8 ms·

Utilities should be happy about this. One of their biggest problems is uneven load on the grid - low at night, too high during a heatwave - and this has the pot

by grandpa 12y ago

Utilities should be happy about this. One of their biggest problems is uneven load on the grid - low at night, too high during a heatwave - and this has the potential to make that problem a lot easier.

astazangasta 12y ago
Utilities won't be happy about thus. They are already upset about having people with rooftop solar selling to the grid (taking their revenue); this will only make it worse.
- snsr 12y ago
  I imagine generation and transmission rates will certainly be adjusted to cope with changes in demand and grid topology.
- ammaar 12y ago
  Is there a legitimate concern for maintenance of the grid? Don't current utility costs partially go back into standard maintenance and improvement?
  - vinceguidry 12y ago
    It's not just maintenance. The system as a whole was architected to take advantage of the economies of scale you get when you assume that your customers remain consumers and you control the production. Nobody foresaw back then that each house could be a potential power plant. When you start to change that, you're still having to maintain the current infrastructure, which is steadily becoming obsolete, while also building new infrastructure to handle random power spikes and draws in arbitrary locations. You have to do this across the whole grid, everywhere in the country. This has the utilities very very nervous.
msandford 12y ago
They should be, but they won't be. Because it makes people less dependent upon them. If you bought one of these and enough solar panels you could go completely off-grid. Which the power companies desperately don't want. It's to the point where they're charging people for being hooked up at all, lest everyone think about putting in solar and only buying power when the sun isn't shining. The utilities would be happy about this if they controlled it, but they won't because the capital expense would be way too high. They'll only be happy about it if they somehow are the only ones who have control and get to use it for free. Somehow I doubt that'll happen.
- JoeAltmaier 12y ago
  Hey, utilities are often run by public-spirited folk with no greedy agenda. They make decisions that are aimed to balance the needs of the many, which can appear to be against the wants of the few.
  - msandford 12y ago
    You're absolutely right! Some are. But some aren't, and some power companies are very scared and lashing out. There was an attempt in Arizona to get monthly connection fees of up to $100/mo if you have solar at all. Hawaii has blocked people from getting solar hooked up to the grid. http://www.takepart.com/article/2013/07/19/solar-energy-arizona-net-metering http://www.takepart.com/article/2013/07/19/solar-energy-ariz... http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-solar-boom-so-successfull-its-been-halted/ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-solar-boom-so-su... The problem is obvious, of course. At some point the only people left paying any kind of substantial monthly fees are those who can't afford solar, and those are likely the poorest. And then what happens is that there's a regressive tax. I get that you can't have that kind of bad outcome. But at the same time, grid maintenance is fairly cheap and peak power generation is very expensive, which is why utilities will pay people to be able to turn off their A/C at peak times. This is quite literally where solar shines: the more A/C load there is the more likely you're getting good power out of solar. If the utilities need to prevent a regressive tax situation then they need to change incentives to be more transparent rather than just flailing about. If peak power is expensive, make it easier for people to put solar up and get paid for it. If nighttime power is cheap, make it cheaper on the bill. Power companies are basically complaining that arbitrage is hard. They're the ones who are in charge of their own business models, though, not me. So if they fail to adapt to the world as it stands, you'll forgive me for not feeling sympathy.
    - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
      For the most part, 'they' is 'us'. We have to live with the results. My power company is the REC, and I could run for the board but I don't. Anyway its my neighbors trying their best to keep the power on for everybody. You didn't mention issues of connecting to the local grid. There may be issues adding solar to your house, relative to the transformer and neighborhood substation. That $100 may be what it cost them to adapt. Likely its a tiny fraction of the cost of dealing with customers with unusual requirements.

by grandpa 12y ago

astazangasta 12y ago

Utilities won't be happy about thus. They are already upset about having people with rooftop solar selling to the grid (taking their revenue); this will only make it worse.

snsr 12y ago
I imagine generation and transmission rates will certainly be adjusted to cope with changes in demand and grid topology.
ammaar 12y ago
Is there a legitimate concern for maintenance of the grid? Don't current utility costs partially go back into standard maintenance and improvement?
- vinceguidry 12y ago
  It's not just maintenance. The system as a whole was architected to take advantage of the economies of scale you get when you assume that your customers remain consumers and you control the production. Nobody foresaw back then that each house could be a potential power plant. When you start to change that, you're still having to maintain the current infrastructure, which is steadily becoming obsolete, while also building new infrastructure to handle random power spikes and draws in arbitrary locations. You have to do this across the whole grid, everywhere in the country. This has the utilities very very nervous.

msandford 12y ago

They should be, but they won't be. Because it makes people less dependent upon them. If you bought one of these and enough solar panels you could go completely off-grid. Which the power companies desperately don't want. It's to the point where they're charging people for being hooked up at all, lest everyone think about putting in solar and only buying power when the sun isn't shining. The utilities would be happy about this if they controlled it, but they won't because the capital expense would be way too high. They'll only be happy about it if they somehow are the only ones who have control and get to use it for free. Somehow I doubt that'll happen.

JoeAltmaier 12y ago
Hey, utilities are often run by public-spirited folk with no greedy agenda. They make decisions that are aimed to balance the needs of the many, which can appear to be against the wants of the few.
- msandford 12y ago
  You're absolutely right! Some are. But some aren't, and some power companies are very scared and lashing out. There was an attempt in Arizona to get monthly connection fees of up to $100/mo if you have solar at all. Hawaii has blocked people from getting solar hooked up to the grid. http://www.takepart.com/article/2013/07/19/solar-energy-arizona-net-metering http://www.takepart.com/article/2013/07/19/solar-energy-ariz... http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-solar-boom-so-successfull-its-been-halted/ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-solar-boom-so-su... The problem is obvious, of course. At some point the only people left paying any kind of substantial monthly fees are those who can't afford solar, and those are likely the poorest. And then what happens is that there's a regressive tax. I get that you can't have that kind of bad outcome. But at the same time, grid maintenance is fairly cheap and peak power generation is very expensive, which is why utilities will pay people to be able to turn off their A/C at peak times. This is quite literally where solar shines: the more A/C load there is the more likely you're getting good power out of solar. If the utilities need to prevent a regressive tax situation then they need to change incentives to be more transparent rather than just flailing about. If peak power is expensive, make it easier for people to put solar up and get paid for it. If nighttime power is cheap, make it cheaper on the bill. Power companies are basically complaining that arbitrage is hard. They're the ones who are in charge of their own business models, though, not me. So if they fail to adapt to the world as it stands, you'll forgive me for not feeling sympathy.
  - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
    For the most part, 'they' is 'us'. We have to live with the results. My power company is the REC, and I could run for the board but I don't. Anyway its my neighbors trying their best to keep the power on for everybody. You didn't mention issues of connecting to the local grid. There may be issues adding solar to your house, relative to the transformer and neighborhood substation. That $100 may be what it cost them to adapt. Likely its a tiny fraction of the cost of dealing with customers with unusual requirements.