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.
Wow, I just watched National Geographic's show "Years of Living Dangerously". This episode (with Letterman and Cecily Strong) was about how on the one hand the Indian government is supporting and encouraging solar installations (while continuing to use coal) but how in the sunny states of Florida and Nevada the megamonopoly utility companies have lobbied the public utility boards so successfully that these states either don't allow home solar panels or have made installing/using them so expensive that people can't afford them.
This just ENRAGED me! The solar companies are trying to make a go of making products here in the US. There is a market for these American products in India, but the solar companies don't have a market in at least two states in the US!
Boy, these power companies are loathesome! And so are the weak public boards (and Nevada's Governor) who have been corrupted by the power companies.
There is an amendment on the ballot this year in Florida that at face value appears to be pro solar but it is a trick the amendment was paid for by the utility companies and is carefully worded to appear to promote the use of solar while actually making it easier to create new laws in the future that harm solar.
My neighbor was already tricked into voting for it in early voting. I know better . There is now a lawsuit by solar companies to get it taken off the ballot on the grounds that it fools the public and is not what it is pretending to be. It is amendment 1 ,
Solar makes solar expensive. If you are going to utilize the grid for net metering then you need to help pay for that infrastructure. You can always avoid these fees by installing a much more expensive battery storage sytem.
Most electric bills are not itemized, what you don't realize is that included in the 12 cents per kWh(or whatever it is) there is about a 2 cent charge for the costs of building and maintaining the grid. If you have solar with net metering without those fees then you doing it on the backs of other ratepayers. The legislation you are talking about will just insure those using solar are paying their fair share of infrastructure costs.
I have read that argument but they counter that by stating that net metering helps by putting less pressure on the utility companies during peak use times and creating other sources of electricity so the power companies do not have to pay to build expensive new power plants.
... the megamonopoly utility companies have lobbied the public utility boards so successfully that these states either don't allow home solar panels or have made installing/using them so expensive that people can't afford them.
All media is propaganda.
When you use the phrase 'home solar panels' you draw a picture, but in this context that picture is not accurate. The accurate context of net-metering.
Net-metering is different from 'home solar power'.
Solar makes solar expensive. If you are going to utilize the grid for net metering then you need to help pay for that infrastructure. You can always avoid these fees by installing a much more expensive battery storage sytem.
In my area a net-metering system is more expensive than an off-grind system [of the same capacity] with battery bank.
A battery-bank is an expense. So are the added certifications, licenses and fees associated with net-metering installs.
My solar power has zero effect on transmission lines.
Are you isolated from the grid? If so the you removed load from the grid. If you are grid tied then you may periodically inject energy into the grid. Now you might think your little system doesn't impact grid stability but imagine 10,000 little systems starting and stopping willy-nilly while tied to the grid or removing the load those little systems represents from the grid totally. Either of these actions causes imbalance on the system which adversely impacts system operations. planing and maintenance. You're a bubble head, you should understand trying to isolate a system with unknown energy inputs. Could you imagine trying to do lock out tag out on that?
The utility gets the better end of the deal in every case that I've heard of. And yes, they always pay you less for the power you sell them, than for the power you buy from them. Why do you think they are 100% dead set against the consumer storing his own power in his own battery bank? They figure that is THEIR power, and you're keeping it for "free".
My point, which either you missed or I did not make clear enough, is that the power company does not actually 'pay' you for the electricity at all. They have this BS 'credit' system instead.
That's just a detail though, in general we have no argument- the consumer generating power gets the sh[or]t end of the stick. You pay to install the equipment, you pay to deliver it to them, and if you consistently make more than you use, the power company waves their middle finger and says "Thanks for the free juice, sucker."
I have read that argument but they counter that by stating that net metering helps by putting less pressure on the utility companies during peak use times and creating other sources of electricity so the power companies do not have to pay to build expensive new power plants.
Numerous small installations cause issues and can never under any circumstances be as cost effective as centralized plant to the utility.
In my area a net-metering system is more expensive than an off-grind system [of the same capacity] with battery bank.
If you can draw the conclusion the battery storage option is the most cost effective then this discussion becomes moot because it's bye-bye utility company.
The problem here is on top of all the taxpayer subsidies these people are now expecting the ratepayer to subsidize their solar installations. If you are going to use the grid, pay for the service.
....the consumer generating power gets the sh[or]t end of the stick.
At most you should get lowest wholesale cost for excess power and it should be capped at no more than 5% to 10% percent of what you produce. Just to add this is open to huge amounts of abuse otherwise.
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.
