You and I both know that residential customers aren't typically charged for demand.
Not with a separate line item but they are most definitely charged.
...and says they would add demand charges to all customers with solar systems if they could.
Of course they would because that is one of the underlying cost factors (Customer, demand, and energy being the three). It is just not in the customer's best interest to put expensive demand meters on residential loads. This will change as the meter costs drop in the future. Some utilities have had residential demand rates for some customers for many years.
Having a solar system has nothing in particular to do with demand. There is no reason Dominion should want to add demand charges to some residential customers, and not all residential customers, just because those customers have solar systems.
You simply have to understand utility cost allocation and it does not appear you do. However, that is not your fault as many do not understand it.
Again, explain to the solar customers why they shouldn't be compensated for helping the utility meet peak demand on sunny days. I would say these things cancel each other out.
If the solar power were as reliable and as cost effective as the other peaking units, they should be compensated. But the problem is they are not the same. You can't replace a van with a compact, or replace a motorcycle with a bicycle, etc. Each has a niche but are not one-for-one replacements.
Notice how you are contradicting yourself. First there are 'costs to using the power system as an energy bank', then there is 'no real energy bank.'
How about if the government ordered that you let me store my annual use of water at your house for a year? It really is no cost to you since I will pick it up a year later and you will wind up with the same net of space you have today. You may not have room to store my water, but I am still using you like a storage facility.
It currently costs Dominion nothing to let solar system owners send their energy to their neighbors through the grid.
Not true.
Nothing, that is, that the flat rate fees and the neighbors energy charges aren't already paying for.
Not true either.
The burden Dominion wants to charge them for doesn't exist (when compared to other residential customers Dominion does not want to charge.)
Not true.
Maybe there are other burdens that do exist, but then the name of the charge should reflect that actual burden.
Therein lies the problem. In a perfect world, every customer would have their own rate and each rate would perfectly track the costs. That rarely ever happens because to do that you would spend a dollar tracking every dime. The rates try to model the costs while we try to use the most cost-effective means to gather the billing determinates and render a bill.
The 'standby charge' is a step in the wrong direction
Rate design is not a perfect science and there are no perfect solutions. I simply do not think you have the expertise to determine the correct direction and certainly are in no position to make a determination as to the right or wrong direction. Of course, everybody is entitled to an opinion but that is usually far from an expert analysis. The charge has already been analyzed by rate experts both for and against the charge. I'm sure it will be vetted even more by experts both for and against and we will just have to wait to see what they have to say won't we?
You are conflating generating capacity with generation in general.
I doubt it.
My understanding is adequate enough to see through your distortions. Your patronizing tone is unpersuasive and adds nothing of value to the conversation.
Yet you hurl insults at the workers, the auditors, the lawmakers, etc, cast dispersions on their integrity, accuse them of criminal activity, and bring their morals into question with no factual basis. You build a case out of fear, misunderstanding, misinformation, etc., but want to question my tone when I call your position and knowledge into question?
Really? ... And you say that I don't understand how utility systems work?
That would be pretty plain to anyone who understands utility operations and costing.
You are asking me to accept an incredibly unwarranted logical leap: that because a utility's cost structure is complicated, that affects the ability of utility to serve solar system owners at night.
Accept it or not, that is the way it is.
Nothing you have said, anywhere, shows that a solar system have a negative effect on a utility's ability to meet the system owner's peak demand. Nothing whatsoever. That is why charging (only) solar customers with a demand charge is wrong and discriminatory.
Start listening to the other things I have said and I'll see if you can learn something about how things really work, and not at the normal fee I charge for classes, but for free.
This is about the only reasonable analysis you have offered in this whole thread. Of course, you probably know very well that there is currently not enough residential solar in Virginia to cause Dominion any energy imbalance problems.
I do not know what the footprint is, although it is probably available online if the reporting is complete.
Why is Dominion adding a fee that affects only one customer? Because they want to discourage people from going solar, and thus maintain their monopoly on generation. If they merely wanted to make sure that they could pay for what might be needed to support solar in the future, they would call the fee a 'Renewable Energy Infrastructure Fee'. But they are not calling it that, because they are not interested in building a renewable energy infrastructure, even if customers were willing to pay for it, because it would threaten their monopoly on generation.
Baseless, insulting, and derogatory commentary on your part.
