How should net metering affect your electric bill?
This article carries way too much water for PG&amp;E. Sad, but I guess since we&#x27;re gearing up for a net-metering 3.0[1] fight we&#x27;ll see more and more articles like this one.<p>Here&#x27;s the places where I think it misses the mark:<p>* The energy generation costs listed by the author actually includes rooftop solar. PG&amp;E paid exactly $0 for you to spend $30k installing the panels, so that number is low for PG&amp;E for a reason.<p>* PG&amp;E turns around and sells your solar power to people enrolled in &quot;Solar Choice&quot; plans who will pay 50% more for electricity than what PG&amp;E net metered you.<p>* California has a green energy mandate and rooftop solar is one of the ways PG&amp;E can meet the mandate <i>while offloading the entire cost of the system onto the homeowners</i>.<p>* Net metering last for 1 year and after that PG&amp;E &quot;credits&quot; you the wholesale value of your excess electricity, which they value at approximately 1c&#x2F;kWh even though they charged other people $0.40&#x2F;kWh during peak time for that power you exported.<p>* The CA legislator mandated all new homes are installed with solar panels. Kind of makes sense why PG&amp;E was favorable of this bill. PG&amp;E again has offloaded the cost of installing green energy generation on someone else.<p>* The monthly non-bypassable fee that the author describes as &quot;pretty low&quot; is actually closer to $10&#x2F;month and expected to rise with NEM 3.0 to $50 a month or more. Keep in mind that PG&amp;E has 5.5 million customers, so this number is significant.<p>* Grid defection is illegal in most municipalities so even if someone wanted to install a battery and go off-grid they still have to pay the $10 a month non-bypassable PG&amp;E fees.<p>Net Metering 3.0[1] &quot;fixes&quot; the problem the author attempts to describe, but really it&#x27;s a rug-pull on everyone in CA who spent tens of thousands of dollars to install rooftop solar.<p>Customers installing solar panels at their expense is a subsidy FOR PG&amp;E, not the other way around despite what this spin attempts to portray.<p>1. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.solarreviews.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;california-net-metering-changes" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.solarreviews.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;california-net-metering-ch...</a>