net metering fight - rooftop solar in Arizona

[Kali]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/16/business/energy-environment/compromise-in-arizona-defers-a-solar-power-fight.html?emc=edit_tnt_20131115&tntemail0=y&_r=1&

Compromise in Arizona Defers a Solar Power Fight

In voting to impose a modest charge on new residential solar customers, Arizona’s power regulators have ended, for the moment, a bitter fight between the rooftop solar industry and the state’s main electric utility.

<snip>

Solar advocates say the credits are fair compensation for the value of power delivered to nearby customers, often at times of peak demand. That extra power can in the short term reduce strain on the system and in the long term avoid the cost of building new power plants.

But utilities, which recoup capital expenses through the rates they charge, say that solar customers are not paying their fair share. That forces the utilities, they say, to shift system costs to nonsolar customers.

In a 3-to-2 vote, the regulators, the Arizona Corporation Commission, agreed that there was a shift and set a fixed charge, 70 cents per kilowatt of system capacity, to pay for it. That works out to roughly $5 a month for an average system, rather than the $40 or $50 month the utility wanted, though that would have included an upfront cash subsidy.

[msongs]

1. gee the power companies can cut salaries to top management & shareholder payouts if they

want to jack up profits. better yet, make them public owned utilities

[Cleita]

3. This is the final solution, publicly owned utilities. n/t

[NYC_SKP]

2. That's a pretty reasonable solution. It would cost me $1.40/month.

Quite fair considering that without the utility as backup, I'd need to invest in several thousands in battery backup equipment and I wouldn't have the pleasure of being part of the community power supply, sharing my electrons with others when then need them.