Edison's not a fan of solar power

I was disappointed reading last week's article, "Solar panel installers set a shining example." Effective January, all new Southern California Edison customers who wish to purchase solar panels have to convert to a "time of use" metering system.

The"time of use" metering system charges a premium rate for using electricity during peak hours. This pricing system is available to everyone currently but only benefits families that are not using electricity during peak hours. That is why most of us continue using the "tier" metering system which charges a base and increases as your use for electricity increases.

The article states, "special rates are used and that the rates charged are based on peak and low usage hours." It also goes on to state that the "solar panel customer gets charged what SCE gets charged." These statements are misleading because they imply favorable pricing and wholesale prices, not surcharges, which is what they are in essence doing. During peak demand the solar panel customer is being charged more than "tier" metered customers, while simultaneously producing the most energy for SCE.

Not surprisingly the "time of use" mandate is not well disclosed. For example, it is absent from the rebate application submitted to SCE. We were fortunate that Advanced Solar Electricity disclosed this material fact to us as the crew was about to install the unit onto our house. If the change in the law had not been explained to us, we may not have known until the end of the year because we would not have questioned SCE changing our meter,.

We would have expected them to do so under the "net use" agreement, meaning you only pay the difference at the end of the year, at which time we would have been shocked to see a bill approximating what we would have paid prior to going solar. What an unpleasant surprise that would have been.

According to Mr. Howard Green, program manager for the SCE California Solar Initiative Program, it is not an option to opt out of the "time use" metering mandate and it is not financially feasible unless the customer purchased a solar panel system that covers 100 percent of that household's electric bill. Mr. Green supports the "time of use" mandate, stating that his office has over 200 applications, up 100 percent from January, and believes that "customers that use SCE electricity should have to pay for it." Who is paying the individual for the solar power produced?

SCE's view is that every customer that converts to solar is a customer lost, so why wouldn't they make the law work in their favor? Monica Rose Agoura Hills