pull down to refresh
21 sats \ 2 replies \ @kepford 26 Mar \ parent \ on: California’s Latest Hustle: Utility Bills Based on Ratepayers' Income econ
That may be but I haven't heard that angle. I think what you are talking about is NEM (Net Energy Metering). A new agreement is now in place called NEM 3.0. The previous agreement which was designed to encourage solar installations was retired. Under the 2.0 the power company was required to buy back excess power sent back to the grid at a reduced rate. Now they no longer have to do this. This results in solar owners receiving much less ROI for their production. Basically as I understand it, the grids were being over powered with energy produced by panels during daylight hours and then production drops off a cliff when the sun goes down. This also is the time when peak usage happens. Honestly, it sounds like a tough spot to be in as an engineer.
Isn't that what batteries are for?
I think this is the issue I was referring to, but whoever I heard arguing against it was taking a bizarre egalitarian stance. It was something about how the solar production wasn't reducing electricity costs for anyone other than the solar producers. Talk about politics of envy.
reply
No kidding. The economics of home batteries are tough unless you have an EV. Many people are making dumb economic decisions with this stuff though because they don't use spreadsheets. Not to mention the risk of fire.
I haven't heard the argument you mentioned. I have only heard it was those greedy utilities. Even though they are overseen by state boards. For all the talk of renewable goals they disincentivized new solar installations. The payoff period for a system is now much longer. One of many reasons why I do not take these people seriously.
reply