LADWP [RE-wrenches]

[Joel Davidson]

Hi Graham,

I hope you and other LA contractors can start selling PV in LADWP territory again. Customers are waiting to buy PV.

You are right about LADWP "profits" bolstering the City's General Fund. Each municipal utility (there are over 2000 "munies" see http://www.appanet.org/index.cfm ) Some munies charge just enough to run their generation, transmission, distribution operation. Others use their excess revenue for low-income assistance and other public benefits programs. LADWP uses its excess revenue to buy political power. Other cities with munies that feed into the general fund have more benign relationships. LA government has become dependent on LADWP money so the utility public servant has become the master. When the City tries to change LADWP, the utility bureacratic management and labor union responses by threatening to reduce revenue to the City AND raise the cost of electricity to ratepayers.

Joel Davidson
"Not all change is for the better, but nothing gets better without change."

-----Original Message-----
>From: Graham Owen <graham at solarexpert.com>
>Sent: Jul 31, 2006 10:32 AM
>To: RE-wrenches at topica.com
>Subject: RE: LADWP [RE-wrenches]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>I believe the LADWP incentive works out to about $5 per Watt, which seems
>like a generous contribution to me.  I hope the performance based incentive
>works smoothly, but I have a feeling it will likely be cumbersome at first.
>As one who pays into the incentive pool it makes me feel happy when these
>monies are doled out as effectively as possible.  It has bothered me for
>some time that homeowners who decide to place an array facing east or west,
>typically for aesthetic reasons, would get the same rebate as a more
>effective south facing array, especially when their roof offers these
>options.  I'm glad to see consumers faced with a choice of either a higher
>rebate for a higher performing system, or a lower rebate due to a less than
>optimal installation, now it's their choice.
>
>With a population the size of L.A.'s the annual $15 million in funding will
>likely become oversubscribed in less than 12 months.  I was surprised to see
>this topic posted here, remember when the CEC program stopped a few years
>ago, and suddenly hundreds of contractors redirected their activities into
>the LA market, resulting in a rapid oversubscription of our local program.
>I have a feeling the administration transition in 07, from the CEC to the
>PUC, will result in a hiccup, and eyes will refocus on L.A.
>
>
>I also have a long list of local property owners who want PV, and it would
>be nice to finally be able to tell them that "now is the time to invest", as
>opposed to my typical advice to "wait until the rebate program is fully
>functional".  For the past few years my focus has been on installing solar
>pool heating panels, and life has been good, very good.  My wife thinks I
>would be crazy to immerse myself back into the stressful and uncertain
>business climate that bureaucratic subsidy programs provide.  I don't see it
>as putting my business on welfare, instead helping those who want to self
>generate solar power in a city where electric rates are relatively
>inexpensive, in effect making this little slice of the world a better place.
>
>I think an unusual political dichotomy exists in L.A., the fact that one of
>the largest sources of money flowing into the city's general budget comes
>from LADWP, and if everyone installed PV, the city would be bankrupt.  I've
>heard statements to this effect mention by local politicos, who reason that
>PV really needs to remain a "boutique" industry locally, otherwise a domino
>effect will take place, and DWP will need to raise prices to offset lost
>sales, resulting in easier sales of PV, and then what?  Tax solar power to
>keep the grid connected?  The part that personally amazes me is how these
>typically short sighted politicos jump ahead a few decades to make today's
>decisions.  I have a feeling in reality it boils down to one thing, who is
>sending them the most generous campaign contributions, and it's hardly
>likely it's coming from the solar industry.  Money talks louder than sound
>reasoning, doesn't that suck...
>
>Graham Owen
>GO Solar Company
>
>
>- - - -
>To send a message: RE-wrenches at topica.com
>
>Archive of previous messages: http://lists.topica.com/lists/RE-wrenches/read
>
>List rules & how to change your email address: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/etiquette.php
>
>Check out participant bios: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/
>
>Hosted by Home Power magazine
>
>Moderator: michael.welch at homepower.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


- - - -
To send a message: RE-wrenches at topica.com

Archive of previous messages: http://lists.topica.com/lists/RE-wrenches/read

List rules & how to change your email address: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/etiquette.php

Check out participant bios: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/

Hosted by Home Power magazine

Moderator: michael.welch at homepower.com
--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: michael.welch at homepower.com

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bz8Qcs.bz9JC9.bWljaGFl
Or send an email to: RE-wrenches-unsubscribe at topica.com

For Topica's complete suite of email marketing solutions visit:
http://www.topica.com/?p=TEXFOOTER
--^----------------------------------------------------------------