7 ms·

Ignoring the time limit you mention, I fail to see the difference? Electricity isn't tangible. In the case of AC, they're just wiggling the electrons in your ap

Ignoring the time limit you mention, I fail to see the difference? Electricity isn't tangible. In the case of AC, they're just wiggling the electrons in your appliances back and forth. Any promise that your power goes to your neighbour, via the grid, would be a lie. In financial terms, letting anyone sell electricity to the "shady power company" at the same price they buy it at is only possible as a government-mandated subsidy paid by all customers, intended to promote clean energy. It effectively makes the grid your free, unlimited, zero-loss battery. If you want to sell it to your neighbour at the same price they and you pay to have the grid wiggle your electrons, there's no difference. If you want, for unfathomable reason, to set a different price, you can just walk over and hand them some money whenever you feel like it. But currently, there are no circumstances under which it would make sense to not sell as much as you can to the power company: if you're producing at costs above grid prices (still likely in most locations), your neighbour could always get his power cheaper from the grid. If you're producing below grid prices, selling as much as possible at the subsidised rates is your best choice.

glandium 10y ago
> In financial terms, it's extremely generous to let anyone sell electricity to the "shady power company" at the same price they buy it at. In some countries, it's even a better deal, because the "shady power company" has to buy it for more than they sell electricity for. (I don't know if it's still true, but it was the case in France)
baddox 10y ago
I think the previous commentator's point is that distributing power between neighbors is a theoretical way to avoid the time limit imposed by the power company. Of course, with current infrastructure I assume the power company would still need to support this model by doing some simple math with everyone's meters in a neighborhood or region.
LoSboccacc 10y ago
If the time limit is 6 months as he say and you have excess panels to cover average winter needs, summer surpluses are lost More importantly it was left unspecified if the discount given was dollar for dollar electricity. If it's less than that suddenly your ideal, infinite battery becomes less than perfect But I agree selling to the neighboor is not gonna work - a feasible alternative would be to have the resources pooled for building a larger panels with a larger battery
roel_v 10y ago
"they're just wiggling the electrons in your appliances back and forth" Sorry for highjacking your comment, but are there any physicists here who can comment on whether this is accurate? More in particular, does electricity have mass? Is 'current' electrons moving across a wire, or wiggling without 'moving'? I've asked this years ago on the physics stack exchange, but I never got an answer I actually understood. The context for my question was a legal paper I was reading whose core argument relied on 'current' having mass, or rather, the consumption of electrical energy requiring the transfer of mass, however small. Note that there is an important precedent in my jurisdiction (the Netherlands) that sort of assumed this back in the 1930's, but in this particular argument (on ownership of virtual goods, like a sword in World of Warcraft), the issue of the mass was even more pertinent. (note that I'm not interested in debating whether that matters re: ownerships of virtual goods; in my legal context it does. And yes I have a law degree. I'm just putting this in because I've asked several times in several places over the years, and there are always people who like to go 'XY problem!' and then make ridiculously wrong pseudo-legal arguments.)
- maggit 10y ago
  The comment is accurate, and electricity should not be considered as having mass. In a direct current (DC) setup, electrons will be moving continuously though the wires in a big loop. But the displacement of the electrons is not the electrical energy we are interested in. It is instructive to think about alternating current (AC). In this case, electrons will be moving a bit forward, and then a bit back. So, basically wiggling more or less in place. There is still a lot of energy transferred. A metaphor is a chain, like in a bicycle. You can use the chain to transfer energy, but it is not the chain links that are the energy. The movement is the energy. This is similar to electricity; it is not the electrons that move that is the electrical energy, instead the electrical energy is the movement itself. (Due to Einstein's theory of relativity, we know that E=mc^2, which can be summarized as "all forms of energy are also mass". Considering this, all transfer of energy is transfer of mass. But it is miniscule. A small nuclear power plant could produce 4450 GWh in one year. The relativistic mass of this is 180g. All the energy produced in one full year of this plant has a total mass of 180g. So you should not consider electricity to be transfer of mass, even though it technically is :P ) (Also, since you asked for a physicist: I am not a physicist)
ctdonath 10y ago
You're overlooking the value of off-grid power storage, severing reliance on the grid.
lovelettr 10y ago
> Electricity isn't tangible. Quibble. Electricity is tangible. Use your finger to complete a circuit. My bet you will perceive it by touch.
spectistcles 10y ago
I guess you could contract with your neighbor and run your own lines to their batteries?

glandium 10y ago

> In financial terms, it's extremely generous to let anyone sell electricity to the "shady power company" at the same price they buy it at. In some countries, it's even a better deal, because the "shady power company" has to buy it for more than they sell electricity for. (I don't know if it's still true, but it was the case in France)

baddox 10y ago

I think the previous commentator's point is that distributing power between neighbors is a theoretical way to avoid the time limit imposed by the power company. Of course, with current infrastructure I assume the power company would still need to support this model by doing some simple math with everyone's meters in a neighborhood or region.

LoSboccacc 10y ago

If the time limit is 6 months as he say and you have excess panels to cover average winter needs, summer surpluses are lost More importantly it was left unspecified if the discount given was dollar for dollar electricity. If it's less than that suddenly your ideal, infinite battery becomes less than perfect But I agree selling to the neighboor is not gonna work - a feasible alternative would be to have the resources pooled for building a larger panels with a larger battery

roel_v 10y ago

"they're just wiggling the electrons in your appliances back and forth" Sorry for highjacking your comment, but are there any physicists here who can comment on whether this is accurate? More in particular, does electricity have mass? Is 'current' electrons moving across a wire, or wiggling without 'moving'? I've asked this years ago on the physics stack exchange, but I never got an answer I actually understood. The context for my question was a legal paper I was reading whose core argument relied on 'current' having mass, or rather, the consumption of electrical energy requiring the transfer of mass, however small. Note that there is an important precedent in my jurisdiction (the Netherlands) that sort of assumed this back in the 1930's, but in this particular argument (on ownership of virtual goods, like a sword in World of Warcraft), the issue of the mass was even more pertinent. (note that I'm not interested in debating whether that matters re: ownerships of virtual goods; in my legal context it does. And yes I have a law degree. I'm just putting this in because I've asked several times in several places over the years, and there are always people who like to go 'XY problem!' and then make ridiculously wrong pseudo-legal arguments.)

maggit 10y ago
The comment is accurate, and electricity should not be considered as having mass. In a direct current (DC) setup, electrons will be moving continuously though the wires in a big loop. But the displacement of the electrons is not the electrical energy we are interested in. It is instructive to think about alternating current (AC). In this case, electrons will be moving a bit forward, and then a bit back. So, basically wiggling more or less in place. There is still a lot of energy transferred. A metaphor is a chain, like in a bicycle. You can use the chain to transfer energy, but it is not the chain links that are the energy. The movement is the energy. This is similar to electricity; it is not the electrons that move that is the electrical energy, instead the electrical energy is the movement itself. (Due to Einstein's theory of relativity, we know that E=mc^2, which can be summarized as "all forms of energy are also mass". Considering this, all transfer of energy is transfer of mass. But it is miniscule. A small nuclear power plant could produce 4450 GWh in one year. The relativistic mass of this is 180g. All the energy produced in one full year of this plant has a total mass of 180g. So you should not consider electricity to be transfer of mass, even though it technically is :P ) (Also, since you asked for a physicist: I am not a physicist)

ctdonath 10y ago

You're overlooking the value of off-grid power storage, severing reliance on the grid.

lovelettr 10y ago

> Electricity isn't tangible. Quibble. Electricity is tangible. Use your finger to complete a circuit. My bet you will perceive it by touch.

spectistcles 10y ago

I guess you could contract with your neighbor and run your own lines to their batteries?