[RE-wrenches] mechanical vs. electronic kwh meter

[toddcory at finestplanet.com]

I successfully litigated (with help from the PUC) our local utility company (PP&L) for requiring a $500.00 fee (which violated the CA net metering law) to replace the bi-directional analog meter with a dual register digital one. I had a certification from the analog meter manufacturer stating there was no metering accuracy difference between registering in one direction or the other. 

The litigation forced them to refund the $500.00 fee to those who had previously paid it. I also asked for and received $3500.00 for forcing them to comply with the net metering law.
 
At the end of he day it turned out they were doing this because their billing software was unable to deal with a possible negative read on summer months when selling was greater than buying... sigh.
 
Todd
 
 
 
On Friday, August 12, 2011 6:45am, "Kirk Herander" <kirk at vtsolar.com> said:




Hello,
 
 
 
 
 
I am now in a debate with the metering dept. of a local utility. They don’t want a PV system to be energized and tested until a bidirectional electronic meter is installed. They insist that an old plain Jane mechanical meter can be damaged and is a safety concern if power is pushed through it (its running backwards) to the grid. I have never heard of, witnessed, or been told this by any utility or AHJ inspector until now. Have any of you ever?
 
 
 
 
 
I don’t know the reason for their paranoia. I assume that many utility districts don’t to this day install bidirectional electronic meters. And rely on the original mechanical meter to count backwards reliably and safely.
 
 
 
 
 
Kirk Herander
 
 
VT Solar, LLC
 
 
dba Vermont Solar Engineering
 
 
NABCEPTM Certified installer Charter Member
 
 
NYSERDA-eligible Installer
 
 
VT RE Incentive Program Partner
 
 
 
 
 


Sent from Finest Planet WebMail.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20110812/23412e77/attachment-0003.html>