Natural gas plants having trouble competing with solar?

[jflorey2]

And maybe you missed the point. People still purchase appliances from "scratch and dent" or second hand because they can't afford new ones.

Exactly. And in ten years those "scratch and dent" appliances will have connectivity. I heard the same thing when hybrids came out; "those things are for rich people." Except now people are buying used Priuses like crazy because those things last forever and they're cheap to operate.

There are also people that will do everything in their power to not cooperate with their POCO.

That's fine; their choice. If they want to spend more on power that's their right.

Automation to help people to reduce their consumption is coming but with "free will" people will just do as they want or what they can afford.

And that is exactly right.

Heck some of the forum members boast about using more power now that they have a pv system and plan on purchasing an EV because power is now cheap.
How the hell is that helping the plan to conserve and reduce. NOT ONE BIT.

Conservation is not the goal; it is merely a tool used to achieve the ultimate goal of reduced consumption of fossil fuels. If you can reach that goal some other way, all the better.

[J.P.M.]

Conservation is not the goal; it is merely a tool used to achieve the ultimate goal of reduced consumption of fossil fuels. If you can reach that goal some other way, all the better.

No, it's not, any more than is solar on a roof for it's own sake ought to be a goal (although I do see a lot of lemming like behavior). Both are a means to an end with several goals in mind, with one big one usually at the top of the list for many/most, of reducing consumption of fossil fuels to maximize how much in the way of assets one has at the end of any designated period of time.

At this time, as for a long time in the past, when it comes to the least expensive ways to necessary to achieve a goal, unless critical to life and health, not using something by whatever means - use reduction via conservation/whatever, is usually still less expensive than getting more of it by whatever means - with PV still being an expensive option relative to most all other methods of reducing residential energy use.

What's critical may be open to some interpretation. I know a lot of folks who set their A/C at 68 F in the spring and don't touch their non setback thermostat until the fall, and still bitch about their electric bill and how SDG & E is screwing them. Not my life/house/elec. bill/whatever. Just sayin'.

[SunEagle]

Count me in that camp!



Whose plan is that? Not mine. The sun puts out thousands of time the energy we use. Society, progress and life itself is based on using that energy to greater purpose. I for one am all for that, the only reason for conservation is to save it for perhaps a better purpose, not to reduce our overall consumption IMO.

Well IMO you are just being selfish. And based on my predictions anyone that lives in a high density area of RE without enough base power sources to back up the RE will see power outages.

You might be an engineer but IMO have not understanding of how power is generated or transmitted to the users.

[J.P.M.]

You might be an engineer but IMO have not understanding of how power is generated or transmitted to the users.

FWIW, that thought crossed my mind as well, but I added used to the generated and transmitted parts.

[SunEagle]

Count me as one of the "boasters" too. But look where I'm coming from. In San Diego we are charged 46c/kw during the 12-6pm peak. So I planned in extra capacity for extra AC just to keep it in the high '70's during summer Maybe in FL with 12c/kw it's easy to point fingers.

Well if your POCO is charging you an arm and a leg then using less should save you money. It seems to be a paradox that the people with high electric rates like to scream and complain about their POCO but are unwilling to find ways to use less electricity.

Doing that will save you money and help secure a higher % of power coming from RE. Increasing usage because you can now generate more power from RE is just painting yourself into a corner. Sooner or later you will find you are stuck or in the dark.

[J.P.M.]

Well if your POCO is charging you an arm and a leg then using less should save you money. It seems to be a paradox that the people with high electric rates like to scream and complain about their POCO but are unwilling to find ways to use less electricity.

Doing that will save you money and help secure a higher % of power coming from RE. Increasing usage because you can now generate more power from RE is just painting yourself into a corner. Sooner or later you will find you are stuck or in the dark.

If one goal is to get most long term bang for the buck for the use a chosen lifestyle requires, doing the most cost effective stuff first seems to be a sort of a no brainer. That usually means finding ways to use less electricity rather than getting/using more of it.

PV is usually/often the most expensive way to offset a portion of an electric bill, and thus, one of the last measures taken, if at all, provided optimum cost effectiveness is the criterion under consideration.

One other way to approach the situation is to game the system as much as possible and use PV to the greatest extent possible under T.O.U. to credit back at max. price, while at the same time shifting loads as much as possible to super off peak times and lower the bill. That then becomes an exercise in process economics and guessing what the future of T.O.U. might look like. System sizing under that scenario is probably best done before such load/time shifting is done to avoid oversizing a system with the associated penalties to cost effectiveness.

Either way, those things seem better, or at least more cost effective, to me anyway, than simply bitching and whining about how badly the POCO is screwing me and doing nothing proactive or productive about my situation.

[DanKegel]

Well if your POCO is charging you an arm and a leg then using less should save you money. It seems to be a paradox that the people with high electric rates like to scream and complain about their POCO but are unwilling to find ways to use less electricity.

Amen.

[Sunking]

Well if your POCO is charging you an arm and a leg then using less should save you money. It seems to be a paradox that the people with high electric rates like to scream and complain about their POCO but are unwilling to find ways to use less electricity.

Perhaps you are missing the point. There is no technical or operational reason reason for high electric rates. It is purely politics that artificially inflate electric rates and punish the public. There is no reason to charge more than 10-cents per Kwh for a residential rate or 5-cents for commercial/industrial rates. You only hurt the country and the working class with high electric rates. It is the Dan's in the world, a minority trying to punish the public.

[DanKegel]

There is no technical or operational reason for high electric rates.

But there are choices in rate design. One could give everybody unlimited power for a flat fee. Would that be wise?

[Engineer]

Well IMO you are just being selfish. And based on my predictions anyone that lives in a high density area of RE without enough base power sources to back up the RE will see power outages.

lol ... selfish? Because I am generating all the power I use? OK then, that's such a delicious non-sensical attitude I don't want to change it!

You might be an engineer but IMO have not understanding of how power is generated or transmitted to the users.

Physicist actually who went into engineering because it's more lucrative, and has taken far more E&M classes, including power EE then you might even know exist (one class was on transmission line theory alone which happens to be what I'm presently working on at my day job). Always been a fascinating subject, I like big engineering and worked at the national labs. But I guess I'm just a selfish no-nothing

If I could make a suggestion you should stop pointing fingers at people, it doesn't add to the discussion and make you look a little foolish. Otherwise I like you so won't let it get in the way.

[SunEagle]

lol ... selfish? Because I am generating all the power I use? OK then, that's such a delicious non-sensical attitude I don't want to change it!



Physicist actually who went into engineering because it's more lucrative, and has taken far more E&M classes, including power EE then you might even know exist (one class was on transmission line theory alone which happens to be what I'm presently working on at my day job). Always been a fascinating subject, I like big engineering and worked at the national labs. But I guess I'm just a selfish no-nothing

If I could make a suggestion you should stop pointing fingers at people, it doesn't add to the discussion and make you look a little foolish. Otherwise I like you so won't let it get in the way.

So we both have an EE background. Mine is only about 40+ years starting with solar cell research, power distribution design & project management for mostly industrial & commercial facilities with continuation in the power quality & distribution field.

While I am a big supporter of RE and solar in particular I am also a realist that knows there is an upper limit to relying on power from RE. There have been a number of times in the past and IMO more in the future where anyone that banks on RE for a large percentage of their power will find out that it will not be there when they need it. Maybe those outages will be short and maybe not. The people and industries that rely on power 24/7 will be the ones that get hurt the most when it goes dark.

I also support energy conservation and finding ways to use it more efficiently even if it is just a commodity. IMO it is a precious resource that is abused due to over use and waste. Anyone that doesn't care about trying to minimize the use and reduce the waste is a road block to finding the balance between the % of RE and other power generation sources.

So go ahead and generate all of the power you need during the day but remember the power that comes to you at night is probably not from RE so you too rely on fossil fuel even if you do not believe it.

[DanKegel]

While I am a big supporter of RE and solar in particular I am also a realist that knows there is an upper limit to relying on power from RE.

Me, too. Keeping the lights on without fossil fuel when the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing is an interesting problem, and a work in progress.

Engineer is right that, for the moment, net metering works, and lets him get power at night. But once RE penetration gets very high, harder problems come to the fore.

[Sunking]

But there are choices in rate design. One could give everybody unlimited power for a flat fee. Would that be wise?

Absolutely. In fact the more you use, the less expensive it becomes. Care to guess how many states do that?

[Sunking]

(one class was on transmission line theory alone which happens to be what I'm presently working on at my day job)

Well Sheldon that is the problem with Academics, Physicist, and Teachers. They only know theory and have never built anything. They can come up with a concept, make a model, but it takes an engineer to actually determine if it works and make it work.

[DanKegel]

Absolutely. In fact the more you use, the less expensive it becomes. Care to guess how many states do that?

I think zero states offer unlimited free power for a flat monthly fee, and with good reason -- it gives an unhealthy incentive to overconsume.