Just spent three hours trying to decode Georgia Power's new net metering tariff that goes into effect next month. They've completely restructured how solar credits work and added a bunch of new fees. The worst part is the new 'grid access charge' of $5.85/kW of installed solar capacity per month. For a typical 10kW residential system, that's almost $60/month before you generate a single kWh. Has anyone else worked through the math on this? I'm trying to figure out if any of my solar customers will still see positive returns.
Georgia Power's new net metering rules - what a mess
Greg, I've been fighting this for months through the PSC proceedings. The $5.85/kW charge is supposed to recover 'grid integration costs' but there's no real justification for the amount. They also changed the credit rate from retail to avoided cost, which cuts the value by about 40%. Existing customers are grandfathered for 10 years, but new installs are basically killed.
This is exactly what we predicted when Georgia Power started pushing back against solar. They can't legally ban net metering, so they're making it economically unviable. The grid access charge alone eliminates most of the financial benefits. I've got clients asking if they should rush to install before September 1st to get grandfathered under the old rules.
Derek makes a good point about the deadline rush. Here in Ohio, FirstEnergy tried similar tactics but the PUCO shot them down. The key was showing that the proposed charges exceeded actual costs. Has anyone done a cost-benefit analysis of Georgia Power's grid integration claims? $5.85/kW per month seems excessive compared to other states.
Frank, I've been trying to get the backup data from Georgia Power through discovery requests. They claim it covers system upgrades, voltage regulation, and administrative costs. But when you break it down, it's about $70/kW annually, which is way higher than actual integration costs in other territories. The real issue is they're using this to cross-subsidize other programs.
Down here in Texas, we don't have net metering per se, but CenterPoint has been adding similar charges for distributed generation interconnections. They call it a 'meter upgrade fee' but it's really just a way to discourage solar. Greg, have you calculated the new payback period for typical residential solar under Georgia Power's new rules?
Vivian, the payback period has gone from about 8-10 years to 15-20 years, assuming you can even break even. The combination of the monthly grid access charge and reduced credit rates kills most projects. A 10kW system that used to save $1,200/year might only save $400/year now. It's particularly bad for smaller systems where the fixed charges are a bigger percentage of total savings.
This is part of a broader pattern. LG&E here in Kentucky hasn't implemented charges this severe, but they've been steadily reducing net metering credits and adding interconnection fees. The utilities see distributed generation as a threat to their business model, so they're using regulatory proceedings to protect their revenue streams. Greg, are any solar companies challenging this through the courts?
Jack, there are a couple of lawsuits pending, but they'll take years to resolve. The solar installers are basically pulling out of Georgia except for very large commercial projects where the economics still work. The residential market is essentially dead. It's frustrating because this stuff makes our jobs so much harder - customers don't understand why their solar savings disappeared overnight.
Greg, I feel your pain. KU tried something similar here in Kentucky but the AG's office pushed back hard. The key was showing that the charges weren't cost-based. You might want to coordinate with the Sierra Club or Vote Solar - they've been effective at challenging these kinds of punitive net metering changes in other states.
Mike S. is right about the environmental groups. They have more resources for extended legal challenges than individual customers or small solar companies. The problem is Georgia Power has deep pockets and political connections. This is really about protecting their monopoly position, not recovering actual costs.
This Georgia Power situation is a textbook example of how utilities can use rate design to eliminate competition without technically banning it. The $5.85/kW monthly charge is particularly egregious - that's over $700/year for a typical residential system before any energy production. When I see charges that high, I always look for cross-subsidization. Greg, have you tried to track where that revenue is actually being used in their system? Often these charges end up funding unrelated utility programs or general rate base recovery.