PG&E Baseline

PG&E Baseline

Many EV Owners can not install a second electric meter exclusively for EV Charging. Even the E9 electric meter does not solve the problem of high cost electricity from PG&E.

After installing almost exclusively LED Lighting and using 94% Off-Peak Kwh, our Model S EV Charging is entirely within the Over 201% of Baseline at a Summer Off-Peak Usage rate of $.30103 per Kwh.

Unfortunately, along the California Coast, our Baseline amounts are almost half of the California Central Valley where Air Conditioning use is acknowledged to require twice the Coastal Baseline.

The best solution to reasonable electrical rates in Northern & Central California would be an increase in Baseline quantities for EV Owners. Since Air Conditioning has been acknowledged to require a significantly higher Baseline quantity, EV Charging needs to be acknowledged as a legitimate basis for an increase in Baseline quantities for EVE Owners.

Any suggestions to accomplish this for all EV Owners would be appreciated. Do we need a petition with the California State PUC ?

Schlermie | 25. kesäkuu 2013

Later this Summer, PG&E is doing away with the tiered billing structure used in the E9 plan. For EV drivers, they'll be offering a new EV plan to replace the E9 plan, where you'll be charged a flat rate, where that rate only changes depending on time of use.

shs | 25. kesäkuu 2013

PG&E has a proposed EV-A rate that is non-tiered and therefore no baseline. It is TOU, but all usage in a given time period will be at the same rate, essentially 10 cents a kWh off peak summer and winter. The new plan was supposed to be available in June, but its introduction seems to have been delayed to December, last I heard. There is also a proposed 2-meter EV-B rate.

When they do introduce it, I hope that they fix the fact that the peak rate lasts till 9 PM.

Schlermie | 25. kesäkuu 2013

By the way, I plugged in the proposed EV rates (which are now over a year old) to my current E9 PG&E bill, and it resulted in a 27% reduction in my cost for electricity.

I also compared the numbers for EV-A vs. EV-B, and I was surprised to find out my overall electric bill is actually cheaper with EV-A, so if you're considering adding a second meter, you should check out the EV plans first. On the E9 plans, E9-B was cheaper for me than E9-A, but I couldn't get a second meter on my house.

Also, if you think you might want to add a solar system to your home someday, I imagine having two meters just complicates things.

mcptwo | 25. kesäkuu 2013

I have researched the possible new E9 rate plans. They do not provide much benefit. The real answer is additional Baseline quantities, regardless of meter type. We need a movement for increased Baseline quantities for EV Owners.

The CA PUC and our state legislators appear to be the only avenue.

mcptwo | 25. kesäkuu 2013

This is a copy of my letter to the California PUC advisor:

Dear Judy Cooper,

I have been fortunate enough to obtain a Tesla Model S electric vehicle. It was somewhat of a stretch, but I am not complaining, it is an amazing car, and I can only hope that more of these become available here in California where they are manufactured.

Unfortunately my PG&E electric bill has more than doubled since we are paying $.30103 per Kwh for the over 200% of Off-Peak usage.

Please note that we have converted almost all of our lighting to LED and 94% of our use is Off-Peak.

I have looked into PG&E E9 meters and second meters, but for a variety of reasons these do not solve the problem.

As you are aware, the California Central Valley receives almost twice the Baseline quantities primarily because of the need for air conditioning, which unfortunately is an ON-Peak need.

I am advocating for an increase in Off-Peak Baseline quantities for all EV Owners regardless of their location in California, because it is a simple and direct way to encourage and make equitable the use of electric vehicles.

I would suggest that an increase in the Off-Peak Baseline quantity of about 300 Kwh per month for anyone regularly charging an electric vehicle at home would be equitable. And I believe this would go a long way toward a transition away from burning fossil fuels in California.

MacKenzie Patterson

Anyone who has the time to endorse this effort by sending a similar email would be appreciated. It takes numbers....

mcptwo | 26. kesäkuu 2013

Just received this reply:

Dear Mr. Patterson:

Thank you for your email. I have provided your email to the Energy Division for review since they have been involved in the EV proceeding before the CPUC. We appreciate your taking the time to write to us regarding your suggestions to increase the off-peak baseline quantities.

Please email: if you agree

NKYTA | 26. kesäkuu 2013

@ mcptwo
I agree, and I sent an email.

shs | 26. kesäkuu 2013

I have written similar letters as we not only have a Tesla, but we are also an all electric home with solar. That does mean that our baseline in the winter is about twice what it would be otherwise, but I was hoping to get an even larger baseline to accommodate the car as well, as charging the car easily blows away the current baseline amount. Their answer seems to be the new non-tiered EV-A and B rates. The only question is when will that rate be available and will the peak hours be better defined for those with solar than the current 2 to 9 PM with E-9A.

mcptwo | 26. kesäkuu 2013

I believe an increase in the Off-Peak Baseline is the most straight forward solution.

This is especially true for those who can not practically install a second meter for EV Charging.

Bob W | 26. kesäkuu 2013

Under most PG&E schedules, they give you a higher baseline in the Winter if you have an electric furnace, but not if you have an electric car or A/C. I guess they consider heat a necessity, but A/C and EV are considered "discretionary."

Schedule EV is labeled "revenue neutral," meaning PG&E believes they'll get just about as much revenue under Schedule EV as they currently do under Schedule E-9. Even though EV eliminates the Baseline and the Tiers, they seem to have changed other things to make up for it.

I've been doing a lot of number crunching between Schedule E-9A and Scheduled EV-A (as proposed), and there seems to be little benefit, for me, as I only average about 10-20 kWh/day to charge my Model S.

Note that schedule EV charges PEAK rates from 2:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Saturday, Sunday and Holidays, year round! Schedule E-9A has no peak periods in Winter, as it should be. EV is worse than E-9 in this regard.

Schedule EV also maintains the complex "Daylight Saving Time Adjustment," which means that for about 35 days of the year (from 10/27/2013 to 11/3/2013 and from 3/9/2014 to 4/6/2014), the peak periods get offset by one hour (becoming 3:00 p.m. to 10 p.m. M-F and 4 p.m. to 8 p.m. Sa, Su, and Holidays). Good luck plugging that detail into your programmable thermostat!

In sum, your car may be cheaper to charge on the flat rate of Schedule EV "Off Peak," but everything else will probably cost you more, wiping out the benefit.

You can try the PG&E PEV Calculator to get an estimate. Be sure to select the << Advanced Options button near the right hand edge of the screen, and enter as much data as you can.

However, I don't really trust the accuracy of the PG&E calculators since they have lots of caveats, and the numbers I obtain from don't actually match my electric bill (close, but not exact).

You can review my calculations or try your own numbers using this Shared Google Spreadsheet. It is big so it takes a while to load, so have patience. Press Ctrl+End a couple times to scroll to the bottom or each sheet, where the totals and tabs are. Or just download it as Excel and open it locally, then paste in your own numbers, which you can get in .CSV format from the MyUsage page, using the green download icon, lower right.

The interesting numbers are the totals at the bottom of each sheet. The spreadsheet ignores Holidays, but tries to take everything else into account, including the DST Adjustment.

Ignore the first tab (Dec. 2012), which was for comparison with my old E-6 TOU rate (before receiving the model S).

david.cheney | 26. kesäkuu 2013

@ mcptwo
I also agree, and I also sent an email.