I'm David, I work with Julian in NY, CT, and NJ. The incentives in NJ are actually better than in NY (except NYC) but on the other hand, electricity doesn't cost as much as it does in NY. But regardless, they are both fantastic states for solar, and we are seeing huge growth and solar panels popping up left and right. The MW Block program in NY is commonly referred to as the NYSERDA rebate.
for NYC, I am not sure about the MW Block program, but there is a 20% property tax abatement which is applied across four years. Meaning if the 20% property tax abatement is $6000. They reduce your property tax by 1500 for the next four years totally $6000.
The property tax abatement in NYC is now 30% applied across 4 years. The MW Block program is commonly referred to as the NYSERDA rebate which is 20cents per watt. Sometimes this NYSERDA rebate can be lower than 20cents per watt when the house is somewhat shaded or the architecture doesn't lend itself highly to solar. It depends on the average irradiance factor -- called TSRF. ~David K with Power Solutions
1:1 mostly makes sense. I understand the utility company wanting some for the transmission of the power. But in california right now for example, the utility company wants to give you between 0 and 5 cents 99% of the time and then send the power all the way next door to sell for an average of 40 cents. That’s crooked.
@@Superiorsolarconsulting California has been dysfunctional since the beginning in regard to “green” energy policy. I certainly would not look to them as an example, other than as an example of what not to do. Personally, I think solar production should be paid at the same rate that the distribution utility is paying for its power on the open market. This seems to me the only fair way to do it. Generally, generation is about half the cost of the total power bill. If the total bill is 14 cents/kWh, then generation is probably 7 cents or so. Solar power generation should be compensated at the same rate is any other generation, be it nuclear, coal, NG, wind or hydro. 1:1 reimbursement is subsidizing solar generation by every other customer on the distribution system. That is crooked also.
@@Royale_with_Cheeze That is not my understanding of how net metering works in PA. My cooperative charges $30/month and that is not subject to net metering credit. Net metering credit is only applied to power used, not the availability charge since the availability charge is not usage based. Any credit from one month is carried forward and applied to the next months usage, but only usage, not availability charge. At the end of each net metering year (ours runs from 6/1 to 5/31), any excess credits are purchased by our generation cooperative at their avoided cost rate, which is currently around 9 cents/kwh. So, as I understand it, I have to pay the $30/month availability charge no matter how much my array produces in excess of my consumption.
@@Royale_with_Cheeze I don’t think it is as good. This is my understanding of how it works where I live. Let’s say in June, the first month after the account is bought out and zeroed, I use 1,000 kWh and product 1,200. I get 200 kWh of credits on my account, but still pay the $30 availability charge. Let’s say the same happens in July, August and September. I now have 800 kWh of credits in my account. Now let’s say in October, I use 1,000 and produce 900. I can use 100 of my 800 credits to zero out my usage for October, but still pay the $30 fixed charge and now have 700 in my credit account. Let’s say in November, December and January, I use 1,000 and produce only 800 each month. I would use 200 of credits each months entering February with 100 in credit. Let’s say I use 1,000 again in February and produce 900. I would use up my remaining credit of 100 and offset my usage, but now have no more credits. If I use 1,000 in March and product only 900, I now have to pay not only the $30 fixed charge, but I have to pay for the 100 kWh I used in excess of what I produced. This would continue until my production again exceeded my usage and thus build a kWh credit balance again or until the end of May when any credits in my account would be bought by the G&T at their avoided cost rate and my credit balance would again be 0 at the start of June.
@@Superiorsolarconsulting An REC. They typically have price structures much more aligned with their cost structures, unlike IOUs whose prices are grossly distorted by the various state PUCs.
Don't you need to address the cost of power? If power costs are too low, then PV will take too long to breakeven. There is a cost to install PV over a period of time. It might cost about the same as some places pay for power, say 12 cents per kwh. So, in addition to the location you need to look at the cost of power to decide if its worth installing PV.
Correct. All these NE states I mentioned have under 10 years payback periods. The incentives make it worth it even though the power costs aren’t that high relatively speaking
I'm David, I work with Julian in NY, CT, and NJ. The incentives in NJ are actually better than in NY (except NYC) but on the other hand, electricity doesn't cost as much as it does in NY. But regardless, they are both fantastic states for solar, and we are seeing huge growth and solar panels popping up left and right. The MW Block program in NY is commonly referred to as the NYSERDA rebate.
for NYC, I am not sure about the MW Block program, but there is a 20% property tax abatement which is applied across four years. Meaning if the 20% property tax abatement is $6000. They reduce your property tax by 1500 for the next four years totally $6000.
My New York based expert can go over details with you if you’d like. 760-473-5878
The property tax abatement in NYC is now 30% applied across 4 years. The MW Block program is commonly referred to as the NYSERDA rebate which is 20cents per watt. Sometimes this NYSERDA rebate can be lower than 20cents per watt when the house is somewhat shaded or the architecture doesn't lend itself highly to solar. It depends on the average irradiance factor -- called TSRF. ~David K with Power Solutions
Yes, 1:1 net metering is great as your neighbors are subsidizing your solar system and it doesn’t get any better than that!
@@Royale_with_Cheeze I agree. My system is supposed to be installed in December or January.
@@Royale_with_Cheeze Northern PA
@@Royale_with_Cheeze My understanding is that PA does not work this way, but I am still learning and may not yet understand all of the details.
1:1 mostly makes sense. I understand the utility company wanting some for the transmission of the power. But in california right now for example, the utility company wants to give you between 0 and 5 cents 99% of the time and then send the power all the way next door to sell for an average of 40 cents. That’s crooked.
@@Superiorsolarconsulting California has been dysfunctional since the beginning in regard to “green” energy policy. I certainly would not look to them as an example, other than as an example of what not to do. Personally, I think solar production should be paid at the same rate that the distribution utility is paying for its power on the open market. This seems to me the only fair way to do it. Generally, generation is about half the cost of the total power bill. If the total bill is 14 cents/kWh, then generation is probably 7 cents or so. Solar power generation should be compensated at the same rate is any other generation, be it nuclear, coal, NG, wind or hydro. 1:1 reimbursement is subsidizing solar generation by every other customer on the distribution system. That is crooked also.
great video thnx
Glad you enjoyed it
I pay $30/month availability fee. How do you get this $10/month cost after installing solar?
@@Royale_with_Cheeze That is not my understanding of how net metering works in PA. My cooperative charges $30/month and that is not subject to net metering credit. Net metering credit is only applied to power used, not the availability charge since the availability charge is not usage based. Any credit from one month is carried forward and applied to the next months usage, but only usage, not availability charge. At the end of each net metering year (ours runs from 6/1 to 5/31), any excess credits are purchased by our generation cooperative at their avoided cost rate, which is currently around 9 cents/kwh. So, as I understand it, I have to pay the $30/month availability charge no matter how much my array produces in excess of my consumption.
@@Royale_with_Cheeze I don’t think it is as good. This is my understanding of how it works where I live. Let’s say in June, the first month after the account is bought out and zeroed, I use 1,000 kWh and product 1,200. I get 200 kWh of credits on my account, but still pay the $30 availability charge. Let’s say the same happens in July, August and September. I now have 800 kWh of credits in my account. Now let’s say in October, I use 1,000 and produce 900. I can use 100 of my 800 credits to zero out my usage for October, but still pay the $30 fixed charge and now have 700 in my credit account. Let’s say in November, December and January, I use 1,000 and produce only 800 each month. I would use 200 of credits each months entering February with 100 in credit. Let’s say I use 1,000 again in February and produce 900. I would use up my remaining credit of 100 and offset my usage, but now have no more credits. If I use 1,000 in March and product only 900, I now have to pay not only the $30 fixed charge, but I have to pay for the 100 kWh I used in excess of what I produced. This would continue until my production again exceeded my usage and thus build a kWh credit balance again or until the end of May when any credits in my account would be bought by the G&T at their avoided cost rate and my credit balance would again be 0 at the start of June.
There could be some utility companies with higher minimum fees. Which utility are you in?
@@Superiorsolarconsulting An REC. They typically have price structures much more aligned with their cost structures, unlike IOUs whose prices are grossly distorted by the various state PUCs.
Don't you need to address the cost of power? If power costs are too low, then PV will take too long to breakeven. There is a cost to install PV over a period of time. It might cost about the same as some places pay for power, say 12 cents per kwh. So, in addition to the location you need to look at the cost of power to decide if its worth installing PV.
Correct. All these NE states I mentioned have under 10 years payback periods. The incentives make it worth it even though the power costs aren’t that high relatively speaking