diy solar

diy solar

Assuming you pay $0.12/KWh, can you ever come out ahead going full offgrid?

Agree. Politicians are getting wise to the fact that net metering, while a way to expand the market, is at it’s core, a subsidy paid by the poor (who can’t afford solar) to the rich (who can afford solar).

The only equitable option is to sell the power at the spot price or enter into long term wholesale contracts. But because the power is going to be used locally, there should be a slight premium since there is no need for the buyers to pay transmission fees.
i cant believe you are falling for that none sense.
power delivered back to grid by non player takes away their bottom lines, payback and profits, next to allowing people to be independent....
everybody pays a connection fee for the grid, so there is no subsidizing
 
Distribution charge $9.65/kWh
(That comes to about what happened in Texas, when the regulators screamed "Market Pricing Isn't Working! Set the cost at $10/kWh!")
I am a firm believer in market economies but when it comes to long term things like infrastructure planning for the future it is no so simple. Your Texas example reminded me of their cost cutting measures to not winterize their wind turbines or even their natural gas distribution. There needs to be a balance between risk management and market pricing.
 
They got more energy out for a split second than the laser energy that went into it. But that didn’t include the power that went into generating the laser energy, or the facility cooling systems, computing power, vacuum maintenance, etc.

SAYS WHO??

There's a lot of funding in them-thar progress reports.
Sure is a good thing all measurements and analysis are performed by the fox in the hen house.

And following the announcements, private funding for fusion power plants. "A fool and his money ..."

Ordinarily, in science, others replicate the test setup and see if they can get the same results. Let's just say in this case that is far from practical.

We’re still 100 years or more from fusion power.

And so, in the lifetime of the people enjoying a career doing this, the truth* may never be known.

* the truth may or may not be the results which were claimed. Third-party oversight & measurement in existing facility would be a way to confirm/refute.
 
California rates are so high because they closed most of their production plants to be "green". And now have to pay more to import electricity from neighboring states.
Are you confusing the sale of generation facilities by the Investor Owned Utilities and the economic obsolescence of Peaker Plants by less costly battery storage and combined cycle plants? The average wholesale rate continues to be around $0.05per kWh. There has actually been growth in capacity in California. Based on failures of infrastructure, my theory is the problem with California is that rates will continue to increase because of the cost of deferred maintenance on the grid which has to be added to the cost of generation. That is necessary to fund future investment in distribution and upgrade of infrastructure to accommodate distributed generation which is a reality of rooftop solar.
 
Are you confusing the sale of generation facilities by the Investor Owned Utilities and the economic obsolescence of Peaker Plants by less costly battery storage and combined cycle plants? The average wholesale rate continues to be around $0.05per kWh. There has actually been growth in capacity in California. Based on failures of infrastructure, my theory is the problem with California is that rates will continue to increase because of the cost of deferred maintenance on the grid which has to be added to the cost of generation. That is necessary to fund future investment in distribution and upgrade of infrastructure to accommodate distributed generation which is a reality of rooftop solar.
I don't remember where. But I read that they were importing more power from neighboring states. Because they closed several plants. And they closed those plants because they didn't fit the "green agenda" , they want to portray.
 
require free open market: the power lines are not such market, they are near monopolies.
I agree, that is the issue. However, for whatever reason, the cost to the consumer is less from Public Utilities like Los Angeles Department of Water and Power than from the regulated Investor Owned Utilities like PG&E and SCE.. In Modesto, my nephew pays $0.20/kWh from Modesto Irrigation District another Public Utility. San Diego Gas and Electric is in a world of it own and the worst example of an IOU, with large fixed fees and rates above $0.50/kWh.
 
I agree, that is the issue. However, for whatever reason, the cost to the consumer is less from Public Utilities like Los Angeles Department of Water and Power than from the regulated Investor Owned Utilities like PG&E and SCE.. In Modesto, my nephew pays $0.20/kWh from Modesto Irrigation District another Public Utility. San Diego Gas and Electric is in a world of it own and the worst example of an IOU, with large fixed fees and rates above $0.50/kWh.
or as we're currently having in europe 0,95 euro per kw.. ( 1,09 usd per kw)..
at these prices roi discussion become mute real fast
 
But I read that they were importing more power from neighboring states. Because they closed several plants. And they closed those plants because they didn't fit the "green agenda" , they want to portray.
I am sure there is some truth to that, but most of it was probably a teaser headline that masks the underlying trends in the growth and shift of generation. Some of those closures have been nuclear because of age and cost of remediation. A lot of the recent issues in California have been timing. During the day large scale solar is being curtailed or given away to other states and then during the evening California imports power from other states in the intertie. I would rather have that problem than the problem in Texas, where a complete failure of generation left them without the option of importing power from other states. And it should be noted that the failure of generation was because the generation facilities were not winterized. Even the natural gas distribution lines froze in Texas so power plants could not function.
 
Last edited:
SAYS WHO??

There's a lot of funding in them-thar progress reports.
Sure is a good thing all measurements and analysis are performed by the fox in the hen house.

And following the announcements, private funding for fusion power plants. "A fool and his money ..."

Ordinarily, in science, others replicate the test setup and see if they can get the same results. Let's just say in this case that is far from practical.



And so, in the lifetime of the people enjoying a career doing this, the truth* may never be known.

* the truth may or may not be the results which were claimed. Third-party oversight & measurement in existing facility would be a way to confirm/refute.
The “facilities” basically destroy themselves in 1/100 of a second. It is faaaar off for power generation. Still really cool though!
 
1/1,000,000,000 of a second.

It is useful for crystallography experiments, for instance determining the phases of plutonium under extreme pressure.
"Validating the codes for stockpile stewardship"

But as for whether the fusion yield actually achieved 1.9 mega-joule fusion yield with less than that much energy delivered to the fuel capsule by x-rays from the hohlraum that was illuminated with lasers, and whether a "burning plasma" was created that caused additional heating and fusion ... that claim is supported by reports from the project. Which receives funding based on the support received by congress and DOE.

I'd like to see 3rd-party confirmation.


Some of the scientific measurements and results are very cool.
 
Yes, I have no objection to nuclear power, only the location of the reactor.
NIMBY. I prefer it to be situated 93,000,000 miles away.
and there we have it..
have no problem with it, nor the waste, just not in my backyard..

just for you i suggest we put it right outside your backyard fence ;)
 
I've lived close to a nuclear power plant for most of my life, and here in Finland I'm about 250km from two different reactors, and the storage compound for the waste. I also work with radiation on almost a daily basis. I'd rather have those things in my neighborhood compared to a coal fired plant...
 
In the meantime, I will continue to collect as much energy as I can from the other fusion reaction, a little further away from this one, that seems pretty stable so far, during the last 4.5Billion years or so.
Me too. An that reactor is pretty good a provide some energy for growing some fruits and vegetables in my back yard.
 
I figure total cost with my setup would be about 64KW of batts and 13 KW of inverter power (dual inverters sungold power clone LV6548), and 15KW solar panels would be about $45,00.00 assuming I do most of the work.
I think the number is pretty high unless I am missing something.

I am installing a similar size system right now.

$5000 for 45 used 325w panels
$18000 for 60kwh server rack batteries (I am only doing 30kwh, so $9k)
$2000 in racking (Iron Ridge XR100)
$3500 for the inverters (x2 LVX6048)
$1500 for stuff (wire, fuse, breakers, switches, combiner(s), etc.)

$30000? Still a long road to ROI happiness, but less than you think maybe.
 
I've lived close to a nuclear power plant for most of my life, and here in Finland I'm about 250km from two different reactors, and the storage compound for the waste. I also work with radiation on almost a daily basis. I'd rather have those things in my neighborhood compared to a coal fired plant...
good point, moved away from a coal/ng powered plant, and felt better..
cant explain it, just do, which should tell you enough..
 
Back
Top