6 ms·

Their example is California, where electricity prices are about 0.40-0.65/kWh. Sole source advanced cycle natural gas plants are about 0.08/kWh. That's quite

Their example is California, where electricity prices are about 0.40-0.65/kWh. Sole source advanced cycle natural gas plants are about 0.08/kWh. That's quite a lot of cost.

imbusy111 2y ago
60%+ of cost on my bill in northern CA is delivery, not generation. Which is dumb, cause it's a fixed cost charged as variable, but that's a separate discussion.
- pstrateman 2y ago
  The 0.08/kWh includes delivery, it's more like 0.04/kWh without delivery.
  - fyrn_ 2y ago
    Well, that's just not what you are actually charged for delivery in California.
- caf 2y ago
  It's done like that to try and approximately apportion the cost based on each user's use of the infrastructure. The cost is almost entirely driven by peak use though, so what would actually be "fairer" (or at least more cost-reflective) is to charge the transmission cost based on your individual contribution to peak demand on the infrastructure. People kind of hate that though because it's difficult for most consumers to predict or control their contribution to peak demand, and for the same reason it doesn't drive behaviour change / more efficient use of the infrastructure as much as you'd like. In the end it'd probably still be about 60% of your bill anyway.
  - ZeroGravitas 2y ago
    Some industrial users are charged in this way, and that's another driver for battery adoption as you can avoid the peak spikes with batteries locally in the same way the larger grid does.
    - andoma 2y ago
      FWIW where I live in Sweden the delivery is charged based on peak usage also for residential customers. Based on average of top three peak kWh/h in a month.
- hackerlight 2y ago
  Iowa has more renewables as a proportion than CA yet has lower electricity prices than the national average. There are a few examples like this. Raw retail prices are not an accurate reflection of anything. You actually have to do your homework properly.
  - AdamN 2y ago
    Exactly. The price of Coke is based on where you're buying it not on the production cost.
  - pstrateman 2y ago
    Iowa and California are on the same grid. They're both the exact same resource mix because it's the exact same grid. Here's the resource mix https://feature.wecc.org/soti/topic-sections/resources/index.html https://feature.wecc.org/soti/topic-sections/resources/index... The difference in cost is entirely contracting and last mile transmission.
    - hollerith 2y ago
      A quick glance at this next map will show that Iowa is not in WECC (although Idaho is): https://www.wecc.org/_catalogs/masterpage/wecc/Images/WI-Map-260.png https://www.wecc.org/_catalogs/masterpage/wecc/Images/WI-Map... Also, just because 2 states are interconnected doesn't mean that the interconnects have enough capacity for electricity sources to be fungible.
      - pstrateman 2y ago
        You're right they're on the eastern interconnect, which is even larger and harder to reason about. Edit: After the 2003 blackouts the Eastern interconnect got much more... connected https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/UnitedStatesPowerGrid.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/UnitedSt...
tech_ken 2y ago
Seems more like .26-.46/kWh[0] And at a quick glance that seems more likely (to me) to be a response to capital cost spikes after all the wildfires as well as higher labor costs for the state, rather than because they are shifting to batteries[1]. The delivery layer is definitely bloated though, I agree with you there. Personally I think that's a regulatory capture problem. [0]https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices_selectedareas_table.htm https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices... [1]https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices_selectedareas_table.htm https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices...
- hedora 2y ago
  I honestly think PG&E is going to collapse. It’s $0.49 / kWh here, which means our power bill would be $600-1000 per month if we didn’t have solar. Full off the grid with propane backup costs less than $80K. ($20K each for panels, batteries, install and generator — I’m wildly overestimating intentionally). At $600 per month, it takes 11 years for cutting the cord to pay for itself. More realistic estimates lower that to under 5-6 years. Having said that, there are ecological reasons to give them free electricity from our batteries and excess solar. However, that doesn’t change the fact that it’s cheaper to just build your own power plant and not do business with them. Ultimately, someone needs to pay for grid maintenance, and, given the current insane market distortions, there’s hardly any economic incentive for individuals to continue to do so.
  - morsch 2y ago
    2000 kWh per month is crazy. Presumably that includes an electric car? Otherwise I don't even
    - lotsofpulp 2y ago
      Cooling (and heating) a 2.5k+ sq ft home with 10ft+ ceiling and open foyer will get you there easily.
      - 2y ago
epistasis 2y ago
Edit: misread comment, please disregard!
- tech_ken 2y ago
  Seems lower than CA right now: https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices_selectedareas_table.htm https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices... I believe historically that hasn't always been true, but I'd bet that after all the bad press Texas utilities are eager to keep their prices as low as possible. In about 20 years I'm guessing we'll find out if that's because they've been skimming off their capital costs or what
- pstrateman 2y ago
  I didn't say that, it's from batteries and solar and wind. Pretty in Texas is 0.02/kWh right now at wholesale. https://www.ercot.com/content/cdr/contours/rtmLmp.html https://www.ercot.com/content/cdr/contours/rtmLmp.html
mjamesaustin 2y ago
I'm on LADWP and my rate is .19 per kWh, so you're off by 2-3x. Many municipal power companies are even lower. If you're comparing using PG&E rates, I don't think a utility that has to pay off damages from causing one of the largest wildfires in history is a good metric for comparing costs of different sources of electricity.
- saagarjha 2y ago
  I don't think the utility is the one paying off damages here.
  - whimsicalism 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - katbyte 2y ago
      Utility just passes the cost onto the ratepayers
  - spywaregorilla 2y ago
    They're paying significant damages. And it drives them to bankruptcy repeatedly. But at the end of the day there's just one grid.
    - saagarjha 2y ago
      Yes and then they turn around and immediately charge us, so it doesn’t seem like it is doing much.
      - spywaregorilla 2y ago
        There's no "turning around". You're in a place with a problem. The utility is not capable of wishing that away.
megaman821 2y ago
Peaker natural gas plants aren't that cheap. Batteries are competitive with peaker plants.
infecto 2y ago
This article did not touch on it that well I think. Its less about replacing gas plants and more about replacing the peaking plants. I know this is true in Texas at least. A lot of sites are adding battery systems to replace an older peaker. Its very cost effective.

Their example is California, where electricity prices are about 0.40-0.65/kWh. Sole source advanced cycle natural gas plants are about 0.08/kWh. That's quite a lot of cost.

imbusy111 2y ago

60%+ of cost on my bill in northern CA is delivery, not generation. Which is dumb, cause it's a fixed cost charged as variable, but that's a separate discussion.

pstrateman 2y ago
The 0.08/kWh includes delivery, it's more like 0.04/kWh without delivery.
- fyrn_ 2y ago
  Well, that's just not what you are actually charged for delivery in California.
caf 2y ago
It's done like that to try and approximately apportion the cost based on each user's use of the infrastructure. The cost is almost entirely driven by peak use though, so what would actually be "fairer" (or at least more cost-reflective) is to charge the transmission cost based on your individual contribution to peak demand on the infrastructure. People kind of hate that though because it's difficult for most consumers to predict or control their contribution to peak demand, and for the same reason it doesn't drive behaviour change / more efficient use of the infrastructure as much as you'd like. In the end it'd probably still be about 60% of your bill anyway.
- ZeroGravitas 2y ago
  Some industrial users are charged in this way, and that's another driver for battery adoption as you can avoid the peak spikes with batteries locally in the same way the larger grid does.
  - andoma 2y ago
    FWIW where I live in Sweden the delivery is charged based on peak usage also for residential customers. Based on average of top three peak kWh/h in a month.
hackerlight 2y ago
Iowa has more renewables as a proportion than CA yet has lower electricity prices than the national average. There are a few examples like this. Raw retail prices are not an accurate reflection of anything. You actually have to do your homework properly.
- AdamN 2y ago
  Exactly. The price of Coke is based on where you're buying it not on the production cost.
- pstrateman 2y ago
  Iowa and California are on the same grid. They're both the exact same resource mix because it's the exact same grid. Here's the resource mix https://feature.wecc.org/soti/topic-sections/resources/index.html https://feature.wecc.org/soti/topic-sections/resources/index... The difference in cost is entirely contracting and last mile transmission.
  - hollerith 2y ago
    A quick glance at this next map will show that Iowa is not in WECC (although Idaho is): https://www.wecc.org/_catalogs/masterpage/wecc/Images/WI-Map-260.png https://www.wecc.org/_catalogs/masterpage/wecc/Images/WI-Map... Also, just because 2 states are interconnected doesn't mean that the interconnects have enough capacity for electricity sources to be fungible.
    - pstrateman 2y ago
      You're right they're on the eastern interconnect, which is even larger and harder to reason about. Edit: After the 2003 blackouts the Eastern interconnect got much more... connected https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/UnitedStatesPowerGrid.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/UnitedSt...

tech_ken 2y ago

Seems more like .26-.46/kWh[0] And at a quick glance that seems more likely (to me) to be a response to capital cost spikes after all the wildfires as well as higher labor costs for the state, rather than because they are shifting to batteries[1]. The delivery layer is definitely bloated though, I agree with you there. Personally I think that's a regulatory capture problem. [0]https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices_selectedareas_table.htm https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices... [1]https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices_selectedareas_table.htm https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices...

hedora 2y ago
I honestly think PG&E is going to collapse. It’s $0.49 / kWh here, which means our power bill would be $600-1000 per month if we didn’t have solar. Full off the grid with propane backup costs less than $80K. ($20K each for panels, batteries, install and generator — I’m wildly overestimating intentionally). At $600 per month, it takes 11 years for cutting the cord to pay for itself. More realistic estimates lower that to under 5-6 years. Having said that, there are ecological reasons to give them free electricity from our batteries and excess solar. However, that doesn’t change the fact that it’s cheaper to just build your own power plant and not do business with them. Ultimately, someone needs to pay for grid maintenance, and, given the current insane market distortions, there’s hardly any economic incentive for individuals to continue to do so.
- morsch 2y ago
  2000 kWh per month is crazy. Presumably that includes an electric car? Otherwise I don't even
  - lotsofpulp 2y ago
    Cooling (and heating) a 2.5k+ sq ft home with 10ft+ ceiling and open foyer will get you there easily.
    - 2y ago

epistasis 2y ago

Edit: misread comment, please disregard!

tech_ken 2y ago
Seems lower than CA right now: https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices_selectedareas_table.htm https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices... I believe historically that hasn't always been true, but I'd bet that after all the bad press Texas utilities are eager to keep their prices as low as possible. In about 20 years I'm guessing we'll find out if that's because they've been skimming off their capital costs or what
pstrateman 2y ago
I didn't say that, it's from batteries and solar and wind. Pretty in Texas is 0.02/kWh right now at wholesale. https://www.ercot.com/content/cdr/contours/rtmLmp.html https://www.ercot.com/content/cdr/contours/rtmLmp.html

mjamesaustin 2y ago

I'm on LADWP and my rate is .19 per kWh, so you're off by 2-3x. Many municipal power companies are even lower. If you're comparing using PG&E rates, I don't think a utility that has to pay off damages from causing one of the largest wildfires in history is a good metric for comparing costs of different sources of electricity.

saagarjha 2y ago
I don't think the utility is the one paying off damages here.
- whimsicalism 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - katbyte 2y ago
    Utility just passes the cost onto the ratepayers
- spywaregorilla 2y ago
  They're paying significant damages. And it drives them to bankruptcy repeatedly. But at the end of the day there's just one grid.
  - saagarjha 2y ago
    Yes and then they turn around and immediately charge us, so it doesn’t seem like it is doing much.
    - spywaregorilla 2y ago
      There's no "turning around". You're in a place with a problem. The utility is not capable of wishing that away.

megaman821 2y ago

Peaker natural gas plants aren't that cheap. Batteries are competitive with peaker plants.

infecto 2y ago

This article did not touch on it that well I think. Its less about replacing gas plants and more about replacing the peaking plants. I know this is true in Texas at least. A lot of sites are adding battery systems to replace an older peaker. Its very cost effective.