With reference to your headline article, ‘Solar power risk’ in The Gleaner Tuesday, June 3, I think that our policy decisions in relation to electricity should be based on long-term considerations, such as the amount of foreign exchange spent on fossil fuels, and the threat of global warming, rather than on return on investments.

My initial observation is that we have failed to capitalise on the opportunities provided by solar energy. Neither Jamaica Public Service (JPS) nor the Office of Utilities Regulation has educated the public on the win-win situation, which is possible with net-billing. More people might be interested in applying for net-billing if the application process were quicker, and the steps involved, detailed instructions for which are given on JPS website, were less onerous. Most people are unaware that you do not need batteries to run a solar system if you have a grid-tie with JPS. In fact, going that route is more environmentally friendly and less expensive, as shown by the calculation below.

BUYING BATTERIES

On the whole, companies selling solar systems encourage purchasers to buy batteries. Their pitch is that you can cut your electricity bills and even get off the grid entirely. They also tell you that JPS pays you only half of what you pay JPS per kWh, which is true, but they don’t tell you that batteries would cost more. Also, most people use more electricity in the summer than in the winter. To get off the grid entirely, one would have to install sufficient panels to supply one’s summer needs, and then one would have excess in the winter. It would be better to be able to send the excess to the grid in the winter and draw from JPS if necessary in the summer.

My calculation is based on a monthly average of 200 kWh being sent to JPS in the day, and drawn from JPS at night. (It does not include the excess amounts being sent or drawn). Nor does it take into account escalating costs. I make the optimistic assumption that a battery bank will last for 10 years.

WITHOUT SOLAR PANELS

200 kWh x J$40 = $8,000 monthly x 12 = $96,000 annually x10 years = $960,000.00

With solar panels and net billing (cost corresponding to half of $40.00)

200 kWh x $20 = $4,000 monthly x 12 = 48,000 annually x 10 years = $480,000.00

Savings: $480,000.00

With batteries, no net-billing, cost would be $0, but cost of 16 batteries at $40,000.00 each with life expectancy 10 years max = $640,000.

In contrast, as Mr John Kistle states, JPS would be faced with the challenge of providing everybody with electricity at peak hours after sunset, or on overcast days. Some of that generating capacity would have to be turned off at peak sunshine hours, thus reducing the return on whatever investment was made in a new power plant. However, solar power would cut down on the amount of fuel needed to run the plant.

Given the importance of the cost of electricity to all of us in Jamaica, perhaps there are some other things we can do. Could there be a consensus, for example, on turning off our fridges during peak hours? Or JPS charging different rates at peak hours?

I think that all stakeholders need to be involved in making these hard decisions.

Jamaica Gleaner;

The Office of Utilities Regulation (OUR) said it has caused J$21.15 million to be credited to the accounts of customers of the island’s two main utilities during the past year.

The money was credited to the accounts of customers of the National Water Commission (NWC) and the Jamaica Public Service Company (JPS) during the period June 2012 to May 2013, the OUR said in a statement yesterday.

The figure dwarfed the $1.19 million secured on behalf of customers during the June 2011 to May 2012 period. The OUR said the sums secured during the past year represents an increase of more than 1,600 per cent.

The OUR said the money was secured as a result of appeals done by the regulator on the behalf of customers. However, the nature of the main complaints against the companies was not obtained byWednesday Business

JAMAICA Public Service (JPS) customers should start paying about 10 per cent less for electricity as of this month due to a significant decrease in the fuel charge on bills.

This month’s Fuel & IPP Charge of $16.748 is the lowest on electricity bills in more than a year, the light and power company has said. The Fuel & IPP Charge on August bills is $16.748 per kilowatt-hour (kWh), compared to a charge of $20.445 per kWh applied to bills in July.

At this month’s rate, the cost of electricity to customers is approximately US 32 cents per kWh.

For the average consumer who uses 200 kWh of electricity each month, this means that he/she will be paying almost $700 less for electricity in August, compared to the previous month.

This month’s reduction in Fuel & IPP Charge is due to a combination of factors the power company said in a release yesterday.

The Petrojam rebate for the overcharge on fuel purchased by independent power supplier, Jamaica Private Power Company (JPPC) is one reason. The others are a new efficiency target set by the Office of Utilities Regulation (OUR) for JPS and an overall reduction in the cost of oil used to produce electricity.

The one-off Petrojam rebate of J$343 million (US$3.8 million), represents the overcharge on fuel to JPPC.

Also, starting this month, customers are expected to see the benefits of a new Heat Rate target, set by the OUR to ensure more efficient electricity generation. The lower Heat Rate target means that JPS will absorb more of the cost of inefficiencies in the electricity generation process, and pass on to customers the benefits of increased efficiencies.

According to the JPS release, customers have been benefiting from lower fuel charges on their bills since June this year, as a result of the recent downward trend in global oil prices.

Read more:

 

JAMAICA Public Service Company (JPS) has applied for a rate adjustment that could result in a 0.42 per cent increase in light bills.

In its submission to the Office of Utilities Regulations (OUR), the light and power company suggested that it increase its non-fuel rates by an average of 2.09 per cent.

It also asked for an adjustment to the heat rate target that would result in a 1.55 per cent reduction in the fuel rate.

Given that the fuel component of the typical residential customer

A vintage ampere meter.
Image via Wikipedia

The Jamaica Public Service (JPS) in its own inimitable way has sent yet another ‘shock wave’ to consumers when it announces that, among others, it will now be adding general consumption tax to reconnection charges. Never mind that the disconnection might have resulted in the first place from their actions – i.e., either the high cost to use their service or massive overbilling.

Electricity supply, like water, is a basic utility without which the quality of life for all individuals will be adversely affected. So, who will speak up against the action of the JPS?

Our first line of defence, the minister of mining and energy, is preoccupied with his personal well-being, and the next line of defence, the Office of Utilities Regulation (OUR), like many of us, are ‘shocked’ into silence. We dare not take to the streets as the residents of Seaview Gardens found out recently. So what are we to do? We need to examine carefully the role and functions of the OUR.

The OUR was established by an act of Parliament in 1995 to regulate the operations of utilities companies. According to the official website of the OUR, its role as an independent regulator is often misunderstood, particularly by its largest stakeholder group, consumers, who are of the general belief that it seems to side with the utilities providers.

The OUR’s mandate is not that of a consumer advocacy group and, as such, will only intervene in grievances if the affected utility consumer writes to them after getting no satisfaction from the utility company who, in their opinion, did them a disservice. If the overbilling by the JPS is not classified as grievances then what is? This overbilling for which many consumers are unable to pay will now have GCT added for the sure disconnection that will follow. All this while the OUR sits and do nothing when, in fact, it can. Even though it does not see itself as consumer advocacy group, it has a number of divisions, such as the Consumer and Public Affairs.

Advisory group

This division deals with consumer affairs, communication and information. It is in this division that the works of an independent advisory group is facilitated. The name of this group is Consumer Advisory Committee on Utilities. If the OUR wants to intervene on behalf of its consumers/stakeholders, then it can do so directly or indirectly, or however it thinks fit. Not to do so will only make consumers question their relevance in face of this frontal assault on our pockets by the JPS.

And I must admit that the JPS, over the years, has lost a lot of revenue through electricity theft, but we must not forget that a percentage of that ‘lost revenue’ was recovered from us legitimate customers on the approval of no less than the OUR, which now stands impotent.

I am, etc.,

HOWARD D. HAMILTON

Jamaica Gleaner

Household electric meter, USA
Image via Wikipedia

I received a bill from Jamaica Public Service via email on Monday morning (September 13). The bill had an amount due of $49,021.51. The readings were – Current meter reading: 3667 kWh; Previous estimated meter reading: 2106 kWh.

This varies from a normal bill of approximately $17,500 with absolutely no change in my consumption or usage pattern. A quick check on the meter showed that the current reading is in fact 2727 kWh, three days after the meter was ‘read’ on September 10. On the bill was a note AH1 which overleaf read:

“Your meter was read and our quality checks identified your reading as high. However, further checks suggest that the reading was correct and so it was used to bill your account.”

While the person at JPS promises to have the matter checked, it leaves me to ask three questions:

1. What “further checks” could JPS have done in the intervening period which covers Saturday and Sunday?

2. Were I not able to read the meter, what kind of hassle would I have to undergo to have this matter resolved?

3. Am I going to hear that the meter is malfunctioning after requesting at least three meter checks over the last two years and being told that the meter is correct?

Clearly, JPS needs to modify its procedures to ensure that cases like this actually undergo some sort of quality-control checks before they reach the consumer.

I am, etc.,

DONATH E. JUMPP

Jamaica Gleaner