SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
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: 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.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(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.