another hiccup to going solar?

[Roric]

Cannibalistic socialism I meant.

A cabal is something else.

 

[Dftodd]

Everyone thinking that if they go solar you are providing the electric company with "free" power to sell is sadly mistaken and has no understanding of how power companies work.

Power companies are just tired of being forced to pay residential customers 4x or 5x what they can buy the SAME power from their suppliers at wholesale for. Which only drives up the cost for everyone else, because you know damn good and well the power companies are just passing along that cost.

This is just the difference between wholesale and retail. No different than any other market.

You go into walmart and see they are selling milk for $5/gallon so you decide to get a couple of dairy cows and approach walmart. You intend to sell walmart milk if your cows make more than you use.....but if mil production drops you will still buy walmart's $5 milk. Now with this scenerio.....do you honestly expect walmart to buy YOUR surplus milk at the same $5/gal they are selling it for Or do you think they will only buy it at their wholesale rate of $2-$3 a gallonor whatever it is?

This is the same for solar. The only difference is it got screwed up because the government got involved and forced the utilities to do this.....thats the ONLY way solar got traction. Because from the very beginning if the electric companies were allowed to purchase residential solar at the market wholesale rate....not many would have went solar.

Again, why should the electric companies be FORCED to pay 4x or 5x for residential solar power when they can purchase it from their normal suppliers for a fraction of the cost. And at the same time while being forced to do so.....they also had to maintain their infrastructure to be your battery for FREE.

It was NEVER sustainable this way. And it was only a matter of time until enough people started switching to solar that things were gonna change. We have reached that time

Arkansas was reimbursing at wholesale cost, not retail.

They have since lowered that reimbursement even more. Hence why we need to go back and reevaluate if we want to go that route or not.

 

[mrmikey]

I remember quite a few years ago the power corp plugging time of day rates, "If the consumers will opt into the TOD system, it will allow us to keep our rates low as we won't have to build extra auxiliary plants to supply power during high demand" yeah...BS on that one. Decades later we get the option of TOD rates with an additional charge tagged on, does the word monopoly mean anything...and no, not the game .
As for solar, I'm thinking by the time they are willing to accept any extra power you generate, by the time they add on the extra fees, it won't be worth it.
I'm with Hay Dude, nuclear...we're gonna go one way or the other anyway.

See "the dramatic increase in return on investment of utility shareholders"

Same here, when the company has to produce profits there's very few ways to increase profits, cut expenses i.e. maintenance (which has been happening here for decades and shows up everytime a breeze blows), fire staff which is happening all the time or increase prices.
I posted before, possibly earlier in this thread, the CEO of Emera which is our power corp, made $8M in wages and other add ons last year. Who in the ***k deserves that kind of money riding on the back of normal working people....noone.

 

[LD1]

Users that go solar or wind SHOULD be able to get full credit for KwHrs generated and sold back to the grid, or at least the wholesale price the utilities pay other providers. They should not have to pay for not using power, or get paid less for generating it.

Are you saying solar users that are connected to the grid.....and use the grids power as their battery, and pull power from the grid when the sun is t shining.......they shouldn't share in the cost of maintaining said grid?

 

[Diggin It]

Are you saying solar users that are connected to the grid.....and use the grids power as their battery, and pull power from the grid when the sun is t shining.......they shouldn't share in the cost of maintaining said grid?

No.

We (as most users do) have two main components on our statements. Usage in KwHrs and Facilities (lines, poles, substations, tree trimming,etc.) As long as we are connected, we pay the facilities charges, whether we use a single watt of power or not. I can understand that.

 

[yubh8tn]

My wife and I looked into solar but the only way I could see it making sense would be to not include the electric company in any way. Meaning go completely off grid or using electric company power only when excessive power is needed. This would require a battery bank and the ROI just isn't there. To go into business with the electric company and expect to use them as a resource just didnt seem reliable or like a good bet. I wouldnt do it without a sufficient battery bank and the cost is preventative.

One day if the battery technology and cost of battery banks changes, it might be worth looking at again.

 

[Torvy]

Their infrastructure and sunk-cost investments exist; are the cost of doing business for a publicly held utility.

Are your utilities publicly held? Our water is a municipal utility. Power is privately held.

 

[LD1]

Users that go solar or wind SHOULD be able to get full credit for KwHrs generated and sold back to the grid, or at least the wholesale price the utilities pay other providers. They should not have to pay for not using power, or get paid less for generating it.

This is what threw me and was just looking for clarification on where you stand.

The way this is worded, that they should get FULL credit....then you say "or at least wholesale price".....Not sure what you meant. The wholesale price is ALL they should get.

And honestly I can even understand paying LESS than wholesale to an extent.

ITs a business.....they have their current supplier already. If you are the new kid wanting to sell goods....and the best you can do is match my current supplier...I'd tell you to get lost. Gotta BEAT them. IE: Charge me less than wholesale for your electric.

The biggest problem with solar is its peak output is when the demand is the lowest.

 

[Eagle1]

I own water and sewer here. Electric is Coop so I'm a shareholder and receive my tiny share of profits. Phone/Internet is small local company with less than 5000 users.

 

[Diggin It]

The wholesale price is ALL they should get.

And honestly I can even understand paying LESS than wholesale to an extent.

ITs a business.....they have their current supplier already.

This can be twisted any number of ways. As I mentioned above, our co-op buys power from over 100 miles away. There has to be some cost involved in that process. Locally produced solar is ... well, local. Not distant, so there must be some savings. Somehow.

 

[Eagle1]

Not really low voltage can not be transmitted without step-up to line voltage 11KV or more. Step up takes power. The stuff from 100 miles away comes on High Voltage lines well above line voltage and is easier to scale and distribute. Plus it is 3 phase - unlikely you create 3 phase from your solar.

 

[Roric]

Are your utilities publicly held? Our water is a municipal utility. Power is privately held.

You are correct and I wasn't careful with my phrasing.
More accurately, our electric is a privately held ( with shareholders) publicly regulated utility.

regards,

R

 

[bnold]

With my coop, energy fee is billed separate from the transmission. I am returned the same value for the energy produced with solar as I purchase it through the coop for.

Ultimately the coop doesn’t product power, they just purchase it from the wholesaler (Brazos).

So they purchase the power from me or Brazos at the same rate. Seems pretty fair and legit to me.

 

[orezok]

Not really low voltage can not be transmitted without step-up to line voltage 11KV or more. Step up takes power. The stuff from 100 miles away comes on High Voltage lines well above line voltage and is easier to scale and distribute. Plus it is 3 phase - unlikely you create 3 phase from your solar.

My solar generated power flows backward through my transformer elevating it to 15KV.

 

[MAX-24-Dean]

This can be twisted any number of ways. As I mentioned above, our co-op buys power from over 100 miles away. There has to be some cost involved in that process. Locally produced solar is ... well, local. Not distant, so there must be some savings. Somehow.

There is never any savings in electricity cost if you are using Solar or Wind. Both are not cost effective, that's why there are tax break incentives (subsidies) with both.

I'm off grid solar and it is not the cheapest way to get power. But it is less expensive than running a diesel generator.
Batteries are the most expensive part of an off grid solar electric system. Which is the biggest reason people want to have grid-tied systems. Making the utility be thier battery.

 

[4570Man]

Can't let you think you can be independent of "them" and make your own power.

Nobody is stopping you from being independent. Your alternative options are either very expensive or very inconvenient but you can go disconnect your meter tomorrow and use your own electricity.

 

[dougtrr2]

Paying solar user wholesale price for what they produce isn't quite right either. Why should they be paid the same price when they can't be depended on to produce? Think of yourself as a purchasing agent. You have two suppliers. One consistently provides what you need when you need it. The other shows up at random times to sell you his product whether you need it or not. Would you pay them both the same?

Doug in SW IA

 

[Eagle1]

As business owner how long can you use a supplier that is not reliable?

 

[LD1]

Paying solar user wholesale price for what they produce isn't quite right either. Why should they be paid the same price when they can't be depended on to produce? Think of yourself as a purchasing agent. You have two suppliers. One consistently provides what you need when you need it. The other shows up at random times to sell you his product whether you need it or not. Would you pay them both the same?

Doug in SW IA

Sorta what I was eluding to in post 30 but you worded it well.

Solar customers have been spoiled over the last 10 years and getting a $0 bill if they make as much as they use. OR even getting paid if they make surplus....and paid at a rate that includes distribution and meter/service charges even though solar users have no distribution network.

Its sad that they are up-in-arms about this change to a business model that actually makes sense. Just blows my mind the mindset of some of these people wanting something for nothing.

 

[Diggin It]

I see it as an incentive to get more solar and wind production in the system. 100 homes with a few panels won't contribute much. 100,000 homes with a few panels will contribute more. 1,000,000 homes and small businesses with panels will be better.

But as noted by a few posters above, the return on investment isn't there for most homeowners and small companies. It costs too much to get in, especially with storage capacity and you don't get enough back to justify the expense.

People complain about farmland, open fields and even wide open desert being converted to solar farms. The plan needs to encourage panels in urban areas, on roof tops of stores and shopping centers, covers over parking lots and in some cases roadways.

But one of the big blocks is that the utility providers don't want to give up their legacy methods as it might cut into their stock options.

Our 'non-profit' co-op just built a huge new office building in an area that is very inconvenient for many customer to get to. I have no idea what that cost them (us), but it wasn't necessary to produce power and our rates have gone up since. And I know the CEO salary hasn't gone down to help us in keeping rates stable.