diy solar

diy solar

California proposes “blatant seizure of property” in solar ruling

kinda, but not quite 1:1

So anyone post 2017 is still assisting is same charges (storm recovery funds/stranded costs) non solar houses are still responsible. If you we’re to break it down it’s prob closer to 1:0.85, it’s more middle of the line.
Isn't that what I said? 1:1 on the energy cost and a fraction of the delivery cost.
 
Mark my words, offgrid solar will be illegal one day. I'm currently thinking of ways to hide off-grid arrays from view of satellites. I am thinking vertical orientation bifacials might be best in the future.

And yes, NEM 3.0 is coming to every state.
You can't hide by going vertical they can get you oblique at nearly 45 degrees...

spysatellite1_wide-daa3879f5260081db70788e06713bb45dbbe93ec-s1400-c100.jpg

 
Slight correction.

"Florida" isn't overly hostile to solar. the energy companies are.

Take for example the ballot FPL and Duke sponsored to make "rooftop solar legal", when it was already legal. Disguising the fact that the entire bill was actually detrimental to solar. Then, when you went to the polling station (where they only give you a highlight) it sounded like it was very pro solar. They were depending on people who did no research to read the "cliffnote" version on the ballot, and vote yes.



That's sort of a distinction without a difference. The utility companies are usually tied to the state government.
 
I am actually happy for utilities to make money, we all have to earn a crust, but what really pisses me off is all the money they hand out to shareholders.
Nearly every single company has forgotten that they actually provide a service or product to their customer not their shareholder.
 
But that's a lie. One that the power companies made up when solar became popular. All power companies that I know of have a minimum power bill. You pay that for the privilege of staying connected. If that fee is good enough for pre solar days and is still good enough now if you don't have solar at all then its good enough for if you do have solar and rarely use any grid power.

Thus the lie.
Seasonal homes and hunting cabins (usually in remote locations) use very little power as a whole and this is just the way it is.
These have been subsidized through higher priced commercial rates, which my State was liking fine. It was promoted as making the rich pay their fair share. Now the State is having problems keeping and attracting businesses.
In my neighborhood, a Grow Op was started and required some expensive upgrades and a new TOU rate to control electric shortages. If this is why they need our solar, why not pay us something above the Residential Rate and isn't Green energy even more valuable?
 
Last edited:
I was stunned to see way more rooftop solar in England than I see in Florida, I don't know if it was the state or FPL that hated solar but the boot is on the other foot now. FPL will now sell you a share of their solar fields and they are putting in EV chargers. FPL love solar because they now have everything in place to control it.
 
FYI, Florida is also extremely hostile to solar power.

B@llShit!

I have had legal, permitted solar at every property I have owned since 2002 ( three different homes over that time ). We still have one to one net-meter with no insurance requirements for under 10kWh systems, and is better than most of all the other states in the USA.

Never had any issues with the building departments or inspectors, everything I built 100% myself to all required codes.

My annual cost for the last 3 years, even with the current minimum usage and connection charge is under $300, and I ac/heat the home, garage and enclosed porch for that sum.
 
I was stunned to see way more rooftop solar in England than I see in Florida, I don't know if it was the state or FPL that hated solar but the boot is on the other foot now. FPL will now sell you a share of their solar fields and they are putting in EV chargers. FPL love solar because they now have everything in place to control it.
Why spend money on PV when it’s so cheap from the utilty, compare costs per Kwhr for FL and the UK and you’ll see why people skip solar in FL.
 
1:1 net metering is basically a subsidy for distributed solar energy, benefiting the solar industry and rich individuals and companies. Treating it as a fair way to pay for an electric utility, is a losing proposition.
I think net-metering has outlived it’s intended purpose of spurring on the industry. Solar has many economical use cases and no longer needs net-metering to achieve economies of scale and market penetration.
 
Isn't that what I said? 1:1 on the energy cost and a fraction of the delivery cost.
Oops my bad, you’re right, that handy chart does list all the PUC required charges PV owners will assist the state with.
 
check out https://www.seia.org/states-map

Florida is ranked #3 for installations and generation in the USA, New Hampshire is #41

California #1 followed by Texas #2
Umm compare that to population and residential houses, then it do a percentage of homes with PV.

NH has a fraction of the population and Id hope NH would still have less cause only recently (past 5 years) has energy prices skyrocketed up north.

Then it’ll be apples to apples.
 
Back
Top