Diane Cardwell reports in the NYT that "many utilities are trying desperately to stem the rise of solar power, either by reducing incentives, adding steep fees or effectively pushing home solar companies out of the market."
The economic threat has electric companies on edge. Over all, demand for electricity is softening while home solar is rapidly spreading across the country. There are now about 600,000 installed systems, and the number is expected to reach 3.3 million by 2020, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association. In Hawaii, the current battle began in 2013, when Hawaiian Electric started barring installations of residential solar systems in certain areas. It was an abrupt move — a panicked one, critics say — made after the utility became alarmed by the technical and financial challenges of all those homes suddenly making their own electricity. "Hawaii is a postcard from the future," says Adam Browning, executive director of Vote Solar, a policy and advocacy group based in California.
But utilities say that "solar-generated electricity flowing out of houses and into a power grid designed to carry it in the other direction has caused unanticipated voltage fluctuations that can overload circuits, burn lines and lead to brownouts or blackouts."
"At every different moment, we have to make sure that the amount of power we generate is equal to the amount of energy being used, and if we don't keep that balance things go unstable," says Colton Ching, vice president for energy delivery at Hawaiian Electric, pointing to the illuminated graphs and diagrams tracking energy production from wind and solar farms, as well as coal-fueled generators in the utility's main control room. But the rooftop systems are "essentially invisible to us," says Ching, "because they sit behind a customer's meter and we don't have a means to directly measure them." The utility wants to cut roughly in half the amount it pays customers for solar electricity they send back to the grid. "Hawaii's case is not isolated," says Massoud Amin. "When we push year-on-year 30 to 40 percent growth in this market, with the number of installations doubling, quickly — every two years or so — there's going to be problems."
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Justin Case on Sunday April 19 2015, @09:12PM
Yet another aging industry resists new tech. Likely the "solution" will be similar.
BigCorp probably has a life-plus-75-years copyright on that 60 cycle per second "signal" they deliver to your house, so if you attempt to "make available" your own 60 cycle electricity, prepared to be fined the total amount "lost" by the utilities nationwide, plus treble damages.
Didn't we hear recently about a new capacitor good enough to replace batteries? How long until we can make and store our own electricity and tell the power grid to go pound sand?
(Score: 2, Interesting) by SubiculumHammer on Sunday April 19 2015, @10:10PM
Agree.
And don't give me bull about paying for the grid.
There is a fee on your electric bill exactly for grid upkeep.
This monopoly utility will just need to adapt, or be broken up.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 20 2015, @07:35AM
They'll adapt, alright. They'll adapt the law to protect their model.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 19 2015, @09:15PM
They can measure the amount you use but not what you give? Without smart meters; I can see that as a problem but with them it's just bull. And if the meter is not able to do it then install one that can. This is just one a a series of barriers that will come up in the next few years until they have time to buy out (ugh: support) a politician that will pass the "ARC" law. Alternative Resources Control act will prevent terrorist from bringing down the grid buy selling too much electricity to the Utilities!
Solar Man - Coming to an Arizona desert near you.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by fishybell on Sunday April 19 2015, @10:11PM
There are semi-legitimate concerns. For example, if too many people are off-the-grid or making back more than they pay, the money to maintain the grid goes down. Obviously if everyone was off-the-grid, who cares? Until that day, the utilities will fight back. Not (just) because of the perceived threat to their business, but the very real threat to their long-term existence.
This is the same reason legislatures are cooking up adding extra taxes (ex. mileage taxes) on electric and hybrid cars: they pay substantially less fuel-tax, which is often times the only method of funding road repairs, expansions, etc. IMHO the correct response to all of these issues is to change the way infrastructure is funded.
Of course, paying for infrastructure out of general funds causes grief among those who use it less. I hear about this a lot in Utah where people who have zero to two kids don't like how they are subsidizing those who have twelve (which is not as uncommon as you would think). The answer to all of these complaints, whether it be about infrastructure maintenance or teaching kids is "it's for the greater good," which people often don't give a rat's ass about. Welcome to America.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 20 2015, @07:11AM
"I hear about this a lot in Utah where people who have zero to two kids don't like how they are subsidizing those who have twelve (which is not as uncommon as you would think)."
When the government subsidies those with more children they are encouraging population growth. This creates a housing problem. When you have 1k houses and 10k people that averages to 10 people per household. That's why you have the problem we have where I live where you have three families per household renting their place, you have apartment complexes, and nowhere to park. A city designed to hold only so many inhabitants now holding three times as many. The solution is to either keep stuffing more people in less space, let people go homeless, build more homes (destroying natural habitats by replacing them with homes), or limit population growth and immigration. The government should not encouraging population growth by subsidizing it.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by LaminatorX on Monday April 20 2015, @01:16PM
The solution to fair road funding has been staring us in the face for years now: get assessed on a mileage X weight basis each year. Fuel taxes approximate this, but break down for electric rides.
(Score: 2) by GungnirSniper on Monday April 20 2015, @03:54PM
Fair? How would that work across multiple states? If there are tolls on a given road am I being hit twice for driving on it? Doesn't my generic sedan cause less wear on the roads than a beefy pickup truck?
Tips for better submissions to help our site grow. [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 20 2015, @04:31PM
Yeah but tolls go into the pockets of private companies instead of the government, so its ok, right? Privatize all the roads!
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Zipf on Monday April 20 2015, @01:43PM
the money to maintain the grid goes down.
This is solved by separating delivery (connection) and energy (consumption) costs. In principle, delivery is priced at a fixed rate depending on the max amperage allowable over your connection. Maintenance costs should be fixed for a 200 A connection, even if unused or used at 200A continuously. I think this must only be a problem because the utilities have not be using worse-case scenario planning (N residents x 200A) for utility cables, instead cutting costs (or forestalling upgrades) based on something like, (N residents x (Avg Amps + 3 Sigma) ).
(Score: 2) by Zinho on Monday April 20 2015, @01:50PM
if too many people are off-the-grid or making back more than they pay, the money to maintain the grid goes down.
The solution to this is to have connectivity/grid maintenance be a flat fee for everyone who wants to stay connected. If the grid maintenance cost scales proportionally with number of connections, then flat rate per connection is the way to go. I'm sure that there's some component of per-kWh scaling as well; fine, add a $0.0x/kWh used factor as well. I might also note that people entirely off-grid put zero load on the grid in either direction, by definition; so except for losing a customer they should be no concern to the power company.
Where I live the delivery charge is billed by a company separate from both the energy producing plants and the nominal energy providing company. They charge a fee for "energy delivery service" that is uniform across the energy providing companies, and everyone with a connection pays into it. The energy providers compete with each other on price-per-kWh and production method (companies that buy from renewable sources can charge premium prices to conservation-minded customers). It's a great model: everyone's power stays on, everyone pays their part, and there's lots of competition for service quality and low price. If only we could get that model going for Internet connectivity...
"Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 20 2015, @04:34AM
Are they measuring in real time or once a month? The latter is useless for regulating power. Since they say the system is "hidden", I assume that they don't have real-time smart metering.
Even with smart, real time metering, they have to measure what's going on with 600,000 systems simultaneously and balance the grid section by section. Not trivial.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 20 2015, @05:34AM
...measure what's going on with 600,000 systems simultaneously and balance the grid section by section. Not trivial.
Not trivial, but doable (at least in other parts of the world). It's a part of providing the service for which they accept peoples money.
(Score: 2) by scruffybeard on Monday April 20 2015, @04:43PM
It's a part of providing the service for which they accept peoples money.
Yes, except that the system was not designed to have to balance so many small electric providers. I think this is equivalent to permitting alternative fuel cars to use carpool lanes regardless of the number of passengers. States did this to encourage people to purchase these vehicles because they were "better" for the environment. Fast-forward a few years, the carpool lanes are now clogged with alternative fuel cars, negating the original benefit of the carpool lanes, which was to reduce congestion, albeit with the secondary benefit of being better for the environment.
Who should pay to retrofit the system so that the power companies have the visibility necessary to balance the load across all these solar stations? I see the benefit to having these connected to the grid, but is it fair for me to pay extra, while my neighbor is getting a credit for the system installed on his roof?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by SuperCharlie on Sunday April 19 2015, @10:11PM
We bought some raw land with only an electric co-op for power. We started a small solar plant and dug into what was required to sell the excess. The stopping point was the requirement for $500,000 liability insurance which would have made it financially unfeasable so we didnt hook to the grid. Also in the requirements were engineering certifications, their inspections and approvals and the like. I am sure that in the long run I could have got past those, but they really didnt want you to make money off them and it was ovbious they were throwing everything they could at making it not happen. Small-time rural example, but I would suspect an uphill climb anywhere.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday April 21 2015, @12:06AM
Make two electrical distribution networks at your property. Where you select which grid your appliances should use?
That way you can reduce your demand rather that wire the national grid and local grid together. As bonus your own grid will most likely manage a solar flare.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by TrumpetPower! on Sunday April 19 2015, @10:27PM
I just got a very close-up view of this here in Arizona.
A few years ago I put a bunch of panels on my rooftop. Best financial investment of my life; I haven't had an electric bill since then and they'll have paid themselves off in a few more years. It's roughly the equivalent of the returns you'd get at 10% annual interest -- something you're not going to get basically anywhere these days -- and not only with no meaningful risk but inflation proof. And energy inflation proof, at that!
A year ago, the other utility in the region, APS, tried to get a $50 / month "fuck you" fee added on to the bills of their rooftop solar customers. It didn't make it past the Arizona Corporation Commission.
Just a month or so ago, Salt River Project, my own utility, succeeded in getting an even more insane "fuck you" fee past their own self-governing "oversight" board that basically ensures that, no matter how many panels you put on your roof, you're still going to pay over half what you would if you didn't have any panels at all.
They were generous enough to grandfather in those of us with existing installations for the next twenty years...but not to people who might buy our homes. So it's completely killed the rooftop solar industry in their market area -- an industry that had been thriving and employing lots of local high-skill well-aid workers.
Their propaganda was all lies. Solar customers are their most profitable; they buy peak power from us in exchange for credits we redeem at off-peak times. Buy low; sell high. Plus, every kWh they buy from us is a kWh they themselves don't have to buy from their own insanely expensive peaking plants. Plus, they get our green energy credits to claim for themselves. Add it all up and they're making money hand over fist.
They've also just shot themselves in the foot in a really big way. Long before I'll ever pay their Danegeld, I'll personally buy a bunch of batteries and drop off the grid entirely, even if it's not the cheapest way to go.
But for new construction, it's already cheaper to install solar plus batteries than it is to pay for a new grid connection.
Tesla's Gigafactory is going to be coming online soon, and they're going to be selling batteries for home use not just for solar customers but for everybody; the idea is that you charge the batteries at off-peak times and run your house off them during on-peak times, effectively always paying off-peak rates. Plus, you've got an whole-house UPS. Shouldn't take long for that purchase to pay itself off for the typical homeowner -- again, if you've got the capital you can tie up. Or, a bit longer if you finance it.
That's just the beginning...very soon, Tesla and others are going to drive down battery prices to the point that a company like Solar City can go toe-to-toe with the utilities. They pay to install the panels and the batteries and own them even after they've installed them. The grid connection gets cut entirely and Solar City becomes your new electric utility, and your monthly bills from them are cheaper than whatever you're paying the utility today. And, of course, those with capital will again buy the systems outright and make even better returns on the investment.
If SRP had even the slightest clue, they'd be in front of all this. They'd be the leading rooftop solar installer in the area and they'd even be taking a small financial hit up front to put batteries in everybody's homes. Instead, they're trying to be like the phone giants of yesteryear that stood in the way of you buying your own telephone, of mobile phones, of number portability, and the rest.
Because that's the way this is headed. Not that long from now the norm is going to be off-grid local generation with grid ties becoming mostly vestigial, just the same way that everybody'd got mobile phones and landlines are dying off more and more. Yes, there'll be a place for the grid for a long time, just as landlines aren't going away any time soon...but the days of the dominance of the grid are at an end.
The only question is which utilities are going to survive this transition and which are going to fight it and die. SRP has chosen the self-immolation route.
Which way will your utility go?
Cheers,
b&
All but God can prove this sentence true.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 19 2015, @11:09PM
Even without cheap battery storage, people in australia are figuring out ways to minimize what the power company can extract from their pockets. [reneweconomy.com.au]
(Score: 2, Interesting) by tftp on Sunday April 19 2015, @11:25PM
Tesla's Gigafactory is going to be coming online soon, and they're going to be selling batteries for home use not just for solar customers but for everybody; the idea is that you charge the batteries at off-peak times and run your house off them during on-peak times, effectively always paying off-peak rates. Plus, you've got an whole-house UPS. Shouldn't take long for that purchase to pay itself off for the typical homeowner
Wait until you see the fireproofing requirements that the local government (their building permit department) will impose upon you. You'd have to dig a concrete bunker for the battery. That's OK if you have lots of land, but that's not exactly OK if you can spit across your entire backyard.
(Score: 2) by arashi no garou on Monday April 20 2015, @12:38AM
Because that's the way this is headed. Not that long from now the norm is going to be off-grid local generation with grid ties becoming mostly vestigial, just the same way that everybody'd got mobile phones and landlines are dying off more and more. Yes, there'll be a place for the grid for a long time, just as landlines aren't going away any time soon...but the days of the dominance of the grid are at an end.
That's exactly how I see the future of the power grid, though realistically I think it will be about 40 years from now before we see more off-grid homes and businesses than on-grid. One of the biggest targets of the modern cyberterrorist is a nation's power grid; take down the grid and you send any country into third world anarchy for a while. There was an indie movie called "Goodbye World" that dealt with this (though it wasn't so much a terrorist attack as it was a domestic hacker screwing up his digital suicide note). If you take away the grid though, you take away the ability for a bad actor to cause a big impact. Granted, most metropolises will still be on the grid even with solar/wind/battery setups on the roof of every skyscraper, but a massive grid meltdown won't cripple a city like it would right now.
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Monday April 20 2015, @02:24AM
That's exactly how I see the future of the power grid, though realistically I think it will be about 40 years from now before we see more off-grid homes and businesses than on-grid. ...
I think it is going to eventually have to be that way if we are going to retain any quality of life. Power centralized over a massive grid is just too economically inefficient and too environmentally unsound to continue forever. I believe the future will be small co-ops, independent individuals and such using whatever combinations of power generation works best for them. Any individual or any combination of solar, wind, tidal, water power, geothermal, maybe even small gas, coal or even nuclear or whatever will be powering homes, neighborhoods and businesses. Big Power, with its layers of costly administration, will have to go.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by frojack on Monday April 20 2015, @04:42AM
I think it will be about 40 years from now before we see more off-grid homes and businesses than on-grid.
Maybe for people in Arizona. A lot of us just don't have that kind of sun.
It will take a dramatic improvement in solar efficiency vs cost (which, remember, is always just 10 years away) to make this practical on most of North America.
Still, micro solar is probably never going to be as efficient as the larger projects like TrumpetPower was talking about. Even at a reduction in costs or an improvement in efficiency, a utility scale project can move to that newer technology whereas Joe Homeowner may not be able to.
Probably the solution for those that have the sun, and the utility scale solar projects, is to get ahold of their local government, and start turning the tables on these companies. Always remember they need customers more than customers need them.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 4, Informative) by bziman on Monday April 20 2015, @12:39PM
You don't need Arizona's sun to make solar practical. Solar worked great for me in northern Virginia. It's a fifteen year payback for that installation, but the prices have fallen by 50% in the six years since I did it, so it would be quicker now.
Here in Colorado, it was instant because I did a lease at zero up front cost and I pay a fee to the solar company each month per kilowatt hour... and a minimum 30% discount off what the local coal plant charges.
People keep saying solar isn't ready, and if you live in the Pacific Northwest or northern New Hampshire, that may be true, but for most of the country it works great.
My coop in Virginia was helpful... they gave me a smart meter for free that helps them handle load. The power company in Colorado is slow and evil, but aside from taking forever, they were also fairly easy to work with (though my solar company handled that here).
The only good reason to ignore solar is if you are worried about your coal stock... I recommend dumping that and writing the loss off your taxes.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Phoenix666 on Monday April 20 2015, @02:27PM
Germany is doing fine with solar and their insolation is much worse than most of the US.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday April 20 2015, @09:45PM
So you apparently think it will be SOONER than 40 years where there will be more off grid homes than on grid?
(That is the factoid I was addressing after all).
Well lets look at Colorado
Intially it looks like CO is doing well on renewable energy.
http://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CO#tabs-4 [eia.gov]
But the more you dive into it you find out Solar is tiny:
http://www.eia.gov/renewable/state/Colorado/ [eia.gov]
If the wind didn't blow in Colorado, you would have vanishingly small renewable energy production.
So No way is Colorado getting near 50% of homes running solar. Your state is the King of Coal.
Play with those tables and stats for a while. Its pretty enlightening.
Arizona generated more power from Hydro than Colorado does. Go Figure.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by tempest on Monday April 20 2015, @02:43PM
At this point that would be my main drive for solar if I had my own house. It never fails some drunk guy hits a power pole somewhere and knocks out electricity at least once a year. That's just an occasional inconvenience, but I've been lucky where I'm at. There have been enough power outages lasting weeks for people in this region that I'd think of it more as a form of insurance.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by KilroySmith on Monday April 20 2015, @12:50AM
Another entitled yuppie crying because his government handout went away. The only thing worse is the screaming from the electric car owners when someone suggests that they should pay to maintain the roads that they drive on, that were historically paid for through Gas taxes.
You've gotten used to the State of Arizona subsidizing your Solar array to encourage alternative energy. You were able to sell electricity back to SRP at RETAIL rates during the day, not WHOLESALE rates like every other electricity producer. You liked being able to be "free" of the grid in the afternoon when the utility made it's profits (you know, those ugly, evil things that keep businesses in business?), but you sure wanted to be able to turn on your lights in the evening. You loved that you didn't have to be part of paying for the electrical grid to be able to accept your puny drips of power. Who is going to pay for all of those power poles and other infrastructure to keep your lights on? Who is going to pay for that trouble truck to roll when the monsoon storms take out the power in your neighborhood?
You're not going to find a utility company apologist here; I hate the fact that on my last bill, only about 30% of what I have to pay is for actual electricity. But you're not gonna find a supporter of "give me mine, and part of yours too" either.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 20 2015, @01:13AM
Another cave man with barely two brain cells to rub together, bought and paid for by Big Oil to keep spreading FUD and flaming anyone who dares to stand up to their bullying practices.
Did you miss the part where the OP is being charged an extra fee on top of what he might pay for any power usage, as punishment (and the utility made it clear it was indeed punishment) for daring to be even the least bit self-sufficient? Kinda blows that whole "yuppie crying about a government handout" argument out of the water, doesn't it? Of course, I wouldn't expect a birther/freeper/UFO watcher like you to grasp a concept like that; to you self-sufficiency means licking the boots of The Man and buying your cigarettes and beer with food stamps while your filthy rugrats eat roaches and dog food. Have fun fucking your sister tonight, you dickless redneck cocksucker.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Phoenix666 on Monday April 20 2015, @02:43PM
In the United States roads are not paid for through gas taxes and driving is heavily subsidized [citylab.com] by the rest of the society.
As for the rest of your post, you do rather sound like an apologist for the utilities trying hard to pretend like you're not one. An electricity company levying penalties on a consumer for daring to use less of their service/product? Sounds an awful lot like socialism to me. The utility ought to be grateful that so many homeowners are willing to provide it green energy at no extra cost to them that they can tack a "carrying" fee onto for everyone connected to their grid who is not yet energy self-sufficient. They could even spin it like it's their part of their plan to supply "green" energy to their customers.
See, utilities really like having a whole bunch of customers who are held hostage to their caprice. Increasingly, though, they are walking a fine line. They are loathe to spend money on new power plants and generation to keep up with growing demand. They are also challenged by an ageing grid that is the source of their monopoly; that is why they have tried so hard to sell people on the "smart grid" and get government to gift them a shiny new system that allows them to continue their monopoly for another 100 years. Meanwhile, pesky homeowners and businesses are starting to get the idea that they can switch to self-generation and thus shrink their paying customer base. So, to keep up their profit margins, they're wont to charge their shrinking customer base more and more. That, of course, sets up the feedback loop that will sink them shortly, because people who start seeing their bills climb and climb while solar and wind prices fall and fall will be more apt to jump.
Utilities are trying to stop that with measures such as these, or in getting subsidies repealed, but it's too late. The train has left the station.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by tathra on Monday April 20 2015, @04:51PM
i'd be more than happy to pay my share to keep the grid up and going, but since when do for-profit companies not care about making profit? from what you're saying, the poor for-profit utility companies only want enough to keep the grid up and pay for upgrades when necessary, which everyone knows is bullshit because there would be no profit in that.
(Score: 2) by KilroySmith on Tuesday April 21 2015, @02:34AM
You do realize, of course, that SRP, the GP's electric company, is a state-owned Co-op? That the governing board is elected by the people that the utility serves, and that there's no "for-profit" company involved here?
My electric company in the same city is APS, which is a spawn of the devil and deserves all the scorn that one could heap upon it's head.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 20 2015, @03:54AM
Solar customers are their most profitable;
Uh no.
And many if not most of them don't intend to be the most profitable customers.
Like you for instance.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Monday April 20 2015, @05:22AM
You don't actually need a huge battery bank to disconnect. If you simply arrange your life so that you do all the heavy lifting during the peak solar hours. Insulate your house so that only a small heat pump will keep it cool (cooling in Az is the biggest load during the day). Put in a cold plate icebox (https://tetech.com/product-category/cold-plate-coolers/?gclid=CPPlxZGMhMUCFRWUfgodN10AUQ) (http://www.seafreezeinc.com/marine_coldplates.shtml) that charges for an hour or so in daylight then keeps your beer and food cold all night. Do your laundry in the middle of the day....etc.
At night you only really need a deep cycle battery of around 200 AH (http://www.westmarine.com/buy/west-marine--gel-deep-cycle-marine-gel-batteries--P015020365) with an inverter (http://www.westmarine.com/inverters) to provide for light and run entertainment stuff (TV, games, computer...)
To get through cloudy spells (not very many in Az nor most of the west US) get a 5KW gas or diesel, or propane generator to pick any slack. The fuel and maintenance will be a lot less than you're paying to the electric company.
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 3, Informative) by LoRdTAW on Monday April 20 2015, @06:30AM
Have you ever dealt with small gasoline powered gen-sets? They suck. I have even had problems with Honda gen sets which cost a few grand for a 5-6kw unit. You have to store very volatile fuel and then there is PM. You need to do oil changes, periodic exercises and possibly add fuel stabilizers for long periods of rest.
Stick with propane or nat-gas if you have access. You still have to exercise but oil stays cleaner longer, no fuel stabilizers, no carburetor problems, etc. Diesel is a good close second but cost is always an issue compared to nat-gas/propane. But if cost weren't an issue id say it's a near tie with diesel coming in first if the engine is mechanically injected and therefor simpler to maintain (Lister-petter or Deutz air cooled). Diesel can spoil from bacteria but I have never heard of an engine or fuel system becoming fouled from stagnant diesel. Usually a fresh filter and they fire right up. You don't want to see what a carburetor looks like after gasoline has sat stagnant in it for a few years. They are almost impossible to clean and are better off thrown in the trash and replaced.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by tathra on Sunday April 19 2015, @10:36PM
this is exactly why anything that is basically required to live in the modern world - running water, electricity, internet, etc - or any governmental functions should not be handled by for-profit companies. i really wish that modern society had not been sold off to profiteers and rent-seekers decades ago, and continuing on to this day; "privatization" is one of the worst thing to ever happen. private probation [hrw.org] companies have brought back debtors' prisons, [wikipedia.org] which were supposed to be abolished over a century ago, private jails/prisons [aclu.org] have turned arrests and convictions into paychecks (via increased stock value, although private prisons are guaranteed to get paid for 100% capacity [alternet.org] even if they're empty), privatizing half the military means its no longer self-reliant and full privatized armies pocket billions every year from the government with no oversight, and not to mention we have the worst and most expensive healthcare [theatlantic.com] system in the world, etc, and despite all the promises of privatization being cheaper, in reality it costs way more [washingtonpost.com] so it turns out to just a transparent way for politicians to funnel money to their friends for decades to come while making public transparency, something we need in our government, completely impossible.
i wonder if its even possible to buy back or regain control of our government. even getting money out of direct politics won't matter because there'll still be plenty of ways to pocket billions and funnel money to your financiers thanks to most government functions and all utilities being used to extort money from everyone. yes, extort is right, because living in this day and age without electricity or running water or even internet is an absurd idea. i, for one, am sick of paying significantly higher prices for significantly shittier services with no hope for oversight or transparency, yet "subsidize risk, privatize profits" is the motto for this century and most of last, and there's no hope of changing that because from the day you're born you learn that the all-mighty dollar rules all, and its extremely obvious that the best way to ensure future profits is to buy the lawmakers, especially now that they're so ridiculously cheap.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Monday April 20 2015, @12:29AM
Yes, but it will require cooperation rather than the idea of individualism and competition (which the corporations makes sure they're sponsoring as social manifestation: the divide et impera serves perfectly their purposes; the "individual American dream" led to this generalized nightmare).
Start at the "grass roots"; e.g. incorporate a home owner corporation (or a cooperative) and pool the money to build a community energy [windpowerengineering.com] storage [businesswire.com]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 20 2015, @06:45AM
ok so let me get this straight.
the sun has been giving dinosaurs sunburn a few million years ago.
dinosaurs die out.
humans evolve. still get sunburn and discover electricity.
humans decide that this is good shit and everybody should get it.
a green-social network infrastructures is constructed to allow everybody access to this wonderous magical ether-like juice.
later humans figure out that what gives them sunburn can also be used to make electricity.
in the mea
time pases and the historic electrical grid design was awarded unesco world heritage status and put under protection.
thus the aliens visiting earth in a few thousand years found a well preserved non-pv compatible electricity grid albeit with no one to use it because of athmospheric pollution and high (*smirk*) "natural" background radition and it was also reported that the aliens didn't bring enough sun-cream.
the point is that the electricity grid was invented and implemented BEFORE there was photovoltaic technology to generate electricity.
i am pretty sure that if we had a time-machine to travel back in time when electricity-grid building was in full swing and told them back then about this technology ... basically a flat electricity generating rock/crystal when exposed to sunburn rays...they would have hurried straight back to the drawing board faster then flash can say "flash".
enjoy your unesco world heritage status ...and bring enough suncream!
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Geezer on Monday April 20 2015, @11:58AM
Duke Energy is really bitchy about grid-connected solar where I live, too. They no doubt have a phalanx of lawyers and lobbyists laboring mightily to protect their business model and profits.
I'm an off-grid crusader now. When they (Duke) bitched about power factor and reverse current relays, I just said "screw your antiquated grid!" and added more storage capacity. Instead of selling my surplus, I now store more than enough to stay completely off-grid and meet my needs. A small diesel generator suffices during repairs and maintenance.
Duct tape now covers the hole in the now-disconnected CT box where their cash register, er, meter, used to be.
I assist my friends and neighbors with installations whenever they ask. Yes, I'm an EE.
As solar system efficiency, economy, and simplicity improve, look for more people to be shorting utility stocks.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 20 2015, @04:34PM
I am very intrigued by what you have to say and would like to subscribe to your newsletter....
Please tell me and others what exactly is your setup, where do you live to get enough power, what your usual usage is. Do you work from home on occasion? I would assume that would increase demand.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Geezer on Monday April 20 2015, @05:23PM
My own system is a DYI setup currently configured for a nominal 1.4 kW (120 amperes) of continuous output under optimum sunlight at 12 VDC from 36 24x48 40-watt Solarex thin-film panels. Yeah, they're old, but they were free when BP Solar's thin-film aSi facility in Toano, VA closed down.
To economize on conversion losses, my household bus is 12 VDC. (I use LED lighting and 12V appliances (readily available from any RV dealer or marina). I limit my installed AC conversion to 1500 watts, solely to power computers and peripherals. At a .8 power factor, the available 15 AC amps is plenty for home use. I'm using six 940 aH flooded batteries that give me about 20-26 hours of load at a 50% draw-down threshold, assuming the solar array is completely off-line.
Been through two Ohio winters and never skipped a beat.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday April 21 2015, @08:37AM
Why not use like 24 or 50 volts DC for distribution and switched converters like one per room or outlet to minimize transmission costs. Power loss = Current^2 * Resistance (asfair).
(Score: 2) by Geezer on Tuesday April 21 2015, @10:39AM
K.I.S.S.
(Score: 2) by gnuman on Monday April 20 2015, @04:44PM
First, net metering is bullshit. No utility has ever enjoyed "net metering". You either provide power at a contract price for contracted amount at specific times, OR you get the spot price. That spot price can even become negative. It means that a utility pumping power into a grid would end up paying to supply that power.
Power grid is a distribution system. Nothing more. Power goes in some points, and it goes out other points. Your feeder 5kV line is not designed to gather and step up power from around your neighborhood and pump it up to 250kV lines. If you overload it, things will break.
The solution is very simple. Every solar installation that wants to feed the grid, gets spot price. To prevent utilities from abusing this, require that grid operation is separate from generation and audit prices paid. Require that solar/wind gets first access to grid *and* that long term contracts do not cut into the spot price range. If that means that at noon 100% of power is spot price only, so be it. But this also means that solar connection fees pay for the grid they are connected to. If what you are looking for is a "net metering" then all you are doing is leeching - the grid is not your battery!!
The utility wants to cut roughly in half the amount it pays customers for solar electricity they send back to the grid.
Spot price is ALWAYS lower than your meter price. Utility generators tend to get 50% of what you pay at your house anyway. And that is considered a good price, generally locked in for years in advance!