Jestersix

Sunrun/PGE Solar Panels

newfly said:
I’m not getting solar for blackout. I’m with Silicon Valley power not pge. As far as I know, they have generous net metering. The meter runs backward if you produce more than you used. At the end of the year, you get a summary of total used vs total produced .. its defeat the purpose of battery ( besides backup for blackout).
Click to expand...
I am not an expert on Silicon Valley power, but your description of their payback being better than PGE doesn't match my understanding. NEM 3.0 is a California level thing, not a PGE thing.

From a quick search online I believe there may be some different ways SV handles payback if you produce more than you used for a whole year, but I don't think that's normal and it appears to have various asterisks on it.

I'd double check things, because y understanding with NEM 3.0 you're basically only getting a useful return on investment if you use almost everything you produce, either directly or via your battery. Sending to the grid is cost ineffective.
 
richiev said:
I am not an expert on Silicon Valley power, but your description of their payback being better than PGE doesn't match my understanding. NEM 3.0 is a California level thing, not a PGE thing.

From a quick search online I believe there may be some different ways SV handles payback if you produce more than you used for a whole year, but I don't think that's normal and it appears to have various asterisks on it.

I'd double check things, because y understanding with NEM 3.0 you're basically only getting a useful return on investment if you use almost everything you produce, either directly or via your battery. Sending to the grid is cost ineffective.
Click to expand...

Yes, i should double check. This is what i read online-


  • Annual Billing and Reconciliation:
    SVP customers with net metering are billed annually, rather than monthly, for their electricity. This allows for an annual true-up where your total energy consumption is offset by the energy your system generated over the year.

    richiev said:
    I am not an expert on Silicon Valley power, but your description of their payback being better than PGE doesn't match my understanding. NEM 3.0 is a California level thing, not a PGE thing.

    From a quick search online I believe there may be some different ways SV handles payback if you produce more than you used for a whole year, but I don't think that's normal and it appears to have various asterisks on it.

    I'd double check things, because y understanding with NEM 3.0 you're basically only getting a useful return on investment if you use almost everything you produce, either directly or via your battery. Sending to the grid is cost ineffective.
    Click to expand...
    From google - I'll call and to confirm for sure before i commit.


    • NEM 3.0 primarily applies to the three large investor-owned utilities (IOUs) in California: PG&E, SCE, and SDG&E.
    • Publicly owned utilities, like Silicon Valley Power, are not required to adopt NEM 3.0.
 
Here is an example yearly bill on SVP website. I hope i'm reading this correctly. Your usage and production get sum up at the end of the year, and yes, if you produce more than you use, you get pennies. This is fine with me. The description says you don;t pay monthly, but annually.

1750862808285.png
 
newfly said:
Here is an example yearly bill on SVP website. I hope i'm reading this correctly. Your usage and production get sum up at the end of the year, and yes, if you produce more than you use, you get pennies. This is fine with me. The description says you don;t pay monthly, but annually.

View attachment 70592
Click to expand...
Interesting. Not going to thread hijack this one, but I'm going to look into this more myself as well. If you find anything fully conclusive please LMK.

Edit: my quick read (I'll read more) is this is very confusing, but I don't think you get paid more for SVCE. I read it as effectively

For power you use:
• you pay the baseline to PGE
• on top of the PGE costs, you pay SVCE $0.017 / kWh for electric -- this is to offset current clean energy production costs (which seems silly this day and age)
• so overall you're paying PGE $x and SVCE $0.017 so in total $x + $0.017 -> electric costs more, which can be worthwhile because you're supporting clean energy

For power you produce, it's effectively the inverse of that. SVCE will refund you back its $0.017, but for the PGE part (which is most of the cost) you only get NEM 3.0 rates, which are extremely low.

So I read this as both these things are accurate, but in different ways. You get a higher rate for production from SVCE, but that's just to offset the cost SVCE had. You get NEM 3.0 rates for the primary cost, which is the PGE portion.

Again, completely possible I'm misreading, and I would be happy to be proven wrong. I think if SVCE does somehow drastically change the way NEM works then everyone would be using it (it might just be everyone is oblivious though). Also since SVCE is just a layer on top of PGE, it feels like it'd be weird if somehow it was cheaper in aggregate.
 
Last edited:
richiev said:
Interesting. Not going to thread hijack this one, but I'm going to look into this more myself as well. If you find anything fully conclusive please LMK.

Edit: my quick read (I'll read more) is this is very confusing, but I don't think you get paid more for SVCE. I read it as effectively

For power you use:
• you pay the baseline to PGE
• on top of the PGE costs, you pay SVCE $0.017 / kWh for electric -- this is to offset current clean energy production costs (which seems silly this day and age)
• so overall you're paying PGE $x and SVCE $0.017 so in total $x + $0.017 -> electric costs more, which can be worthwhile because you're supporting clean energy

For power you produce, it's effectively the inverse of that. SVCE will refund you back its $0.017, but for the PGE part (which is most of the cost) you only get NEM 3.0 rates, which are extremely low.

So I read this as both these things are accurate, but in different ways. You get a higher rate for production from SVCE, but that's just to offset the cost SVCE had. You get NEM 3.0 rates for the primary cost, which is the PGE portion.

Again, completely possible I'm misreading, and I would be happy to be proven wrong. I think if SVCE does somehow drastically change the way NEM works then everyone would be using it (it might just be everyone is oblivious though). Also since SVCE is just a layer on top of PGE, it feels like it'd be weird if somehow it was cheaper in aggregate.
Click to expand...
Confirmed with Silicon Valley Power. My interpretation is correct. At the end of the year, they sum all your production and consumption and if you produce more than you consume, they will pay you back at the (low) buy back rate. In this case, there is no reason (besides backup power) for battery. Paying $11k ( per powerwall) for this backup doesn't make financial sense to me. I have a $400 generator, which i have not used in the last 2 years.

the key is SVP is not obligated to conform to NEM 3.0 rates. They can set their own rules. Their per kwh rates is 1/2 of PG&E. This is the reason i didn;t seriously consider solar for many years.
 
They can set their own rates/rules but their backend is still PGE; so they are not likely to deviate too much as they still have bills to pay and those costs do change from year to year.
As for the annual true-up (annual vs monthly) bill; that is the norm for solar as you will make more in the summer months less in the winter so it makes sense to administrate once versus constantly.
BTWL if you have NG at your house, you will still pay that monthly.
 
newfly said:
Confirmed with Silicon Valley Power. My interpretation is correct. At the end of the year, they sum all your production and consumption and if you produce more than you consume, they will pay you back at the (low) buy back rate. In this case, there is no reason (besides backup power) for battery. Paying $11k ( per powerwall) for this backup doesn't make financial sense to me. I have a $400 generator, which i have not used in the last 2 years.

the key is SVP is not obligated to conform to NEM 3.0 rates. They can set their own rules. Their per kwh rates is 1/2 of PG&E. This is the reason i didn;t seriously consider solar for many years.
Click to expand...
Can you share the exact question and answer, assuming it was over email or something?
 
I just realized one difference, you're discussing Silicon Valley Power versus I was meaning Silicon Valley Clean Energy. SVP being a Santa Clara oddity different than all the other setups (SVCE / Peninsula Clean Energy / ...), and things about it others outside of there should ignore. Seems like a great thing for the lucky few though!
 
I just got a cancellation notice email from Tesla. It didn’t really give a straight answer just multiple possible reasons.

IMG_0541.png
 
Last edited:
Yeah that’s pretty much how Tesla treats people. Disorganized, poor communication, they don’t give you anything to go on. Notice it’s not even signed with a name or dept to allow you to ask for more info. Even with customer service, they expect you to figure out the problem yourself by googling first if it isn’t obvious. If you leave it to them to figure out they’ll just say it’s fine or come up with something wrong to fix.

Their disorganization and incompetence at followup swings both way though. My neighbor had a huge Tesla PPA (or similar) solar system installed and turned on and then Tesla forgot about it and never charged him for it. So just a free system.

In general their engineering is the best though. Or at least it has been.

After being a Tesla customer for many years and multiple products I have lots of examples in both directions.
 
SupraSaltyReefer said:
How far along did you get with Tesla? Did they make a layout plan for you? Did you try texting your advisor for the specific cancellation reason? I've had good quick responses every time I text the advisor.
Click to expand...
So I had the consultation on June 21st and gave the $100 deposit to get the design phase going. They never sent a design. I texted Hunter my Project Advisor but haven't herd back from him yet. I've read on Reddit that once you get the cancellation notice they ghost you.
 
That’s the same guy Hunter I got assigned. He don’t respond to txt but you can schedule a call via Tesla website. Not sure it matters anymore
 
So I had another consultation with Tesla. This was so I could find out why the project was cancelled. They said it was because of the fire setbacks and vents they could only place 4 solar panels on our roof. She did give me a Tesla link for certified installers and said I would have better luck with them since a lot of them also install roofs.
 
I guess it’s good they didn’t try and install something that would not be ideal. From what people have posted it seems some reps or companies are less than scrupulous.
 
NickRoseSN1985 said:
So I had another consultation with Tesla. This was so I could find out why the project was cancelled. They said it was because of the fire setbacks and vents they could only place 4 solar panels on our roof. She did give me a Tesla link for certified installers and said I would have better luck with them since a lot of them also install roofs.
Click to expand...
Yeah they're full of it, they just didn't want to deal with a non-simple install. The setback requirements are 18 inches from edges and looking at sunroof plus Google Earth, despite your roof having lots of eaves, you can mount horizontally on a lot of the surfaces and still avoid vents on the south/southeast facing sides.

Google Sunroof:
1000007782.png


Google Earth:
1000007781.png


My guess is you could get 18 panels where I have them on here, probably more, despite all the angle changes and complexity of the roof. Red are ridges and vents.

To get an accurate view, they usually will use software to measure how things will fit and I went over this with my company to maximize placement where they initially thought we couldn't.
 
Darkxerox said:
Yeah they're full of it, they just didn't want to deal with a non-simple install. The setback requirements are 18 inches from edges and looking at sunroof plus Google Earth, despite your roof having lots of eaves, you can mount horizontally on a lot of the surfaces and still avoid vents on the south/southeast facing sides.

Google Sunroof: View attachment 70960

Google Earth: View attachment 70961

My guess is you could get 18 panels where I have them on here, probably more, despite all the angle changes and complexity of the roof. Red are ridges and vents.

To get an accurate view, they usually will use software to measure how things will fit and I went over this with my company to maximize placement where they initially thought we couldn't.
Click to expand...
Are you sure it’s 18”? When I googled, it says 3’.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top