U.S. Retail Electricity Rate Trends Analysis

[OVERKILL]

At some point it will be a necessity to have solar on your property and battery backup. As expensive as it may be, it might be cheaper in the long run. Electric hookup with be the backup oddly enough.

And that will highlight the failing of these subsidy-driven programs, forcing those that can pay to install VRE + storage to keep their monthly costs reasonable, leaning only on the prohibitively expensive utility, whose costs have skyrocketed due to a reduction in use, as a backup, while those that can't afford the VRE system get further behind, being unable to heat, cool or cook due to the cost.

Large publicly owned power systems were built precisely because they were less expensive to operate and more egalitarian than bespoke local resources available only to those with the means to develop and exploit them. In this feverish pursuit of low energy density weather-dependent generation, forcing a reversal of over a century of progress, we have created a Rube Goldberg web of complexity that hamstrings the operators of these legacy systems and subsidizes wealthy private parties in the name of environmental activism.

It is truly a masterpiece of government picking winners gone amuck.

 

[alarmguy]

@OVERKILL
Talking about boondoggles and subsidies.
Knowing you, you’re aware, but maybe not. They wanted to shut this down in California as the 2+ billion dollar project has been a complete failure but if they do shut it down taxpayers will be on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars.

They attempted to shut it down in September 2025 I believe and because of that reason it was blocked by California plus California is saying now they are stuck between a rock and a hard place due to energy shortage if they do shut it down even though it’s a ridiculous failure

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/othe...tly-ivanpah-solar-plant-running/gm-GM7E500A47

….

 

[OVERKILL]

@OVERKILL
Talking about boondoggles and subsidies.
Knowing you, you’re aware, but maybe not. They wanted to shut this down in California as the 2+ billion dollar project has been a complete failure but if they do shut it down taxpayers will be on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars.

They attempted to shut it down in September 2025 I believe and because of that reason it was blocked by California plus California is saying now they are stuck between a rock and a hard place due to energy shortage if they do shut it down even though it’s a ridiculous failure

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/othe...tly-ivanpah-solar-plant-running/gm-GM7E500A47

….

I think the grid reliability concerns are pretty baseless, given the unreliability of the plant itself. I think the major issue is the sunk cost, given the staggering amount of money invested.

For an energy production perspective, the facility produced 769 GWh in 2022, which was above average for the installation. That same year, Diablo Canyon Unit 1 produced 8,912 GWh. Unit 2 produced 8,743 GWh. 11.6 and 11.4 times the output respectively, and they've been trying to shut it down for years.

 

[OVERKILL]

I think the grid reliability concerns are pretty baseless, given the unreliability of the plant itself. I think the major issue is the sunk cost, given the staggering amount of money invested.

For an energy production perspective, the facility produced 769 GWh in 2022, which was above average for the installation. That same year, Diablo Canyon Unit 1 produced 8,912 GWh. Unit 2 produced 8,743 GWh. 11.6 and 11.4 times the output respectively, and they've been trying to shut it down for years.

Taking this a step further for the sake of this exercise:
For 2024:
Vogtle-3: 7,679 GWh
Voglte-4: 5,990 GWh (was commissioned the end of April of that year, so this is 8 months of production, would be 8,985 if we adjust for the year)

If we use the adjusted value for unit 4, that's 16,664 GWh; 21.7x more energy than Ivanpah. Ivanpah cost $2.86 billion in 2024 dollars, Vogtle 3/4 is claimed to have cost $34 billion, but the total capitalized cost is $23.76 billion, with non-capitalized interest adding another $3.53 billion, for a total of $27.29 billion. That makes Ivanpah more than twice as expensive (or almost twice as expensive if you are using the $34B figure) as Vogtle. And Vogtle will generate electricity for 60+ years.

 

[Brons2]

The study goes on to say that rate increases in California are due to a combination of wildfire mitigation and the scheme by which utilities pay homeowners for their excess rooftop solar production.

Apparently I am not the only one reaching this conclusion.

That's not to say solar is a bad idea, it isn't. I calculated that my 25 year production rate would be about 17 cents per KWH for the $41K system I was quoted with a Tesla Powerwall, which exceeds my utility rate by about 50% at an average of 11 cents per KWH. A solar system won't ever reach ROI. But self-reliance is a good thing and I'd rather not be subject to grid condition availability factors like winter storms or summer peaks, or fuel input costs. I will probably pull the trigger at some point.

 

[Astro_Guy]

I calculated that my 25 year production rate would be about 17 cents per KWH for the $41K system I was quoted with a Tesla Powerwall, which exceeds my utility rate by about 50% at an average of 11 cents per KWH.

The numbers are much more favorable if you omit the battery backup.

 

[Brons2]

Regardless the new NEM 3.0 destroys solar viability, mandating new housing have it , while the power company reaps the rewards with the homeowner carrying the cost. In other words - they don't want solar to benefit the homeowner, they get to steal the power you might over produce and sell it for list price to everyone else. If you want any benefit you have to buy batteries.

Do you care to parse out what you mean by this?

Why should utilities pay more than wholesale to repurchase homeowner produced electricity?

In what case does the homeowner not carry the cost of solar?

 

[Brons2]

The numbers are much more favorable if you omit the battery backup.

That destroys the reason I want it. I'd rather have a battery with no solar than solar with no battery.

ERCOT can come up with whatever numbers they want about grid reliability since 2021, and I'm sure they're good, but trust has been lost.

 

[Brons2]

Love data! This is our usage for the month of Jan in this brutally cold winter Southeast NC
Even though I have access to our usage, it will still be a couple days until our final bill for Jan 2026 is accessable.
Super curious because Oct 2025 we went from straight 10 cents kWh billing to peak billing. So far our bills have not changed much and the Month of Dec 2025 was actually a little less Than the year before. The electric co-op told everyone to expect a general increase of $5 a month. However I use our thermostat to program around it as best I can.

Seems like we used just a little over 1,200 kWh for Jan 2026. Cant wait to see what the actual charge is now with peak billing. If like Dec 2025 most likely little change up or down. I chose one place on the graph Jan 27 to give an idea of our breakdown.

Peak rate (orange) is 19 cents kWh and Off peak (blue) is 7.9 cents kWh

View attachment 323166

One day Jan 27th Orange is peak usage
View attachment 323164

That seems like a lot. Do you have electric heat? I used 1336 KWH in January and I have two EVs and we drive a lot.

 

[4wd]

Wow, less than 11 cents a kWh I didn’t think rates like that exist anymore, here. I thought I was making a killing at 13 cents

I went from 12 to 13 this year and locked it for 24 months …

 

[ripcord]

There's no reason electricity should cost more than a nickel a kilowatt except for a lack of political will to make it happen.

 

[Brons2]

The more mankind wastes finite minerals on fixed batteries - vs EV’s where it’s absolutely necessary - the result is we help one country (not mine) in the short term - but limited people in the long run

The answer to this question is sodium ion. We'll see if it works out.

 

[Brons2]

I think the grid reliability concerns are pretty baseless, given the unreliability of the plant itself. I think the major issue is the sunk cost, given the staggering amount of money invested.

For an energy production perspective, the facility produced 769 GWh in 2022, which was above average for the installation. That same year, Diablo Canyon Unit 1 produced 8,912 GWh. Unit 2 produced 8,743 GWh. 11.6 and 11.4 times the output respectively, and they've been trying to shut it down for years.

The major issue is that there is $700+ M still owed to the feds on this plant, and if they shut it down, CA is on the hook for it.

That said the math should be pretty easy for any actuary to figure out whether shutting it down or running it is cheaper, but I'd be fairly certain that egos and politics are getting in the way.

 

[PandaBear]

Apparently I am not the only one reaching this conclusion.

That's not to say solar is a bad idea, it isn't. I calculated that my 25 year production rate would be about 17 cents per KWH for the $41K system I was quoted with a Tesla Powerwall, which exceeds my utility rate by about 50% at an average of 11 cents per KWH. A solar system won't ever reach ROI. But self-reliance is a good thing and I'd rather not be subject to grid condition availability factors like winter storms or summer peaks, or fuel input costs. I will probably pull the trigger at some point.

This actually proves that roof top solar is actually a good thing for a commercial entity rather than residential home.

In an office or a store that runs AC, roof top is just subsidizing the actual electricity usage matching the occupied hours, especially the retail stores that open every day of the week instead of offices that operates 5 days a week.

For home use unless you match it exactly to AC and you need AC every day, you either have to feed into the grid during day time or store it for night time when you get off work.

 

[alarmguy]

That seems like a lot. Do you have electric heat? I used 1336 KWH in January and I have two EVs and we drive a lot.

Yes, heat pump. I’m sure out of my whole community we would be among the lowest.
They are all efficient homes but also record-breaking cold

 

[Brons2]

For home use unless you match it exactly to AC and you need AC every day, you either have to feed into the grid during day time or store it for night time when you get off work.

That's what the PowerWall is for.

I also would prefer to run my residence in a high availability manner, I guess it comes from years working in datacenters. I have a backup Internet connection and multiple UPSs in the house. I really don't want stuff going offline and am willing to pay so that it doesn't.

 

[Brons2]

Yes, heat pump. I’m sure out of my whole community we would be among the lowest.
They are all efficient homes but also record-breaking cold

Understood, our gas bills get pretty high when it's cold. Our AC is very efficient, but the heater is not at all efficient. I wouldn't mind going to an inverter heat pump, mainly because they're quiet and our current AC compressor/condenser is quite loud.

 

[PandaBear]

That's what the PowerWall is for.

I also would prefer to run my residence in a high availability manner, I guess it comes from years working in datacenters. I have a backup Internet connection and multiple UPSs in the house. I really don't want stuff going offline and am willing to pay so that it doesn't.

I would say that's what the grid is for instead. Powerwall is going to be more expensive than the solar itself.

 

[alarmguy]

Understood, our gas bills get pretty high when it's cold. Our AC is very efficient, but the heater is not at all efficient. I wouldn't mind going to an inverter heat pump, mainly because they're quiet and our current AC compressor/condenser is quite loud.

So you have gas I’m guessing on the main floor heat pump on the second?

That was our arrangement in the last home

 

[UncleDave]

Do you care to parse out what you mean by this?

Why should utilities pay more than wholesale to repurchase homeowner produced electricity?

In what case does the homeowner not carry the cost of solar?

Sure thing.

Nem 3.0 brought numerous changes

1. Forced entry into solar - New homes are burdened with "mandatory" solar whether the owners want it or not.
In a panel only config the power company enjoys re-billing any unused output at tremendous markup while avoiding at least part of the burden of daytime power generation. I believe one can now choose to non export without a battery if they wish.

2. The only way to really get any kind of reasonable payback is to purchase a battery.
Batteries make the systems more complicated as well as have a finite life, and are expensive up front.

Why should utilities pay more than wholesale to repurchase homeowner produced electricity?

Im not saying they should. A plan with over 500 buyback TOU options is ridiculous though.
Just like I shouldn't be forced to buy anything I don't want to buy, I should not be forced to connect to a grid if I so choose to deal with my own electricity.
Why cant I legally defect from the grid?

In what case does the homeowner not carry the cost of solar

When they choose not to have it at all.
In what other state is a new home buyer forced to add solar to their home?