Some things I can support conceptually:
1) you can’t treat self consumption
As a cost shift a priori. If you want to debate whether people pay a fair share that is a cost of service study.
2) the fact that care customers get paid less and their nem reduces care subsidy is a reasonable point
…
1) you can’t treat self consumption
As a cost shift a priori. If you want to debate whether people pay a fair share that is a cost of service study.
2) the fact that care customers get paid less and their nem reduces care subsidy is a reasonable point
…
Comments
Needs to be being taken seriously as constructive professionals. Until that happens these kind of reports won’t mean anything, even if they are of better quality
Still get this. The 75% haircut comes from two things: 1) rates =/= avoided costs; 2) solar used to coincide wit the hours that drove G,T, and D capicty needs. Now it mostly out of those hours and just avoiding energy….