Electricity Rates

[iamlucky13]

After seeing your reply I was curios so I did a search for plasma power consumption from 9/2016 to present day. One tv I found the specs on is a Panasonic 61" model VT60. I'm not sure but I remember hearing that Panasonic was the last maker of plasmas sets? Here are the ratings listed:

• Power SupplyAC 120 V, 60 Hz
• Screen Size Diagonal (inches)60.1
• On mode Average Power Consumption169 W
• Rated Power Consumption472 W
• Standby Power Consumption0.2 W
  
  I have no idea what the difference is between the on mode average power consumption and the rated power consumption is? Anyone?

Average is the number to use for operating cost estimates.

Rated is the number to use to make sure you don't overload your wiring, assuming you even bother to check (those with too many outlets on a circuit, like my house, or else with a very high end sound system might want to). The TV should never draw more than that.

UL labels will list the rated power consumption. Most manufacturers don't bother to give average power consumption in any of their specs, although if it's Energy Star rated, they will have measured the average under the Energy Star test conditions, and you can figure it out from the Energy Guide label provided with the appliance. For mine, they say 205 kWh per year, at 5 hours use per day (wow...we average maybe 1 hour/day), which works out to 112 W.

I think you're correct that Panasonic was the last plasma holdout. Now the focus for absolute best picture quality is on OLED screens. Mid-grade LCD's are good enough for almost all buyers who aren't willing to pay top dollar for OLED screens.

 

[Swedishchef]

Pretty far north, I assume, with a small local powerplant that fuel has to get trucked or barged in for?

That is right. Hence the sky high prices.

 

[chimneyman]

Considering Nextera (FPL) charges their typical grid customers $0.06259/kWh (non-fuel charge) plus $0.02491/kWh (fuel charge) for the first 1,000kWh and $0.01 more for each category for every kWh over 1,000kWh per month, you're really not taking much markup on FPL base residential rates, and FPL rates are far from static. They generally ask for and receive a ~3%/yr increase, to keep the share holders happy.

I was a bit wrong on holding rates steady for 5 years....they actually REDUCED RATES FOUR TIMES IN TWO YEARS and the cost of 1,000 KwHR is not $110 but $106. Rates are lower today than in 2008. It's LCEC (Lee County Electric Co-op). Here's stuff from their site. Disclaimer: I don't work for them nor does any family member.

"Beginning January 1, LCEC customers saw the fourth rate decrease in two years. LCEC electric rates are below the national average, and among the lowest of 56 utilities in Florida. Employees work hard to provide the best possible price for reliable service to customers and it was possible to reduce rates again due to a calculated business strategy, process improvements, cost management, use of technology and efficient work practices.

As an electric cooperative, LCEC is not in business to make money, only to serve its members/customers by delivering reliable, cost competitive electricity and service. LCEC is governed by its members represented by a ten-member Board of Trustees. At their December meeting, the Board reached a unanimous decision to reduce rates again in 2016. This marks a residential rate reduction of nearly seven percent since 2014, bringing rates from $114.16 per 1,000 kWh to $106.55 per 1,000 kWh. Customers are paying less for electricity now than they were in 2008!

According to the Florida Municipal Electric Association, the average investor-owned electric utility rate in Florida is $128.59 per 1,000 kWh. The average rate for the 33 municipal electric utilities in Florida is $114.41 per 1,000 kWh. LCEC rates are well below the state average and the lowest among Florida cooperatives."

 

[WiscWoody]

Average is the number to use for operating cost estimates.

Rated is the number to use to make sure you don't overload your wiring, assuming you even bother to check (those with too many outlets on a circuit, like my house, or else with a very high end sound system might want to). The TV should never draw more than that.

UL labels will list the rated power consumption. Most manufacturers don't bother to give average power consumption in any of their specs, although if it's Energy Star rated, they will have measured the average under the Energy Star test conditions, and you can figure it out from the Energy Guide label provided with the appliance. For mine, they say 205 kWh per year, at 5 hours use per day (wow...we average maybe 1 hour/day), which works out to 112 W.

I think you're correct that Panasonic was the last plasma holdout. Now the focus for absolute best picture quality is on OLED screens. Mid-grade LCD's are good enough for almost all buyers who aren't willing to pay top dollar for OLED screens.

Thanks for the explanation!

 

[CHeath]

Holy smoke screen. I know someone dug up this thread buts good. .26 per kw/h! Omg

Mine is .09 but with a small fee and tax it ends up being about 10.5 cents. I gobble up 1800-1900 kWh in winter with no stove and about 900 with the stove. Family of 5 with teenagers that shower every 6 minutes.

Last month it was $177 no wood burn.

 

[Brian26]

Man I wish I paid some of the prices you people are posting. According to the EIA Electricity data I pay the highest rates in the continental U.S. here in CT. I am at the top of the chart.

https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_5_6_a

Here is what my bills looks like. They absolutely crush you in delivery charges and fees. $64.34 in fees to deliver 500 kwh!

The one good thing is supplier power prices have gone way down. Here in CT you can shop around for your actual supplier. Its around .5-.8 kwh now but 4 years ago it was .10+.

 

[Circus]

They absolutely crush you in delivery charges and fees. $64.34 in fees to deliver 500 kwh!

Over $770 a year to rent some wire You have good reason to be angry. I'm at a loss to what you can do about it though.
The lower kwh fee is a feature of cost shifting to lower income customers.

 

[CHeath]

Dang that's ****. I'm not gonna complain. I'm shooting for 1000 kw/h this month. It's been mild and I've went all LED Lighting and my heat pump hasn't been on. I usually do 1500-1900 in febs

 

[dh1989]

$56.38 for 284 kWh here in RI, all charges included. $0.199/kWh. We have a natural gas pipeline bottleneck in the northeast that keeps the prices high, as well as the nuke plants slowly going offline.

 

[Junebug90]

We pay about .149 in the woods of Michigan

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

 

[oakridge]

I recently built a home and put 2 by 6 walls instead of 2 by 4 s , this way I could pack more insulation in the walls.It gets hot and very humid in the summers here so AC is a must for me .I am single and kids gone so I built a 1100 sq ft home .My highest bill was 85 bucks.I keep it 70 degrees in the summer.Insulation is crucial.

 

[blades]

$64 of rip off for $27 of electrical power. at those rates and that use you likely could run your own jenny

 

[jebatty]

Rising rates plus rising distribution and service charges make a very strong case for going solar off-grid for anyone who has a suitable site. Our utility has been raising monthly distribution/service charges by $2-4/year for the last several years, and the indicators show a likely goal of the high $40 to $50 goal from the current $22/month for these charges within a few years, and probably continuing to rise after that.

Some quick numbers: at approximate current install cost of $2.5/watt, not including off-grid batteries, our 12.3kW PV system now would cost about $31,000 to install new. This system provides 100%+ of our annual kWh usage. My estimate is that we would need about 20kWh of battery storage if we went totally off-grid. For li-ion batteries, current cost is about $1,000/1.2 kWh of storage, or about $16,500 for batteries. Total cost of an off-grid system = $47,500. Less federal tax credit of 30%, cost would be $33,250.

Based on 2016 electric usage of about 13 kWh and current kWh charges of $0.12 plus $600/mo of distribution/service charges, total cost of electricity is about $2200/yr. Simple payback on an off-grid system would be about 15 years, and likely would be less due to continuing increase in electric kWh and distribution.

For those who pay even higher electricity rates, or who have additional credits/incentives for PV, payback could be much faster.

 

[sloeffle]

Total cost of an off-grid system = $47,500. Less federal tax credit of 30%, cost would be $33,250.

Based on 2016 electric usage of about 13 kWh and current kWh charges of $0.12 plus $600/mo of distribution/service charges, total cost of electricity is about $2200/yr. Simple payback on an off-grid system would be about 15 years, and likely would be less due to continuing increase in electric kWh and distribution.

I am all for sticking it to the man. But in this situation I think you are better off investing the $33,250 into a mutual fund that follows the S&P 500. According to the calculations ( 11% ROI ) that I did you would have $451,703 after 35 years. I can buy a lot of electric for $450k. If you were to add in the environmental costs of using solar vs fossil fuel then I am not sure what the ROI would be.

Personally, we "bought" the rights to the electric produced from 5 solar panels from our electric company about 6 months ago. The bad thing is that we are charged a little more for some of our electric. The good thing is that it is a fixed per kWh cost for the next 25 years and I do not have to worry about the maintenance or the initial cost of the solar panels.

 

[jebatty]

sloeffle, I'm not sure what calculation parameters you used. If I would use the S&P index for early March 1987 (290), 1997(793), 2007 (1436) and 2017 (2384)and rounding to full % point, I find an investment made in 1997 for 10 years at a 10% compound annual interest rate would have about matched the increase to 1997, and doing the same for each of the next 10 years I come up with 5% for each of the 10 year periods. And all of those investments would have been subject to income taxes, state and federal, so the net return would be less.

For my PV system, which produces about 15,300 kWh/year, and at the current kWh rate of 0.109, which is subject to sale tax of 0.07372%, resulting in an effective kWh rate of 0.117. The annual value of the electricity is $1,790. My investment in PV after the federal tax credit (no other incentives) was $38,900. That equates to a simple rate of return of 4.6%, nearly the same as the S&P, and the return is not subject to tax. The return also is likely to increase year by year, as electric rates rise, and the return is not subject to the market ups and downs.

My system was installed in 2013 (6.9kW) and 2015 (5.4kW). The same system installed today in my area would cost about $23,700 after the federal tax credit. And at 15,300 kWh/year, the simple rate of return would be 7.6% tax free. With higher electric rates and/or incentives, the rate of return would be higher, and potentially much higher.

If I change the system to off-grid and add $16,500 for batteries, the numbers would be: system cost would be about $34,900 after the federal tax credit, and the rate of return at my electric rates would be 5.1% tax free, just about the same as the S&P 500 before taxes. Plus, I avoid all of the distribution charges, currently at $22.mo and very likely to rise substantially, which raises my current rate of return to 5.9% tax free. Again, with higher electric rates and/or incentives, and avoiding higher distribution charges, the rate of return would be higher, and potentially much higher.

sloeffle, I appreciate your perspective, but I don't read anything you say that changes my point of view that "Rising rates plus rising distribution and service charges make a very strong case for going solar off-grid for anyone who has a suitable site."

 

[blades]

Its the distribution section that is going to eat you alive- no controls on that.

 

[jebatty]

Agreed - will be "eaten alive" by distribution charges. Our utility is a distributing utility only: buys wholesale power and then resells and distributes the power in its service area. It had a long practice of low distribution charges and burying the excess distribution charges in the kWh rates. With "threats" from solar and wind, as well as reduced demand through customer conservation, it is now pursuing a plan to raise distribution charges to what it says are its actual costs of distribution (rumored to be in the mid-$40 to low-$50 range per month). What it will do with rates will await the outcome.

 

[iamlucky13]

If you're net zero on the year with a 12.3 kW solar array, 20kWh worth of batteries won't suffice for a couple cloudy days unless you're willing to make major changes to how you use electricity.

I'm not understanding some of your other numbers. I'm sure $600/month in connection fees is a typo, but I don't know if that's $60/month or $600/year.

Also, I would not count on higher than 8% return for the S&P 500. That's slightly below it's long term average, but well above it's worst 20 year returns. I generally use 7% for my retirement planning.

I'm not bullish on off-grid, especially not for above average electricity users, but one thing in favor of energy investments in general is it is far lower risk than the stock market - you will be using energy, and there is little reason to expect utility costs to go down.

 

[Brian26]

Its the distribution section that is going to eat you alive- no controls on that.

They tried last year to raise the base connection fee from like $20 dollars to almost $40 but the state regulators shot it down. I have another thread going in here about looking into solar. My biggest savings with them would be not paying their outrageous delivery charges. A rough estimate when my summer usage is higher is that I pay almost $1K in delivery charges a year. All they could get me on is the $20 a month connection fee if I had panels and produced enough power to cover my usage.

 

[Brian26]

They tried last year to raise the base connection fee from like $20 dollars to almost $40 but the state regulators shot it down. I have another thread going in here about looking into solar. My biggest savings with them would be not paying their outrageous delivery charges. A rough estimate when my higher summer usage is factored in is that I pay almost $1K in delivery charges a year. All they could get me on is the $20 a month connection fee if I had panels and produced enough power to cover my usage.

 

[jebatty]

It was a typo, should be $600/yr. The computation was made correctly, treating the $600 as annual.

Is 20kWh of batteries storage sufficient? Good question.

Our house is all-electric, except for most of the heat, which is wood. We do use electric to keep the lower level at 50F during the winter. Although it is living space, it usually is occupied only by guests in spring/summer/fall when more than one extra bedroom is needed. If needed, the lower level could go without heat during any period with insufficient PV + battery storage. DHW is also electric, and kWh usage for DHW averages 100 kWh/mo.

Not counting electric heat for the lower level and electric for DHW, normal electric usage for our household is about 500 kWh/mo or about 17 kWh/day It is likely then that to maintain normal usage, the PV system would need to produce a minimum of about 600 kWh/mo. The only month our PV system produces less than 600 kWh/mo beginning with 2014 is in December, and that production was: 2014 - 452 kWh, 2015 - 310 kWh., 2016 - 439 kWh. November PV production runs between 650-750 kWh, and January between 600-793 kWh. Other months are much higher.

December with low PV production and 20 kWh battery storage clearly would be a challenge. "Normal" usage could be reduced to essentials, as needed. There would be some sunny days that PV would produce more than needed to fully charge the batteries and provide excess for usage. Other days would not have enough PV production to charge the batteries at all. We would have the option, as needed, to use the electric generator to supplement if we really needed more electricity on any days when PV + batteries would be insufficient.

The question comes down to whether or not for December each year, and probably for occasional days in November and January, would my wife and I have the "will" to reduce usage to a minimum to go off-grid. It clearly is possible. Do we have the "will," even with additional generator use? Something to ponder.

 

[Highbeam]

It was a typo, should be $600/yr. The computation was made correctly, treating the $600 as annual.

Is 20kWh of batteries storage sufficient? Good question.

Our house is all-electric, except for most of the heat, which is wood. We do use electric to keep the lower level at 50F during the winter. Although it is living space, it usually is occupied only by guests in spring/summer/fall when more than one extra bedroom is needed. If needed, the lower level could go without heat during any period with insufficient PV + battery storage. DHW is also electric, and kWh usage for DHW averages 100 kWh/mo.

Not counting electric heat for the lower level and electric for DHW, normal electric usage for our household is about 500 kWh/mo or about 17 kWh/day It is likely then that to maintain normal usage, the PV system would need to produce a minimum of about 600 kWh/mo. The only month our PV system produces less than 600 kWh/mo beginning with 2014 is in December, and that production was: 2014 - 452 kWh, 2015 - 310 kWh., 2016 - 439 kWh. November PV production runs between 650-750 kWh, and January between 600-793 kWh. Other months are much higher.

December with low PV production and 20 kWh battery storage clearly would be a challenge. "Normal" usage could be reduced to essentials, as needed. There would be some sunny days that PV would produce more than needed to fully charge the batteries and provide excess for usage. Other days would not have enough PV production to charge the batteries at all. We would have the option, as needed, to use the electric generator to supplement if we really needed more electricity on any days when PV + batteries would be insufficient.

The question comes down to whether or not for December each year, and probably for occasional days in November and January, would my wife and I have the "will" to reduce usage to a minimum to go off-grid. It clearly is possible. Do we have the "will," even with additional generator use? Something to ponder.

With modern generator automation, the genset would automatically fire up and run at optimum output to charge your battery bank in the least amount of time with zero human interaction. You could schedule this to occur during the day so as not to interrupt your peace and quiet. New gensets can be very quiet and relatively efficient when used this way. In fact, I would consider the genset to be a normal part of the operation during the winter so that you can optimize your solar investment.