They took the poll places away before Covid in our area. Didn’t even have a say in it. Vote by mail only. Like mines not going in the shredder. Who’s gonna know?Just look who is counting the votes. You will understand.
They took the poll places away before Covid in our area. Didn’t even have a say in it. Vote by mail only. Like mines not going in the shredder. Who’s gonna know?Just look who is counting the votes. You will understand.
#1 is valid, sort of. Zoning and all that.The justification for preventing people going off grid is simple.
1. The public has a vested interest in private homes not being without power except for in an outage for health and safety reasons. You can't have a home without power and water or it gets condemned.
2. The public has a vested interest in not having generators running in residential neighborhoods except for in an outage. It's an unnecessary air quality hazard when there is grid power available.
3. 99.9% of off grid systems will run out at some point in winter. At which point they would then run afoul of either of the above.
I would be sympathetic to objections to point 1. Except that even if you do say people have a right to be without power if they choose to, a lot of them are end up trying to break rule #2.
I'm not sure a submarine would be all that useful. All those military bases do not belong to California, they are simply in California.How exactly would you win? Do you not realize that California is home to most of the military industrial complex, the Air Force with major bases with nuclear weapons, the Marines with Camp Pendelton and Air Station Miramar, the Navy with home to many nuclear submarines and multiple air craft carriers and their supporting ships. Also the mountains and desert would provide a formidable terrain to cross and California ports up and down the coast could not be stopped from importing goods from the rest of the world. Yes, go to war with California. You would lose and we would be laughing and drinking our home grown wine!
This comment is on the subject of people wanting to close their utility account to avoid basic charges, which is why they would choose to pay more for winter generator use. Because it's less than the year round charges.#2 is silly. Grid power at it's highest cost is 1/2 the cost of running a small generator, marginally better but still more if you are on natural gas.
If you can go all winter and not run out of solar/battery power you are the .1%.#3 is not necessarily true. In Arizona the winter is when I can take full advantage. Now that I have 60KWH of batteries I no longer need to flip over to the grid in the evening. Might not be enough this summer in July/Aug. I'm air-gapped to the grid with a transfer switch.
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?
"Pass the peanuts . . . My beer is still cold, thanks"This comment is on the subject of people wanting to close their utility account to avoid basic charges, which is why they would choose to pay more for winter generator use. Because it's less than the year round charges.
If you can go all winter and not run out of solar/battery power you are the .1%.
"They" don't need your Solar. "Green" energy is not more valuable. Neither should "They" pay you more for any power you create and push back than "They" would pay from normal sources.
In California we are talking about this in the context of potentially $92 in basic charges for a utility account soon. So generator backup for 10 days in winter will probably be cheaper than maintaining a utility account. Especially that being on grid already normally involves a few generator days.I still don't think a generator would be cheaper unless you really didn't use it much, at which point running it would not really pollute. My TOU metering cost is $20/mo. That's $240/year. 100 gallons of fuel is $300+. How may KWH with a mythical 5K generator? Dunno maybe.
.1% is made up, but I stand by it. This forum might represent 1% of solar owners, who are in the top 10% of battery storage capability. Among us, I postulate that only 1-5% of us can actually make it through winter without a shortage and generator run or grid backup event.I'm kinda thinking Phoenix, Tucson, Most of Texas, I have a friend up near 4 corners on the Res (in New Mexico) that built offgrid (no availability) over 10 yrs ago. On his 2nd set of FLA's. He is 100% by necessity, has propane for heat. @timselectric is somewhere in Appalachia I think, he's close if not there. I'm not really sure where your .1% number is coming from.
Agree, although it's very conveniently understood how it works. Michigan lost net metering around 2019, and now use inflow/ outflow metering called distributed generation.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.
The generator issue is real. It isn't a big deal with a small Honda unit 20' or more from your property line for a few hours during the day, but a 20kW unit running at night is quite annoying from personal experience.#1 is valid, sort of. Zoning and all that.
#2 is silly. Grid power at it's highest cost is 1/2 the cost of running a small generator, marginally better but still more if you are on natural gas.
#3 is not necessarily true. In Arizona the winter is when I can take full advantage. Now that I have 60KWH of batteries I no longer need to flip over to the grid in the evening. Might not be enough this summer in July/Aug. I'm air-gapped to the grid with a transfer switch.
I'd say closer to 1% than 5! For my 30kWh average daily demand I would need essentially 20kW of PV and 90kWh of battery (and the ability to convince my wife to not do laundry on cloudy days) and I am at 21º latitude.This forum might represent 1% of solar owners, who are in the top 10% of battery storage capability. Among us, I postulate that only 1-5% of us can actually make it through winter without a shortage and generator run or grid backup event.
Don’t run it at night. You don’t have to do a full charge either. Just enough to get by until the weather is scheduled to break.The generator issue is real. It isn't a big deal with a small Honda unit 20' or more from your property line for a few hours during the day, but a 20kW unit running at night is quite annoying from personal experience.
Specific to California, air quality issues also come into play. Getting rid of [most of] the smog was a long journey and small inefficient generators all over the place are a threat to that.
Give it time... don't borrow money to do it. I dunno, the cheapest way to save money is micro-inverters and grid-tie. That is what the majority of the instant solar folks are doing anyway, so CA is really just going to be skimming off the savings of most of the solar folks. Once you start adding batteries leave CA. The weather isn't THAT great.I'd say closer to 1% than 5! For my 30kWh average daily demand I would need essentially 20kW of PV and 90kWh of battery (and the ability to convince my wife to not do laundry on cloudy days) and I am at 21º latitude.
That system would have a LCOE of $0.83/kWh at current interest rates.
In our area, almost all of the new housing built is townhomes. The builders like Beazer contract with Sunpower who installs the prescribed number of panels on the rooftop of the townhome. the sadness of this is that these "rooftops" may face North, South, East or West or varying degrees. The result is that one homeowner may have their panels facing South while the other Northeast! And they are set into the roof in such a way that adding to the array is not possible. Microinverters are installed and the line runs right into the main service panel. No hybrid inverter, no batteries. Adding to this is either the "purchase price in full at the time of closing" which will be about 18k to 25k depending on the square footage of the townhome and panels installed or you can opt for the like 20 year monthly payment plan from Sunpower.Give it time... don't borrow money to do it. I dunno, the cheapest way to save money is micro-inverters and grid-tie. That is what the majority of the instant solar folks are doing anyway, so CA is really just going to be skimming off the savings of most of the solar folks. Once you start adding batteries leave CA. The weather isn't THAT great.
I don't think this over-regulation will fly most places other than CA. I'm also hopeful we will see the mini and micro nuclear stuff, which will make some of this moot if the regulators will let them build it. I'll probably be dead before it matters.
the sadness of this is that these "rooftops" may face North, South, East or West or varying degrees. The result is that one homeowner may have their panels facing South while the other Northeast!
Some communities have zoning or rules preventing street-side solar.That reminds me, there's a guy not too far from here (in Ohio) that put solar on his roof. On his NORTH facing roof. Can't imagine he gets much out of it, and it seems utterly pointless. Only reason I can think of that he did that is he didn't want the panels visible from the front, but then why did he even bother...
Planning ahead for the real SHTF?On his NORTH facing roof. Can't imagine he gets much out of it, and it seems utterly pointless.