patrick.net

One additional issue not addressed by that long-winded article is that of paying for the infrastructure.

My bill shows a certain amount for electrical "generation" and a charge for the infrastructure that is, seemingly, proportional to the amount of electrical use. What that means is that when more and more people get solar panels and have no net use of PGE's electricity, those people will also pay nothing towards infrastructure. Instead, the fixed infrastructure costs are foisted onto the ever-decreasing number of households without their own solar panels even though those with solar panels are using the infrastructure (maybe even more than those without). At some point there will be only one customer in the city that doesn't have solar panels; that single customer will be expected to pay for all of the many million of infrastructure costs every month. (Obviously, that person will go off-grid or get solar panels too.)

That article must be using the "new math," too...

The utility’s average rate is 20.06 cents per kilowatt hour, compared with an average 16.06 cents statewide and 10.48 cents nationally.

But interestingly, those higher rates are offset by California’s higher efficiency. The state’s average monthly consumption is about 300 kilowatt hours less than the U.S. average, with California’s average monthly electricity bill at $101.49 compared to $111.67 nationwide.

Hmmm... If average California monthly bill is $101.49 at $0.1606 per kWh, then that's 101.49/0.1606 = 632 kWh. So national average consumption is 632 + 300 = 932 kWh. National cost is $0.1048 per kWh, so that should come to 932 * $0.1048 = $97.66. The article says the cost is $111.67. Ooops.

Then there's this:

California’s average monthly electricity bill at $101.49 compared to $111.67 nationwide. The average residential PG&E customer pays $113.64 a month for electricity

Oops.

20 cents per KWh? And this at a time when solar is delivering 4 cents per KWh?

Yah, if you can afford solar it is the way to go. It can even work out well with a lease for some people.

Quigley says

20 cents per KWh? And this at a time when solar is delivering 4 cents per KWh?

Yah, if you can afford solar it is the way to go. It can even work out well with a lease for some people.

Some of the same problems that make electricity expensive in silicon valley also make installation of solar panels expensive in silicon valley. This is especially true for people who don't use much electricity. I average about 8 kWh / day, so can't (yet) overcome the fixed cost part of solar. As electrical costs rise and solar costs fall, though, there will probably come a point when it makes sense.

When I recognize the solar power sales people walking toward me at the Home Depo, I stop them cold in their tracks before even open their mouths by saying: My monthly bill is only $40.

That said, I have a solar-power clothes dryer. It only cost $5 and works great. Also gives the clothes a sanitizing dose of ultraviolet radiation!

Quigley says

solar is delivering 4 cents per KWh

How did you arrive at this number?

https://www.solarpowerworldonline.com/2018/01/solar-pv-costs-expected-cut-half-2020/