The problem is that when the sun shines on your roof enough to backfeed it is also shining on the megawatt solar farm down the road and the market price of power goes negative.
Determining a fair price then becomes problematic!
Electric Companies slowly taking back control
- Thread starter Tony Scott
- Start date
Determining a fair price then becomes problematic!
Hedges
I See Electromagnetic Fields!
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2020
- Messages
- 20,687
The value of a kWh is not the value of the last kWh. Allocate the fair value (what would have been paid for peaker plant power) across the PV producers.
It may be that an incremental added kWh is worth zero or negative, but most of the PV generated power is highly valuable, delivered in the middle of the day or middle of the afternoon, when demand to power air conditioners is high.
Rather than the "Duck's Back Curve", which is intended to show (falsely) that solar generated power is worthless, look at total consumption.
PJM Learning Center - How Energy Use Varies with the Seasons
Energy use in PJM varies with the seasons. The amount of electricity being used is affected by many factors, mainly temperature and time of day.
learn.pjm.com
It is clear than noontime and afternoon power is valuable.
If not for the PV we've installed, much more power would be needed from peaker plants, consuming fossil fuel and emitting the carbon dioxide people are so worried about.
The issue is not that PV generated power isn't needed (in fact more will be needed in the future as population grows and fossil fuel cars are replaced with electric.) It is just that PV not contracted wholesale with the utility cuts into their profits.
tigerwillow1
Solar Enthusiast
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2021
- Messages
- 194
I'm skating on thin ice saying this I realize. In my state of Oregon, it's politics that got us into this mess in the first place. To be "green", the politicians mandated to the power companies that they would supply net metering hookups at no cost, change no extra monthly fees, and buy back power at the same rate that it's sold. So I and other solar users have been getting a free 100% efficient AC battery and maintained infrastructure to supply a certain amount of power that's rarely used to generate revenue to support it. On top of that, the power companies provided subsidies for the cost of installation in addition to what the taxpayers provided. To anybody with a brain (politicians obviously excluded) as solar installations became more common, power company revenue would go lower and lower with no change in the infrastructure cost. If everybody achieved net zero, the power company would get zero revenue to support the full infrastructure that has to be there to supply everybody's peak demand. So now in California, they're swinging the pendulum too far the other way and punishing the people that did what they were encouraged to do.
Here is the Australian Market Data -
https://aemo.com.au/energy-systems/...ricity-market-nem/data-nem/data-dashboard-nem
Spot price here now Qld (4pm) is 6c/kw. In another state SA (3.30pm)which has a high % of renewables the spot price is -41c/kw
You are fine, on topic discussion of public policy relevant to solar & energy storage is A-Okay (as long as it stays mature, non-partisan, and on topic).
wattmatters
Solar Wizard
Bingo.
In the Australian NEM it's easy to assign a value to one's solar PV exports for every 5-minute interval of the day - it's just the spot wholesale price of electricity for that interval.
Indeed if you choose to go on one of the wholesale cost pass through plans (e.g. Amber Electric) then that's exactly what you will be paid for your solar exports, with the exception that here there is hedging insurance to ensure the annual / billed value for exports is not negative in total.
Several people here I know have worked on how to curtail their own solar exports and start adding load when their prices go negative. Mostly such events are confined to South Australia at the moment, and occasionally in Victoria, pretty rare in other states but that will change.
For most who are on regular retail plans, each state government each year determines what they expect to be a fair minimum value for FIT based on the real value of the energy at those times of day, and only in Victoria is this value a mandated minimum retailers must pay. For other NEM states it's just a guideline. In VIC the 2021/22 minimum is 6.7c/kWh, and the current draft proposal is for that to drop to ~5.2c/kWh from 1 July.
It's just the reality of the value of energy during the day. There will be a time when FITs will pop back up for a while when there is a step change in supply as coal power stations close.
IMO there’s no free lunches.
For excess generation would it be better if you get paid the same 5min local price of energy just like every other wholesale generator? Cause that’s what you are an shouldn’t get subsidized as anything different.
The down side is the financial metrics behind calculating your generation to 5 min spot prices isn’t viable so local regulators are doing the best you can.
For excess generation would it be better if you get paid the same 5min local price of energy just like every other wholesale generator? Cause that’s what you are an shouldn’t get subsidized as anything different.
The down side is the financial metrics behind calculating your generation to 5 min spot prices isn’t viable so local regulators are doing the best you can.
Punishing or adjusting the markets? so those houses without solar aren’t picking up the tab for the rest of everyone else.
A few years ago Hawaii has gone through this exact same process Cali is going through and survived, take a breath and things will be okay.
Noneyabussiness
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2020
- Messages
- 54
problem is a LOT of the rest of Australia ( outside major city's, but not always) is still locked to only 1 supplier ( ergon ) and they basically charge what they feel... Townsville was a classic example, only 1 supplier, dismal feed in tariffs, high usage tariffs... no choice ... the poll out the front of a house i was staying in had been struck by lightning at least twice ( neighbours confirmed, twisted badly) been through several cyclones... had been reported several times and when they finally came out they wrapped it in tape ( not a joke!!) and tagged it for " replacement " ... I just casually asked the linesman while he was there how long it would probably take to replace, he replied " lol... while its still standing, never, but covers our a$$ " ...and yet quick maths for same city, just in " meter read fees " for a city of 250000 ish, devided by say 4 people per house (62,500) at 28 bucks a month , works out bit over 1.6 million a month.. thats just residential... i know there are costs, but come on.. most of the system has been standing for decades and they have been profiting off of it for said time... yet time and again the system is " overloaded " and blackouts happen or being told in a heatwave that you can't run / reduce your air con usage (anyone from NQ knows that can be deadly) ... pathetic...
12VoltInstalls
life passes by too quickly to not live in freedom
No. Those houses without solar aren’t getting a return on investment because they didn’t invest anything.
Basically across the states incentives were given to help solve a personal cost aversion problem as private was viewed as a partial solution to a real problem. Buy-back rates were implemented to amortize the incentive. So to in retrospect when ‘they’ decide that those who made the investment no longer deserve the incentives there are ethical problems with that.
Those non-solar houses aren’t “picking up the tab” they merely getting no return on the investment that they didn’t make.
That is a frustrating component of post-modern thought to me. How many thousands of years did people survive on the earth without tv and air conditioning?
I’m not saying we need go live in caves, but rather in a global sense mankind has become soft and and intolerant of any discomfort, and unwise in our approach to selecting our locales of residency.
As is is stated often here in regards to folks trying to assemble solar to meet their requirements; reducing and modifying consumption behavior is less expensive than buying system components.
Just my opinion.
Locally here in northern New England I’ve been amazed in my lifetime over the growth in window and central AC. When I was a kid the only family I knew of with air conditioning the father was a nuclear scientist and engineer. And even then they often had the windows open instead of paying the bill for air conditioning.
If the demand wasn’t borderline maxed in so many areas the solution of solar wouldn’t have been as attractive to public utility regulators. But it was attractive, they incentivized it, and now it’s “oops. Sorry. Never mind” which is an ethical problem in my opinion.
As far as disassemble coal plants: why? Inoperative plants have the infrastructure to support ginormous inverter exports from battery banks. This is already being done to store excess to return to the grid at demand times. If that’s working economically now, with coming battery technology that purports costs will be at a fraction of lifepo rooftop solar that exceeds demand by a large margin makes sense.
Unless this year’s profit is the only goal.
I respectfully disagree. Yes, most of the dangerous radioactive materials in nuclear waste are short lived, but we have no way to safely dispose of waste that possess the ability to harm life for tens of thousands of years. We cannot safely dispose of the garbage we make on a daily basis. I do realize this is my opinion and will not be slighted by a contrary view, or if proven wrong.
Rant ...
Living several miles from the largest active garbage pit in the county, I see first-hand how we are destroying our planet. Yes, for the most part, we simply bury our waste in a great big hole; out of site, out of mind. Forget about global warming. Forget about electric cars. Forget about green energy. What I see on a daily basis is the 'here and now' factual, proven, right in your face, undeniable, wasting and destruction of our planet, and much of it is fueled by our very own 'throw-away' mentality. This is something we can have a positive affect on, right now. By simply refilling our water bottles, reusing our bags at the grocery store, not having to have the latest and greatest gadgets. Small steps but if we all chip in ... we can make a here and now difference.
As a side note ... there was an article in one of the local papers confirming leachate from the garbage dump, is contaminating local drinking water. There was no follow-up, just a single newspaper article that appears to be impossible to find online.
I wish politics and science were not in $$$ bed together so, we the people, would know the real unscripted truth about our world.
This is an interesting thread with a lot of useful information, but I feel I have taken it much too far off course. My apologies.
Last edited:
Who’s paying for the forward capacity market to make sure those generators are online when the sun goes down and you need to heat your hot tub? The idea of the fictitious grid as a battery is ridiculous. Show me an incentive that must be enacted in perpetuity. When any solar interconnect was signed it was for the terms at hand which are set forth by governing bodies, it’s that governing bodies that’s responsible for fair equity for all customers not just a select few who can install solar.
Sounds like an investment in batteries for your house is in order, what size batteries would you need to cut the cord?
Show me a battery that can output 300-800MW that can run for 8-12 hours then can reliably charge to full SOC in 12-16hrs, no such battery exists in the world, yet in New England alone we’d need 4-6 of these plants to fix the issues at hand
Also what happened in TX has a very very high chances of happening in New England either this winter or next. I’m not saying it is a major cause of the issues be behind the meter solar is a factor of keeping dispatchable generators on line and operating when the grid needs it.
Last edited:
Hedges
I See Electromagnetic Fields!
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2020
- Messages
- 20,687
At least in the beginning, California had surplus generation capacity at night. Nuclear and hydro. During they day they were skating on thin ice. One day in the 1990's, a fire near the Canadian border took out a transmission line. Over the next three days the grid collapsed from Vancouver to Ensenada.
Population and consumption has grown since then. Baseline utility production hasn't kept up.
I think a lot of peaker plants were built after that. California intentionally screwed up the market, keeping retail rates fixed while making wholesale generation "competitive", which meant we paid $0.10/kWh to run A/C on a hot day and PG&E had to pay $1.00/kWh to buy power.
With lots of PV on line, while there of course isn't a grid-scale battery (except one pumped hydro plant), PV generated power during hot days routes through a few wires to neighbor's A/C. Less loss (and infrastructure cost) than traveling further through transmission lines. Then at night when there is surplus we get power using the credits. The "battery" is accounting, much cheaper and more efficient than storing power.
That only works with surplus baseload generation capacity. And PV that isn't excessive to the point of destabilizing the grid.
Moving forward to greater PV penetration, two things are needed.
1) Control of PV production so total output and ramp rate doesn't topple the grid.
2) Control of loads to utilize surplus PV and avoid use of fossil fuel. Also curtailing loads to avoid toppling the grid.
At some point we might have PV capacity 2x what is needed, dynamically adjusting its output to match loads and able to fill in for up to 50% reduction in sunlight across the state.
When utility can't supply all demand, the grid collapses and everyone loses power.
A system of signaling to shed some/all but critical loads would be preferable to the grid going down. That is almost trivial to implement.
PV can be part of the solution rather than part of the problem.
Utility scale PV costs a fraction what rooftop PV does.
Rates and net metering need to keep utility company viable/profitable.
Some reasonable charges and credits for rooftop PV customers can be part of the system.
12VoltInstalls
life passes by too quickly to not live in freedom
Everybody is.
My cord is essentially cut. I’m using ~1.3kWh/day on cloudy/overnights from grid and have excess in the sun. By the end of March I’ll be using zero grid again. Or I could use a 12V generator to sustain but a couple hundred feet of cord I owned already is cheaper.
I don’t know how big most of those battery plants are. A friend is an EE that is employed supporting those MW facilities however. Don’t be so skeptical
Under-reported here but true. Although it won’t happen to me hahaha! I have three non-grid means of supplemental electricity if required.
That is what escapes most people I talk to. It’s not all about them. But i also think it shouldn’t cost more for solar homeowners than if they were 100% grid
That’s the thing if a generator isn’t needed half the time (but is base load capable) the generator will shut down then will never be able to be dispatched when PV houses need them.
How is it right for the non-PV house to pick up the cost of the generators being dispatchable to assist non dispatchable PV owner? When people flip the light switch they don’t care if the neighbor had excess generation 5 hours ago, they care their lights turn on.
Power plants are built to generate power and make revenue not sit idle. In the North East load growth has been virtually flat for the past decade due to energy efficiency, new baseload generation hasn’t been built on the same rate as it’s been retired, and those that are still online are running less hours a year earning less money. This has happened in New England and I fear will have ripple impacts this winter (mainly due to global LNG and pipeline natural gas prices/congestion).
As for pumped storage the last one of note built in the North East was built back in the 1960s and people today are still fighting to shut it down. Even then it can only supply for 8hrs at max output, and needs well more that 8hrs to refill. Meanwhile the entire CT river is disrupted.
I’m all for saving costs and energy and being in control of their needs, but regulatory markets are there to best aid all customers, not just a few that over generate and demand to be compensated at unreasonable costs.
Again look at how Hawaii has handeled this issue a few years ago, if those in Cali kept their head in the sand thinking things would never change, that’s their fault.
Grid tied battery storage facilities only spec 4hr discharge in their nameplate capacity rating, so a 100MW battery is sized for 400MW/hr, that’s a quick 4 hoursI don’t know how big most of those battery plants are. A friend is an EE that is employed supporting those MW facilities however. Don’t be so skeptical
Under-reported here but true. Although it won’t happen to me hahaha! I have three non-grid means of supplemental electricity if required.
Looks like the largest being built will only output 400MW for a 1600MW/hr battery. People in Texas and soon to be the Northeast will need much more than 4hrs between when the sun shines or the wind blows.
As for winter 2021-2022 in the North East, ISO-NE says we’re fine, if we have a mild winter, if we have any sort of event similar to Texas, all heck will break lose.
A week or so again many news outlets picked up on the good side of the story for headlines, but didn’t pick up the bad side.
Ampster
Renewable Energy Hobbyist
If you are talking about steam generators that is true if the boilers are shut down. However in California many are compensated and remain as spinning reserves. Also combined cycle plants can spin up limited capacity fairly quickly then more slowly for full capacity. It is a complex matrix for the Independant System Operators around the Country to manage.
Ampster
Renewable Energy Hobbyist
Hopefully Texas will winterize their equipment which could help. If they had joined some of the national interties like East Texas and El Paso did they would have had backup sources of power.
Still the number of days fast starts sit idle has increased while compensation has fallen.
ISO’s driving goal is to reduce cost of generation, one of the pinnacles of divested utilities, the free market will bring the lowest costs, until it can’t, then the lights go off. There was no price point that could have saved Texas.
ISO’s driving goal is to reduce cost of generation, one of the pinnacles of divested utilities, the free market will bring the lowest costs, until it can’t, then the lights go off. There was no price point that could have saved Texas.
Hedges
I See Electromagnetic Fields!
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2020
- Messages
- 20,687
Load shedding is so much easier and less capital intensive. Just a pager wired to open a thermostat circuit or motor contactor.
That won't provide heat, but it can adjust loads to what generation can carry.
Power costs everyone less if generation is better utilized, fewer peaks and valleys in consumption and less idle capacity maintained to handle peaks.
Last edited:
Similar threads
