Quote:
Originally Posted by McG
Thank you for this. It does explain a lot and makes sense.
So humour me for a moment, but wouldn’t it be advantageous (if we are serious about net zero) to upgrade equipment area by area to accept excess electricity from solar? Sure, the price per kw/h might go down, but the biggest impacts would be on the utility companies to become distribution companies part of the day/year, and producers at the other. That’s a philosophical shift, but I see the demand for electricity increasing, therefore it’s in all of our best interests for this transition to happen.
First movers would generate more electricity from bigger personal grids. I think that it could be done. It’s just math, and math is money, and investment is money with outcomes.
Cheap electricity from the sun and reduce emissions from other sources? That’s crazy.
Thank you again for the explanation and article.
|
Then you shouldn’t be paid based on net metering you would need to be bidding into the system to provide power when it’s needed and not provide power when it’s not. You’d also need to pay transmission costs on input and output power.
Right now household solar gets preferential pricing treatment and is limited in the amount it’s allowed to export. If you want a truly level playing field then those benefits go away. Long term we need base load or storage to pay for when the sun doesn’t shine.
So polity wise as mass adoption of solar occurs will people like the 0 cents per kw they get from their solar in peak producing times and significantly higher prices overnight when they aren’t using?
I think in terms of getting roof top solar installed in many places the current polciies that both subsidize the power price and transmission costs but limit the amount of export is a reasonable compromise.