DG Net Metering

Re: DG Net Metering

Tom B wrote: »

Are the utilities in Arizona still supportive of PV installations or have the subsidies been reduced or eliminated due to the high penetration of PV?

APS has attempted to levy a pretty high fee ($50 a month) on customers who use solar. They were bargained down to $5. However, when I spoke to an APS representative a few weeks ago he said they were still very much in favor of solar.

Overall Arizona residents get a 30% tax credit (federal) a 25% of gross cost tax credit (Arizona) and various specific subsidies/incentives depending on which utility they are a part of.

Is net metering permitted by the local utility?

Yes. No limits on percentage of total load, up to 125% of a customer's load, and compensation by avoided cost (not retail cost.)

if so, has there been significant pushback by the utility to continue the practice?

APS seems to be pushing back.

Re: DG Net Metering

Cariboocoot wrote: »

Since the NEC only allows 20% over the maximum based on the bus bar rating (although inspectors tend to read main breaker) the most you can put on a 200 Amp service is 40 Amps, or 9.6 kW. Removing loads from the service doesn't change this, although it may give you the needed connection space. Beyond that you have to check the bus bar ratings (good luck) or put in a smaller main (not always easy) or change the service (that ups the price a lot) or use a line-side tap (not always welcome everywhere nor cheap).

That's why I only go with the Eatons exterior mounted meter/distribution panels the bussing is rated for 224 amps for the (20 slot and 40 slot), eaton customer service can send you the spec on the bussing. Schnieder/square D not so lucky when it comes to getting that bussing info. I don't believe PG&E allows line side tap on residential under any circumstance, they do it for commercial and only if the producer carries insurance. What that amount is, I don't know the answer.

Re: DG Net Metering

solar_dave wrote: »

That is nice to know about the Eatons!

Whats not nice about the eatons is that some PG&E jurisdictions have an issue with underground, over head exterior combo boxes. Thats how I went in a tizzy for the spec sheets. I had 5 jurisdictions that passed the box no problem, then I went to another jurisdiction and it took 7 days to meet approval.

The project coordinator told me to read over greenbook for what is or is not allowable with no reference to manufacturer types. I told the coordinator it looks like it passes in every way. Then he came back with the response, oh its overhead/underground that came into question.... Just seemed like I was selected at random for approval.

Re: DG Net Metering

jaggedben wrote: »

None of that is true.

Well how are you going to prove that it isn't? I don't mind that you boldly called me a liar, but whatever different strokes for different folks.

For residential it would require a switch gear. In most cases it hasn't been allowable in the jurisdictions I have worked in using common meter distribution panels under 200amp 240V.

Common 100amp or 200amp 240V service distribution panels, do not allow for the contacts, PG&E hasn't approved a method for common 240V 200amp/100amp distribution panels.

Now I did a line side tap 4 mega watts worth in hanford, client had insurance, and a switch gear. I've done mega watts worth in residential sectors 208V for school districts, but those aren't considered a residence or home, and still had switch gear and insurance for the term of the NEM.

For truth in the content, line side taps in switch gear's remove the certified UL listing as it is considered "tampering" a UL certified part. In order to do line side tap on the back end of the gear bussing it is a drill and tap method, (which de-lists the certification). A UL inspector by request of PG&E or client or both parties, which in most cases for school districts its a requirement along with insurance. The last time I called out a UL inspector for 3.5 meg of power costs $16,000 to have the inspector come out to approve the gear. So yeah its costly and the client should be making a enough whole sale power to offset that cost alone.

Other circumstances that cause problems with line side tap are the age of the gear, specs available for that gear, if even the specs still exist, not to mention the cabinet portion that is specifically for PG&E only.

The bureaucracy to a "true" line side tap is because of cabinet space, what PG&E defines as impeding into their jurisdiction, PG&E can feel that impeding into their cabinet which under no circumstance is anyone allowed to line side tap in PG&E's portion of cabinet. Reminds me of a project I did, that called out for line side tap, and infact it was in PG&E's cabinet portion because there was no other place to line side tap. I verified with the engineer even before the installation that we were in PG&E's cabinet, and was told to do so any way. End result PG&E inspector failed inspection, and we suffered $10,000, liquidated damages under a performance contract for the CSI/PBI incentives. Had to recalculate the system specs and run some new conductors to another service gear.

For residential 240V 100 and 200 amp residential service distribution panels would require approval from PG&E which in most cases I have been told no. Either because there isn't a raceway established with the meter/distribution, its in PG7E's designated cabinet, or the box isn't calculated for radius bend, and as always will de-list UL cert to the service panel. Line sides can be done, but to swap out for a gear or service that can be designed for line side exceeds the ROI. In most cases Line side isn't practical for systems under 25kWh because of the extra precautions, means and methods, bureaucratic B.S involved for that type of installation. Installing breakers is always cheaper and is the lowest form of insurance you need.

So the real truth is how much is the client willing to spend on a system under 25kWh for a line side tap. Truth is its unrealistic for the cost.

Re: DG Net Metering

solarix wrote: »

As an Arizona installer, its been a roller coaster ride since last June. Sales went 10 fold as people stampeded to beat the APS end of rebates deadline (which kept slipping in time) Just now working off the backlog. Give us a deadline anytime - I now say. This year however, the public perception has gone the other way thinking solar is not so economic even though costs continue to decrease and the new "solar tax" is only about $5/month. From what I read, the Utilities are learning that they need to seriously figure out a new business plan as charging by the kwh is going to mean decreasing revenues. The great majority of US demand growth is being met by recent renewable generation and in Germany and Hawaii it has allready reached a degree of saturation. (oops - maybe shouldn't have built those fossil fuel resources I guess) Here in Arizona renewables are at about 4% of utility generation.
While it is true that the renewable technologies still rely on base load generation and perhaps can be said to have an unfair advantage with net-metering but Utilities have had a much larger concession from the public as well by not having to pay the costs of coal-fired pollution and nuclear cleanup. Not to mention the unproven affects on climate change. The developed world is coming around to the realization that we need to have a cleaner method of energy production even if it costs more and net-metering is a simple incentive that has become a cornerstone of encouraging renewables. From what I read, the installation rate for solar is going to go ballistic in the coming years. Get ready!

+1 on the charge by kWh. Solar has broken that model and I suspect that the utilities might look for alternatives to the connect charges for all consumers to correct that issue. While I don't want to see higher costs for solar users like myself, I do understand that using the utility as a "battery" should have some nominal cost involved. If they drive that Nominal cost to high then people will just leave the utility altogether.

Re: DG Net Metering

bill von novak wrote: »

Every company in the US does this. Even solar installation companies.

Its not the installation company, its the finance company.
Finance companies subcontract for the installer to get the job done, the finance company is the one that makes record profits, more than the utility company after year 5.

30% tax credit
2%~10% CSI generated from state funding (now extinguished in California)
20% savings to client, and monthly payment to PPA contract financing.

Within the first year term, finance companies generate 50% of the initial start up cost.

So for 15 of the 20 year agreement its all profit for the finance company. Little guys like me just recieve a check for install, thats about it, its not profiting or capitalizing on the installers end.
I also refuse to work under PPA contracts, they have nasty language in there that does some serious damage to contractors for failure to perform. I work direct with my clients, they purchase material, they own it, I just install, the way it should be.

Re: DG Net Metering

bill von novak wrote: »

It's everyone. Companies that do not watch costs and maximize profits go out of business; they are out-competed by the companies who do a better job maximizing profits.

This is not because companies are evil, it's a characteristic of capitalism. (Wal-Mart doesn't sell cheap Chinese products because the owners don't like American companies - they sell Chinese products because their customers like low prices.)

I don't find that to be entirely fact of the matter. I install solar on shingle slate rooftops for .99 cents per watt labor only. My competitors do the same labor installation for $1.50 or more per watt, financed agreements have hidden install costs almost reaching $1.80 per watt.
my business model is to build a system at grid parity for consumers. I don't profit from it, I break even month to month to pay the bills. My company grows on word of mouth to consumers at that price point. I'm able to expand from the low cost that it becomes more accelerated, which puts me at a point to hire employees and keep the economy going. For me my company model is to grow organically using ethical fundamentals, the consumers will take care of me based on the low cost and open relationship which is quite the opposite of corporate Americas stance on selling energy.

my other big problem is the governments lack of control in the energy world, it should have more regulation so a kWh is a kWh at fair equal value and the government as a business should tax renewable property as they are a business to make money as well, it would be far less depriciative than the way utility buys energy from whole sale distributors @ 55% savings for that energy than re distribute for greater profit. The whole economic system is corrupted, that doesn't make it capitalism, it makes it corruption.

Re: DG Net Metering

SolarPowered wrote: »

Well how are you going to prove that it isn't? I don't mind that you boldly called me a liar, but whatever different strokes for different folks.

I suppose if I had pictures handy of the multiple installations I've worked on which were done with line-side taps, that's how I'd prove it to you. I don't have any handy, although we have one coming up that will probably be inspected in a couple weeks, so maybe I'll get some. If we have problems with PG&E, I'll eat crow.

BTW I'm talking about actual taps, not just breakers installed as service disconnecting means in existing panels. Of the latter I've done quite a few more. Never an issue with PG&E interconnection, although I've had to talk a few AHJs through it.

For residential it would require a switch gear. In most cases it hasn't been allowable in the jurisdictions I have worked in using common meter distribution panels under 200amp 240V.

If it's the AHJ who's disallowing something, that's not the same as PG&E disallowing it. I have yet to experience PG&E rejecting an interconnection application on technical grounds if there's a passed building permit from the AHJ.

Common 100amp or 200amp 240V service distribution panels, do not allow for the contacts, PG&E hasn't approved a method for common 240V 200amp/100amp distribution panels.

I don't know what you mean by that.

Now I did a line side tap 4 mega watts worth in hanford, ... ... line side taps in switch gear's remove the certified UL listing as it is considered "tampering" a UL certified part. ... A UL inspector by request of PG&E or client or both parties, which in most cases for school districts its a requirement along with insurance. ... Other circumstances that cause problems with line side tap are the age of the gear, ... not to mention the cabinet portion that is specifically for PG&E only.

[etc. etc]

Yes, you've certainly listed a number of genuine circumstances that make line-side taps difficult. I don't disagree with any of that. But none of that justifies your original statement ("I don't believe PG&E allows line side tap on residential under any circumstance.")

Indeed one of the earliest solar installations I worked on (not in any supervisory role) required a UL representative to field list the equipment, and the inspector made us jump through so many hoops that he eventually apologized to us for having asked us for things that were not required. This BTW, was a 3-phase 208 service, but technically it was residential. In any case, as far as I know, there was never a peep of objection to the whole thing from PG&E.