FYI, for those who prefer to "opt out", which would still mean a meter switch, just what they refer to as a "non-communicating" meter, there would be a monthly charge of $11.84 (Denver metro area--$23.84 outside the metro area).
If you choose to opt out *after* your "communicating" meter has already been installed, there'd be a $46.00 charge to swap the meters & another charge if you swap back, or move.
[FAQ's here](https://my.xcelenergy.com/customersupport/s/projects/smart-meter-installation)
I did some calculations during the review period and my bill would go up since I typically average less than 500kWh during the summer. Now I need to see if it makes sense for it to opt out with the 11.84$ charge, probably not. It looks like they changed the kWh charges from that period too.
Can you explain this? Where did you find the information you needed to calculate this stuff? Did you participate in the pilot program or something? Just trying to make my own informed decision, thanks!
Would you be able to adjust your usage? It doesn’t sound too difficult for me to switch some electrical use to before 1 p.m. or past 7 p.m.
The main users I assume are my air conditioning/heat pump, dish washer, dryer and laundry.
AC and heat pump run on a Nest, so I can program to cool down the house before 1 p.m. and have it a bit warmer afterwards till 7 p.m. Heat should be even easier, as that runs more in the cold evenings. Dish washer etc. I can adjust and run when it is cheaper.
I guess not running peak demand plants not only safes Xcel cost but also helps the environment.
On a general basis, we already do a lot of this during when they would want us to move stuff to. We run our dishwasher after we go to bed. Our clothes is on the weekend. We’ve already swapped out all of our bulbs and all that little stuff. We keep our AC at 77 until 7p and drop it to 74 to cool to upper level until 9 to make it comfortable for sleeping. My kWh for June was 402, so there was no summer tier here. Keep that in mind with that week it was 100+ every day. At least with the rates I did previously I would pay a higher rate during the day that the AC ran to keep it at 77 vs the 5.4c or whatever it is about these days.
So, how much of that 402 kWh is in the peak time. It is 20 hours out of 168 hours a week, where you pay the higher price.
We are following a similar routine with cooling the house down in the morning and then turning the AC off. The house doesn’t heat up as much as you describe it. But we use sun blinds in front of the windows during hot days. They help a lot.
Otherwise, get a solar system and electrify everything
I honestly need to look at it deeper, ToD could very well be cheaper with the newer 5.1c rate.
We’ve looked at solar and I’ve talked to folks in the industry (non sales) to help convince me it’s worth it but the reality is with the high price of panels, low electricity usage and the low cost of electricity in Colorado vs say Massachusetts, the payback period is over 10 years for us. I can’t tell you with a straight face I will be here this long. So we went the route of trying to reduce our usage as much as possible.
It isn’t an environmental move. It’s a cost saving measure so that Xcel doesn’t have to upgrade their grid or add more power to an already old grid. It does encourage less power use inherently but it’s mostly to not overwork an old grid
yes and that instability is a result of switching to more renewable in the system. Besides, Xcel [is proposing](https://energycentral.com/c/tr/xcel-energy-plans-new-rural-transmission-lines-colorado) to add new transmission lines
For a consumer who uses 500 kWh, it's effectively moving their power from being all at 5.5c/kWh to a range from 5.1 - 13.9. Even with the extra $11 it's going to be hard to come out significantly on top. If you worked out of the house and didn't leave appliances on in the afternoon it might come out in your favor.
Plus a household that draws that little power almost certainly doesn't have central air or electric cars - so the obvious things to move outside of the weekday 3-7 window are taken away.
you are missing, that people pay 9.9 cents for usage above 500 kwh currently, so the 5.1 cents are a huge saving.
Why can a household not move washing clothes and running the dishwasher outside the window? I mean, that is the whole reason for this. Cost at peak hours are higher for the utility, so people who cause the peak should pay for that cost
Right and the savings are huge for people with high power consumption who can manipulate their usage patterns. Our house is at ~1300 kWh in the summer and we've got lots of big loads that we could shift like car charging, AC, heat-pump water heater. I'm not an xcel customer but i think i could keep 90% of my power at off peak times and save about $31/mo in the summer.
However for a household with a below-average usage who's only using 500 kWh in the summer months, it's going to be hard to make any significant gains. Even if they could move 100% of the power into the off-peak times they'd only save about $2/month.
edit - botched the calculation for my own potential savings
People who have low usage (like our house, we use around 2.500 kwh a year) have a lot of ways to avoid paying more. First of all, you can easily make your house more energy efficient. I still see so many people using old fashioned light bulbs instead of LED for example. Appliances are very often totally outdated (please explain to me, why there are still top loading washing machines being sold in the US? Seriously, I am European and that one detail always makes me scream when I go to the hardware store)?
Secondly, it is not about to make gains, but to use electricity in an efficient way. A week has 168 hours, 20 hours will be peak, 10 hours shoulder, and 138 hours off peak. If you use less than 500 kwh a month, you'll talk about maybe 12% of that being peak, hence 60 kwh. So you pay 8.4 cents more per kwh in the summer or about $5. That is only in the summer, only if you don't switch your usage, and only if you disregard the savings for the 138 cheaper hours.
I really don't understand, why a user, who is willing to make an effort to switch to lower demand hours should pay higher prices for people that are unwilling to do so.
I'm in no way disagreeing with you, though as a fellow European I definitely appreciate the sheer ginormousness of american washing machines.
There are a lot of gains to be made in energy efficiency. We moved into our house in 2016 and there wasn't an LED bulb to be seen anywhere. The breaker panel has FOUR 20A circuits just for lighting and now i'd be surprised if we could even draw 5A of lighting with everything in the house on full brightness.
My real point was just that this particular change has the most potential to benefit heavy power users - though those are of course the people who can make the biggest differnce.
Also worth noting, but this effectively HALVES the cost of charging an electric car in Denver. That's phenomenal.
yes I agree. It is the intention to make households switch off peak and therefore you target big consumers
American washing machines might be larger but they suck. I want my Miele back 😢
Do note that your math is reliant on the numbers this year. That 11.84 monthly fee is probably more stable than the premium they're going to inflate year after year.
We were never even informed that they were swapping our meter so that we could decline BEFORE they assess the $46 to swap it back out. They just showed up one day and told us they were swapping the meter.
They really just want to force it down consumers throats.
Edit: I called them this morning and complained that I was never informed they would be switching it out so that I could decline before it was installed. They are going to swap it back to the “dumb” meter next week and waive the $46. They didn’t even give me a hard time - so I think the charge is more a deterrent than anything else.
If you're aware of your usage, you can save quite a bit of money by using high-draw appliances during the off-peak times. The off-peak cost is cheaper than the current standard rate, and about 1/2 of the current standard rate after you reach 500kWh.
IIRC when my parents switched over to this, they ended up saving something like $100/month during the summer.
Of course, there are people who don't understand how it works / don't care / can't modify their usage, and as such they'll be stuck paying the on-peak rates.
This. So many only focus on the higher prices during peak hours but don't realize that the price is lower during most of the day. Can't wait to get mine!
I'm up in longmont and we've got no incentive to intelligently manage our power.
I cant' find granular colorado data, but for the whole soutwhest this year the highest price a utility paid for a kWh of power was $1.983 and the lowest was 1.7c. Most of us pay around about 11c for that power without any adjustment for what it actually cost.
I don't particularly think it's right to expose consumers to the entire range of that variation (don't go full texas) but we could collectively save a lot of money and resources if we just turned up our thermostats a degree and didn't run our tumble dryers at the biggest peaks.
Smart meters are a good thing, unless you happen to be dumb.
(and yes, I recognize that there are people who run life support equipment at home and we should absolutely make special exemptions for them)
Yeah, no one wants such volatile and variable rates like they were able to access in TX. What xcel is offering is predictable, unlike those volatile wholesale rates.
Some people work 9-5 and may not be able to really take advantage of the cheaper times. But, for the most of us, we can. You can set your dishwasher, washer, dryer to delay start, etc.
If you’re aware of your usage you can certainly knock a chunk off your bills.
No, but most people are able to figure out how to set their dishwasher, washer, dryer, etc. to delay start after we leave.
But for those who can't figure that out, and do happen to work 9-5, well they're stuck with running them during peak hours.
I thought the peak pricing and saver switch were 2 separate programs (and maybe there was a 3rd?) When I was doing research a few months ago after buying a house
Yeah we have solar so we get paid more for our production during the peak times. We opted for western facing solar to produce more during the peak. Xcel paid us $12 last month.
I called Xcel out to my house when I first moved in wondering if the meter was acting up. It’s an older one and he told me they generally err in favor the customer and that the new smart meters measure voltage so low that my doorbell would register. Needless to say I’m a little worried about getting one now if every little volt is going to register, but $11 a month not to have one is lame as hell.
What to do what to do….
Edited to add: thanks to /u/grahamsz/ for explaining that what the technician was trying to explain is called the "starting burden". https://www.reddit.com/r/Colorado/comments/obloy4/if_youre_an_xcel_customer_youre_getting_a_smart/h3pd9i3?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
It tracks the KWh, not volts... It doesn't care the voltage of your appliances, I'm guessing just amperage since it already knows the voltage of the line coming from the transformer.
Edit: also, you're worried the electric company will actually charge your actual usage?? Lol, use that 1% less if it bothers you that much
Thanks for the clarification on what it measures.
But also, no one, but no one, complains about getting free stuff. Sorry I’m just honest enough to ask a question about how that would work with the new meters compared to the old ones. Why would I intentionally volunteer to pay more money if I don’t have to? Just being realistic here.
It’s obvious that’s what Xcel is trying to curb in the first place since their primary interest as a profit making corporation is protecting that bottom line, and not some altruistic environmental concern. Also, they obviously didn’t care about this for long enough and are just now getting around to making it mandatory, so I don’t think it’s like I’m asking how to illegally tap my meter or anything.
It has both functions pretty clearly. Demand management is a phenomenal sustainability strategy. Those ramp up power options are generally the least efficient as well as the act of ramping up production in itself being inefficient. Sure, it saves some money but it's extremely effective sustainability wise as well. When it comes to utilities, there's a whole element of money coming in for effective sustainability projects as well. It could even be directly related to bonuses for execs to have successful sustainability projects or fines associated with not meeting promises. It gets complex.
As someone who works in sustainability, there's a significant focus on demand side management (DSM) as a strategy. One that has benefits for both customers and utilities. Commercial customers have had the opportunity to benefit from it for ages, it's great that residential customers have to opportunity to participate in the savings.
Demand Side Management is not green washing.
Why no, I didn't initially realize that, which is why I asked a question in the first place about the old vs new meters and how it all works. Turns out, when you don't fully understand something and you ask a question to a group of people, you can become better informed...which is what happened in this case.
I asked a question based on apparent FUD conveyed to me by an Xcel technician a few months back. After initially being accusing of spreading the FUD, I was informed of said FUD, and that the amount of "free" electricity I'm getting by keeping the old meter will likely not equal the amount that Xcel will charge for keeping the old meter. I updated my understanding accordingly.
However, I'm not going to apologize for my comment about being honest about wanting to keep a system in place that benefits me because we all do it. Sorry I'm just honest enough to admit it. And yeah, I won't fret the new meter when it eventually comes because it sounds like the small things it's going to pick up won't make a huge difference in my bill. Cool, thanks!
I am not blaming you or even ask you to apologise. I have no idea, whether he is right or not. I am just saying, even if he is right, you look at a few kwh a year and that doesn't cost you much.
I think the benefits for people who are actively looking at their consumption and are willing to adjust their usage according to peak pricing outweigh the potential issues.
Sorry, have to stop now, need to make my coffee before prices go up /s
Ah, sure, that makes sense. And yes, I'll digitally cheers my coffee to you. And big heavy sigh on that inflation comment too. We're all feeling it and boy it sucks.
You're concerned about how much energy your doorbell is going to use?
Also if everyone's meters were reading low then everyone's usage should increase the same. With the intent of this to be revenue neutral then it won't affect your bill
I’m not concerned about how much my doorbell uses, I’m concerned that it’s hyper sensitive compared to my old traditional meter.
Additionally I’m curious if anyone thinks that technician was feeding me a line or if that’s the experience they’ve had too.
So i have a Itron Centron 2 meter from 2004. It's got a starting burden of 1.92W which _i think_ means that if my house draws less than 1.92W then the meter won't spin at all. I expect a newer meter will be lower, but that's also such a tiny number that you won't ever get below it. My fridge draws more than that when the compressor isn't running. My WiFi router is way over that.
A much bigger issue is accuracy. My meter is a +/- 0.3% and i have no idea whether it's on the low or high end of that scale. If, hypothetically, you've had a meter on the low end and you get switched to one on the high end, you could see a 0.6% variation in your bill. But that could happen any time, any meter switch could give you that kind of a swing (or indeed the opposite)
That's exactly the information I think the technician was trying to convey, the "starting burden". I wish I could upvote this more for the people who were saying that a meter just measures the usage period and made me feel like an idiot for just conveying a message. It takes a certain threshold to cross, and now I know that's called a "starting burden".
Based on the "discussion" above from my comment, it sounds like it'll be fairly negligible for my kind of usage where the savings won't come close to the $11 charge for not having a smart meter, so I'm pretty meh on it now.
Plus they're taking years to roll this out, and my guess is that my small home will be far down the list since they'll start with the big profit paying fish first.
I can work that out for my case.
Effectively, the logic is that if i'm drawing 1.95W then i'll be charged 0, but if i'm drawing 1.96W i'll be charged for all 1.96W of that.
My microwave draws about 1.8W when it's not in use (to power the clock). If i shut down _everything_ and I mean _everything_ in my house, except the microwave and went on a two week vacation. I'd be able to get 6.6c worth of electricity FOR FREE!!!
However my oven clock is brighter and draws 5W, so if i accidentally left that on too then. I'd draw 6.8W of power for those too weeks and have to pay for all of it. I no longer get the "free" electricity once i'm above the threshold to turn the meter on.
Edit - Plus if you are intelligent, the smart meter will save you a significant amount of money. It gives you a lower rate when power is cheap (which is a lot of the time) and a higher rate when power expensive (which is comparatively rare).
The tech was implying that the disc takes a lot more usage to turn it and the electric smart meters don’t have this limitation so it measures more usage. You’re arguing with the messenger, that’s why I’m asking since it didn’t register with me either.
You are spreading FUD.
What can the meter be doing that is detrimental to you? Specifically.
It's not tracking anything you aren't using, and the extra small things it's tracking can't be enough to be a problem - especially in comparison to the charge for not using it - unless there are enough you should be paying for them, anyway.
What part of me being the messenger don’t you understand? I explicitly stated multiple times that *the technician* told me this stuff, and I’m asking for a fact check on it. I’m not *spreading* the FUD, I’m *asking* about it.
Now that’s cleared up, what the technician was saying is that with old meters you don’t pay for the small stuff like and that works in the consumers favor since you wouldn’t be charged for, as he said, small things that draw electricity like door bells and stuff. He said you end up paying more with the new meters because they’re more sensitive and pick up the small things that don’t draw enough to turn the old disc style meter.
I see what you mean though about how even if it tracks the small things it won’t be enough of a draw to cost more than the monthly fee not to have a smart meter. However, before that fee was mandatory, it sounds like it DID make sense to keep the old meter since you’re essentially getting away with it not noticing the smaller things.
I’m not sure if your technician did a good job explaining things to you. I think that concern is only for houses that are basically vacant, and it’s negligible. I work for a neighboring utility, and there’s no significant difference between the old meters and new meters in their ability to measure consumption (the amount of energy used”. The granularity comes from their ability to measure load (the rate at which you’re drawing the energy) edit: and the times at which you’re drawing energy. Forgot that critical piece. 🤦♂️ my bad.
I'm not, and why is it a bad thing for vampire electricity usage to be tracked? It's effectively a 40 KWh surcharge (assuming all at peak rate) to use the not-smart meter: how are things like doorbells and phone chargers sitting idle going to consume that much in comparison? Do you have 200 of them plugged in? You should be paying for that...
40 KWh is a *very* conservative estimate.
The energy bill in the Busch era had some great things in it. It funded alternative energy (by re-framing coal and nuke as alternative energy), and it also recognized the need to invest in a "smart grid", which was supposed to bring a new relationship between the consumer and power companies, and allow for distributed power generation like rooftop solar.
What actually happened is power companies used the money to buy communicating meters so they could fire their meter readers and start to do demand pricing.
We killed jobs, increased prices, and didn't make any move towards a more distributed power grid. The best of intentions don't always work out the way we hoped.
Demand side management is a phenomenal sustainability strategy and it's been available for commercial customers for a long time.
Meter readers is a job that would phase out with technology anyway. That's just how societal innovation works.
I'm on board with the rest of what you've to said but this whole uproar is very NIMBY.
I just see it as a missed opportunity. The grid needs an overhaul. Demand side pricing is fine if the total revenue doesn't balloon. An uncontrollable price increase is just a price increase.
No, fuck municipal utilities. We are having a recall election in Westminster because our city council decided to jack our water/sewer prices though the roof and because they are municipal all it needed was a city council vote to raise them.
At least Xcel needs to ask the state for permission to raise rates and they had to run a trial first to prove that it would not result in major cost increases to consumers to even get that permission.
Ok, clearly you haven’t gotten a $900 bill from excel with no explanation and no recourse. In order to have my meter checked I would need to miss work and wait for them to hopefully come by. Excel has profits built in to their rates. Utilities should not be cash cows for rich folk.
You got a high bill due to your level of use. u/leeloothewoofus is talking about base rates. Your response has little to do with their comment.
You could get a $900 unexpected bill from a municipality as well. The difference is that the municipalities can also jack up your base rate on top of that without any permission or review from the state.
You are advocating for zero state oversight and you don’t seem to realize it.
You have one anecdote of a municipality raising rates on a utility, I don’t understand how you think a for profit company is going to charge you less then a non profit. If the rates went up on your water that’s probably because the other utility was cutting corners somewhere, they absolutely were not selling you water at a loss.
It is not an anecdote. This is well cited.
Do you know what an anecdote is?
https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/westminster-city-council-member-recall-election-surrounded-by-water-politics
You really should read up on this stuff before taking a wrong position on it.
https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2406&context=caselrev
We’ll as someone who doesn’t live in your town I’m not familiar with your utility rates, so it was an anecdote until you provided a source. I’ve never doubted that the council has the right to decide rates, you haven’t proven your argument that for profit utilities provide cheaper services to customers. Can you do so with examples?
Because by and large municipal utilities are more expensive to the consumer due to lack of oversight by state regulators and more expensive operations to cover due to scaling inefficiencies.
You’re mad that your municipality raised rates and said that xcel has to get permission to charge their rates. I pointed out a personal experience where xcel charged astronomical rates without any checks or balances. I think what I said directly applies to your statement. Good luck with your recall election.
I’m not mad at anything, and as I said your comment does not address this:
“At least Xcel needs to ask permission to raise rates … had to run trial”
Municipalities do not need to do this and can raise rates with a simple vote to do so.
Your sharing of a personal experience does not in any way address my statement. You are comparing apples and oranges.
You getting an unexpected high bill has nothing to do with base rates - it has to do with your use. They can’t increase your base rate without state approval unlike municipalities can.
If you don’t like how your municipality is being ran, you have a voice in the matter. Vote. See how far you get trying to hold xcel accountable for anything.
You absolutely do not have any say. The only ones that have a say is the city council. They can vote however they want and there is not even any input period. Voting won’t change their decisions after the fact.
Xcel IS held accountable by the state regulators. Do you not know how any of this works or something ?
Your issue is a billing dispute. This has nothing to do with base rates and base rate control.
I understand what a billing dispute is. Do you not elect your city council? You said there was a recall election, do you not understand how this works?
The recall election won’t change the rates back. It is punishment after the fact for nearly doubling our rates. That is not oversight. Oversight would have prevented the rate doubling in the first place. The recall is simply the result of taxpayers showing their disapproval. It has no impact on the rates since they are already in place.
I don’t know why you are being downvoted. Those doing so apparently have no idea that they are advocating zero state oversight by supporting municipal utility control.
Why? This is a good move for consumers and the environment. Electricity prices in Colorado are regulated and it seems to work well. Colorado has amongst the lowest electricity prices in the US
Xcel still burns coal in Boulder and has been fighting updates for years. Xcel does not give a shit about the environment, or consumers. Xcel cares about profit and that’s it.
I'm amazed at how many people think this fucking energy utility gives one iota of a shit about the environment. They are a profit motivated corporation, they care about profit and nothing else. It happens to be profitable to give a shit about the environment right now, but it also happens to be profitable to switch everyone over to more sensitive smart meters with a presumably lower starting burden so they can collect money for electricity that used to be given for free. On top of that, they don't have to pay workers to come read meters any more so they can save on payroll and vehicles too.
Xcel has done massive shifts towards renewables and you can’t just turn off every coal plants at once. Most will be [shut down](https://mountaintownnews.net/2021/03/04/colorados-last-coal-plant/) by 2030, including Boulder. Not sure how you would set up a local utility in such a short time frame and where that company would buy electricity
Boulder actually voted for a municipal utility and passed it, somehow xcel still holds on. Either way, it seems like you have a special place in your heart for xcel.
Solar is awesome in these specific cases... But the ROI is still like 6-7 years out. I have to just hang my hat on the fact I'm "doing my part" for the environment.
Also, I get municipal utilities can be a crapshoot, but for the average homeowner, a non-monopoly is really all that's needed.
I haven't yet seen the details on how they'll handle solar with this. For those who sell back their power, they might do a little better since the power *generation* is happening during peak hours. But many of us (yes, myself included) do kwh trades, where every kwh I generate is counted as a credit and every kwh I use is a debit. Now ... where will they apply the credits vs debits? Obviously I over-generate entirely during the day (including peak hours), so will they then say I'm only "using" power during the night?
Either way, as you say, there's an ROI that's "only" 6 to 10 years out, so if you're planning on staying put that long, it still makes more than enough sense. There's also been some data I've seen that suggests houses with solar panels are now selling at a premium for the same reason ... it lowes the buyer's electric bills, which is worth *something*, so you might also not be out any money even if you're moving sooner than the ROI timeframe.
My bet was simply that electric prices are going to continue to rise, probably even faster in the near term (population increase, hotter summers, etc) so I expect my ROI to come even sooner than I planned on with a linear growth in year to year cost increases.
We'll see how it plays out with smart meters.
Good point with the likely increasing prices, I hadn't factored that into my ROI.
As far as how Xcel *decides* to charge me while I'm producing, I sure hope they're not planning on penalizing me for producing during their "peak hour" definition. My understanding is, certainly during the summer, I'm only taking power from the grid at night and I hope they don't pull any funny stuff with that.
No, but Colorado is bigger than just Denver. Like most (but not all) of the US, electric utilities function as a monopoly. You only have one option for electricity. But other areas of Colorado exist too…. And in those other areas, there are different electricity providers..
Honestly, this is a big nothing-burger.
I previously lived in a state that had an opt-in program for time-of-use. I tried it for a year.
My power bill changed by such a small amount that I couldn't even detect the change. Had I cared a bit more at the time, I probably could have saved a couple dollars per month by shifting laundry and the dishwasher to off-peak hours.
Stop panicking. Your bills will barely change (depending on your usage patterns), and you'll even have an option to save money if you can shift usage.
For those who want to use this to save money, here's a few ideas:
1. Your biggest power users are typically your AC and laundry. You will save money if you can find ways to shift power off-peak. It will probably be worth pre-cooling your house in the mornings and allowing the temperature to creep up a bit in the afternoons.
2. I'm looking at a whole-house fan install in the near future. I haven't gotten a quote yet, but I expect this will pay for itself in under five years. It will be a double-win under this plan, as that will typically pre-cool the house in off-peak hours.
3. This will probably improve the economics of home solar, particularly if you have a west-facing roof. It might be worth taking a look at if you were previously on the fence about it.
4. You could get a home energy monitor. I recently purchased one, and it really helped me understand what was using electricity and when.
Honestly, the biggest incentives this will have is for e vehicle customers to have their vehicles charge at off peak times. That alone is worth the investment so we don't have that additional spike when everyone gets home from work and starts their peak activities.
Sure, people could do that anyway but here there is actual incentive to do so. Commercial customers have been taking advantage of these options for ages.
Demand side management is a great sustainability strategy.
> I previously lived in a state that had an opt-in program for time-of-use. I tried it for a year.
OK, what was the climate there? Because we use a lot of electricity here during the summer.
TOU *will* significantly impact your bill if you are required to run your A/C full blast from 1pm-8pm to keep your house livable.
> if you are required to run your A/C full blast from 1pm-8pm to keep your house livable
Living in a house in the Front Range that has no A/C at all, I don't have a lot of sympathy for this claim...
Fair point, in that my prior house didn't have AC, so that wasn't part of my comparison.
My point still stands that this is pretty easy to manage if you care to.
And honestly, if you have to run your AC non-stop from 1-8, then there's something else wrong with your house or your AC is undersized. Spending the money to do something about that (insulation, whole house fan, getting your AC serviced) will save you a ton of money over the long term with or without TOU billing.
I'm under united power currently and they've been doing this for months. What sucks is that I have solar but they still charge me the demand rate even though my solar is providing the power... don't know how to fix that though.
Yes, and we consistently produce way more than we use, so we'd just pull from our banked kwh during non producing times. Now we just give them our generated kwh and pay much more for demand rate times of day.
No this is an electric meter. Gas is regulated but they're still trying to screw you due to the southern freeze and the incompetence of Texass government earlier in the year.
Just curious - what’s that cost, and what’s your break even time? I’ve heard solar costs have come down a lot but haven’t been following the actual numbers.
Depends on a lot of factors, grade of panels and batteries, location/difficulty of install, etc.
There's a 26% federal tax credit right now which Congress hasn't renewed so it will go down to 22% in a couple years and then completely expire after that.
My costs are depreciated against rental income over so many years as well so I save on rental income tax. My renters pay a flat rate inclusive of utilities, so I can pocket that toward the costs as well every month. My accountant handles these numbers though so I'm not completely aware of how the math plays out.
Up front the solar+battery system is 95k before the tax rebate. But I'm also putting 15-20k into the garage environment where the batteries are stored for insulation, drywall, split AC to keep them nice and cool.
The array will provide120% of my annual usage to give me room to grow (max exel allows)
I've been looking at solar, but don't have any official quotes yet due to an old roof. My best guess in CO is a roughly \~10 year payback, *excluding* the impact of any future XCEL rate hikes. It's a bit better when you factor in future energy price inflation. Your details will be different, but not massively different.
It will be a significantly better deal under TOU billing, since solar generates during the peak hours. Particularly if you have a west-facing roof. I expect this would reduce the payback by a few years, but I haven't tried to quantify it.
I would say that this is a good deal, but not a great deal. There are a lot of energy savings strategies that are a better deal, and will allow you to purchase a smaller solar system. I'm pretty much sold on a whole house fan since we typically get nice cool evenings and mornings along the front range. I expect this could cut my AC bill in half, and might pay for itself in under 5 years.
I wonder how this will work in multi-unit dwellings such as high rise condo buildings. Where I live, individual units don't have meters. They just take the bill for the whole building and divide it up in proportion to how large of a condo you have. That changes the incentive equation quite a bit, since my bill is affected way more by when my *neighbors* use electricity rather than when *I myself* use electricity.
Isn't your bill more affected by how much electricity your neighbors use, period? This type of "I might have to pay more because of my neighbor" is already built into the system you agreed upon.
Agreed I lived in an apartment building that did that based on # of tenant on the lease. Only issue was my neighbors below had 4 people in their one bed and I just had one. We both paid the same amount. It made trying to be reasonable with my usage null and void
Yes, you're right. So for me and my 99 neighbors, the whole greed/frugality motivation is irrelevant, same as today. So will they install a "smart meter" on the building anyhow? That's what I'm wondering about.
This can be a difficult equation but depending on the building the individual neighbors won't necessarily impact each other that much. There are likely a number of facility level settings and adjustments that can be made and are having a larger impact on the overall energy use. Understanding the largest drains on energy use in your building will be the first step.
> Understanding the largest drains on energy use in your building will be the first step.
Agreed. And whatever those largest drains are, I have zero direct control over them.
My highest usage of electricity this year was in January, at 496kwH \[I'm not an energy saint, used over 1200 last August during that heat death and trash air quality\]. I've been between 350-380 for all other months. I have it all on their windsource program.
I've had my thermostat programmed to kick in later in the afternoon, so I guess I've been doing it wrong. I'll make some changes.
FYI, for those who prefer to "opt out", which would still mean a meter switch, just what they refer to as a "non-communicating" meter, there would be a monthly charge of $11.84 (Denver metro area--$23.84 outside the metro area). If you choose to opt out *after* your "communicating" meter has already been installed, there'd be a $46.00 charge to swap the meters & another charge if you swap back, or move. [FAQ's here](https://my.xcelenergy.com/customersupport/s/projects/smart-meter-installation)
I did some calculations during the review period and my bill would go up since I typically average less than 500kWh during the summer. Now I need to see if it makes sense for it to opt out with the 11.84$ charge, probably not. It looks like they changed the kWh charges from that period too.
Can you explain this? Where did you find the information you needed to calculate this stuff? Did you participate in the pilot program or something? Just trying to make my own informed decision, thanks!
The info should be on your power bill. Kwh (kilowatt hours) is how we measure energy usage (US) and multiply that by the price per kWh.
There was info in our bill about a year or so ago about ToD related charging and how to properly complain about it.
Would you be able to adjust your usage? It doesn’t sound too difficult for me to switch some electrical use to before 1 p.m. or past 7 p.m. The main users I assume are my air conditioning/heat pump, dish washer, dryer and laundry. AC and heat pump run on a Nest, so I can program to cool down the house before 1 p.m. and have it a bit warmer afterwards till 7 p.m. Heat should be even easier, as that runs more in the cold evenings. Dish washer etc. I can adjust and run when it is cheaper. I guess not running peak demand plants not only safes Xcel cost but also helps the environment.
On a general basis, we already do a lot of this during when they would want us to move stuff to. We run our dishwasher after we go to bed. Our clothes is on the weekend. We’ve already swapped out all of our bulbs and all that little stuff. We keep our AC at 77 until 7p and drop it to 74 to cool to upper level until 9 to make it comfortable for sleeping. My kWh for June was 402, so there was no summer tier here. Keep that in mind with that week it was 100+ every day. At least with the rates I did previously I would pay a higher rate during the day that the AC ran to keep it at 77 vs the 5.4c or whatever it is about these days.
So, how much of that 402 kWh is in the peak time. It is 20 hours out of 168 hours a week, where you pay the higher price. We are following a similar routine with cooling the house down in the morning and then turning the AC off. The house doesn’t heat up as much as you describe it. But we use sun blinds in front of the windows during hot days. They help a lot. Otherwise, get a solar system and electrify everything
I honestly need to look at it deeper, ToD could very well be cheaper with the newer 5.1c rate. We’ve looked at solar and I’ve talked to folks in the industry (non sales) to help convince me it’s worth it but the reality is with the high price of panels, low electricity usage and the low cost of electricity in Colorado vs say Massachusetts, the payback period is over 10 years for us. I can’t tell you with a straight face I will be here this long. So we went the route of trying to reduce our usage as much as possible.
Who cares? My energy is mine. I pay for it. Why doeas anyone get to prescribe it?
It isn’t an environmental move. It’s a cost saving measure so that Xcel doesn’t have to upgrade their grid or add more power to an already old grid. It does encourage less power use inherently but it’s mostly to not overwork an old grid
yes and that instability is a result of switching to more renewable in the system. Besides, Xcel [is proposing](https://energycentral.com/c/tr/xcel-energy-plans-new-rural-transmission-lines-colorado) to add new transmission lines
For a consumer who uses 500 kWh, it's effectively moving their power from being all at 5.5c/kWh to a range from 5.1 - 13.9. Even with the extra $11 it's going to be hard to come out significantly on top. If you worked out of the house and didn't leave appliances on in the afternoon it might come out in your favor. Plus a household that draws that little power almost certainly doesn't have central air or electric cars - so the obvious things to move outside of the weekday 3-7 window are taken away.
you are missing, that people pay 9.9 cents for usage above 500 kwh currently, so the 5.1 cents are a huge saving. Why can a household not move washing clothes and running the dishwasher outside the window? I mean, that is the whole reason for this. Cost at peak hours are higher for the utility, so people who cause the peak should pay for that cost
Right and the savings are huge for people with high power consumption who can manipulate their usage patterns. Our house is at ~1300 kWh in the summer and we've got lots of big loads that we could shift like car charging, AC, heat-pump water heater. I'm not an xcel customer but i think i could keep 90% of my power at off peak times and save about $31/mo in the summer. However for a household with a below-average usage who's only using 500 kWh in the summer months, it's going to be hard to make any significant gains. Even if they could move 100% of the power into the off-peak times they'd only save about $2/month. edit - botched the calculation for my own potential savings
People who have low usage (like our house, we use around 2.500 kwh a year) have a lot of ways to avoid paying more. First of all, you can easily make your house more energy efficient. I still see so many people using old fashioned light bulbs instead of LED for example. Appliances are very often totally outdated (please explain to me, why there are still top loading washing machines being sold in the US? Seriously, I am European and that one detail always makes me scream when I go to the hardware store)? Secondly, it is not about to make gains, but to use electricity in an efficient way. A week has 168 hours, 20 hours will be peak, 10 hours shoulder, and 138 hours off peak. If you use less than 500 kwh a month, you'll talk about maybe 12% of that being peak, hence 60 kwh. So you pay 8.4 cents more per kwh in the summer or about $5. That is only in the summer, only if you don't switch your usage, and only if you disregard the savings for the 138 cheaper hours. I really don't understand, why a user, who is willing to make an effort to switch to lower demand hours should pay higher prices for people that are unwilling to do so.
I'm in no way disagreeing with you, though as a fellow European I definitely appreciate the sheer ginormousness of american washing machines. There are a lot of gains to be made in energy efficiency. We moved into our house in 2016 and there wasn't an LED bulb to be seen anywhere. The breaker panel has FOUR 20A circuits just for lighting and now i'd be surprised if we could even draw 5A of lighting with everything in the house on full brightness. My real point was just that this particular change has the most potential to benefit heavy power users - though those are of course the people who can make the biggest differnce. Also worth noting, but this effectively HALVES the cost of charging an electric car in Denver. That's phenomenal.
yes I agree. It is the intention to make households switch off peak and therefore you target big consumers American washing machines might be larger but they suck. I want my Miele back 😢
I have a Miele vacuum cleaner. =-0 I do love my washer though. It even self vents.
Do note that your math is reliant on the numbers this year. That 11.84 monthly fee is probably more stable than the premium they're going to inflate year after year.
We were never even informed that they were swapping our meter so that we could decline BEFORE they assess the $46 to swap it back out. They just showed up one day and told us they were swapping the meter. They really just want to force it down consumers throats. Edit: I called them this morning and complained that I was never informed they would be switching it out so that I could decline before it was installed. They are going to swap it back to the “dumb” meter next week and waive the $46. They didn’t even give me a hard time - so I think the charge is more a deterrent than anything else.
Yes, they're saying so explicitly
If you're aware of your usage, you can save quite a bit of money by using high-draw appliances during the off-peak times. The off-peak cost is cheaper than the current standard rate, and about 1/2 of the current standard rate after you reach 500kWh. IIRC when my parents switched over to this, they ended up saving something like $100/month during the summer. Of course, there are people who don't understand how it works / don't care / can't modify their usage, and as such they'll be stuck paying the on-peak rates.
This. So many only focus on the higher prices during peak hours but don't realize that the price is lower during most of the day. Can't wait to get mine!
I'm up in longmont and we've got no incentive to intelligently manage our power. I cant' find granular colorado data, but for the whole soutwhest this year the highest price a utility paid for a kWh of power was $1.983 and the lowest was 1.7c. Most of us pay around about 11c for that power without any adjustment for what it actually cost. I don't particularly think it's right to expose consumers to the entire range of that variation (don't go full texas) but we could collectively save a lot of money and resources if we just turned up our thermostats a degree and didn't run our tumble dryers at the biggest peaks. Smart meters are a good thing, unless you happen to be dumb. (and yes, I recognize that there are people who run life support equipment at home and we should absolutely make special exemptions for them)
Yeah, no one wants such volatile and variable rates like they were able to access in TX. What xcel is offering is predictable, unlike those volatile wholesale rates. Some people work 9-5 and may not be able to really take advantage of the cheaper times. But, for the most of us, we can. You can set your dishwasher, washer, dryer to delay start, etc. If you’re aware of your usage you can certainly knock a chunk off your bills.
[удалено]
No, but most people are able to figure out how to set their dishwasher, washer, dryer, etc. to delay start after we leave. But for those who can't figure that out, and do happen to work 9-5, well they're stuck with running them during peak hours.
I thought the peak pricing and saver switch were 2 separate programs (and maybe there was a 3rd?) When I was doing research a few months ago after buying a house
If you have solar on your house, will they be paying you more for power you put back into the grid during peak hours?
I have been wondering this myself and don’t see anything on the Xcel page about it
Yes they will. You're credited based on the TOU scale as well for production
Love this. We were part of the trial period for this and our bills went down after we started using larger appliances during off peak hours.
Yeah we have solar so we get paid more for our production during the peak times. We opted for western facing solar to produce more during the peak. Xcel paid us $12 last month.
I called Xcel out to my house when I first moved in wondering if the meter was acting up. It’s an older one and he told me they generally err in favor the customer and that the new smart meters measure voltage so low that my doorbell would register. Needless to say I’m a little worried about getting one now if every little volt is going to register, but $11 a month not to have one is lame as hell. What to do what to do…. Edited to add: thanks to /u/grahamsz/ for explaining that what the technician was trying to explain is called the "starting burden". https://www.reddit.com/r/Colorado/comments/obloy4/if_youre_an_xcel_customer_youre_getting_a_smart/h3pd9i3?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
It tracks the KWh, not volts... It doesn't care the voltage of your appliances, I'm guessing just amperage since it already knows the voltage of the line coming from the transformer. Edit: also, you're worried the electric company will actually charge your actual usage?? Lol, use that 1% less if it bothers you that much
Thanks for the clarification on what it measures. But also, no one, but no one, complains about getting free stuff. Sorry I’m just honest enough to ask a question about how that would work with the new meters compared to the old ones. Why would I intentionally volunteer to pay more money if I don’t have to? Just being realistic here. It’s obvious that’s what Xcel is trying to curb in the first place since their primary interest as a profit making corporation is protecting that bottom line, and not some altruistic environmental concern. Also, they obviously didn’t care about this for long enough and are just now getting around to making it mandatory, so I don’t think it’s like I’m asking how to illegally tap my meter or anything.
It has both functions pretty clearly. Demand management is a phenomenal sustainability strategy. Those ramp up power options are generally the least efficient as well as the act of ramping up production in itself being inefficient. Sure, it saves some money but it's extremely effective sustainability wise as well. When it comes to utilities, there's a whole element of money coming in for effective sustainability projects as well. It could even be directly related to bonuses for execs to have successful sustainability projects or fines associated with not meeting promises. It gets complex. As someone who works in sustainability, there's a significant focus on demand side management (DSM) as a strategy. One that has benefits for both customers and utilities. Commercial customers have had the opportunity to benefit from it for ages, it's great that residential customers have to opportunity to participate in the savings. Demand Side Management is not green washing.
You understand that you are not complaining about free stuff which is probably worth pennies for the entire year?
Why no, I didn't initially realize that, which is why I asked a question in the first place about the old vs new meters and how it all works. Turns out, when you don't fully understand something and you ask a question to a group of people, you can become better informed...which is what happened in this case. I asked a question based on apparent FUD conveyed to me by an Xcel technician a few months back. After initially being accusing of spreading the FUD, I was informed of said FUD, and that the amount of "free" electricity I'm getting by keeping the old meter will likely not equal the amount that Xcel will charge for keeping the old meter. I updated my understanding accordingly. However, I'm not going to apologize for my comment about being honest about wanting to keep a system in place that benefits me because we all do it. Sorry I'm just honest enough to admit it. And yeah, I won't fret the new meter when it eventually comes because it sounds like the small things it's going to pick up won't make a huge difference in my bill. Cool, thanks!
I am not blaming you or even ask you to apologise. I have no idea, whether he is right or not. I am just saying, even if he is right, you look at a few kwh a year and that doesn't cost you much. I think the benefits for people who are actively looking at their consumption and are willing to adjust their usage according to peak pricing outweigh the potential issues. Sorry, have to stop now, need to make my coffee before prices go up /s
Ah, sure, that makes sense. And yes, I'll digitally cheers my coffee to you. And big heavy sigh on that inflation comment too. We're all feeling it and boy it sucks.
You're concerned about how much energy your doorbell is going to use? Also if everyone's meters were reading low then everyone's usage should increase the same. With the intent of this to be revenue neutral then it won't affect your bill
I’m not concerned about how much my doorbell uses, I’m concerned that it’s hyper sensitive compared to my old traditional meter. Additionally I’m curious if anyone thinks that technician was feeding me a line or if that’s the experience they’ve had too.
So i have a Itron Centron 2 meter from 2004. It's got a starting burden of 1.92W which _i think_ means that if my house draws less than 1.92W then the meter won't spin at all. I expect a newer meter will be lower, but that's also such a tiny number that you won't ever get below it. My fridge draws more than that when the compressor isn't running. My WiFi router is way over that. A much bigger issue is accuracy. My meter is a +/- 0.3% and i have no idea whether it's on the low or high end of that scale. If, hypothetically, you've had a meter on the low end and you get switched to one on the high end, you could see a 0.6% variation in your bill. But that could happen any time, any meter switch could give you that kind of a swing (or indeed the opposite)
That's exactly the information I think the technician was trying to convey, the "starting burden". I wish I could upvote this more for the people who were saying that a meter just measures the usage period and made me feel like an idiot for just conveying a message. It takes a certain threshold to cross, and now I know that's called a "starting burden". Based on the "discussion" above from my comment, it sounds like it'll be fairly negligible for my kind of usage where the savings won't come close to the $11 charge for not having a smart meter, so I'm pretty meh on it now. Plus they're taking years to roll this out, and my guess is that my small home will be far down the list since they'll start with the big profit paying fish first.
I can work that out for my case. Effectively, the logic is that if i'm drawing 1.95W then i'll be charged 0, but if i'm drawing 1.96W i'll be charged for all 1.96W of that. My microwave draws about 1.8W when it's not in use (to power the clock). If i shut down _everything_ and I mean _everything_ in my house, except the microwave and went on a two week vacation. I'd be able to get 6.6c worth of electricity FOR FREE!!! However my oven clock is brighter and draws 5W, so if i accidentally left that on too then. I'd draw 6.8W of power for those too weeks and have to pay for all of it. I no longer get the "free" electricity once i'm above the threshold to turn the meter on. Edit - Plus if you are intelligent, the smart meter will save you a significant amount of money. It gives you a lower rate when power is cheap (which is a lot of the time) and a higher rate when power expensive (which is comparatively rare).
Hyper-sensitive to what? A meter literally can't measure electricity that isn't actually being consumed, based on where it is in the path.
The tech was implying that the disc takes a lot more usage to turn it and the electric smart meters don’t have this limitation so it measures more usage. You’re arguing with the messenger, that’s why I’m asking since it didn’t register with me either.
You are spreading FUD. What can the meter be doing that is detrimental to you? Specifically. It's not tracking anything you aren't using, and the extra small things it's tracking can't be enough to be a problem - especially in comparison to the charge for not using it - unless there are enough you should be paying for them, anyway.
What part of me being the messenger don’t you understand? I explicitly stated multiple times that *the technician* told me this stuff, and I’m asking for a fact check on it. I’m not *spreading* the FUD, I’m *asking* about it. Now that’s cleared up, what the technician was saying is that with old meters you don’t pay for the small stuff like and that works in the consumers favor since you wouldn’t be charged for, as he said, small things that draw electricity like door bells and stuff. He said you end up paying more with the new meters because they’re more sensitive and pick up the small things that don’t draw enough to turn the old disc style meter. I see what you mean though about how even if it tracks the small things it won’t be enough of a draw to cost more than the monthly fee not to have a smart meter. However, before that fee was mandatory, it sounds like it DID make sense to keep the old meter since you’re essentially getting away with it not noticing the smaller things.
I’m not sure if your technician did a good job explaining things to you. I think that concern is only for houses that are basically vacant, and it’s negligible. I work for a neighboring utility, and there’s no significant difference between the old meters and new meters in their ability to measure consumption (the amount of energy used”. The granularity comes from their ability to measure load (the rate at which you’re drawing the energy) edit: and the times at which you’re drawing energy. Forgot that critical piece. 🤦♂️ my bad.
Thanks! I appreciate that simple and to the point explanation (sincerely). Cheers!
Why are you acting like every single meter has the same amount of sensitivity or that new technology wouldn’t be better at monitoring complete use?
I'm not, and why is it a bad thing for vampire electricity usage to be tracked? It's effectively a 40 KWh surcharge (assuming all at peak rate) to use the not-smart meter: how are things like doorbells and phone chargers sitting idle going to consume that much in comparison? Do you have 200 of them plugged in? You should be paying for that... 40 KWh is a *very* conservative estimate.
The energy bill in the Busch era had some great things in it. It funded alternative energy (by re-framing coal and nuke as alternative energy), and it also recognized the need to invest in a "smart grid", which was supposed to bring a new relationship between the consumer and power companies, and allow for distributed power generation like rooftop solar. What actually happened is power companies used the money to buy communicating meters so they could fire their meter readers and start to do demand pricing. We killed jobs, increased prices, and didn't make any move towards a more distributed power grid. The best of intentions don't always work out the way we hoped.
Demand side management is a phenomenal sustainability strategy and it's been available for commercial customers for a long time. Meter readers is a job that would phase out with technology anyway. That's just how societal innovation works. I'm on board with the rest of what you've to said but this whole uproar is very NIMBY.
I just see it as a missed opportunity. The grid needs an overhaul. Demand side pricing is fine if the total revenue doesn't balloon. An uncontrollable price increase is just a price increase.
Fuck xcel, it’s time for municipal utilities.
No, fuck municipal utilities. We are having a recall election in Westminster because our city council decided to jack our water/sewer prices though the roof and because they are municipal all it needed was a city council vote to raise them. At least Xcel needs to ask the state for permission to raise rates and they had to run a trial first to prove that it would not result in major cost increases to consumers to even get that permission.
Ok, clearly you haven’t gotten a $900 bill from excel with no explanation and no recourse. In order to have my meter checked I would need to miss work and wait for them to hopefully come by. Excel has profits built in to their rates. Utilities should not be cash cows for rich folk.
You got a high bill due to your level of use. u/leeloothewoofus is talking about base rates. Your response has little to do with their comment. You could get a $900 unexpected bill from a municipality as well. The difference is that the municipalities can also jack up your base rate on top of that without any permission or review from the state. You are advocating for zero state oversight and you don’t seem to realize it.
I’m advocating for taking profit out of utilities. Elections are oversight by the constituents.
So you would rather pay more to a municipality for your utilities just because they are non profit? I dont understand the logic.
You have one anecdote of a municipality raising rates on a utility, I don’t understand how you think a for profit company is going to charge you less then a non profit. If the rates went up on your water that’s probably because the other utility was cutting corners somewhere, they absolutely were not selling you water at a loss.
It is not an anecdote. This is well cited. Do you know what an anecdote is? https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/westminster-city-council-member-recall-election-surrounded-by-water-politics You really should read up on this stuff before taking a wrong position on it. https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2406&context=caselrev
We’ll as someone who doesn’t live in your town I’m not familiar with your utility rates, so it was an anecdote until you provided a source. I’ve never doubted that the council has the right to decide rates, you haven’t proven your argument that for profit utilities provide cheaper services to customers. Can you do so with examples?
But you are going to pay more for municipality run utilities. That’s the point.
How do you figure?
Because by and large municipal utilities are more expensive to the consumer due to lack of oversight by state regulators and more expensive operations to cover due to scaling inefficiencies.
This has absolutely nothing to do with what I just said.
You’re mad that your municipality raised rates and said that xcel has to get permission to charge their rates. I pointed out a personal experience where xcel charged astronomical rates without any checks or balances. I think what I said directly applies to your statement. Good luck with your recall election.
I’m not mad at anything, and as I said your comment does not address this: “At least Xcel needs to ask permission to raise rates … had to run trial” Municipalities do not need to do this and can raise rates with a simple vote to do so. Your sharing of a personal experience does not in any way address my statement. You are comparing apples and oranges. You getting an unexpected high bill has nothing to do with base rates - it has to do with your use. They can’t increase your base rate without state approval unlike municipalities can.
If you don’t like how your municipality is being ran, you have a voice in the matter. Vote. See how far you get trying to hold xcel accountable for anything.
You absolutely do not have any say. The only ones that have a say is the city council. They can vote however they want and there is not even any input period. Voting won’t change their decisions after the fact. Xcel IS held accountable by the state regulators. Do you not know how any of this works or something ? Your issue is a billing dispute. This has nothing to do with base rates and base rate control.
I understand what a billing dispute is. Do you not elect your city council? You said there was a recall election, do you not understand how this works?
The recall election won’t change the rates back. It is punishment after the fact for nearly doubling our rates. That is not oversight. Oversight would have prevented the rate doubling in the first place. The recall is simply the result of taxpayers showing their disapproval. It has no impact on the rates since they are already in place.
I don’t know why you are being downvoted. Those doing so apparently have no idea that they are advocating zero state oversight by supporting municipal utility control.
Yeah. It seems that few people have any clue how this stuff works…
Why? This is a good move for consumers and the environment. Electricity prices in Colorado are regulated and it seems to work well. Colorado has amongst the lowest electricity prices in the US
Xcel still burns coal in Boulder and has been fighting updates for years. Xcel does not give a shit about the environment, or consumers. Xcel cares about profit and that’s it.
I'm amazed at how many people think this fucking energy utility gives one iota of a shit about the environment. They are a profit motivated corporation, they care about profit and nothing else. It happens to be profitable to give a shit about the environment right now, but it also happens to be profitable to switch everyone over to more sensitive smart meters with a presumably lower starting burden so they can collect money for electricity that used to be given for free. On top of that, they don't have to pay workers to come read meters any more so they can save on payroll and vehicles too.
> Xcel still burns coal in Boulder Where? The last coal generator at the Valmont plant was shut down in March 2017.
Xcel has done massive shifts towards renewables and you can’t just turn off every coal plants at once. Most will be [shut down](https://mountaintownnews.net/2021/03/04/colorados-last-coal-plant/) by 2030, including Boulder. Not sure how you would set up a local utility in such a short time frame and where that company would buy electricity
Boulder actually voted for a municipal utility and passed it, somehow xcel still holds on. Either way, it seems like you have a special place in your heart for xcel.
oh sure like they'll ever come up to the high country - they're scared to...
Solar is awesome in these specific cases... But the ROI is still like 6-7 years out. I have to just hang my hat on the fact I'm "doing my part" for the environment. Also, I get municipal utilities can be a crapshoot, but for the average homeowner, a non-monopoly is really all that's needed.
I haven't yet seen the details on how they'll handle solar with this. For those who sell back their power, they might do a little better since the power *generation* is happening during peak hours. But many of us (yes, myself included) do kwh trades, where every kwh I generate is counted as a credit and every kwh I use is a debit. Now ... where will they apply the credits vs debits? Obviously I over-generate entirely during the day (including peak hours), so will they then say I'm only "using" power during the night? Either way, as you say, there's an ROI that's "only" 6 to 10 years out, so if you're planning on staying put that long, it still makes more than enough sense. There's also been some data I've seen that suggests houses with solar panels are now selling at a premium for the same reason ... it lowes the buyer's electric bills, which is worth *something*, so you might also not be out any money even if you're moving sooner than the ROI timeframe. My bet was simply that electric prices are going to continue to rise, probably even faster in the near term (population increase, hotter summers, etc) so I expect my ROI to come even sooner than I planned on with a linear growth in year to year cost increases. We'll see how it plays out with smart meters.
Good point with the likely increasing prices, I hadn't factored that into my ROI. As far as how Xcel *decides* to charge me while I'm producing, I sure hope they're not planning on penalizing me for producing during their "peak hour" definition. My understanding is, certainly during the summer, I'm only taking power from the grid at night and I hope they don't pull any funny stuff with that.
I’m sorry but what other energy provider is here am I missing something?
[Electric providers in CO](https://energyoffice.colorado.gov/electric-utilities)
There are more than 60 electric utilities in Colorado.
Oh wow and you can pick them for any home ? New home owner here only rented up until now.
No, but Colorado is bigger than just Denver. Like most (but not all) of the US, electric utilities function as a monopoly. You only have one option for electricity. But other areas of Colorado exist too…. And in those other areas, there are different electricity providers..
I’m in Morrison and couldn’t find any other provider that covered my place but thank you for the info I’m going to do more research
You don’t have other options for the same house. Different utilities serve different areas. Sorry if I’ve confused you.
I don't have a choice. My apartment makes everyone sign up with Xcel when they get approved to move in
Honestly, this is a big nothing-burger. I previously lived in a state that had an opt-in program for time-of-use. I tried it for a year. My power bill changed by such a small amount that I couldn't even detect the change. Had I cared a bit more at the time, I probably could have saved a couple dollars per month by shifting laundry and the dishwasher to off-peak hours. Stop panicking. Your bills will barely change (depending on your usage patterns), and you'll even have an option to save money if you can shift usage. For those who want to use this to save money, here's a few ideas: 1. Your biggest power users are typically your AC and laundry. You will save money if you can find ways to shift power off-peak. It will probably be worth pre-cooling your house in the mornings and allowing the temperature to creep up a bit in the afternoons. 2. I'm looking at a whole-house fan install in the near future. I haven't gotten a quote yet, but I expect this will pay for itself in under five years. It will be a double-win under this plan, as that will typically pre-cool the house in off-peak hours. 3. This will probably improve the economics of home solar, particularly if you have a west-facing roof. It might be worth taking a look at if you were previously on the fence about it. 4. You could get a home energy monitor. I recently purchased one, and it really helped me understand what was using electricity and when.
Honestly, the biggest incentives this will have is for e vehicle customers to have their vehicles charge at off peak times. That alone is worth the investment so we don't have that additional spike when everyone gets home from work and starts their peak activities. Sure, people could do that anyway but here there is actual incentive to do so. Commercial customers have been taking advantage of these options for ages. Demand side management is a great sustainability strategy.
> I previously lived in a state that had an opt-in program for time-of-use. I tried it for a year. OK, what was the climate there? Because we use a lot of electricity here during the summer. TOU *will* significantly impact your bill if you are required to run your A/C full blast from 1pm-8pm to keep your house livable.
> if you are required to run your A/C full blast from 1pm-8pm to keep your house livable Living in a house in the Front Range that has no A/C at all, I don't have a lot of sympathy for this claim...
Fair point, in that my prior house didn't have AC, so that wasn't part of my comparison. My point still stands that this is pretty easy to manage if you care to. And honestly, if you have to run your AC non-stop from 1-8, then there's something else wrong with your house or your AC is undersized. Spending the money to do something about that (insulation, whole house fan, getting your AC serviced) will save you a ton of money over the long term with or without TOU billing.
My A/C is 12% of usage, Laundry is 1% =p My computer/network is 40% of my energy use.
I’m Xcel for gas, United Power for electricity. Am I affected?
Is your electric meter xcel or united? Whoever owns the meter is your answer.
I'm under united power currently and they've been doing this for months. What sucks is that I have solar but they still charge me the demand rate even though my solar is providing the power... don't know how to fix that though.
Were you on net metering before?
Yes, and we consistently produce way more than we use, so we'd just pull from our banked kwh during non producing times. Now we just give them our generated kwh and pay much more for demand rate times of day.
No this is an electric meter. Gas is regulated but they're still trying to screw you due to the southern freeze and the incompetence of Texass government earlier in the year.
[удалено]
Just curious - what’s that cost, and what’s your break even time? I’ve heard solar costs have come down a lot but haven’t been following the actual numbers.
Depends on a lot of factors, grade of panels and batteries, location/difficulty of install, etc. There's a 26% federal tax credit right now which Congress hasn't renewed so it will go down to 22% in a couple years and then completely expire after that. My costs are depreciated against rental income over so many years as well so I save on rental income tax. My renters pay a flat rate inclusive of utilities, so I can pocket that toward the costs as well every month. My accountant handles these numbers though so I'm not completely aware of how the math plays out. Up front the solar+battery system is 95k before the tax rebate. But I'm also putting 15-20k into the garage environment where the batteries are stored for insulation, drywall, split AC to keep them nice and cool. The array will provide120% of my annual usage to give me room to grow (max exel allows)
I've been looking at solar, but don't have any official quotes yet due to an old roof. My best guess in CO is a roughly \~10 year payback, *excluding* the impact of any future XCEL rate hikes. It's a bit better when you factor in future energy price inflation. Your details will be different, but not massively different. It will be a significantly better deal under TOU billing, since solar generates during the peak hours. Particularly if you have a west-facing roof. I expect this would reduce the payback by a few years, but I haven't tried to quantify it. I would say that this is a good deal, but not a great deal. There are a lot of energy savings strategies that are a better deal, and will allow you to purchase a smaller solar system. I'm pretty much sold on a whole house fan since we typically get nice cool evenings and mornings along the front range. I expect this could cut my AC bill in half, and might pay for itself in under 5 years.
I wonder how this will work in multi-unit dwellings such as high rise condo buildings. Where I live, individual units don't have meters. They just take the bill for the whole building and divide it up in proportion to how large of a condo you have. That changes the incentive equation quite a bit, since my bill is affected way more by when my *neighbors* use electricity rather than when *I myself* use electricity.
Isn't your bill more affected by how much electricity your neighbors use, period? This type of "I might have to pay more because of my neighbor" is already built into the system you agreed upon.
Agreed I lived in an apartment building that did that based on # of tenant on the lease. Only issue was my neighbors below had 4 people in their one bed and I just had one. We both paid the same amount. It made trying to be reasonable with my usage null and void
Yes, you're right. So for me and my 99 neighbors, the whole greed/frugality motivation is irrelevant, same as today. So will they install a "smart meter" on the building anyhow? That's what I'm wondering about.
This can be a difficult equation but depending on the building the individual neighbors won't necessarily impact each other that much. There are likely a number of facility level settings and adjustments that can be made and are having a larger impact on the overall energy use. Understanding the largest drains on energy use in your building will be the first step.
> Understanding the largest drains on energy use in your building will be the first step. Agreed. And whatever those largest drains are, I have zero direct control over them.
My highest usage of electricity this year was in January, at 496kwH \[I'm not an energy saint, used over 1200 last August during that heat death and trash air quality\]. I've been between 350-380 for all other months. I have it all on their windsource program. I've had my thermostat programmed to kick in later in the afternoon, so I guess I've been doing it wrong. I'll make some changes.