Hi Brian26, keep in mind that if you get solar panels, you will still pay the monthly charge even if you get 100% of your electricity each month from solar. Having said that, solar panels at 16-20 cents/kWh is still a pretty good investment.
Electricity Rates
- Thread starter Parallax
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil. -
Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount Use code Hearth2024 Click here
![[Hearth.com] Electricity Rates](https://www.hearth.com/talk/data/attachments/145/145022-13f57782444456694304168b3ec93093.jpg?hash=XNspil2sho "[Hearth.com] Electricity Rates")
Nastay grid emass charges for distrib just short of $.08. most of the difference are in the excess usage. Our last bill was down to one of our lowest kw used @ 485kw.
let us hope for short run cold snaps this year. rumblings from one power supplier already? http://news.yahoo.com/biggest-u-pow...408.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory&soc_trk=tw
Laurent Cyr
Burning Hunk
Electric bills depend on a bunch of things....lol!
![[Hearth.com] Electricity Rates](https://www.hearth.com/talk/data/attachments/145/145274-626ab23662f11d0758ec71a64e184256.jpg?hash=S-QehRTLfg "[Hearth.com] Electricity Rates")
Two views, before and after the PV system. The bill for November 2013 is the first bill that would have reflected some PV (PV active with Oct 28), all following bills include full impact of PV.
zaroot86
Member
Here in the Land of Marylandistan, the rates are surprisingly reasonable. With base charge, all the delivery fees, credits, and taxes factored in, we are at around $0.14 kwh. My house is 100% electric, with a new HE heat pump/range/microwave/HWH/Fridge/DW/space heaters/CFL Lighting; my fiance and I use around 700 kwh a month. Attic fully insulated, new windows, 2300 SF home. I keep the thermostat set around 60, and just wear heavier clothing/make her use a blanket. Between cooking and moderate space heater use for the room we're occupying, it's quite temperate all the time I think. Combined with the new Old Mill stove I set up in the basement, I am looking to drop the thermostat to 50 jic and run the fan for the forced air 24/7. I have a tower fan blowing behind the stove to the RA vent in the basement, which is circulating the warmer air via ductwork. Will the new stove dialed in, I am hoping to drop that down to about 450-500 kwh/Mo, or $70. This excludes months where I have large draws from my shop (welder/plasma cutter/power tools/battery chargers/etc., so if I am steady working out there every weekend, it'll easily add $40 to my bill; but at least I don't have a propane, gas, or heating oil bill to fret over.
Backup generator
20 gallons of treated fuel
4 cords of oak
Backup generator
20 gallons of treated fuel
4 cords of oak
Thanks for that informative post! Electricity prices hike that's why bill goes up drastically. Some people may have realized that natural gas and other energy fuel costs have been trending down. They likewise may have realized that electricity charges, though, are up. It is because electricity prices are complicated and are set by numerous factors.
Electric utility strategy in many places is or will be to raise the base rate which is not dependent on usage. The effect is to penalize users who lower usage through conservation or through PV. It also on a % basis will adversely affect the bulk of the users by number (households) and have minimal impact on large commercial/industrial users. Also the strategy is to assure the utility a profitable income stream and insulate it from a rapidly increasing sustainable energy supply environment. It would be far better IMO for the utility to focus on operating in the new energy environment.
Just got notice of another $2/mo increase in our base rate, and it was raised $2 just two years ago also. Our base rate still is quite low compared to other areas, $14/mo, but that's a 40% increase in just 2 years.
Just got notice of another $2/mo increase in our base rate, and it was raised $2 just two years ago also. Our base rate still is quite low compared to other areas, $14/mo, but that's a 40% increase in just 2 years.
Where2
Feeling the Heat
Rhetoric from the same grid owner that gives me a credit 6 months out of the year for allowing them to randomly disconnect my A/C compressor to shed base load (if they need to)... Ironic that in the 5+ years I've had the A/C disconnect installed, I don't recall the disconnect ever having activated. The up to $9/mo credit comes in handy though... 
I should have had that disconnect system installed when I bought the house, it would have paid for 2 more PV panels & inverters!Yeah, load shedding programs in the US are all a mess....apparently after a number of federal grants to install demand response equipment, some ambiguous wording was hit upon by a Fed circuit court that put the whole business in legal limbo. Its going to the Supremes on the next cycle, IIRC.
I have demand response on my AC too, which switches it off for 30 mins out of every hour (as needed). Of course, since my system is sized for heating in 20°F weather, my AC only needs to run about 40% of the time to maintain setpoint even in 100°F weather. So the switch does nothing to the utility load or my temperature, but pays me $30-50/yr.
I have demand response on my AC too, which switches it off for 30 mins out of every hour (as needed). Of course, since my system is sized for heating in 20°F weather, my AC only needs to run about 40% of the time to maintain setpoint even in 100°F weather. So the switch does nothing to the utility load or my temperature, but pays me $30-50/yr.
Just in - a timely new article about coming winter electricity price hikes for those in New England.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/14/u...odule=Search&mabReward=relbias:w,{"1":"RI:8"}
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/14/u...odule=Search&mabReward=relbias:w,{"1":"RI:8"}
As the article states...looks like a ng pipeline and transmission line problem, related to a combination of NIMBYs and utility co mismanagement.
I have read the pipes to PA were supposed to go on line in 2016-7. Hope for warm winters until then.
I have read the pipes to PA were supposed to go on line in 2016-7. Hope for warm winters until then.
Figuring out how much new pipeline might be enough is not an easy calculation. Massachusetts, for one, is analyzing its needs now for a report due at the end of the month. It is a complex process, said Mark Sylvia, the state’s undersecretary for energy, because it must take into account the state’s desires to avoid dependence on one type of fuel, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and ensure reliability “so the lights stay on.”
last paragraph says it all to me "you can't bring in what you want or need without our(state ) ok." close coal plants before replacements ready, knee jerk reactions. I've been bitchin about these new rate since announced last Aug. once again most people a surprised . why? they don't pay attention until there bill arrives. aside, my business less able to compete than even 2 months ago, not many people raising prices in this environment.
first paragraph last in the article
last paragraph says it all to me "you can't bring in what you want or need without our(state ) ok." close coal plants before replacements ready, knee jerk reactions. I've been bitchin about these new rate since announced last Aug. once again most people a surprised . why? they don't pay attention until there bill arrives. aside, my business less able to compete than even 2 months ago, not many people raising prices in this environment.
first paragraph last in the article
just not ready and no one gives a tihs, really well thought out. first real winter test coming around Christmas! if winter settles in from there some folks will be in real trouble come next spring when they have to pay nasty grid and nsturd. at least they can't shut them off in winter. unless we brown out. the grid came close to shutdown last winter. this is a tougher situation for power than last year.
granted homes come first for gas, but we now import some much of our electricity and the winter spike in gas cost to electric makers is where the problem lies. shut down coal plants before your ready for, why. it is not only the power cos. fault it is also a political fault.
granted homes come first for gas, but we now import some much of our electricity and the winter spike in gas cost to electric makers is where the problem lies. shut down coal plants before your ready for, why. it is not only the power cos. fault it is also a political fault.
When some politicians are closing single plants as stunts, for short-term political gain, and others are putting together long-term plans (i.e. ones that don't cause energy havoc) and getting roasted for it, it does matter. If you think shutting down coal plants is the root of current high energy prices in MA, then you should put the blame where it belongs.
As much as I like to poke fun at our future president, I think the NIMBYs up there are the bigger problem.
As much as I like to poke fun at our future president, I think the NIMBYs up there are the bigger problem.
Last edited:
ok, it's all Romney's fault, none of the blame fails to the 87.5% democrat Mass Senate and 90 % Democrat house. When there is a Rep. Govna. up here more political power sits in Sen. Pres. or the House Speakas office. have no doubt he got something he wanted from it.
if it has helped and is part the reason Mass rates double. not the entire part. please,you know that as do I. the rush to close is part of the problem without having viable substitutes. politically expedient
Indeed. NE is a hot mess in terms of its energy policy. A well intentioned electorate is being taken advantage of by a ridiculous crew of politicians to force through ill-planned plant closures and ill-budgeted RE projects. And reasonable things like enough plants and pipelines to serve actual projected demands, or profitable, low-risk onshore wind projects funded by private investments....nope, I suppose mostly due to NIMBYism.
Beyond New England....which will win? The virtuous cycle of profitable RE and effective efficiency projects begetting more and more, or a vicious cycle of higher rates blamed on energy havoc, mal-investments counter to future regs/needs, underinvestment in needed infrastructure, boondoggle RE plants (Cape Wind, Ivanpah, etc)????
