Sign-In  or  Create a Free Account
Sign-in with:
 
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
 
Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

Solar Energy Fee Fuels Debate in Louisiana

By Todd C. Elliott, The Eunice News
October 9, 2012   |   8 Comments

Do you like this news?

 
 
8 Reader Comments
No image available
Comment
1 of 8
Anonymous
October 10, 2012
We can't achieve energy independence with fees like these. Based on average retail energy prices in LA, customers in New Orleans need to install a 3 kW PV array—that is optimally oriented and unshaded—in order to generate an average of $25 worth of electricity per month. That's a big investment just to break even.

Run your own simulations here:

http://rredc.nrel.gov/solar/calculators/PVWATTS/version1/US/Louisiana/New_Orleans.html

These fees will put small business job creators out of business.
Comment
2 of 8
October 10, 2012
The majority of a persons bill is from the cost to maintain transmission lines and other functions not directly related to the generating cost. As long as you are hooked to the grid you want these functions to continue. So the person who used to pay $185 a month was paying $90 or more to maintain the transmission system. Since they are now paying $50 a month someone else has to subsidize them.

If accelerating the installation of renewable systems is your goal continue as you are. The cost will rise for those not using renewable energy, increasing their incentive to change. If you want to maintain a reliable grid someone will have to pay for it and that means charging for connection to the grid.
Comment
3 of 8
October 10, 2012
Yes, this looks to me like prejudice against anyone who is not the utility company by a monopoly that sees lower future profits on the horizon (greed). You can also see who has the Louisiana Public Service Commissioner in their back pocket! A little known secret...the utility will not tell you that solar PV compliments their power load curve which helps the utility by reducing the need to buy power from a Peaker Plant which charges dollars per kWh which is then passed on to the consumers. My lifelong education had 'Monopolies' pegged as illegal. I do not think that a 'Monopoly' should have much to say nor should be able to corrupt other influential people...'Monopolies' should be happy with whatever they get. Maybe a higher level in the State of Louisiana can step in and remind these 'Monopolies' of there place? As far as comment #2...look at electric coops and how they operate. They have fewer customers per mile while having and maintaining the same equipment as larger electric utilities. The Coop business model is to charge the actual costs to their members. If you query their websites you will find charges from $9.95/month to $19/month to maintain the transmission system. Their cost per kWh also ranges from $.03/kWh to $.10/kWh depending upon what part of the US they are located in. Now add 10% on that for the typical profit and you are well under what you state for charges. Again, maybe the state needs to step in and identify possible excess utility charges that already exist. When will people evolve past greed to help move our society in a positive direction resulting in a better future for all?
Comment
4 of 8
October 10, 2012
tim-gulden, you are missing the point. The kwhr charge has more than just generating costs in it. When you generate your own power you avoid paying the generating cost and the other cost. The only servgice you avoided was the generating cost, so you receive the others for free.

If you want to argue that peak power costs are higher and are partially avoided when I generate my own electricity shouldn't the power company be allowed to not send me peak power? Before you answer, remember that most utilities have peak loads as the sun comes up (we are getting out of bed) and late afternoon (when we come home from work and start cooking). Solar does not work so well at those times.
Comment
5 of 8
October 10, 2012
What I would like to know is what kind of fee they will want to charge for the homes and business that go off grid as there is a company in Canada testing a small retrofit home system that has had an 18 moth trial for total home consumption that will cost about the same as a new dishwasher and about the same size with wireless capability. If the predictions are right within 5 years you may be able to go down to your local Walmart and buy a system have it installed and not see another utility bill again. Then what are they going to do tax you for what you don't use?
Comment
6 of 8
October 11, 2012
Paying $25.00 per month to store excess electricity on the grid is a reasonable price to pay in comparison to buying your own battery to store the electricity.
Comment
7 of 8
October 11, 2012
@DavidCarl

Please review the demand chart at http://www.caiso.com/Pages/TodaysOutlook.aspx#SupplyandDemand

There is a slow curve up in the morning, not a peak. During peak summer demand the peak usage is mid-day all summer as air conditioning systems work hardest. Today's chart at the link shows a peak in the evening at bedtime as people run dishwashers, clothes washers, watch tv and surf the net. Temperatures are moderate in CA this time of year generally requiring little or no heating/cooling.

Solar production generally matches the demand curve.

Scroll down the above page and the second graph shows interconnected renewable generation production! If any customer should have an additional fee it should be highly variable wind! Solar ramps with demand!

Frankly, the utilities have a basic monthly fee for being connected to the grid. That used to be justified by paying for a meter read and local distribution and company overhead. Now with smart meters (which are a new add-on fee!) there's no meter reading by people, so it's basically an inconsequential cost to the utility. So that base monthly fee IS WHAT YOU PAY TO MAINTAIN THE LOCAL DISTRIBUTION NETWORK and pay overhead for the utility company to exist. You shouldn't have to pay yet again for something everyone is already billed for.

Now, on my bill I'm charged for the generation I consume, and then charged additionally for the transmission to get those watts to me. That's money paid to the long-haul transmission "pipeline" carriers who move power from the big generation sources OVER TO the local utility distribution network. If I'm not purchasing that far-away generation why should I pay for using their pipeline?

When you buy a more fuel efficient car, and visit the gas station less often, should you have to pay Shell another fee to pay for your reduced usage of their fleet of tankers and refineries?
Comment
8 of 8
October 21, 2012
Comment 6, not sure if that is true. Even at 25 a month that is 300 a year. If that rate doubles, which it no doubtably will, I am sure you can purchase some decent batteries that will make you independent of the grid.
And realize that the grid doesn't store power, the power you make with your PV that they give you 10 cents for, goes right to your neighbor who pays 25 cents.
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Advertise With Us

Schneider Electric EnergyDreams LLC Conergy Inc. Ambient Technologies, Inc. Solar Electric Power Association Upsolar Sol Systems LLC
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters