As you may remember from WeatherDem's diary, Xcel is planning on adding a monthly charge to their "net metered" customers (i.e. those who would have likely invested $15,000 - $25,000 in their solar installation). The new charges will result in the solar customers paying MORE than those without solar installations.* If passed, this proposal would result in solar installations coming to a screeching halt in Colorado.
Update 3:
Update below is incorrect, the meeting will still be held to cover the rest of the proposed rate increase.
Update 2:
The PUC meeting has been canceled and The solar fee proposal has been recinded according to a story at the Denver Post. A big Thank YOU to everyone who called or wrote.
There will be a PUC public comment hearing on:
Wednesday, August 5th
4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
1560 Broadway, Suite 1550
Denver, CO 80202
Sierra Club and East Denver Neighborhood Volunteers for Change, plan on attending the hearing. We'll be easy to spot, as we're still planning on wearing black to signify what will happen to solar installations in Colorado if this outrageous proposal were to go through. Please consider joining us!
Every residence with a solar system will be charged a ratcheted MINIMUM MONTHLY CHARGE-regardless of how much electricity is generated by the solar system in that month. If a solar household purchases electricity from Xcel Energy in ANY twelve-month period, Xcel will charge the customer for that same amount of electricity as A MINIMUM CHARGE EVERY SINGLE MONTH FOR THE NEXT TWELVE MONTHS-even in months when you are producing all of your own electricity!
If you purchase electricity from Xcel Energy in more than one month, the new minimum monthly charge will be pegged to the month in which you purchase the GREATEST number of kilowatt-hours!
These charges are IN ADDITION to the current monthly minimum of $7.50 already paid by solar customers!
Update: From further reading I've realized that commenter Stan Wagon is likely missing a key detail -- the calculation would be MAX(monthly KWH) x 0.026. Taking his scenario and using 1000 KWH as the December usage, the charge would be $26 added to my bill each month. Its not as bad as the $65 that Stan Wagon comes up with, but it certainly would lengthen the ROI of the system to a point where many fewer folks would make the financial commitment to implement a system.
Suppose my electricity cost with no solar panel would be $600 a year, for an average of $50 a month.
Suppose that in December my panels are completely covered in snow (this happened this year) requiring me to purchase, say, $65 worth of electricity from XCel. Dec. is darker and colder than July so usage in Dec. is above the $50 average.
Then XCel wants to charge me $65 a month for the next 12 months. So my expense to XCel over the year would be 65 x 12 = $780. This would be MORE than if I had no solar PV system at all. So at this point the solar panels would be costing me money, and therefore I should put the entire system in the trash, and eat the $25,000.00 I paid for it.
Xcel's last rate increase was just implemented a mere (6? 7?) weeks ago. The one before that was last fall. Xcel is allowed to pass energy basic costs (natural gas, coal) on to customers monthly without a rate increase request, so I have a difficult time figuring out how they can be so inefficient.
I can't help but compare this "situation" to the health crisis, except that is worse. In this case, we have a single private company providing essential services, with (apparently) weak governmental oversight and as a result treating their customers as their personal no-limit ATM.
IMHO, If Xcel can't provide energy services at a reasonable cost, then we need to introduce competition or switch to a "public option".
*Customers with systems in place prior to April of 2010 will be grandfathered in, only installations after that will be subject to the new charges.
RSS Feed
