Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
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.
|
I wasn’t aware earlier of the technical limitations of existing technologies for people becoming net producers and uploading to the grid. Reading the Australia example, it is obviously one of the limitations of what I was wondering earlier about consumers uploading as much as they could. Technical limitations upstream require protection.
Since I don’t think zero costs is actually realistic, how close could we get? Is it solar panels running down the middle of highway 2 from Calgary to Edmonton? Is it free solar panels for rooftops? I think the real shift will be when it is zero sum for consumers versus day to day existing costs. I just don’t know when that is.
I think that personal batteries are likely the next big thing after solar panels. That seems a reasonable way to not push consumer production to the grid.