• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Net metering: Solar Energy's poison pill

RabidAlpaca said:
But Carrotville only has one set of power lines and the residents don't have a choice on which lines to use or from which company. If Carrottville as a whole is producing more and more of their own power, that shouldn't mean that the power company should get more and more money for producing less. Most of that energy is produced and used locally, so the more people that use solar the less net traffic that is being put on the power company's larger grid. Yes, I realize what a regulated monopoly is, but when the power companies pay the regulators to siphon funds from homeowners into the power company's pockets, there's a serious problem. Also, being a regulated market, the regulators priority is for what's best for their constituents, not what's best for the corporations. I hope you can at least admit that the OP is dead wrong and that reducing the amount people get paid for solar power generation from 11 cents to 2.6 cents is a disincentive and not an incentive.



Of course it's required, especially before home battery packs become widely available. However, with power being a public utility, the lines should be built and maintained with taxes based on that energy usage, not a 76% redistribution scheme where you're forced to rebuy the same power you generated at a dramatically higher cost. If your house is generating 10 KWh while you're at work, you're not using most of that because you're not there, you're forced to sell that energy to the company at a massive discount, then when you come home from work and the sun is no longer shining and your house isn't self-sustaining, you have to buy energy at 11 cents per KWh. That is not a benefit to the solar owners, it's a massive loss.

That's why the price to sell has to be the same (or very close) to the price you're charged to buy the energy. Without a battery you can only use the energy immediately or it's gone, meaning you're only saving 2.6 cents of the 11 cents of your energy bill.
Click to expand...
You seem to be under some misconception that the lines are publicly owned, they are not in most places.
Most utilities are publicly regulated, but the lines are privately owned and maintained.
The power company as part of their public utility arrangement, is required to provide power to all who request it and pay for it.
The grid is private property, and other than selling you power, you have no right to attach to their property, without their permission.
They allowed early Solar adopters to sell power back to the grid, and that was fine as long as the numbers were low,
but that path is not sustainable.
In your example in red above, the power company could choose to not allow you to add power to their private property,
and your own system would then have to get rid of 10Kwh of heat somewhere.
That the solar homeowners house is not self sustaining, due to duty cycle use, is one of the failings of solar power.
I have said before energy storage is the key, we can produce plenty of energy, but we need to store it until needed.
 
An interesting side note, As part of this thread I looked up what the wholesale rate was for electricity.
https://www.eia.gov/electricity/wholesale/
So far in 2017 it looks like $26.23 per Mwh (2.6 cents per Kwh)
Audi/Sunfire has claimed efficiencies on their power to liquid fuel process as high as 70%.
Fuel - Sunfire
The Naval Research labs has stated a 60% efficiency
This means that the spot price of Oil is getting much closer to the price it would cost a refinery to make their own feedstock,
from electricity. The fuel could be made carbon neutral!
For those who like math,
A gallon of gasoline contains about 33.7 Kwh of energy, at 60% efficiency that is 56.1 Kwh
to make a gallon of gasoline. $26.23 per Mwh, Each Mwh could make 17.8 gallons,
so 26.23/17.8= $1.47 per gallon, times the 35 gallons they get from a barrel of oil = about $52 a barrel.

Now it is unlikely that the wholesale rates will stay this low, but I wanted to demonstrate that the
economic curves are in motion, and at some point the refinery operators will decide the greater profit,
will be in making their own feedstock, rather buying organic oil.

If they did not tell us we were buying carbon neutral fuel, we would never know,
but I can's see the oil companies passing up a good marketing point!
 
longview said:
An interesting side note, As part of this thread I looked up what the wholesale rate was for electricity.
https://www.eia.gov/electricity/wholesale/
So far in 2017 it looks like $26.23 per Mwh (2.6 cents per Kwh)
Audi/Sunfire has claimed efficiencies on their power to liquid fuel process as high as 70%.
Fuel - Sunfire
The Naval Research labs has stated a 60% efficiency
This means that the spot price of Oil is getting much closer to the price it would cost a refinery to make their own feedstock,
from electricity. The fuel could be made carbon neutral!
For those who like math,
A gallon of gasoline contains about 33.7 Kwh of energy, at 60% efficiency that is 56.1 Kwh
to make a gallon of gasoline. $26.23 per Mwh, Each Mwh could make 17.8 gallons,
so 26.23/17.8= $1.47 per gallon, times the 35 gallons they get from a barrel of oil = about $52 a barrel.

Now it is unlikely that the wholesale rates will stay this low, but I wanted to demonstrate that the
economic curves are in motion, and at some point the refinery operators will decide the greater profit,
will be in making their own feedstock, rather buying organic oil.

If they did not tell us we were buying carbon neutral fuel, we would never know,
but I can's see the oil companies passing up a good marketing point!
Click to expand...
I can see paying solar customers the wholesale rate, but they still need to pay for being tied to the grid too.
 
Lord of Planar said:
I can see paying solar customers the wholesale rate, but they still need to pay for being tied to the grid too.
Click to expand...
Or some slightly lower rate to compensate.
I know many people complained about my bringing this up, But the subject will need to be addressed if Solar is to advance quickly.
 
longview said:
Or some slightly lower rate to compensate.
I know many people complained about my bringing this up, But the subject will need to be addressed if Solar is to advance quickly.
Click to expand...

Solar will become viable fast enough. Storage of it will take longer. It is not right to make corporations subsidize a solar users storage. Let this be a reason to bring battery technology cheaper, or some other type of power storage. I prefer a water heater sized hydrogen storage unit. Home storage can consist of using excess solar energy to make hydrogen from water, then use fuel cells when power is needed at night and peak times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom