Solar power sucks! Well, according to utility companies, anyway

[EricKei]

Utilities are apparently fighting back against those darn solar power advocates. Even the Tea Party (or, at least the Green Tea group, an offshoot) is on the consumers' side on this one. Not sure if I should be happy or scared about that.

[s_stabeler]

to be fair, there IS a point to what the utility companies are saying- basically, what thye are saying is that it is an issue because net metering laws are causing issues with coverng distribution costs. The problem is basically that the EXCESS electricity produced over and above what a house uses themself also has to be paid for at the full retail cost to consumers- what companiesx would prefer is either a fee to cover the distribution costs, or to pay wholesale prices for the excess. It's not unreasonable to have a lower price fore the extra.

[TheHuckster]

to be fair, there IS a point to what the utility companies are saying- basically, what thye are saying is that it is an issue because net metering laws are causing issues with coverng distribution costs. The problem is basically that the EXCESS electricity produced over and above what a house uses themself also has to be paid for at the full retail cost to consumers- what companiesx would prefer is either a fee to cover the distribution costs, or to pay wholesale prices for the excess. It's not unreasonable to have a lower price fore the extra.

I agree with this idea.

Home-based energy solutions are becoming more and more popular as the technology improves and becomes less expensive. It's not going to completely replace fossil fuel and public energy anytime soon, but it's definitely going to make a difference in how utility companies do business.

Sadly, I see them responding to this trend through lobbying to make it difficult for consumers, rather than changing their business structure to adapt to the new trend.

[AccountingDrone]

And one assholery they are using to fight solar is to require houses to be on the grid.

I pointed out to a friend of mine who installs solar packages for a living the way to get around his for those who really do not wan to be on the grid is to add the gizmo that you normally have when you have a generator that automatically kicks on when the power goes off so that your normal state is off grid until it reads your batteries are totally depleted and the solar is not charging them. Effectively, installing it 'backwards' in function. The property is still technically on the grid, however it is not taking anything from the grid unless the internal systems fail.

[EricKei]

I actually don't have a problem with the "excess" power being sold back at a lower rate, either. I just thought it would be an interesting topic for discussion That, and I would love to see a time when most people are able to realistically generate enough of their own power to ease their dependence on the utility companies -- tho I don't see why we can't all just get along.

On that note, though, power companies do have this nasty habit of selling "excess" power to their own subsidiaries (a certain amount of which isn't excess...I have more than once heard that they routinely, intentionally, drop below par levels when doing this) instead of storing it (yes, I realize that the capacity for storage is relatively limited), which then resell it few more times, eventually ending up with the original seller buying it back -- and the price goes up each time. I can see where this would generate (ha!) a profit at the steps along the way, just unsure how it helps the company as a whole, or the consumer. My thinking on the latter is, "It doesn't." Can someone please ELI5 this one for me? (Pardon the rambling)

One thing I am curious about is, in which areas is solar power, even to the point of being able to reduce your power bills by 25% or so, truly viable at all (as in, the savings+tax credits will offset the installation cost within, say, 10-15 years), and in what areas can one really produce THAT much power that you'd have an excess, aside from the obvious ones such as desert areas? The utility companies' comments from the article about being "forced" to raise everybody *else's* rates in order to compensate kinda make me twitch, as well. No business has the right to automatically maintain profitability without being willing to shift their business model to suit the times.

That being said, I realize that the power companies, in effect, DO have that -- they are generally allowed to raise rates yearly or so. Back in Louisiana, when some hotshots in the state legislature turned Entergy down for their customary, automatic rate increase one year, the big E responded by tacking an (apparently) arbitrary "Fuel Surcharge" onto the bills instead. This fee varied wildly, from 25%-over 100% of the actual electricity cost each month -- the net result was that, if my usage charge was $120 one month, I'd get a fuel charge of $30; if my usage was more like $85 (Winter in New Orleans - didn't need the heater often), I'd get a fuel charge of $90, and ended up with bills whose net charge was higher than what the rate increase would have been. They haven't had any trouble getting the yearly increases pushed through since then, IIRC.

I am wondering in part because, as I lived much of my life in southern Louisiana -- where it's pretty much ALL marshy, unstable ground (even in drained, city areas, the ground is unstable), not all alternative energy sources are even a possibility -- e.g. Too flat for hydroelectric (not that damming the Mississippi is a good idea), probably too soft to reliably support the structures needed to get thermal energy from underground (if it's even accessible there), and we didn't get intensive sun there enough to make solar a major thing year-round -- tho there is still enough there that solar is a realistic supplementary power option.

re: Living completely off the grid (in terms of utilities; I don't mean skipping out on property taxes or anything) -- Isn't doing that illegal in some states? I could swear I saw a recent article about someone in Florida getting into some deep shit for doing so.

[s_stabeler]

it's actually got more to do with the angle of your roof... if you have a 30 degree roof that is even vaguely south-facing, the average house can get payoff in ( IIRC) less than 10 years. I DO know that it was less than half of the life of the panels, anyway. This is in the UK.

[AccountingDrone]

it's actually got more to do with the angle of your roof... if you have a 30 degree roof that is even vaguely south-facing, the average house can get payoff in ( IIRC) less than 10 years. I DO know that it was less than half of the life of the panels, anyway. This is in the UK.

Hell, the retirement properties we are considering each have 2 clear acres aimed the right way ... now that is starting to be considered a commercial enterprise! We would be *starting* with 150-200% of household need and plowing the excess back into installing more solar until the 2 acres is filled.

I feel that if you have a business property, put a solar roof over your parking area - generate some juice. Install a couple of electrical charging areas for electric cars. There are already some colleges and businesses that are popping up solar installations over their parking areas - win win situation, the cars get shade, and electricity gets generated. If you have a property with space and sunlight, pop up panels and add juice to the grid. COnsider changing over to composting toilets and reduce water use, recycle your grey water to watering your lawn or rip out the lawn and go with xeriscaping and lose the watering. I never understood the fascination with lawns anyway.

[if we end up in the foothills east of Fresno CA, we will be doing the composting toilet, xeriscaping and using filtered grey water to water the garden, as we also want to grow a lot of our own veggies and fruits.]

[HYHYBT]

Here, unless you're particular about what plants it's made of or are starting from bare dirt, there's enough rain even in "drought" years to keep lawns alive; likewise with other common plants once they're past their first year, like azaleas. Covering parking lots with solar panels is a great idea, though I can see why a lot of businesses wouldn't want them.

[EricKei]

On an oddly-related note -- It's my understanding that commercial-scale solar plants (meaning, in desert areas) are beginning to come under fire, as they tend to be a bit on the warm side As they normally collect power and redirect it to a central pylon, the focused heat has apparently been quick-frying any avians that happen to fly too close o_O

[AccountingDrone]

On an oddly-related note -- It's my understanding that commercial-scale solar plants (meaning, in desert areas) are beginning to come under fire, as they tend to be a bit on the warm side As they normally collect power and redirect it to a central pylon, the focused heat has apparently been quick-frying any avians that happen to fly too close o_O

That is because they are subbing in solar generated heat in place of coal, gas or zoomies. If they went with photovolaic, it wouldn't fry the critters.

[protege]

After reading the article, I could only come up with one conclusion. That is, of course the power companies aren't going to like this. It means their monopolies are now in jeopardy of becoming endangered. Cry me a river

[Sarah Valentine]

I kinda figured that from the title, they're getting all pissy because they're getting less money from people than they think they should. Boo fuckin hoo.

[HYHYBT]

Zoomies?

[AccountingDrone]

Zoomies?

Nuclear power plants. Electrons, zoomies in navy nuke power parlance. Don't get me wrong, I loves me some nuke plants. I made good money back in the late 1980s working for Henze-Movats doing nuke plant renovations. I would have no problem with the US ditching all the fossil fuel plants for nukes. I just think that it is irresponsible to not add photovoltaic panels whenever possible. Think of all that almost free [except for the mechanical bits] energy just falling to earth.

[Nyoibo]

I find it hard to feel sorry for power companies here, we generate more power per day than we use yet the power bill is still about a third of what it was before we got solar panels.