4 tenants, 1 60kW solar array - possible to run 4 AC outputs from single inverter?

Brettstep said:
www.dispatch.com

Despite complaints, PUCO rules it can't fully regulate companies selling power to tenants

Ohio utility regulators have ruled in a long-running consumer dispute over companies that buy electricity at wholesale levels and then resell it.
www.dispatch.com
Click to expand...
Yeah I know two things about this:
1) this is regulated at the state or even local level, so someone with intricate knowledge of the local legal details would be a big help
2) I don't know enough about it in my own state, let alone yours!

I did find the article interesting. One thought : If the landlord is going to save money by going solar, I recommend passing at least some of those savings along to the tenants. Otherwise a tenant might be motivated to complain to the regulators about unfair profiteering.
 
jaggedben said:
I did find the article interesting. One thought : If the landlord is going to save money by going solar, I recommend passing at least some of those savings along to the tenants. Otherwise a tenant might be motivated to complain to the regulators about unfair profiteering.
Click to expand...
Why would you say that? If a building owner wants to put a PV system on the roof of his building to feed a meter that is separate from the tenants' meters, why would the tenants object unless he raises their rent to pay for it or unless the roof is part of what they are leasing?
 
ggunn said:
Why would you say that? If a building owner wants to put a PV system on the roof of his building to feed a meter that is separate from the tenants' meters, why would the tenants object unless he raises their rent to pay for it or unless the roof is part of what they are leasing?
Click to expand...

We're not talking about a meter that's entirely seperate from the tenants' meters. What's discussed in the article is a master utility meter upstream in series with non-utility tenant submeters that the landlord uses to bill tenants. I.e tenants pay landlord based on sub meters, landlord pays utility.

As the article mentions, the regulators don't want submetered tenants to pay more than they would typically pay to a utility. It's basically supposed to be a pass through. And I would wager that no one has yet tested the law on whether solar savings are required to be passed through as well. So I advise passing some through so that tenants aren't incentivized to make the OP's client the test case.
 
jaggedben said:
We're not talking about a meter that's entirely seperate from the tenants' meters. What's discussed in the article is a master utility meter upstream in series with non-utility tenant submeters that the landlord uses to bill tenants. I.e tenants pay landlord based on sub meters, landlord pays utility.

As the article mentions, the regulators don't want submetered tenants to pay more than they would typically pay to a utility. It's basically supposed to be a pass through. And I would wager that no one has yet tested the law on whether solar savings are required to be passed through as well. So I advise passing some through so that tenants aren't incentivized to make the OP's client the test case.
Click to expand...
Well, OK, but the tenants do not own the building, and if PV on the roof does not detract from what they receive with their lease or make their energy cost more than it otherwise would, why should they care if the building owner uses PV on the roof to generate more income for himself? It's his investment.
 
For the same reason they would care if the owner buys electricity from the utility and resells it to them. They will want the best deal they can get.
 
I don't see how the tenant on the load side of the meter has any claim on what the landlord does on the line side of it.
 
jaggedben said:
Charging anyone for electricity is generally heavily regulated.
Click to expand...
Many people think that, but I don't really think that is true. According to a resource on the NCSL.ORG website, there are only Twenty-two states, three counties and Washington, D.C., that have statutes, regulations, or rulings on utility submetering. None of them outright prohibit the practice. I think the most restrictive regulation is just that the electricity can't be marked up in price. Also it should be noted that some states actually REQUIRE submetering for conservation purposes.
 
electrofelon said:
... I think the most restrictive regulation is just that the electricity can't be marked up in price. ...
Click to expand...
Right, so if you are effectively paying less for electricity because you installed solar to supply or offset it, are you then allowed to charge regular price to your submetered tenants? Or is that a markup? I'm not saying I know the answer, I'm saying I'd consult a lawyer about. And I suggested cutting the tenants in on the deal by some amount to lower the incentive for someone bringing it to court. The only thing I'm willing to bet a sandwich on is that if there's a law or regulation restricting markups, it was written before anyone thought of the solar situation, so the lawyers will be reading between the lines.
 
jaggedben said:
Right, so if you are effectively paying less for electricity because you installed solar to supply or offset it, are you then allowed to charge regular price to your submetered tenants? Or is that a markup? I'm not saying I know the answer, I'm saying I'd consult a lawyer about. And I suggested cutting the tenants in on the deal by some amount to lower the incentive for someone bringing it to court. The only thing I'm willing to bet a sandwich on is that if there's a law or regulation restricting markups, it was written before anyone thought of the solar situation, so the lawyers will be reading between the lines.
Click to expand...
Good question, who knows. Or, say a building is off grid. What can the owner charge the tenants for electricity? 🤔
 
electrofelon said:
Good question, who knows. Or, say a building is off grid. What can the owner charge the tenants for electricity? 🤔
Click to expand...
Capitalism would say, whatever the tenants are willing to pay is what the owner can charge...otherwise, they move somewhere else.
 
jaggedben said:
Right, so if you are effectively paying less for electricity because you installed solar to supply or offset it, are you then allowed to charge regular price to your submetered tenants? Or is that a markup? I'm not saying I know the answer, I'm saying I'd consult a lawyer about. And I suggested cutting the tenants in on the deal by some amount to lower the incentive for someone bringing it to court. The only thing I'm willing to bet a sandwich on is that if there's a law or regulation restricting markups, it was written before anyone thought of the solar situation, so the lawyers will be reading between the lines.
Click to expand...
I guess it is for the court to decide if it comes to that, but if the tenant is getting their energy for the same price before and after the owner installs a PV system I don't see where they have a beef unless they contributed to the cost of installing the system. If someone puts a system on their house that exports energy, some of what they produce goes to his next door neighbor's loads. So what?
 
ggunn said:
I guess it is for the court to decide if it comes to that, but if the tenant is getting their energy for the same price before and after the owner installs a PV system I don't see where they have a beef unless they contributed to the cost of installing the system. If someone puts a system on their house that exports energy, some of what they produce goes to his next door neighbor's loads. So what?
Click to expand...

I mean, you're being reasonable. That doesn't necessarily matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top