I do not defend Central Maine Power, Emera Maine or any other electric utility. However, the Sept. 25 Portland Press Herald editorial, “Our View: Solar lawsuit aims to put Maine back on track,” demonstrates a lack of knowledge and understanding that proliferates in the argument regarding net metering.
The difficulty comes from terms used to distinguish between the two separate portions of residential electric bills. These terms are “supply charge” and “delivery charge.” “Supply charge” is the actual amount of electricity, measured in kilowatts, that is used by a household. “Delivery charge,” however, is a misnomer; a better term might be “line use charge” or “grid connection fee.”
Electric utilities own the distribution, measuring equipment and lines connected to a residence, right up to and including the meter on the side of the house. The cost of maintaining that equipment is the same, whether the electricity flows to the home or away from it. The electric meter may run forward or backward – it costs the same to measure, connect and distribute the electricity on the line.
If residential solar generators wish to be connected to the grid, the cost of the connection, transportation and metering of the flow must be paid. The costs do not change with the direction of electric current.
An analogy can be made to a sewer fee. Even if one has their own water supply, there is a charge for outflow. The service connection and material distribution have costs. If the outflow, be that electricity or sewage waste, is not paid by those connected to it, rates increase for the others on the line.
Paying a solar generator for the electricity provided to the grid makes sense; it makes no sense to also credit that generator for the distribution of that current, a process in which the generator plays no part.
Micah Engber
South Portland
Send questions/comments to the editors.
