Solar Power vs. Utility Companies 'Power Trip'

[Ponzio]

Here’s an interesting documentary about an issue that is getting twisted by the utility companies vs. solar power and by politicians vs. the people.

https://www.pbs.org/independentlens/videos/jonathan-scotts-power-trip/?utm_campaign=PowerTrip+FullFilm&utm_medium=il+social&utm_source=Social

The decreasing cost of solar panels has reinvigorated the consumer/small business/etc. market and the utility companies are fighting back, to our disadvantage.

The only thing that gives me hope is that all stripes of conservative, liberal, moderate inclined voters can clearly see that they’re getting screwed, just by looking at their utility bill every month.

Let your senator and congressmen/women know and that you have a long memory.

 

[Trell]

Did you say anything, I sort of forgot it

The cost of alternative energy has certainly changed the last 10 years or so. Coal is dead going forward.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Residential solar, in the interim until high capacity reasonably priced residential storage batteries are available, is a financial PITA for power companies. Homes still need to be on the grid, grid costs remain the same, but the current rate-based system means grid maintenance is essentially has a usage-driven finance model. In effect this means everyone without solar panels is subsidizing everyone with them. (Electric vehicles cause the same financing issues on roads, where road maintenance is paid for by fossil fuel taxes.) The bottom line is that power companies hate residential solar installations because they reduce their revenues, increase grid management complexity, and don't reduce their grid maintenance costs.

 

[Ponzio]

You’ll have to excuse my crocodile tears for the utility companies Irv as I look at my utility bill every month.

And suffer increasing power outages locally, from hardly ever in the 60’s to the late 90’s, to a creeping incremental increase over time, to almost 5 or 6 times a year now in the last 8 years, especially after every heavy rain-storm, which have also increased with regularity. We’re now being hit with derecho winds/rain (60 mph to 70 mph); three to date so far this year. Never mind the normal 35 mph to 50 mph storms, which have also increased with some regularity.

The only saving grace is that our local police department building is about 200 yards away from my house and we’re on their grid, and they get first dibs on PECO repairs, after a storm or the occasional drunk takes down a pole.

After the last outage three weeks ago I asked an older PECO inspector in my back-yard who was checking the poles/lines; WTF is going on? It seems we have these power outages with increasing regularity? He was honest and we played the ‘I’ll tell you but I’ll deny it’ game. I’m paraphrasing the conversation.

‘The truth’ he said ‘is that the poles & lines and the associated infrastructure should have been replaced 20 some years ago but management would rather ride out the complaints, as long as profits keep increasing for the company who owns us now’.

‘We haven’t been a ‘public’ utility in ages’ he told me, ‘and since the early 80’s, when deregulation kicked in, it’s only gotten worse and accelerated the process. Plus outside of solar, who are you gonna turn to, to get power? Face it pal they’ve got you by the short hairs’.

‘As usual I’ll file my report to replace the pole/lines and as usual it will be ignored. What can I tell ‘ya?’. He seemed as frustrated as I was. ‘I recommend you do like some of your neighbors have and get solar panels with some back-up batteries, it’s not gonna get any better in the foreseeable future, as far as I can see’.

I appreciated his honesty and plan to do so when I redo my roof, sometime in the next 5 years, after I talk to those neighbors with solar panels and do some research.

 

[highfigh]

Here’s an interesting documentary about an issue that is getting twisted by the utility companies vs. solar power and by politicians vs. the people.

https://www.pbs.org/independentlens/videos/jonathan-scotts-power-trip/?utm_campaign=PowerTrip+FullFilm&utm_medium=il+social&utm_source=Social

The decreasing cost of solar panels has reinvigorated the consumer/small business/etc. market and the utility companies are fighting back, to our disadvantage.

The only thing that gives me hope is that all stripes of conservative, liberal, moderate inclined voters can clearly see that they’re getting screwed, just by looking at their utility bill every month.

Let your senator and congressmen/women know and that you have a long memory.

Utilities fighting against consumer use of solar power is hardly new. Ironically, WE Energies, the power and natural gas provider in much of Wisconsin, uses PV for their headquarters and many other facilities. OK for them, but they don't want to make it easy for us because, like telling us to use less energy, it causes them to receive less revenue and then, they raise our rates. Net cost after changing to LED changes nothing, long term. The only thing that makes sense is completely disconnecting from the power company. WE Energies used to pay fairly for excess power from solar and now, it's not worth doing unless the PV provider pays for the equipment and leases it to the homeowner/business.

This shyte is screwed up BECAUSE of out politicians- I don't see them doing much/anything to help it.

 

[highfigh]

Homes still need to be on the grid, grid costs remain the same, but the current rate-based system means grid maintenance is essentially has a usage-driven finance model. In effect this means everyone without solar panels is subsidizing everyone with them. (Electric vehicles cause the same financing issues on roads, where road maintenance is paid for by fossil fuel taxes.) The bottom line is that power companies hate residential solar installations because they reduce their revenues, increase grid management complexity, and don't reduce their grid maintenance costs.

Why do homes need to be connected to the grid? If the home(s) can be powered by some other source, why make it mandatory? Why should anyone not using the grid be required to pay for any of its cost? Utilities just raise their rates when the revenue declines, subject to any limitations placed on them by a public service commission or other similar agency. For years, WE Energies (before they merged with Wisconsin Gas Company) had a message on hold with "Did you know that our power rates are among the lowest in the Midwest?". That ended quite a while ago and now, they're among the higher rates.

When Wisconsin Electric and Wisconsin Gas Company merged, they put new logo decals on every vehicle. I don't know how much they paid, but the typical cost for something like that at the time, ran about $100 without needing to remove an old decal. They had about 26,000 vehicles at the time, so my question was, "How did spending $26 Million on stickers provide any kind of service for their customers?

WE Energies also forced their coal powered plant on an area of Milwaukee that A) didn't want it (and sued to stop construction), B) the area didn't need it and C) it wouldn't be needed in the future, based on declining demand due to lighting and appliances being more efficient. Along with this, manufacturing has declined, so that use wouldn't occur.

The problems that came with this plant:

- Lawsuits to defend it cost millions- residents claimed that the emissions would damage the area's environment, homes, vehicles, etc.
- The cost overruns and delays prevented startup and lost revenue
- The EPA fined WE Energies because they hadn't installed sufficient scrubbers for the stacks, costing more millions.
- The ash dump at the top of a bluff overlooking Lake Michigan breached, sending many tons of ash slurry into the lake with pollution from not only the ash itself, but the Mercury that goes with it.
- Not long after commissioning, they announced that they needed to raise rates because their revenue had dropped. Well, no shyte! Successfully getting people to use less electricity will do that.
- Then, the war on coal caused the cost of fuel to increase, which meant they raised the rates again.
- Guess who plans to close their oldest coal plant and transition to natural gas, wind and solar power generation- yup.

We Energies is the largest single user of natural gas in the state- they could have used that instead of coal for the newest plant, but they decided to piss away money and goodwill on this debacle.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Why do homes need to be connected to the grid? If the home(s) can be powered by some other source, why make it mandatory?

It isn't mandatory, it is necessary. Most homes can't put enough solar panels on the roof the power the home 24/7, and for those times when the sun isn't shining (night, lousy weather, etc.) you'd need a battery array to time-shift the energy generated by the solar panels. Interesting tidbit: even some hydropower facilities use methods to time-shift electrical generation. Like the Grand Coulee dam.

John W. Keys Pump Generating Plant | Bureau of Reclamation

Grand Coulee Dam, John Keys Pump Plant, John W. Keys III Pump-Generating Plant, Columbia Basin Project, Bureau of Reclamation - Managing water and power in the West

www.usbr.gov

Why should anyone not using the grid be required to pay for any of its cost? Utilities just raise their rates when the revenue declines, subject to any limitations placed on them by a public service commission or other similar agency.

That's not the point I was trying to make. If you really are off-grid you don't pay anything. Many states or power utilities are subject to statutes that force them to buy back surplus residential solar power, assuming the residential installations have the appropriate technology:

https://solartechonline.com/blog/net-metering-how-to-sell-residential-solar-power-back-to-the-utility-company/

And as I just mentioned, most homes can't accommodate enough solar panels to fully power the home anyway.

Just using the example of San Diego Gas and Electric:

Excess Generation | San Diego Gas & Electric

www.sdge.com

These statues are usually unfunded mandates, and all ratepayers end up paying the cost, but ratepayers who don't or can't install solar subsidize those who do.

For years, WE Energies (before they merged with Wisconsin Gas Company) had a message on hold with "Did you know that our power rates are among the lowest in the Midwest?". That ended quite a while ago and now, they're among the higher rates.

When Wisconsin Electric and Wisconsin Gas Company merged, they put new logo decals on every vehicle. I don't know how much they paid, but the typical cost for something like that at the time, ran about $100 without needing to remove an old decal. They had about 26,000 vehicles at the time, so my question was, "How did spending $26 Million on stickers provide any kind of service for their customers?

WE Energies also forced their coal powered plant on an area of Milwaukee that A) didn't want it (and sued to stop construction), B) the area didn't need it and C) it wouldn't be needed in the future, based on declining demand due to lighting and appliances being more efficient. Along with this, manufacturing has declined, so that use wouldn't occur.

The problems that came with this plant:

- Lawsuits to defend it cost millions- residents claimed that the emissions would damage the area's environment, homes, vehicles, etc.
- The cost overruns and delays prevented startup and lost revenue
- The EPA fined WE Energies because they hadn't installed sufficient scrubbers for the stacks, costing more millions.
- The ash dump at the top of a bluff overlooking Lake Michigan breached, sending many tons of ash slurry into the lake with pollution from not only the ash itself, but the Mercury that goes with it.
- Not long after commissioning, they announced that they needed to raise rates because their revenue had dropped. Well, no shyte! Successfully getting people to use less electricity will do that.
- Then, the war on coal caused the cost of fuel to increase, which meant they raised the rates again.
- Guess who plans to close their oldest coal plant and transition to natural gas, wind and solar power generation- yup.

We Energies is the largest single user of natural gas in the state- they could have used that instead of coal for the newest plant, but they decided to piss away money and goodwill on this debacle.

I'm sorry you have to live with a utility dumb enough to build a coal plant, but what does this have to so with solar?

BTW, for you and Ponzio, I'm not necessarily defending power companies. I am, however, against dumb unfunded government mandates like mandatory solar power (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-22/california-prepares-for-a-huge-solar-boom), and mandatory power buybacks at a certain rate, and then public commission regulated rate increases that never cover the mandates. The end result is usually less reliable power. A lot of California's power problems are from long-standing unfunded mandates regarding renewable power sources, buybacks, and decommissioning existing power plants, which caused a diversion of resources from grid maintenance and upgrades. The result is very high rates and rolling blackouts during high demand. I always considered myself somewhat left of center when it came to environment issues, but the recent rise of the New Green Deal idiocy has made my views, which haven't changed, seem pretty right wing. I find that the only entities greedier and dumber than private corporations are governments.

 

[slipperybidness]

Just adding some interesting items.

Texas is the state that generates the most power from the wind. Not what you would expect from a state that is so intimately tied to oil and gas production, and an economy that depends on it. Also, don't miss the detail that the TX summer is brutally HOT and there will be days that the power demand is enormous. There have been some instances of brownouts and rolling blackouts, but everything I hear says that California has it much worse in that regard. Seems that Ca is not as well equipped to handle the demands.

Also, the USA has 3 power grids: East, West, Texas! I suspect that this was a very wise approach for Texas.

 

[highfigh]

It isn't mandatory, it is necessary. Most homes can't put enough solar panels on the roof the power the home 24/7, and for those times when the sun isn't shining (night, lousy weather, etc.) you'd need a battery array to time-shift the energy generated by the solar panels. Interesting tidbit: even some hydropower facilities use methods to time-shift electrical generation. Like the Grand Coulee dam.

John W. Keys Pump Generating Plant | Bureau of Reclamation

Grand Coulee Dam, John Keys Pump Plant, John W. Keys III Pump-Generating Plant, Columbia Basin Project, Bureau of Reclamation - Managing water and power in the West

www.usbr.gov

That's not the point I was trying to make. If you really are off-grid you don't pay anything. Many states or power utilities are subject to statutes that force them to buy back surplus residential solar power, assuming the residential installations have the appropriate technology:

https://solartechonline.com/blog/net-metering-how-to-sell-residential-solar-power-back-to-the-utility-company/

And as I just mentioned, most homes can't accommodate enough solar panels to fully power the home anyway.

Just using the example of San Diego Gas and Electric:

Excess Generation | San Diego Gas & Electric

www.sdge.com

These statues are usually unfunded mandates, and all ratepayers end up paying the cost, but ratepayers who don't or can't install solar subsidize those who do.



I'm sorry you have to live with a utility dumb enough to build a coal plant, but what does this have to so with solar?

BTW, for you and Ponzio, I'm not necessarily defending power companies. I am, however, against dumb unfunded government mandates like mandatory solar power (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-22/california-prepares-for-a-huge-solar-boom), and mandatory power buybacks at a certain rate, and then public commission regulated rate increases that never cover the mandates. The end result is usually less reliable power. A lot of California's power problems are from long-standing unfunded mandates regarding renewable power sources, buybacks, and decommissioning existing power plants, which caused a diversion of resources from grid maintenance and upgrades. The result is very high rates and rolling blackouts during high demand. I always considered myself somewhat left of center when it came to environment issues, but the recent rise of the New Green Deal idiocy has made my views, which haven't changed, seem pretty right wing. I find that the only entities greedier and dumber than private corporations are governments.

WI seems to have relaxed the laws- the site in the link shows all states and their rating with Wisconsin being rated 'Excellent'. Used to be much more restrictive.

Load management by power companies makes it possible for them to control supply, and therefore, rates but they know there's no reason to provide power during low demand hours. I have been in the Grand Canyon for rafting trips three times and they vary the flow greatly. The last night on the first trip, the water level was raised by close to ten feet overnight at the place where we camped, having been adjusted for the beginning of the week.

WRT California's power problems- my cousin't husband worked for SCE and her son in law works for them now- I have heard some pretty weird comments about how it's operated, but at least they don't work for PG&E.

I don't like the idea of non-polluters and those who aren't wasting power, placing excess demand on water treatment systems and anyone who's minding their own damn business to be forced to comply with excessively restrictive and over-reaching governmental policies, but I do think more people need to pay attention to what they do WRT the planet. When I go boating on Lake Michigan, the harbor is disgusting after heavy rain because so much trash washes in from the rivers.

 

[highfigh]

Just adding some interesting items.

Texas is the state that generates the most power from the wind. Not what you would expect from a state that is so intimately tied to oil and gas production, and an economy that depends on it. Also, don't miss the detail that the TX summer is brutally HOT and there will be days that the power demand is enormous. There have been some instances of brownouts and rolling blackouts, but everything I hear says that California has it much worse in that regard. Seems that Ca is not as well equipped to handle the demands.

Also, the USA has 3 power grids: East, West, Texas! I suspect that this was a very wise approach for Texas.

California has over 39.5 million people and lots of industry- I don't know how they could handle the demand without inflated rates in light of the HVAC demands during hot weather, restrictions on fuel used for power generation and regulations. Also, I don't know that the cost of repairs needed after fires is paid by insurance. As far as wind power, CA has a lot- just drive between LA and Riverside and you'll see a huge wind farm.

However, when hot weather comes, wind usually comes with it.

 

[jinjuku]

Residential solar, in the interim until high capacity reasonably priced residential storage batteries are available, is a financial PITA for power companies. Homes still need to be on the grid, grid costs remain the same, but the current rate-based system means grid maintenance is essentially has a usage-driven finance model. In effect this means everyone without solar panels is subsidizing everyone with them. (Electric vehicles cause the same financing issues on roads, where road maintenance is paid for by fossil fuel taxes.) The bottom line is that power companies hate residential solar installations because they reduce their revenues, increase grid management complexity, and don't reduce their grid maintenance costs.

Sounds like a 'them' problem.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Sounds like a 'them' problem.

I'm not sure what a "them problem" is, but you obviously don't live in California. Screw around with the electrical utility companies too much and you get exorbitant prices per KWH and rolling blackouts. If you really want off the grid, and I know of a couple of people who have done this, the recipe is a lot of solar panels, a Tesla Powerwall (or similar), and a Generac generator/UPS for contingencies (cold and cloudy weather). Now that I think about it, both guys stayed with natural gas or propane for heating, hot water, and the Generac. But last I heard they are not connected to the electrical grid.

 

[jinjuku]

I'm not sure what a "them problem" is, but you obviously don't live in California. Screw around with the electrical utility companies too much and you get exorbitant prices per KWH and rolling blackouts. If you really want off the grid, and I know of a couple of people who have done this, the recipe is a lot of solar panels, a Tesla Powerwall (or similar), and a Generac generator/UPS for contingencies (cold and cloudy weather). Now that I think about it, both guys stayed with natural gas or propane for heating, hot water, and the Generac. But last I heard they are not connected to the electrical grid.

Ultimately it will be a 'them' problem. You simply have to look at the Price/Kwatt hour time curve for Solar Panels.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Ultimately it will be a 'them' problem. You simply have to look at the Price/Kwatt hour time curve for Solar Panels.

I know about the improvement curve for solar panels, but I'm still not understanding what you mean by a them problem.

 

[jinjuku]

I know about the improvement curve for solar panels, but I'm still not understanding what you mean by a them problem.

At some tipping point it will be a utility problem. Just like cutting the cable is a CableTV provider problem.

 

[panteragstk]

Just adding some interesting items.

Texas is the state that generates the most power from the wind. Not what you would expect from a state that is so intimately tied to oil and gas production, and an economy that depends on it. Also, don't miss the detail that the TX summer is brutally HOT and there will be days that the power demand is enormous. There have been some instances of brownouts and rolling blackouts, but everything I hear says that California has it much worse in that regard. Seems that Ca is not as well equipped to handle the demands.

Also, the USA has 3 power grids: East, West, Texas! I suspect that this was a very wise approach for Texas.

I'm still waiting on the Tesla solar roof products to be available here. Price is on-par with "regular" solar panels, but I also get a much better roof without the ugly panels sitting on top. Supposedly will last longer than a tile roof.

Still, the ~$36k asking price is a lot (with rebates, tax incentives)

 

[Hobbit]

It's clearly a double edged sword. On one hand you want to help out emerging technologies. Especially when they could be good for the economy, and the environment too. However, the laws that are created often backfire in the long run.

Keeping things in perspective, Texas generates the most wind power in kW (MW) and is in the top 10 in kW/person and percentage of power generated (kudos to them!). However, IA, KS, OK, ND, and SD are 100%+ ahead in % power generated and kW/person generated. Politicians like using this trick for their gain - that (high population) state has the worst covid count. Therefore they're doing a bad job. But when you actually look, the rate is actually in the lower quartile of all the states.

But it's all good and hopefully getting better. I live in a windy state and we're about even with TX in the rates categories.

 

[Hobbit]

I'm still waiting on the Tesla solar roof products to be available here. Price is on-par with "regular" solar panels, but I also get a much better roof without the ugly panels sitting on top. Supposedly will last longer than a tile roof.

Still, the ~$36k asking price is a lot (with rebates, tax incentives)

The problem is panels aren't that good. It takes a lot of watts to move a 2 ton car at 45mph. There's not really a benefit to doing this yet. Well, maybe cool factor!

 

[highfigh]

I'm not sure what a "them problem" is, but you obviously don't live in California. Screw around with the electrical utility companies too much and you get exorbitant prices per KWH and rolling blackouts. If you really want off the grid, and I know of a couple of people who have done this, the recipe is a lot of solar panels, a Tesla Powerwall (or similar), and a Generac generator/UPS for contingencies (cold and cloudy weather). Now that I think about it, both guys stayed with natural gas or propane for heating, hot water, and the Generac. But last I heard they are not connected to the electrical grid.

The other part of going off-grid is choosing appliances that don't use a lot of power & budgeting the power vs loads. I recently looked at some refrigerators for my van and found some that are small enough to fit between the seats for long road trips and use about 150W, which is low enough for my inverter to handle. If I need to, I'll just get a bigger inverter. In a home, some full-size fridges only draw 500W, but that's not a SubZero or anything of that size. Gas heat & water heat, LED lighting and a large enough inverter can be used with the new LiIon or AGM batteries without really breaking the bank. Larger boats have PV panels, battery banks, solar chargers and power management for the same purpose- staying powered while away from shore without needing to use the generator. Some use 6V batteries in series to make the needed voltage, some use 12V and connect them parallel. Lots of options, but I have been watching a lot of videos from Pacific Yacht Systems for info & ideas- the principals are basically the same, whether for a home or boat.

 

[highfigh]

The problem is panels aren't that good. It takes a lot of watts to move a 2 ton car at 45mph. There's not really a benefit to doing this yet. Well, maybe cool factor!

Moving two tons isn't difficult when torque multiplying is done in the transmission. Electric motors provide a lot of torque, but the current needs to be managed well.