[RE-wrenches] Battery backup under attack in CA
Ray Walters
ray at solarray.com
Thu Aug 8 15:18:15 PDT 2013
Just to add to the discussion: Maui Electric (MECO) has had the same
policy of denying all battery based systems. My understanding is they
won't even allow simple battery backup systems (no grid tie, so sell back).
PNM (in Alan's backyard) used to require a very expensive and
unnecessary load break rated transfer switch for battery backup systems:-(
This issue is important to all of us, as regular grid tie goes more
towards big lease outfits like Solar City, et al. these more
complicated backup systems could be the smaller installers' bread and
butter. It also has the capability in the future of further stabilizing
the grid. Being able to sell from the battery during potential brown
outs with the utility's consent might actually give the utilities more
incentive to allow these systems.
With talk of even electric vehicles being able to sell back some of
their stored energy at peak times, I think the potential to further
stabilize the grid is there, but of course the old school guard is wary
of anything that might loosen their monopolies.
R.Ray Walters
CTO, Solarray, Inc
Nabcep Certified PV Installer,
Licensed Master Electrician
Solar Design Engineer
303 505-8760
On 8/8/2013 3:50 PM, Allan Sindelar wrote:
> Phil and Wrenches,
> I agree that SCE's position is not suppportable. SCE has a long
> history of obstructing PV while professing to support it; that's my
> opinion based on following online PV newsletters and Wrenches posts
> over the years. If SCE gets away with this, other utilities are likely
> to follow. I don't know what action if any we should take, as we're
> not in California. Should installers outside of California weigh in on
> this? If so, how?
>
> I am also of the opinion that utilities in general are gathering
> resources to fight back against this disruptive technology - PV, not
> batteries - that will fundamentally alter their
> regulated-monopoly-with-guaranteed-rate-of-return business structure.
> New Mexico is no exception, as we have already seen on multiple occasions.
>
> Simple reality: buying power at nighttime off peak rates to charge
> batteries in order to sell power back at peak day rates is not cost
> effective when the amortized cost of battery replacement due to heavy
> cycling is factored in. So independent of the legality of SCE's
> position, it simply doesn't make financial sense.
> Allan
>
> *Allan Sindelar*
> _Allan at positiveenergysolar.com_ <mailto:Allan at positiveenergysolar.com>
> NABCEP Certified PV Installation Professional
> NABCEP Certified Technical Sales Professional
> New Mexico EE98J Journeyman Electrician
> Founder and Chief Technology Officer
> *Positive Energy, Inc.*, a Certified B Corporation^TM
> 3209 Richards Lane
> Santa Fe, New Mexico 87507
> *505 424-1112 office 780-2738 cell*
> _www.positiveenergysolar.com_ <http://www.positiveenergysolar.com/>
>
> On 8/8/2013 3:02 PM, Phil Undercuffler wrote:
>> Wrenches,
>>
>> Unfortunately, this is affecting all battery-based systems -- it's
>> not limited to OutBack.
>>
>> SCE recently issued an External Memorandum stating their position.
>> I've read the memorandum, but I've also read SCE's Rule 21 and their
>> NEM tariff, and the utility's position is not supported by their own
>> rules. These systems fully meet the requirements of the SCE Rule 21
>> and NEM Tariff. The new RPS Guidebook, which the SCE NEM Tariff uses
>> to define permissible systems, allows for two classes of energy
>> storage -- Integrated, and Directly Connected. With Directly
>> Connected energy storage, the system can be charged by any number of
>> sources. The customer is allowed to have onsite loads. Maintaining
>> a battery is an onsite load. The only energy exported is from the
>> renewable source, the PV array.
>>
>> SCE's position that the battery can never charge from the grid is
>> simply not supported by their own rules, However, their current
>> position has put a substantial barrier in place to homeowners that
>> desire grid-tie with battery backup, and to businesses like your own
>> that support this market. We need to push back against this
>> position, and help people move forward with their renewable energy
>> systems.
>>
>> I would ask any of you affected by this issue to press the CPUC to
>> give SCE and the other utilities clear and specific guidance on this
>> issue as soon as possible. Explain how this current impasse affects
>> your business and your customers. Telephone: 866-849-8390
>> <tel:866-849-8390> or 415-703-2074 <tel:415-703-2074> Email:
>> public.advisor at cpuc.ca.gov
>> <mailto:public.advisor at cpuc.ca.gov>. Better yet, file a complaint
>> with the CPUC, either as an informal complaint or as a formal
>> complaint. Formal complaints carry far more weight, but take more
>> work. More info on the process is available at
>> http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/aboutus/Divisions/CSID/Public+Advisor/
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>> Philip Undercuffler
>> Director, Product Management and Strategy
>> OutBack Power Technologies
>> 17825 59th Ave NE, Suite B, Arlington, WA 98223
>> 360.618.4306 <tel:360.618.4306> office | 425.319.2821
>> <tel:425.319.2821> mobile
>> www.outbackpower.com <http://www.outbackpower.com>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 7:45 AM, August Goers <august at luminalt.com
>> <mailto:august at luminalt.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Wrenches,
>>
>> I bumped into this article about an Outback battery backup system
>> being rejected by a utility in Southern CA:
>>
>> http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2013/08/solar-battery-backup-under-attack-in-california?cmpid=SolarNL-2013-08-08
>>
>> It sounds like the utility is rejecting the system because the
>> batteries have the capability of feeding back to the grid. I'm
>> not familiar enough with the Outback system to know how this
>> would work. We are installing a pretty good amount of Sunny
>> Island based battery backups these days but they don't have the
>> capability of sending battery power to the grid.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> -August
>>
>> *August Goers*
>>
>> Luminalt Energy Corporation
>>
>> o: 415.641.4000 <tel:415.641.4000>
>>
>> m: 415.559.1525 <tel:415.559.1525>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> List sponsored by Home Power magazine
>>
>> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>> <mailto:RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org>
>>
>> Change email address & settings:
>> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>
>> List-Archive:
>> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>
>> List rules & etiquette:
>> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>> <http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm>
>>
>> Check out participant bios:
>> www.members.re-wrenches.org <http://www.members.re-wrenches.org>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> List sponsored by Home Power magazine
>>
>> List Address:RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>>
>> Change email address & settings:
>> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>
>> List-Archive:http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>
>> List rules & etiquette:
>> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>>
>> Check out participant bios:
>> www.members.re-wrenches.org
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List sponsored by Home Power magazine
>
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>
> Change email address & settings:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
> List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
> List rules & etiquette:
> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>
> Check out participant bios:
> www.members.re-wrenches.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20130808/05c39d2f/attachment-0003.html>
More information about the RE-wrenches
mailing list