3 ms·
Eh, through a couple of levels of bureaucratic indirection and regulation, net metering is effectively a subsidy. Power companies would essentially never "get t
by twoodfin 11y ago
Eh, through a couple of levels of bureaucratic indirection and regulation, net metering is effectively a subsidy. Power companies would essentially never "get their money's worth" paying retail rates for the surplus power generated by residential panels during the day. If they were unregulated, consumers would thus never get such a deal.
- ZeroGravitas 11y agoIs this just a gut feeling you have? The power supply curve from solar is going to correlate highly with the air-conditioning load that'll drive the peaks in Nevada. Peak shaving is a big business because the energy at the peak is (by far) the costliest to generate. Just a customer supplying their own household power from solar power will be saving the utility money at peaks, sharing the excess with nearby customers even more so. You are of course correct that they wouldn't get this deal if they where unregulated. The way you say it might fool people into thinking that minus regulation a utility would be a great example of free market competition, rather than a Monopoly (or a Monopsony in this particular case). So I'm confused why you bring it up? That's like talking about a business deal and saying if this was a Mad Max style post-apocalytic wasteland then you wouldn't offer as much. Of course not, you'd just take it from them at the point of a gun. What does this say about its actually value though?