3 ms·

> the power company is devaluing what you put back into the sub-system more and more. Here's a related article to what I'm talking about here, I think this is

> the power company is devaluing what you put back into the sub-system more and more. Here's a related article to what I'm talking about here, I think this is happening across the country though: http://www.kansascity.com/news/business/technology/article38981193.html http://www.kansascity.com/news/business/technology/article38... Specifically: > Power companies argue that a solar house doesn’t pick up enough of the cost of all it takes to make energy available around the clock. If those solar homes don’t pay for upkeep, they contend, other customers eventually get stuck with higher bills. Honestly, a solar house seems like it really is only beneficial to itself; it only has the capacity to produce power for itself, and maybe a fraction above. Nothing worth selling back "wholesale".

protonfish 9y ago
Unless you consider that peak electric demand correlates to daytime usage on the sunniest days of the year (for cooling purposes.) Electric companies are actively trying to discourage use during these times by offering a discount for interruptible power (they can remotely shut off power to your hot tub/water heater and other non-critical uses) or offering variable rates (proportional to overall grid demand.) Even if a solar installation merely reduces electric usage, it will almost always correlate to peak times making it immensely valuable to power companies. But I wouldn't expect their PR to confess to this.