasionally. Oh, and I don’t have a TV or a coffee maker (use a hand grinder and manual drip).
Does anyone know how this compares with the charge for hooking to the grid with net metering?
*From:* WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:06 PM *To:* wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' *Subject:* [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on rooftop solar customers
“To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the average is ‘subsidized,’” Young wrote. “It is the average rate structure, not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers.”
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102
__._,_.___
Posted by: "frank young" fyoung@mountain.net
•
Reply to sender <fyoung@mountain.net?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
Reply to group <WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20>
•
•
Messages in this topic https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/conversations/topics/27179;_ylc=X3oDMTM1YnJxNmFvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEbXNnSWQDMjcxNzkEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4BHRwY0lkAzI3MTc5 (1)
Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West Virginia's natural resources
[image: Image removed by sender. Yahoo! Groups] https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJjZms4ajJxBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDZ2ZwBHN0aW1lAzE0NDQxNTExODg-
• Privacy https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html • Unsubscribe <WVHCBOARD-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms of Use https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
.
[image: Image removed by sender.] [image: Image removed by sender.]
__,_._,___
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
-- Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com 304.698.9628
Remember, Mother Nature bats last.
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
Right. On Oct 9, 2015 3:22 PM, "William V. DePaulo, Esq." < william.depaulo@gmail.com> wrote:
THEY PAY ALL OF THE COST OF OBTAINING JUICE FROM THE GRID, THE SAME AS ANY OTHER RETAIL CUSTOMER...
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com wrote:
Now Bill..... Maintenance cost IS result of net meterers, when they draw power from the grid. Net meterers are NOT sending juice the shortest possible distance, when they draw power from the grid. Did you forget that net meterers do get some of their power from the grid? On Oct 9, 2015 2:45 PM, "William V. DePaulo, Esq." < william.depaulo@gmail.com> wrote:
no, it doesn't make sense, because all of the maintenance charges are calculated as part of the base fee spread over all customers. those maintenance fees are not a result of net metering customers, and to the extent that they have any impact on maintenance net metering customers reduce maitenance cost by sending juice the shortest possible distance to the nearest customer. and they already pay it.
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com wrote:
Doesn't make sense. If they (elec companies) stop paying to maintain the system, John can't get his juice. Only makes sense if all that maintenance cost is rolled into the initial hook-up charge. On Oct 9, 2015 2:34 PM, "William V. DePaulo, Esq." < william.depaulo@gmail.com> wrote:
JIM - BOTH AEP AND FIRST ENERGY ADMITTED, IN MEETINGS WITH PSC'S NET METERING TASK FORCE, THAT -- ASIDE FROM INITIAL HOOKUP WHICH NET METERING CUSTOMERS ALREADY PAY FOR -- THERE WERE NO, ABSOLUTELY NO AS IN Z E R O EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH NET METERING CUSTOMERS BEING ON THE NET.....NONE, NIENTE, NADA, RIEN.......GOOS EGGS....ZILCH......NUTTIN BILL
William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com wrote:
I have to say I'm just slightly sympathetic to the elec companies in this one. Net metering customers DO use the distribution system with the expenses that entails.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Beth Little blittle@citynet.net wrote:
> Ooooh, so I’m subsidized. I’m beginning to feel less guilty for not > going solar. > > At $20 - $25 a month, my bill must be lower than the average. This > is despite the fact that I have the full complement of electric appliances > – freezer, fridge, water heater, washer, drier (just the motor, the fuel is > propane), and various electronics (computer, printer, radios, microwave), > even a 220 water pump in the well. I did get energy efficient appliances > over the last few years, which lowered my bill noticeably. > > The only thing I don’t have is electric heat, although I do use > those oil-filled space heaters in the bathroom and office occasionally. > Oh, and I don’t have a TV or a coffee maker (use a hand grinder and manual > drip). > > Does anyone know how this compares with the charge for hooking to > the grid with net metering? > > > > > > > > *From:* WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com] > > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:06 PM > *To:* wvec-board@yahoogroups.com; WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com; 'WV > Chapter Energy Committee' > *Subject:* [WVHCBOARD] Utilities want higher charges placed on > rooftop solar customers > > > > > > “To be sure, any customer who purchases less electricity than the > average is ‘subsidized,’” Young wrote. “It is the average rate structure, > not net metering, that shifts costs among retail customers.” > > > > http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20151005/GZ01/151009735/1102 > > __._,_.___ > ------------------------------ > > Posted by: "frank young" fyoung@mountain.net > ------------------------------ > > *Reply via web post > https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/conversations/messages/27179;_ylc=X3oDMTJwcXJrYmM0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEbXNnSWQDMjcxNzkEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDcnBseQRzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4?act=reply&messageNum=27179 > * > > • > > Reply to sender > <fyoung@mountain.net?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20> > > • > > Reply to group > <WVHCBOARD@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Utilities%20want%20higher%20charges%20placed%20on%20rooftop%20solar%20customers%20> > > • > > Start a New Topic > https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/conversations/newtopic;_ylc=X3oDMTJkaGh0amk3BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDbnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4 > > • > > Messages in this topic > https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/conversations/topics/27179;_ylc=X3oDMTM1YnJxNmFvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEbXNnSWQDMjcxNzkEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4BHRwY0lkAzI3MTc5 > (1) > > Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West > Virginia's natural resources > > *Visit Your Group > https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WVHCBOARD/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJkcm5zcG9tBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEc2VjA3Z0bARzbGsDdmdocARzdGltZQMxNDQ0MTUxMTg4* > > [image: Image removed by sender. Yahoo! Groups] > https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJjZms4ajJxBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwODEwOARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjQxNzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDZ2ZwBHN0aW1lAzE0NDQxNTExODg- > > • Privacy > https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html • > Unsubscribe > <WVHCBOARD-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms > of Use https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/ > > > > . > > [image: Image removed by sender.] > [image: Image removed by sender.] > > __,_._,___ > > _______________________________________________ > EC mailing list > EC@osenergy.org > http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec >
-- Jim Sconyers jimscon@gmail.com 304.698.9628
Remember, Mother Nature bats last.
EC mailing list EC@osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec
-
Allan Tweddle -
Beth Little -
frank young -
James Kotcon -
Jim Sconyers -
William V. DePaulo, Esq.