3 ms·

I heard that they are trying to restructure the billing in this way for next fiscal year (July 2026- ), but its really difficult to find a non-regressive scheme

I heard that they are trying to restructure the billing in this way for next fiscal year (July 2026- ), but its really difficult to find a non-regressive scheme. Electricity per-unit prices in Pakistan are set by the government, they vary depending on how much you consume [1], and they play a pretty significant role in government popularity. [1] There is a price for the first 50 units you consume, then a higher price for the next 150 units, etc. Similar system to income taxes.

namibj 11mo ago
Grids in Germany if you're not a "typical household/office" with therefore atypical grid usage bill for peak power and energy separately; the billing related peak power is measured by averaging power over 15 minute chunks, and taking the worst one of a year. Alternatively it's also practical for such solar situations to bill for market rate price of the energy in each 15 minute chunk separately; this doesn't correctly attribute transformer and other transmission equipment expenses between solar houses and non-solar houses, but it's still handling the grid tie solar load on the grid's power plants during periods of very little sun.
- andyferris 11mo ago
  > averaging power over 15 minute chunks, and taking the worst one of a year. What an interesting metric. Wouldn't even a very cheap and small battery (definitely small enough to keep inside an appartment) provide enough smoothing to, like, halve this peak number? You could rig it to not even output energy until you are beyond the current year's peak usage... How much money would you save this way? I just feel this number is so prone to small mistakes (grandma plugs in the wrong things at the wrong times) and hacks (like the above) that the relationship between users' reward/punishment and the grid's health seems wildly disproportionate. > market rate price of the energy in each 15 minute chunk separately I am currently on a plan with 5 minute market rates, can buy and sell in (sell prices can go negative - as can buy, actually), all automated. At least I feel we am working with the grid, not against it, and we make a small net profit (before depreciation).
  - distances 11mo ago
    > Wouldn't even a very cheap and small battery (definitely small enough to keep inside an appartment) Like namibj mentioned, this does not apply for residential contracts.
    - namibj 11mo ago
      I don't think it's necessarily impossible to get that billing model as a household; it's just not an interesting one to have as it's not competitive for the usage patterns of a household.
  - Tuna-Fish 11mo ago
    > relationship between users' reward/punishment and the grid's health seems wildly disproportionate. It's still much closer to the real costs for the grid operator than $/kWh. The fundamental problem that rooftop solar has revealed is that people think they are paying for the electricity, but they are not. Electricity is dirt cheap. Most of what they are paying for is the maintenance of the grid, and simple usage based billing crushes the system because of freeloader problem once rooftop solar is added. Long term, the likely thing you pay for will be the size of the main fuse that connects you to the grid. Because that's the thing that scales with the costs you impose on the operator.
    - namibj 11mo ago
      Actually the local cost is not the fuse size, but how much smaller the first transformer after you could be if you weren't there. Though it's often more fair to determine such for each user; then take those as a relative scale, then split the transformer's actual TCO by the determined share sizes between the users. Because the first user needs the transformer to it's peak size; the second only by the instantaneous-added peak size, which is lower as they won't use it peak at the same time.
      - chickenbig 11mo ago
        > the first user needs the transformer to it's peak size; the second only by the instantaneous-added peak size Of course, how does the electricity company determine which user was first in this situation. A tariff that depends on the order of connection may not be practical for domestic situations, although it may be OK for very large users, e.g. factories, data-centres. Using fuse size seems a more reasonable and fair proxy for cost, assuming the same load patterns as the rest of the users. Then again, consumers with EVs might argue that their load pattern is different to the average user (e.g. filling up with off-peak electricity). Also consumers with air conditioning might argue for special treatment given their usage correlates with solar output (except where it does not).

namibj 11mo ago

Grids in Germany if you're not a "typical household/office" with therefore atypical grid usage bill for peak power and energy separately; the billing related peak power is measured by averaging power over 15 minute chunks, and taking the worst one of a year. Alternatively it's also practical for such solar situations to bill for market rate price of the energy in each 15 minute chunk separately; this doesn't correctly attribute transformer and other transmission equipment expenses between solar houses and non-solar houses, but it's still handling the grid tie solar load on the grid's power plants during periods of very little sun.

andyferris 11mo ago
> averaging power over 15 minute chunks, and taking the worst one of a year. What an interesting metric. Wouldn't even a very cheap and small battery (definitely small enough to keep inside an appartment) provide enough smoothing to, like, halve this peak number? You could rig it to not even output energy until you are beyond the current year's peak usage... How much money would you save this way? I just feel this number is so prone to small mistakes (grandma plugs in the wrong things at the wrong times) and hacks (like the above) that the relationship between users' reward/punishment and the grid's health seems wildly disproportionate. > market rate price of the energy in each 15 minute chunk separately I am currently on a plan with 5 minute market rates, can buy and sell in (sell prices can go negative - as can buy, actually), all automated. At least I feel we am working with the grid, not against it, and we make a small net profit (before depreciation).
- distances 11mo ago
  > Wouldn't even a very cheap and small battery (definitely small enough to keep inside an appartment) Like namibj mentioned, this does not apply for residential contracts.
  - namibj 11mo ago
    I don't think it's necessarily impossible to get that billing model as a household; it's just not an interesting one to have as it's not competitive for the usage patterns of a household.
- Tuna-Fish 11mo ago
  > relationship between users' reward/punishment and the grid's health seems wildly disproportionate. It's still much closer to the real costs for the grid operator than $/kWh. The fundamental problem that rooftop solar has revealed is that people think they are paying for the electricity, but they are not. Electricity is dirt cheap. Most of what they are paying for is the maintenance of the grid, and simple usage based billing crushes the system because of freeloader problem once rooftop solar is added. Long term, the likely thing you pay for will be the size of the main fuse that connects you to the grid. Because that's the thing that scales with the costs you impose on the operator.
  - namibj 11mo ago
    Actually the local cost is not the fuse size, but how much smaller the first transformer after you could be if you weren't there. Though it's often more fair to determine such for each user; then take those as a relative scale, then split the transformer's actual TCO by the determined share sizes between the users. Because the first user needs the transformer to it's peak size; the second only by the instantaneous-added peak size, which is lower as they won't use it peak at the same time.
    - chickenbig 11mo ago
      > the first user needs the transformer to it's peak size; the second only by the instantaneous-added peak size Of course, how does the electricity company determine which user was first in this situation. A tariff that depends on the order of connection may not be practical for domestic situations, although it may be OK for very large users, e.g. factories, data-centres. Using fuse size seems a more reasonable and fair proxy for cost, assuming the same load patterns as the rest of the users. Then again, consumers with EVs might argue that their load pattern is different to the average user (e.g. filling up with off-peak electricity). Also consumers with air conditioning might argue for special treatment given their usage correlates with solar output (except where it does not).