"Net Billing" in MA

[MikeNovack]

My state of Massachusetts has "net billing", so there is little incentive for batteries EXCEPT for power when the grid is down. That's because in this state people with solar systems can more or less use the grid as a gigantic battery. Sort of, as the accounting is in money as opposed to KWh and there is sometimes a difference in the rates (adjusted every six months). We are allowed to do this up to our annual consumption at the time solar was installed.

Because the best roof location was on our barn-garage rather than the house roof, that's where the panels were installed. But because a neighbor's right of way runs between our house and the barn and because the previous owners were (foolishly) stingy about the buried conduit between house and barn, this added a complication. In other words, the existing wire between house and barn inadequate AND no way to pull a large enough wire through that small diameter pipe. Would need a NEW crossing of the right of way. At the time, the neighbor dying of cancer, so we didn't want to bother him with legal business. So..... that existing connection abandone, the barn rewired to be on its own meter, a different account. It is however possible, with enough nagging of the electric company, to set up a transfer of money between accounts. The added cost of having two accounts is only about $100/year, a tiny fraction of what it would have cost to trench/lay a new larger "pipe".

We are essentially net zero, producing as much as we use, and so pay no electric bills. Annual production (panels no longer new) is still almost 8 MWh/year. LOL, that's easy for me to see as also here in MA we get issued SRECs, one for every MWH, which are bundled and sold to businesses under order to have power they use be local solar << in other words, instead of putting up their own panels >>

[Fintray]

I always thought that net billing would be great to have and not need to use batteries though, like you said they're handy in a power cut.

[Krill]

Net billing is a de facto single rate tariff though. The moment a split tariff exists then arbitrage becomes calculable and batteries can become financially variable and valuable beyond the off grid advantage.

Are there split rate tariffs in MA?

[Stinsy]

Octopus nolonger recommend batteries with their solar installs. Which is a big change from a few years ago when battery-only installs were commonplace.

For reference: in the UK off-peak electric is 7p/kWh and you can get 15p/kWh for your export so us lot charge off peak and discharge back into the grid.

[Krill]

Octopus nolonger recommend batteries with their solar installs. Which is a big change from a few years ago when battery-only installs were commonplace.

For reference: in the UK off-peak electric is 7p/kWh and you can get 15p/kWh for your export so us lot charge off peak and discharge back into the grid.

It's not a surprise that an energy buyer wants to remove a competitor from the field. Batteries provide a cap above which they can't charge the user, so it limits the providers profits, and for Octopus it limits their ability to shape the market to their benefit.

Therefore I would not lend much credence to Octopus on this topic. Batteries all the way IMO.

[John_S]

Octopus nolonger recommend batteries with their solar installs. Which is a big change from a few years ago when battery-only installs were commonplace.

For reference: in the UK off-peak electric is 7p/kWh and you can get 15p/kWh for your export so us lot charge off peak and discharge back into the grid.

The above rates are those of one particular supplier in the UK, Octopus Energy, and only one of their tarriffs, intelligent Octopus Go, and are only available to those with a smart meter and a battery, not hybrid, electric vehicle. Many people are not able to take advantage of them.

I am always surprised that net metering has survived as long as it has in some parts of the world. It subsidises the rich who can afford to install solar. They pay nothing, except perhaps a small daily charge, for the security of an always available grid connection, which, in realality, they are only likely to use in times of high demand and thus adding to the pressure on the grid. Perhaps it is because they have the loudest lobbying voices and least regard for the poor.

[Stinsy]

Octopus nolonger recommend batteries with their solar installs. Which is a big change from a few years ago when battery-only installs were commonplace.

For reference: in the UK off-peak electric is 7p/kWh and you can get 15p/kWh for your export so us lot charge off peak and discharge back into the grid.

The above rates are those of one particular supplier in the UK, Octopus Energy, and only one of their tarriffs, intelligent Octopus Go, and are only available to those with a smart meter and a battery, not hybrid, electric vehicle. Many people are not able to take advantage of them.

I am always surprised that net metering has survived as long as it has in some parts of the world. It subsidises the rich who can afford to install solar. They pay nothing, except perhaps a small daily charge, for the security of an always available grid connection, which, in realality, they are only likely to use in times of high demand and thus adding to the pressure on the grid. Perhaps it is because they have the loudest lobbying voices and least regard for the poor.

I completely and wholeheartedly disagree with your entire premise.

Those who chose to invest in solar rather than spend their money on useless consumer goods, such as the latest iPhone or branded clothing, benefit from lower bills. Some people on this forum have negative bills. We’ve discussed “delayed gratification” on here before. Very few people are genuinely destitute. Most people can afford to make small changes that will save them money over the long term. They just chose not to.

You do nothing for people by pretending they’re helpless.

[Krill]

Octopus nolonger recommend batteries with their solar installs. Which is a big change from a few years ago when battery-only installs were commonplace.

For reference: in the UK off-peak electric is 7p/kWh and you can get 15p/kWh for your export so us lot charge off peak and discharge back into the grid.

The above rates are those of one particular supplier in the UK, Octopus Energy, and only one of their tarriffs, intelligent Octopus Go, and are only available to those with a smart meter and a battery, not hybrid, electric vehicle. Many people are not able to take advantage of them.

I am always surprised that net metering has survived as long as it has in some parts of the world. It subsidises the rich who can afford to install solar. They pay nothing, except perhaps a small daily charge, for the security of an always available grid connection, which, in realality, they are only likely to use in times of high demand and thus adding to the pressure on the grid. Perhaps it is because they have the loudest lobbying voices and least regard for the poor.

I completely and wholeheartedly disagree with your entire premise.

Those who chose to invest in solar rather than spend their money on useless consumer goods, such as the latest iPhone or branded clothing, benefit from lower bills. Some people on this forum have negative bills. We’ve discussed “delayed gratification” on here before. Very few people are genuinely destitute. Most people can afford to make small changes that will save them money over the long term. They just chose not to.

You do nothing for people by pretending they’re helpless.

This viewpoint cannot be a fair representation for the cohort of renters who are not allowed to invest in (household) solar.

[Joeboy]

The above rates are those of one particular supplier in the UK, Octopus Energy, and only one of their tarriffs, intelligent Octopus Go, and are only available to those with a smart meter and a battery, not hybrid, electric vehicle. Many people are not able to take advantage of them.

I am always surprised that net metering has survived as long as it has in some parts of the world. It subsidises the rich who can afford to install solar. They pay nothing, except perhaps a small daily charge, for the security of an always available grid connection, which, in realality, they are only likely to use in times of high demand and thus adding to the pressure on the grid. Perhaps it is because they have the loudest lobbying voices and least regard for the poor.

I completely and wholeheartedly disagree with your entire premise.

Those who chose to invest in solar rather than spend their money on useless consumer goods, such as the latest iPhone or branded clothing, benefit from lower bills. Some people on this forum have negative bills. We’ve discussed “delayed gratification” on here before. Very few people are genuinely destitute. Most people can afford to make small changes that will save them money over the long term. They just chose not to.

You do nothing for people by pretending they’re helpless.

This viewpoint cannot be a fair representation for the cohort of renters who are not allowed to invest in (household) solar.

Transportable Balcony solar is an option there.