No need to worry. You just try going without using any grid electricity at all
and then look at your bill. You still will be charged an appreciable sum each
month. Easily this is an adequate infrastructure maintenance share.
I do not have solar cells, but if those who do are to be charged a fee, then
those of us who don't use solar should also be charged a fee because we
pollute and squander energy resources excessively. Fair is fair.
This argument works, if they get paid for the electricity that they put back
into the system.Do they?If not, then this argument is
So, David, would you also complain about those folks who reduce their power
usage through installing insulation, replacing the electric stove and water
heater with gas appliances, upgrading electric appliances to EnergyStar rated
appliances, replacing incandescent bulbs with LED bulbs, or who otherwise
conserve electric energy? Should they also be surcharged because they draw less
from the grid but are still connected to it? Why should solar users be singled
out for the surcharge?RMP's proposal is discriminatory, and
reveals its fear of and attempt to suppress competition from solar customers, as
well as its allegiance to the coal industry, ALEC, and the Koch brothers.
Has Peter North seen what the valley looks like most of the year? Does he have
children with respiratory illness? Do his eyes burn during November to May
because the inversion is so strong?I don't care how justified
he thinks RMP is to charge those rich "greenies." RMP should not be
punishing those who are doing us all a favor by going green. Apparently North doesn't care at all about our health. He wants to hurt
the greenies so that he can continue to use dirty fuel.
I moved into an old house, and have cut my power consumption by 30%-40%, by
insulating the attic, walls and crawlspace, replacing all of the ancient
appliance with brand new high efficiency appliances, all my light bulbs are LED,
and replacing the electric water heater with a natural gas water heater. Should
RMP be able to charge me a surcharge for being more energy efficient?
Somebody has been listening to too much Koch propaganda.
This is nothing more than the Koch bros legislating via Americans for Prosperity
and ALEC their own personal agenda.In Kansas, they have already
unsuccessfully attempted to overturn a mandate that required 20 percent of the
state's energy come from renewable resources. In fact, Barry
Goldwater Jr., a Republican Party stalwart said, "These solar companies are
becoming popular, and utilities don't like competition," Goldwater
said. "I believe people ought to have a choice." RMP
doesn't want competition. They don't like people using solar. Solar
panel users have rattled the cage.
Renewable electricity is most available during the day. That is when peak hours
are. Did you know that Germany produces 5 times more solar energy
than the USA? How can we be satisfied with this? How is Germany and China
outproducing us in solar energy? Unacceptable!Now, to clear up the
muck that I've read recently:Did you know that RMP doesn't
allow solar users to sell their energy back?Did you know that all of
RMP's directors earn $300k+? Pacificorp, the company that owns RMP, is a
Fortune 500 company. And yet, they want to cry the blues about money? Oh please!
Adapt or go extinct!RMP should be thanking users for going solar. If
they were a smart business, they'd take advantage of the newly liberated
resources and expand! Why punish solar users?Did you know this would
be their 3rd increase in 2 years? I thought tax increases were bad? How
isn't this a tax increase?Due to the inversions we typically
get, RMP should be encouraging not discouraging solar energy. Perhaps it's
the competition they're afraid of? I thought repubs liked competition?
Neither the letter nor the comments tell me what the actual situation is. I
don't live in Utah and so I don't know the circumstances but…If the power company has a basic connection fee - a fee they charge each
month for those who are connected to their service - and if a home is connected
to that service, then they should pay the fee, no matter how much service they
use. The service is there and is available if, and or when they need it.If the home is connected but also uses solar cells to supplement their
power usage, and they are charged a separate fee, on top of what others who
don't' have solar cells are charged, then that is nonsense and
unfair.And of course, if a home is not connected to the system and
does not use any energy from the power grid, then they should not be getting a
power bill of any kind.So just what is the situation in Utah? Can
one of the commenters explain?
Folks like North are using divisive Koch bros inspired rhetoric to hurt
Americans.If North feels like he's being taken advantage of
then perhaps he should join the rest of us in the 21st century and get solar
panels? Have you seen the winter times here? Have you looked into
the eyes of a child born with respiratory illness due to the nation's worst
air quality? And yet, you want to punish those who are acting responsibly? For most of our country's existence, we've had a sense of
freedom together with a sense of responsibility.Unfortunately, since 1980,
I've seen a surge in selfishness and instant gratification. Immorality
abounds! Now, it's good to lie on your tax payers and claim
that your company isn't based here in the United States.Now,
it's okay for millionaires to pay lower rates than a single mom with kids.
Now, it's perfectly fine to shut down the government and hurt our
armed forces and retired people to throw a temper a tantrum.Now, RMP
and cohorts like North, want to hurt those who have merely tried to help clean
our environment. Is this moral?
@ ECR"So just what is the situation in Utah? Can one of the
commenters explain?"All are charged about $5 dollars per month
for their hookups. And that was fine... Up until this year.RMP is
now proposing an increase of $10 dollars on solar panel users and only solar
panel users. Those without solar panels would not be effected. It's clearly motivated to discourage those who might be thinking about
dropping RMP and going green. If they go green then they pay less for RMP's
dirty energy. RMP is controlled by the Koch bros. The Koch bros are
trying to pass similar increases in states all around the west. California,
Wyoming, Arizona, and Kansas have experienced similar attacks. If you google
this you'll see countless articles from Forbes to the LA Times exposing
@Curmudgeon – “Why should solar users be singled out for the
surcharge?”And the answer is – solar is competition and
businesses hate competition. Further, RMP is a natural monopoly and barring any
regulation to stop them, they can do whatever they want. @The Real
Maverick – “RMP is controlled by the Koch bros.”Add to the mix this little nugget and the problem becomes infinitely worse. It
used to be that anyone with half a brain recognized the deleterious effects of
monopolies, but today we have large segments of the country who have been
brainwashed into believing the opposite.The oligarchs and
monopolists have never had it so good…
Maverick,I recently read an article on yahoo talking about Germany and
their solar energy. Their system is so unreliable they have to supplement it
from traditional fossil fuel burning supplies, and have to pay up to 400% the
normal wholesale market price for the power. You cannot yet hold Germany up as
a shining example of solar energy.And you talk of divisive Koch bros
inspired rhetoric? I guess you’ve never listened to your hero BO and
harry reid and all their divisive rhetoric. And their actions and legislation
have hurt Amricans.
Does the water company charge a fee, just to be "connected"?Does
the gas company charge a fee, just to be "connected"?orDo
they just charge by useage?Since when did Rocky Mountain Power get
to dictate and change the rules on how Public Utilities are being charged?ANDIf being connected is a real cost, Then EVERYONE
connected needs to be charged.
@ LostMitch McConnell declared that his job was to make Obama a
one-term President.Boehner has launched a lawsuit against the President.
When has this ever worked? Remember Newt?Republicans act like their
victims of unprecedented attacks from the left when exactly the opposite is
true. Until Romney is questioned about his birth certificate, the right has no
room to complain.
@Tyler D"RMP is a natural monopoly and barring any regulation to stop
them, they can do whatever they want."Actually, RMP is a
regulated monopoly; it cannot do whatever it wants, because it has to obtain
approval from the public utilities commission in each state where it operates
(which is why it is petitioning the Utah Public Service Commission for
permission to impose the solar surcharge). It also has to comply with federal
regulations. If it ever was a natural monopoly (which I doubt), it is fast
becoming subject to competition from other sources of power controlled by third
parties, including but not limited to solar power. Interestingly, RMP is
experiencing something similar to what happened to the Bell telephone system 30
years ago, which also was once a regulated monopoly until MCI started its own
long distance network.
Wow there are a lot of really obnoxious posts today!Lds liberal hit
the nail on the head. If there's a charge to be connected, then everyone
should have to pay.Instead, it seems like RMP is creating out of
their rear new ways to charge people... And not just anyone, solar panel
users.Why?Well... Isn't it obvious? They don't
want the competition. It will be interesting to see how our legislature deals
with this. Aren't they supposed to approve or disapprove all rate
increases? Will they continue as business as usual or in light of recent
scandals be more sensitive to being so openly biased and bought off?
Solar power is a GOOD thing. We want ALL people to go to solar power...
Right?So... what if everybody DID go to solar power... Who would
pay for the guys who construct the towers or tunnels and wires that come to each
house? Who pays for the guys who dig up the roads each summer to fix stuff, and
the guys who come out in the middle of the night when a snow storm tears the
wires down? Who pays for the transformer stations and their maintenance. Who
pays for the people to monitor the system and to maintain it... so we know it
will work when we need it?Nobody??===================Should we all have to pay for our own? Each person runs their own wire
from Flaming Gorge to their house? And each person maintains it (because RMP is
not around anymore)...===================If we are going
to encourage EVERYBODY to get solar power... we need to find a way to pay for
the infrastructure that backs in up... Right???What GOOD does
putting RMP out of business to for ANYBODY?
@Curmudgeon – “Actually, RMP is a regulated
monopoly…” Yes, and what does it tell you (in terms of
who is in whose pocket) that the utilities commission is allowing them to charge
this fee.LDS Liberal got it exactly right – anyone connected
should be charged a connection fee. And your understanding of
monopolies is a bit flawed – utilities are regulated precisely BECAUSE
they are natural monopolies. And there is no other way to connect to the power
grid except through your local power company, so your analogy to telecomm is off
base. @lost in DC – “And you talk of divisive Koch
bros inspired rhetoric? I guess you’ve never listened to your hero BO and
harry reid and all their divisive rhetoric.”When I was around
9 yo I threw a rock and broke a window. When my Dad asked me about it the only
response I gave was that my brother threw a rock too. When I asked him later why
I was grounded for longer than normal he said it was because rather than taking
responsibility for my own actions, I tried to deflect blame.
@Maverick,Where did you get your factoid that Germany produces 5
times more solar energy than the USA? Sources please....If you
Google "Where does Germany get their electricity"...Wikipedia"Germany is one of the largest consumers of energy in the
world. In 2009, it consumed energy from the following sources:Oil
34.6%Bituminous coal 11.1%Lignite 11.4%Natural gas 21.7%Nuclear power 11.0%Hydro- and wind power 1.5%OthersRenewable
energy is more present in the domestically produced energy, since Germany
imports about two-thirds of its energy. This however is offset by exports of
energy.Germany is the fifth-largest consumer of oil in the world.
Russia, Norway, and the United Kingdom are the largest exporters of oil to
Germany, in that order. Germany is the third-largest consumer of natural gas in
the world.Because of its rich coal deposits it has a long tradition
of fuelling its economy with coal. Germany is still is the fourth-largest
consumer of coal in the world.
FF41Mitch McConnell was just doing what he thought was best for the
country – too bad he failed.I think you are premature in
saying the lawsuit has been launched.“Republicans act like
their victims of unprecedented attacks from the left”I do not
understand what you are saying. Do you mean “they’re” instead
of “their”?How do you console a grammar fanatic? You
pat him on the back and say “their, there, they’re”Actually the attacks from the left are not unprecedented, just continuing.And yeah, I remember Newt – slick willy actually worked with Newt
to reduce the deficit (once he wetted his finger and held it into the political
winds to see that is what people really wanted. As opposed to BO, who started
his misadministration by declaring the GOP was welcome to come along, but
they’d have to ride in the back of the bus.Tyler DYour
point?BO and harry were spewing divisiveness LOOOONNNNGGGGG before
the Kochs came along. So by your analogy, BO and harry should be punished much
more severely than the Kochs.
Tnanks for the explanation Maverick. Sounds like RMP is gouging in an effort to
discourage the use of solar energy. What a shame.
2 Bits:Nice straw man argument. Nobody thinks private solar power
will replace RMP any time soon. As long as RMP maintains a grid and people
connect to it, then the costs of maintaining the grid will have to be borne by
the customers. The issue here is, why should customers who use solar power have
to bear a proportionately larger share of maintaining the grid than the
customers who are energy wasters, or the customers who practice energy
efficiency through other means? Why shouldn't the cost of grid maintenance
be shared equally among all subscribers?
Isn't this a bit like the Garbage company charging those who recycle a fee,
because they provide a service and drive their trucks through your
neighborhood and past your house even if you don't have any garbage put
out?BTW, When I built my house -- "I" had to pay for
the powerline and hook-up.Why to I have to pay a monthly fee in
addition to something I've already paid cash-on-the-barrelhead for?
Tyler D:It would help if you got up to speed on the facts. The Utah
Public Service Commission has not yet ruled on whether the solar surcharge will
be allowed. That is why there is still a vigorous debate going on. But being
from Idaho, maybe you were not aware of that.As to natural
monopolies, what if I install solar panels that produce twice the power I need,
and run a line from my panels to my neighbor's house, and he pays me at
half the rate RMP would charge for the same power? Where is RMP's
"natural" monopoly there? Same principle as micro-hydro power.
Everyone who uses the utilities for power pays their share of
"infrastructure costs based upon their actual usage. Why should there be a
special fee for those that use less because they are using solar power. The
writers argument does not seem to make much sense.
@Curmudgeon – “Where is RMP's "natural" monopoly
there?”Sure, and when this starts happening on a significant
scale (is it… where?) their monopolistic pricing power will decline
accordingly.And given the rate of scientific advance on individual
(and portable) power generation, we should expect this to be the case a few
decades from now… hopefully sooner. Of course oligarchs like the Koch
brothers will no doubt attempt to “buy” portions of the atmosphere
in order to charge us all for the privilege of getting sunshine.I
guess the upside of their “owning the atmosphere” would be we can
sue them to clean up the excess carbon, and adding staggering punitive damages
(given their role in causing the problem) would make that all the more
satisfying. @lost in DC – “Tyler D Your
point?”Nevermind… it seems to have been lost on
To "cjb" the issue is not that the people have solar panels. I could
install enough solar panels to power my house through the day and I
wouldn't have to pay RMP anything more than the power that I do use that
comes from them.The fee is for the RMP "Net Metering"
program, which buys power from residents with solar or wind generators. RMP has
to buy power from residents for the same price that they sell it to residents.
Is it fair that RMP has to maintain power lines and buy power from people who
don't contribute anything towards the infrastructure?To
"LDS Liberal" are you and your ilk going to get it through your heads.
This is not a connection fee, but is a fee charged by RMP to sell your excess
electricity? If you don't want to sell, then you don't pay the fee.
Think of eBay, but for electrons.To "The Real Maverick" that
is a lie RMP is not owned by the Koch brothers. It is owned by George Soros.
That's right, your favorite liberal billionaire.
Germany produces 6.5 times more solar energy than the United States. They now
get 26 percent of their energy from renewable resources. Compare that to just 13
percent here in the United States (2 percent comes from solar). You can get
these numbers from the eia website. Just Google it. These reports aren't
that difficult to find. Unless all you do is read Heritage and Cato nonsense.
The other complains I hear a lot are about solar energy competing
with coal. So? What's wrong with that? Competition is good, unless
you're a monopoly and are afraid of what competition might do to your
profits. Last I checked, we lived in a capitalist society. What's wrong with a little bit of competition? If RMP can't handle
it then maybe it's time for another more innovative and sleeker company to
take its place. Everyone else has felt the changing economy. Why shouldn't
they have to change?
@Mike in Texas,If you are a really good solar power dude... you
would use no power from RMP, so you would pay zero dollars to RMP. But you
still use their infrastructure. And you want RMP there (as a backup).Now.. if enough people got good at it like you... what would happen to
municipal power?You guessed it... it would fall into disrepair and
not be reliable (like some places in Africa and Iraq during the war, and other
countries that neglected their power infrastructure for various reasons).==============It's ironic that the two sides have
completely traded places on this topic... The Right is pushing for
collective social responsibility, to keep municipal systems funded and viable...
while the solar fans (usually on the left) want the government out of their
business, and and say, "leave me alone I'll do it myself"... and
"Why do I have to pay for something so YOU can use it" (compare to
welfare, etc)... etc.
To "Henderson" you are wrong. According to various German web sites,
they get 1.5% of their power from renewable sources for a total of about 54 GWH
(according to German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy). The US
gets about 13% of its power from similar sources, for a total of about 527 GWH
(according to the DOE). The US has nearly 10 times the green energy production
that Germany does.Please state your sources since they are in
complete contradiction to the US and German government official figures.
If you have a wire connecting your house to the grid, you should pay. There is
a cost to maintaining that access, and you need to be prepared to share in that
cost. Just like for enterprises, if you need standby power, compute capability,
or data storage - you pay for that capability. Even if you are 100 Percent
self generating - if you are relying on the utility for your backup power - you
need to help pay the cost of keep up that infrastructure.Now the
utilities need to be reasonable here - and not gouge - but please, don't
expect to have access with out paying part of this cost of maintaining that
access.Nothing in life if free - including your connection to the
@ RedshirtHad you actually read my post you'd see one source
cited, eia (energy information agency).However, since you insist on
other sources, I shall happily oblige, The cia website created and
maintained by the United States of America and the iea are sources that I
used.However, for something more simple, I would Google "German
renewable energy." There are articles from Time magazine, the NY Times, Wash
Post, and the Wall Street Journal. Even Forbes magazine (is this a liberal
magazine?) in their article: "How Opposite Energy Policies Turned The
Fukushima Disaster Into A Loss For Japan And A Win For Germany" said:"So why do Germany, with 25% renewable electricity in 2013, and
Denmark, with at least 47%, have Europe’s most reliable electricity, about
ten times more reliable than America’s? These countries, like three others
in Europe (none very rich in hydropower) that used roughly half-renewable
electricity in 2013—Spain 45%, Scotland 46%, Portugal 58%—simply
require fair grid access and competition." They key?
Competition. RMP doesn't want it. But we need it. Do you need more information or are you good for now?
To "Henderson" go back and look at the German Energy Consumption, and
not just the domestic production. Germany produces 1/10th the amount of green
energy that the US does. The US produces about 4 TWH of power, compared to 3.6
TWH that Germany uses. Tell us is 13% of 4 TWH greater or less than 1.5% of 3.6
TWH?If competition is good, then let solar and wind compete with
coal, gas, and nuclear on equal grounds. Get rid of the massive subsidies that
wind and solar receive, make them equal to nuclear. I would guarantee that if
you cut subsidies that wind and solar would die within a year.Why do
we need to go to power generation systems that will either raise our taxes to
subsidize or else are too expensive for the poor to afford? That is what you
get with wind and solar.
Don't any of us remember what our valley is like during the winter
inversions? RMP should be encouraging not punishing solar power
users. And if they're going to charge a new fee it should apply to all not
just to solar users. @ Redshirt I don't think your
argument has a leg to stand on. There's no reason why Germany is
outproducing us so badly. There's just no excuse for it. The future is in
renewables, not dirty filthy energy. Besides, competition is good reddy
you've said it many times. Unfortunately, it seems like competition when it
comes to solar energy is bad. I wish you'd make up your mind and be
I think these people who think they should have to pay NOTHING to use the
municipal power infrastructure (only pay for the energy they use)... should get
what they want. Nothing from the power company. And if they want power when
it's dark, or when it's overcast, they can pay for their own wire to
be stretched from the power source to their home, and pay to maintain it on
their own. And be on their own only paying for the power the company provides
them (but not the infrastructure to deliver it to every home in the State).
Mav, your Koch brothers conspiracy theory just plain cracks me up. You know if
Geneva Steel was still working we could blame this theory on the smog affecting
you. But now we can't do that.Just like the left. Blame
everything on the Koch's. Of course I blame everything the democrats do on
Soros, so we're kind of even.Bottom line, no extra fee.
To "FreedomFighter41" if you want clean energy, why not go nuclear?
Nuclear can supply power 24/7 regardless of the weather conditions. The fuel
can recycled, and it takes up less land than a solar or wind farm. You
don't have the noise pollution that wind power causes, and you don't
destroy animals like you do with solar.Why not go nuclear for clean,
reliable, renewable energy? We have enough fuel rods buried to power the US for
centuries.To "Flashback" worse than just Mav's hatred
of Koch brothers, he doesn't even know that George Soros owns RMP.
@HendersonOrem, UTThey key? Competition. RMP
doesn't want it. But we need it. 1:42 p.m. Aug. 4, 2014------ Great post!BTW -- RedShirt may
"say" he's for Free Markets, Capitalism, less regulation, and
'competition' -- Ya-dah Ya-dah...BUT By his
very own posts, When rubber hits the road, we can all clearly see he
really is NOT.
Curmudgeon is right. Just because you own solar panels and spent thousands of
dollars for self reliance, clean air or energy efficiency or whatever
doesn't mean our bill is zero. There are 1 kilowatt systems and there are
4 or more kilowatt systems, but I would say most owners of solar systems pay a
bill and some a sizeable bill to RMP. Why should solar panel owners be singled
out for a special fee? What about second home owners who don't use much
energy that month, or a particularly efficient energy users? How about small
apartment owners? Its ridiculous that RMP wants to impose this fee, but if
there is a fee for having too small of a bill, everyone should have to pay that
has a "too small bill for RMP" or "not enough money to RMP"
assessment. I'm sure many solar owners already pay RMP plenty.
Re 2 bitsWho would pay? Electricity rates would be raised on
everyone so that the power company would continue to make a fair profit.But people who use solar would not be targeted with extra fees. That
would be stupid.
It is simply amazing how a simple item like charging solar users a fee gets
turned into a political playground. This is a story about Rocky Mtn Power
wanting to charge more for some who connect to the grid but don't use their
services and in fact get paid full retail for power they contribute to the
system, not wholesale that they pay everyone else.Utah's big power
plants in Delta, Vernal and Emery County do not contribute anything to Salt
Lake's winter woes so blame someone else.And to finally set the
record straight, RMP is owned by Berkshire Hathaway, the company controlled by
Warren Buffett. Buffett is the guy that talks about his secretary paying more
in taxes than he does and is willing to pay more. NOT!!Every year RMP
protests their property taxes here in Emery County and every year everybody gets
less money. This is also the very same company that is putting it to the last
union coal mine here in Utah.So the truth is Warren Buffett doesn't
want to pay more taxes and he hates the unions, sounds like a true hero to the
If there is a connection to RMP fee, everyone should have to pay it and then the
rate that everyone pays for electricity needs to come down to compensate. In
that case, RMP should be required to pay the same rate they charge their
customers per Kwh to solar customers who are net positive at the end of the
year. Its only fair. They think somehow charging only solar
customers a fee and come to the size of their fee using the "average"
solar customers bill and how that is reduced. Some people live is studios and
some in mansions. Some people have 1 kw systems and some over 7 kw, so how is
charging the 1 kw customer and the 7 kw customer the same solar penalty fair?If I have a small solar system but my bill is larger than Joe Smo
without a solar system, how am I not being fair to RMP and why should I be
singled out for a fee?
By this logic, then1. Rural customers should be charged more
because the infrastructure costs to deliver electricity to them is significantly
more than in urban centers.2. Customers who use natural gas or
propane for heat over electricity should pay more because such substitutes
reduce power needs.3. Customers who own diesel generators for power
should pay more because they too reduce their power needs.The
solution to this situation is to de-couple infrastructure and power use costs
that Questar Gas instituted years ago. Charge everyone a flat 'connection
fee' for access to the grid and variable fee for the amount of power
actually used by each customer.The reality is that utilities'
business model will change in the future from being "one-way suppliers"
of power to "two-way networks" of power management brokers where
they'll act as "back up batteries" for customers, many of which
will produce their own power or drastically cut their need for it through modern
green/efficient building design. That is, utilities' infrastructure will
be more important than their power production.
"@HendersonOrem, UTThey key? Competition. RMP
doesn't want it. But we need it. "So what you are saying is
rather than having the stable "regulated" energy source you have right
now, you would prefer to have your home energy cost fluctuate like we see in
other energy markets. That your rate for electricity increased 10 to 20 percent
in summer because of increased demand - or perceived shortages? You need to be
really careful about what you ask for. Airlines used to be a
regulated industry. You hardly ever saw carriers fail, and service was far
superior to what we "enjoy" today. Now - in a derogated market, we
have random pricing, carriers perpetually in financial distress, and service
that is marginally better than a UTA bus with wings on it.So when
you ask for a unregulated business model, think really carefully what you might
get as part of the total package. It isn't as clear of a picture as you
To "LDS Liberal" what are you talking about? The way the laws are that
govern power distribution prevent us from having free markets for power. I
would love to see a free market for power. Instead we have a fascist system
where private companies are managed by the government.The net
metering could be a great free market solution if RMP wasn't forced by the
government to buy power from people for the same price that they sell it. Let
RMP buy power from residential power producers at the wholesale rate, then sell
it at the retail rate.Please explain how I don't support free
markets? I love the free market and it could make the power system better if it
was allowed to operate as a free market. Your fascist approach to power is just
now starting to show its ugly face.To "cmsense" it is fair
because everybody who produces power pays the same price regardless of how much
they produce or use. If it makes it easier, think of it as a membership fee for
net metering (sort of like Costco for power sales).
@ Redshirt Why should there be a "membership fee" for
net metering? I'm ok with a "membership fee" if all customers are
that are connected to RMP have to pay the fee. Solar power users spend
thousands of dollars of their own money, not RMP's to set up their systems,
so why should they be penalized or singled out? The vast majority do pay RMP a
significant bill. If I'm 30% self reliant but my bill is still higher than
a lot of people without a solar power system, why do I owe RMP anything more
than non solar customers with lower bills than mine? If you put extra
insulation in your attic, build an energy efficiant home, partially supplement
your heat with a wood burning stove or south facing windows or electric heating
and your gas bill isn't as high as your neighbors, should you be singled
out for an extra fee? People should be applauded for using our natural
resources wisely. If there is a connection to a natural gas fee, everyone needs
to pay it, not just the person who is extra thoughtful. You shouldn't be
penalized for being self reliant.
To "cmsense" the net metering program is a membership in a club that
sells power using the RMP system. Anybody that doesn't want to be part of
the club that sells power on the grid doesn't pay that fee.You
owe RMP more because you cost them more. Yes, by selling power back to the RMP,
it costs them money because they don't make any money off of the power they
buy from you.The bigger question is why should RMP engage in a
business activity that will make them lose money?Net metering
isn't something they started to appease the green power movement. It is
something they started to add more power to the system.
IMO, the real long-term solution is a change to how utilities are metered and
sold. UPSC should solve the problem by adopting rules for all utilities, which
charge independently for the delivery system and the product delivered. This
way, anyone who connects equally shares the costs of the delivery system. Anyone
who consumes the product pays for what they consume. Anyone who provides product
is paid for what they provide. A side benefit would be increased transparency
into what utilities are, and are not, spending to build and maintain the
With due respect to Mr. North, many of the comments are taken from Rocky Mtn
Power's slideshow presentation and doesn't tell the whole story. RMP
is, at the core, a business and local solar power threatens that business.I own a solar system and had it sized to power at least 100% of my
house's needs. Eight of the twelve months during the year, I generated more
power than I use and despite what RMP says, I generate the power when I use it.
Most of the electricity I produce is done on summer afternoons when I am using
my air conditioner. Should I pay for my fair share of the infrastructure? Sure.
But I feel like I am doing that plus some. During the eight months that I
generate a surplus, I still pay a $5 connection charge and a $2 min bill charge,
all the while I am giving RMP electricity. Does there need to be a huge system
to receive my power? No, it goes across the yard to my neighbor's house
where RMP sells it to them.