Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

California

CoopersDad

(3,199 posts)

5. I understand this, it's better than what we have today

Reply to BigmanPigman (Original post)

Wed Apr 12, 2023, 10:25 PM

Apr 2023

Currently (no pun intended) a natural disincentive exists with tier billing: big homes using more power pay a premium for high use.

That premium is erased for homeowners who can afford a solar and or battery backup that shifts time of use and counteracts high rates, and that means it hurts the poorer ratepayers.

The Time of Use and Tiered Rate schedules notwithstanding, paying a recurring connection fee that's higher for higher incomes while dropping per KWH charges would help more people than it would hurt, I think.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

SDG&E, PG&E, SCE propose billing electricity customers based on income [View all] BigmanPigman Apr 2023 OP

So a household with, say, $500K annual income grumpyduck Apr 2023 #1

The math is confusing to me bucolic_frolic Apr 2023 #2

...and just WHAT problem does this solve? Thunderbeast Apr 2023 #3

+1 2naSalit Apr 2023 #4

I understand this, it's better than what we have today CoopersDad Apr 2023 #5

Might be a sneaky way to make homeowners with solar panels pay more Zorro Apr 2023 #6