Why is too much solar real? I’ve never understood how too much consumer solar generation can be a bad thing for anyone or anything other than utility companies’ profits. The financial incentives that used to exist meant people generating more power than they needed could make a tidy profit by selling it back to the grid. I can see how that might have been unsustainable in the long term, but that’s irrelevant now that the subsidies have essentially been eliminated.
I have absolutely no sympathy for utility companies, especially here in CA, since all the ones I can think of are felonious companies responsible for countless deaths due to their terrible wildfire mitigation strategies and lack of investment in sustainability.
Because the business model is designed around everyone paying the utility for consumption of energy when the should be paying for the availability of a service.
When 50% of the people no longer pay, it’s not like the utility can deal with that. They still have poles to maintain and generation plants sized for peak load.
To fix this we would need to pay a baseline service fee for the size of the panel. A home might have a 200 amp panel while a laundromat might have something much larger.
Then, some nerds would need to figure out how to charge for consumption.
But like I said, it’s not designed like this today. It’s designed around consumption only.
Because a solar home (without batteries) is producing excessive power during parts of the day, relying on the grid to accept it, while using power from the grid the rest of the day. While those times may balance, you’re still relying on that power grid for both. That’s hugely expensive infrastructure that you’re no longer paying for. If something happens to your solar, your home can still use grid power: that’s hugely expensive infrastructure for “just in case” that you’re no longer paying for
Why is too much solar real? I’ve never understood how too much consumer solar generation can be a bad thing for anyone or anything other than utility companies’ profits. The financial incentives that used to exist meant people generating more power than they needed could make a tidy profit by selling it back to the grid. I can see how that might have been unsustainable in the long term, but that’s irrelevant now that the subsidies have essentially been eliminated.
I have absolutely no sympathy for utility companies, especially here in CA, since all the ones I can think of are felonious companies responsible for countless deaths due to their terrible wildfire mitigation strategies and lack of investment in sustainability.
Because the business model is designed around everyone paying the utility for consumption of energy when the should be paying for the availability of a service.
When 50% of the people no longer pay, it’s not like the utility can deal with that. They still have poles to maintain and generation plants sized for peak load.
To fix this we would need to pay a baseline service fee for the size of the panel. A home might have a 200 amp panel while a laundromat might have something much larger.
Then, some nerds would need to figure out how to charge for consumption.
But like I said, it’s not designed like this today. It’s designed around consumption only.
Also because if more electricity goes in than comes out things break.
Ahh I see what you’re saying, thanks for the explanation.
Because a solar home (without batteries) is producing excessive power during parts of the day, relying on the grid to accept it, while using power from the grid the rest of the day. While those times may balance, you’re still relying on that power grid for both. That’s hugely expensive infrastructure that you’re no longer paying for. If something happens to your solar, your home can still use grid power: that’s hugely expensive infrastructure for “just in case” that you’re no longer paying for