Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is not an extra fee and can completely be avoided by not connecting your solar panels to the grid. That of course would require the installation of an expensive storage system. If you wish to take advantage of the infrastructure provided by the utility to avoid those costs expect to pay for it.
Exactly. I see this as no different than asking EVs to pay a highway use fee, since they aren't paying highway taxes on gasoline.
And I think it is perfectly logical that a company which is in the business of providing large-scale commercial and industrial solar systems would want to see residential users pay a fair share of the cost of maintaining the grid. And at $3 - $6 per month for those systems, nobody can say it's an unreasonable charge, nor one that is likely to impact residential sales at all. And most people can probably tell this is not Walmart backing the measure, despite the misleading headline.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RVcook
Yes...I did say coal, oil or gas...but not in a disparaging context...only from an observational point of view and my opinion only . And I think I'm done now.
The article you have linked too states they have a 30 percent controlling interest in first solar. Based on that companies web site it apears their business is geared towards industry. Assuming their business is geared towards industry then certainly eliminating or making residential solar less desirable is in their best interest.
There is other things to consider here as well, the power from these large solar facilities is sold at a considerably higher rate than conventional sources because distributors need to meet mandates. One other way they do that is by buying credits from residential customers....
I have no idea what they are invested in other what the article you linked too states. It's a solar company.
Are you reading the same thing I am? RVCook specifically mentioned coal, oil and gas.
RVCook mentioned coal, oil and gas, there are many types and not are "big" as in industry leaders. You created a specific when none was stated.
Nevertheless, being geared toward industry does not necessarily mean away from the consumer. If Walmart is selling panels in quantities usually associated with rooftop installation, then you statement doesn't really explain anything.
Walmart would like to see rooftop solar restricted or disappear when they make money from consumers (home owners) who buy rooftop solar equipment from them? Perhaps you should clarify or support that idea since it makes no sense. I can accept that you don't know but to simply put that out there is a contradiction by itself.
Yes...I did say coal, oil or gas...but not in a disparaging context...only from an observational point of view and my opinion only . And I think I'm done now.
Walmart would like to see rooftop solar restricted or disappear when they make money from consumers (home owners) who buy rooftop solar equipment from them? Perhaps you should clarify or support that idea since it makes no sense. I can accept that you don't know but to simply put that out there is a contradiction by itself.
I already explained the fact... which you ignored... that it isn't Walmart that is doing this. You are confusing (deliberately? ) the actions of a solar energy company which has Walton family investments in it, with what an entirely different company called WalMart does. And it's a big "Of Course" that a commercial and industrial solar company would want residential customers to pay their fair share of the grid costs, just as it is a big "Of Course" that this grid-connect charge of $3 - $6 per month will not hurt solar panel sales at WalMart.
How long do you think you can continue this pretense of ignoring what I say? First, can't you figure out that everyone else can read what I write here, even if you pretend you can't? And second, I've found the smoking gun that proves you aren't telling the truth on this. Shall I share it with everyone?
Obviously the real reason you pretend not to see my comments here is that I post facts, and you cannot disprove them.
America as a whole would be better off without further meddling by Wal Mart and it's corporation into ANY OTHER FACET of our lives than selling us food and Chinese made junk. I don't want them in our finances, our tax filing, our healthcare, or our ability to bank. And rest assured, they want to be in all of those. They want to corner the market and put ALL COMERS OUT OF BUSINESS.
Nevertheless, being geared toward industry does not necessarily mean away from the consumer. If Walmart is selling panels in quantities usually associated with rooftop installation, then you statement doesn't really explain anything.
As I said it was speculation but that is the only logical conclusion I can think of. When companies get this large and diverse they often have competing divisions with different interests. Sony is a classic example with their entertainement and electronics division. There was no Sony products for years that supported MP3 despite the fact it was clearly where the market was.
OP......Stop and listen to yourself. You are saying that Walmart and the state is trying to stop roof top solar. Lets look at what the fees do and don't do.
1: Don't Do. They do not charge you for having roof top solar. If you put in the storage facility to hold electricity in the daytime, for use at night when there is no sunlight, there is no FEE. None at all.
2: Do Do. If you put up roof top solar, and instead of putting in your own storage facility as you are too cheap to go all the way with solar power as some families I know here in Montana have done, you have two choices.
A....Go without electricity when the sun is not providing free electricity.
B....Use the power companies facilities, to take your excess power when the sun shines and pay you for it, and provide you back power when the sun is not shining.
It is not your fault if you are too cheap to put in your electric storage system. Taking your power when you have excess, and providing you power when the sun is not shining costs the company money. The power company has 2 choices.
C....Let the other customers, pay for your using the power company facilities to take your excess electricity and provide your electricity when t he sun is not shining (you may even provide more electricity than you take from t he power company). The other customers, do not feel they should be paying for your use of the electricity utility to store your excess power.,
D....As the other customers do not want to pay for your being too cheap to store your own electricity, the power company simply is going to charge you a fee to cover the cost of actually operating the system to take your excess power, and get it back later.
As a solar power roof top owner, you are going to be asked to pay for this cost, or go all the way and pay a lot more to store your excess power, and get it returned to you later.
I don't think that someone putting up solar panels, should expect the other electric users to pay for you being too cheap to put in their own electric storage system, and want the electric company to pay for your electrical storage costs.
And Walmart has nothing to do, with making you pay the costs for your electric storage problems, and is not responsible for you being too cheap to install your own electric storage system.
If you don't know what an electric storage system is, let me explain. Our housekeeper and her family live on top of a small mountain. They have a solar system as their sole power source. They have a room with many batteries, that stores all excess electricity. On cloudy days, and snowy days when it is not making electricity for them, they back up the batteries with a gasoline powered generator.
Why put in such an expensive system? It would have cost them $20,000 more to run in electric lines, than their entire system costs. Their total electrical power including gasoline and periodic batter replacement costs about the same as buying power from the power company. They saved $20,000 going this route.
Quit complaining that you only put in a partial solar power system as you were too cheap to put in the storage facilities and have to pay your share of providing you the storage you need. Don't expect other customers to pay it for you, and get a free ride.
Yes, Walmart. You know, the ones who are supposedly not charging you for bags? Right, biting the hand that feeds it, the family owned company through its financial influence and the panel maker it controls in supporting Arizona regulations to impose a fee on businesses and home owners who install roof top solar.
While some have make positive note that Walmart claims not to charge customers for bags, they turn right around and support imposing fees on people wanting to install roof top solar.
Why would Walmart do this?
Think it through, why do you think Walmart has something to gain by doing this?
Someone doesn't know what they are talking about. Why would Walmart be against something that they not only support but even USE themselves. They sell solar panels in their stores and over 200 of their stores have already gone solar. They will be changing over more and more stores as time goes on and by 2020 hope to have ALL of them on solar energy. Right now they are #1 in solar energy use but there's a loooong list of other companies jumping on the bandwagon. They figured that it would save them millions, if not billions, in energy costs so they've rolled with it. They have NO intentions of limiting home...or any other...solar energy.
I googled Walmart solar energy and got a BUNCH of sites. Really interesting. I would've posted a few of them but don't intend to really take part in this discussion so didn't care. You can if you want to though. People who write articles about anything should do a little more research.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. And I think I'm done now.
) the actions of a solar energy company which has Walton family investments in it, with what an entirely different company called WalMart does. And it's a big "Of Course" that a commercial and industrial solar company would want residential customers to pay their fair share of the grid costs, just as it is a big "Of Course" that this grid-connect charge of $3 - $6 per month will not hurt solar panel sales at WalMart. 
