PUC Approves Seasonal Tiered Electric Rates For Xcel Energy
March 4th, 2010 : Posted in Solar Energy NewsDENVER – The Colorado Public Utilities Commission (PUC) today approved seasonal tiered electric rates for Xcel Energy in which residential customers will pay more for higher usage during peak summer months and less during other non-peak times.
The “inverted-block” rates, which will be in effect during the months of June through September, are designed to promote efficient use of energy during periods when the demand for electricity is greatest. Under the June-September rates, customers would pay a lower charge for the first 500 kilowatt-hours of electricity, and a higher rate for usage above that.
“For years, consumers have advocated ‘the more you use, the more you pay’ for electricity,” PUC Chairman Ron Binz said. “Today, we’re making that slogan a reality.”
A typical residential customer uses about 687 kilowatt-hours (kwh) per month during the four-month summer period and about 605 kwh per month the rest of the year. Under the new tiered rates, residential customers with average usage will pay about 2 percent more in summer and about 5 percent less during the rest of the year. Customers who are able to reduce their electricity usage during the peak months will be able to see larger savings on their bills.
“The largest customers will pay more, and customers will realize greater rewards for their efforts to use electricity wisely,” Binz said.
The changes are part of the PUC’s decision in Xcel Energy’s phase II rate case, which sets the rate design for the company’s various customer classes. The company receives no additional revenue from the changes. The new rates are expected to go into effect on June 1.
Source: Department of Regulatory Agencies
Tags: Electricity Rates, Solar News, Xcel
March 25th, 2010 at 5:16 am
I certainly hope the PUC will take another look at this fixed tier level to make it more fair for everyone. It appears to me that the tier level is based on a per household or per meter basis without regard to the number of persons living in the house. To be fair the tier level should vary depending on the number of people living at a residence. For example: my neighbor who lives alone will have no trouble keeping her electric usage below the tier threshold but I have six people living in my home and will be penalized for the higher usage even though my per person usage is about 1/2 what my neighbor uses by herself. This inequity is totally unfair and should be addressed by the PUC before this rate hike tier is implemented. This should also apply to the tier level on water usage which is directly related to the number of people on a given meter. The fixed tier level does not take this issue into consideration and is therefore unfair to larger households.
May 14th, 2010 at 5:51 pm
This is just another Xcel Energy scam to raise revenue. The Colorado PUC is owned by Xcel!
May 17th, 2010 at 8:29 pm
The article above states that residential customers will pay about 2 percent more in summer and 5 percent less the rest of the year. This is simply untrue. Comparing Xcel’s published rates from their website and comparing to my current bill (602 kWh), shows a 17% net increase ($83.16 vs $70.53). The tiered summer rate add’s almost another 5% to the bill.
Xcel finally figured out how to sneak one past the PUC. Shame on the PUC.
May 19th, 2010 at 10:02 am
We also have six people in our home, two teleworkers (saving gas and transportation impact), and three home schooled, online, teenagers. We dont spend gas to commute as much as a similar family, yet we are now being penalized to do what we feel is the most beneficial. Please don’t penalize us, but rather consider a waiver for home-bound students and workers!
May 19th, 2010 at 2:13 pm
Translation: Ron Binz said consumers advocates to pay more to Excel. Ron serves Excel interests period.
“For years, consumers have advocated ‘the more you use, the more you pay’ for electricity,” PUC Chairman Ron Binz said. “Today, we’re making that slogan a reality.”
May 20th, 2010 at 9:44 am
Base 500 K figure is too low – An average is just a number -
Ron Binz should be replaced for making such a gratuitous sound bite – he does not have a clue
All electric bills in CO will rise – how can the company NOT get the increased revenue? – once again bureaucrats in over their head have relied on private sources to dictate public policy.
May 23rd, 2010 at 2:34 pm
I believe in energy conservation but this fixed tier level is taking advantage of larger families that simply cannot keep power usage below the tier threshold.
Larger households are being penalized because they have more people using power from the same meter. In the interest of fairness if the tier level cannot be adjusted based on a per person usage rather than a per meter usage then it should be abandoned altogether before it is implemented.
May 26th, 2010 at 10:47 am
How did they figure their “Average” user? Did they take the total costs for all residential customers and divide by the total number of accounts? Thus, lumping extended family homes in with one bedroom apartments to get an “average”. Take a look at your actual KW usage – bet it is way more than the average!
May 26th, 2010 at 6:21 pm
Xcel is now running an ad where the spokesman sneeringly touts that “Xcel is doing us a favor” by charging us more with their “tiered” electric billing structure (read, RATE INCREASE). I find it quite coincidental that the KWH tier rate increase break point is about 165 KWH below the “average” summer residential usage level. This equates to an automatic rate increase for every “average” user.
I guess Xcel and their subsiderary Colo. PUC think they are quite clever in trying to make us believe they are doing this to”protect the environment.”
WE THANK YOU XCEL FOR LOOKING AFTER OUR “WELFARE!”
June 1st, 2010 at 12:56 pm
When I received notice of the tiered billing system, I was appalled to find that I almost have to shut down my house during the summer to even come close to staying within the 1st tier. We have 3 in the house, no AC, mostly hang clothes to dry, try to turn out lights, computers “sleep”, etc and yet still consume 900-1100 KWH. As others have commented, HOW IN THE WORLD DOES ANYONE, EXCEPT THE MOST AUSTERE, EVER GOING TO NOT HAVE A HUGE INCREASE IN THEIR BILL. THE FIRST TIER SHOULD HAVE BEEN SET TO REFLECT “ADDITIONAL” USAGE BY AC USERS NOT PENALIZE THOSE OF US WHOSE ELECTRIC USAGE TENDS TO BE LOWER IN THE SUMMER!
June 6th, 2010 at 10:29 pm
Thanks for giving me an excuse to hook up an old diesel generator on a transfer switch to run my AC. Cooling my home with off-road diesel is cheaper than Xcel.
June 12th, 2010 at 11:46 pm
We have 8 people in the house. Our approach is to change the few incandescent to CFL, including a 175W outside security light. We’ll also be hanging more laundry outside.
replacing an incandescent 60W CFL bulbs on for 4 hours/ day will pay for themselves in about 2 months. If you have CFL in a drawer and incandescent in a socket you’ll benefit by swapping them today!
June 19th, 2010 at 9:00 pm
I share the amazement of Thomas West in his comments. We have solar electricity, barely ever run AC, hang clothes outside in summer, turn off sources at the surge protector, use CFLs, and didn’t make it below 1,000 kwh in billing that ended June 14. Why the cutoff for the first tier is 500 kwh when average use is 687 kwh in summer is beyond me! I feel our household is almost austere in its usage, and even with a whole roof of solar, we can’t come close!
June 26th, 2010 at 1:19 pm
The electricity usage of both Thomas West and ChrisM is incredible. We haven’t come close to their usage even without many of their energy-saving measures. We live in a 1972 vintage (a.k.a. insulation-deprived), 1500 sf home without AC, use an electric dryer, cook with an electric stove and oven, and keep food in a refrigerator. Computers and televisions, in use about 5 hours/day, comprise a major portion of our energy usage.
My energy frugality measures include pedestal fans in occupied rooms, each of which consumes 25 W and provides quite a bit of comfort on the hottest days. A whole-house fan (about 1 kW) running for 30 minutes at bedtime and in the morning make life in this house pleasant (or at least tolerable on 100+ degree days with 80 degree nights). All lamps which are turned on more than a few minutes per day have CFLs installed. Our electricity usage in summer months averages 240 kWh, increasing to about 300 kWh in winter months due to an extremely inefficient forced-air furnace fan motor (I now wish we had spent the additional $400 for the variable-speed DC motor when we replace the furnace four years ago)
I would like to suggest that anyone with extraordinarily high energy bills, especially those practicing the energy-saving measures of Thomas and Chris, either borrow if possible, or invest $25 in a Kill-A-Watt meter. Use of this or a similar device will help pinpoint the source of the energy hogs.
When we purchased this house in 1989, we appreciated that the previous owner left their old refrigerator. Included with it was an instruction manual stating something like “newer, larger refrigerators use more energy and are noisier than older, smaller, obsolete refrigerators.” We put up with the noise for ten years before monitoring the energy usage of this klunker (not with a Kill-A-Watt, but with a watt-hour meter borrowed from my workplace). It was surprising that the klunker reefer accounted for about 40% of our electric bill! The beast was replaced with an Energy Star refrigerator and resulted in a 25% reduction in energy usage.
July 3rd, 2010 at 11:06 pm
Anyone who has kids and more then 5 people living in house will have a hard time keeping under 600.There is always someone in house 12 hours a day.Doing something washing clothes or watching t.v..To say when its a 100degrees outside you can be comfortable without running some sort of cooler is remarkable.My house was built in 1974.Unless you just returned from Iraq were the temp is 110 plus during the summer
July 8th, 2010 at 11:36 am
Just received my elec bill and its doubled. Called the so called customer service and he said that most people are seeing their bill doubled. Looks like they are itemizing costs in 2 seperate ways and charging customers for both.
Someone needs to look into this!
July 8th, 2010 at 1:44 pm
As much as I agree with all the above messages, I must add an extra dimension to the arguments against this new 2-tiered rate. Many people, myself included, rely on medical equipment which draws a lot of KW. We have little control over the equipment we get from our suppliers, and we are already burdened with health cost issues. This increase unfairly hits those who have little options to decrease their usage.
I am an oxygen patient who has had an oxygen concentrator at home for 8 years. By going back to about 2005, I find that my electrical usage is always higher in price than my gas, winter or summer. We have redone windows, added more insulation, bought energy efficient appliances, switched to gas range, florescent lighting, to keep KW usage around 1000KW.
I have had different models of concentrators but regardless, they draw energy. And now I am having to pay extra for this.
I feel as though I will have to stop breathing so that my family can pay this bill.
NO THANKS for your concern, PUC!!!
July 13th, 2010 at 6:37 pm
How did Xcel push thru this two tiered billing? 500 kwh is way to low for the 2nd tier to kick in! I used 3% LESS kwh than a year ago yet paid 28% MORE! The PUC needs to take another look at this. Encouraging conservation is one thing – INCREASING Xcel’s PROFITS is quite another.
July 14th, 2010 at 11:29 am
Exactly, how in the world can you tell a 6 household person to cut their electricity in half. What a great time in our economy to steal even more money out of my wallet. It makes me want to move to an IREA location.
July 14th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
Its surprising that there aren’t more complaints regarding these unreasonable rate increases. PUC is government-run, so it’s not surprising that they need more funding to maintain their bloated budget. Why is it that the citizens are expected to cut back while the government keeps spending? If PUC is not receiving more revenue, then who is and where is it going? We producers are tired of supporting the moochers, and the gravy train has to end. My Xcel rep urged me to air my grievences, and this post is just the beginning. See you in November…