5 ms·

Have you met PG&E?

jeffbee 4y ago
I have but for the audience who might not know much about California: PG&E are not players in the renewable energy construction game. Other entities build and operate the plants, and the utilities buy the energy. My impression is the main hurdle for us is CEQA, which gives every homeowner, misguided Sierra Club member, and union goon a way to stop or delay the projects.
- mistrial9 4y ago
  there is a quiet non-profit based around Palo Alto that builds long-term residential solar installations, directly under the wing of PG&E. The tradeoff is that they put three "phone home" operators in your solar controller, and reserve the right to shutoff power back into the grid for their own reasons; high-quality installs though.
  - shagie 4y ago
    > The tradeoff is that they put three "phone home" operators in your solar controller, and reserve the right to shutoff power back into the grid for their own reasons. The ability to push any substantial power back into the grid always comes with that. Consider Hawaii's solar options: https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/products-and-services/customer-renewable-programs/rooftop-solar https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/products-and-services/custo... > Customer Grid-Supply Plus (CGS Plus) systems must include grid support technology to manage grid reliability and allow the utility to remotely monitor system performance, technical compliance and, if necessary, control for grid stability. > Smart Export customers with a renewable system and battery energy storage system have the option to export energy to the grid from 4 p.m. – 9 a.m. Systems must include grid support technology to manage grid reliability and system performance. > Customer Self-Supply (CSS) is intended only for private rooftop solar installations that are designed to not export any electricity to the grid. Customers are not compensated for any export of energy. --- Having too much power on the grid can be as damaging as not enough. There are systems that take longer to power up and down and corresponding issues with environmental regulations. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonbruner/2011/10/20/the-high-stakes-math-behind-the-wests-greatest-river/?sh=455c0a5b222b https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonbruner/2011/10/20/the-high-s... > But as large as the dams are, their margins are minuscule and operating them takes unerring foresight and subtle management: let too much water fill reservoirs and a rainstorm might flood Portland; keep the reservoirs too empty and you’ll parch farmers. Send too much water over a dam’s spillway and you’ll suffocate fish with dissolved gases; send too much through its turbines and you’ll overload the electrical grid. > ... > It’s also brought about tension when the BPA hasn’t been able to change its output. Both wind and hydro generation are subject to nature at the extremes. In May 2011, with near-record snowmelt swelling the Columbia River and spillways at their limits under environmental regulations, the BPA had to keep the Columbia’s hydro turbines spinning. It told regional wind power producers to curtail their output by 6%. The producers howled, and in June the BPA ended up the subject of a complaint before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. At issue is what happens when too much electricity is on offer. The enormous supply of hydroelectricity during spring runoff can push electricity prices to zero—the BPA gives away electricity to local utilities for free when it’s forced to produce more than it wants to. Since wind producers enjoy production subsidies, they can push rates below zero, effectively paying other utilities to switch off their generators. Last winter, the BPA told wind producers under its balancing authority that it wouldn’t pay negative rates to them during high-water events. Making sure that the water doesn't go over the spillways in a hydro plant during a spring peak to avoid killing fish means turning off power from other sources. In that example, it was primarily wind
  - chiph 4y ago
    > reserve the right to shutoff power back into the grid for their own reasons. That's not unreasonable. They might shut off your PV panels as a safety measure to prevent backfeeding into the local lines when utility crews are working nearby. Or when there is a supply glut - it's faster/cheaper/causes less wear to turn off several thousand[0] residential PV panels than to shut down a major generating plant for a few hours. [0] Or maybe only a few hundred if that's all that is needed to balance the system.
    - bradknowles 4y ago
      I don't mind cutting off the feed from the solar panel to the grid, if there are crews working on the lines, or other reasonable events. I don't want them cutting off my solar panels from being able to feed my house or my batteries, unless all my batteries are all full and there's no power draw from my house. If they don't want my solar power, then it's fine for them to refuse to accept it, but the decision of what to do with that remaining power should be left entirely on my end.
      - mistrial9 4y ago
        agree -- no experimental evidence but I suspect that the power cutoff is "no more power from those panels" not "power is available but no grid connection"; secondly it is annoying to not have any say over when or how long that connection is off. I tend to view the relationship in cynical terms, I admit. The quality of the physical equipment though, is notable.

Have you met PG&E?

I have but for the audience who might not know much about California: PG&E are not players in the renewable energy construction game. Other entities build and operate the plants, and the utilities buy the energy. My impression is the main hurdle for us is CEQA, which gives every homeowner, misguided Sierra Club member, and union goon a way to stop or delay the projects.

mistrial9 4y ago
there is a quiet non-profit based around Palo Alto that builds long-term residential solar installations, directly under the wing of PG&E. The tradeoff is that they put three "phone home" operators in your solar controller, and reserve the right to shutoff power back into the grid for their own reasons; high-quality installs though.
- shagie 4y ago
  > The tradeoff is that they put three "phone home" operators in your solar controller, and reserve the right to shutoff power back into the grid for their own reasons. The ability to push any substantial power back into the grid always comes with that. Consider Hawaii's solar options: https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/products-and-services/customer-renewable-programs/rooftop-solar https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/products-and-services/custo... > Customer Grid-Supply Plus (CGS Plus) systems must include grid support technology to manage grid reliability and allow the utility to remotely monitor system performance, technical compliance and, if necessary, control for grid stability. > Smart Export customers with a renewable system and battery energy storage system have the option to export energy to the grid from 4 p.m. – 9 a.m. Systems must include grid support technology to manage grid reliability and system performance. > Customer Self-Supply (CSS) is intended only for private rooftop solar installations that are designed to not export any electricity to the grid. Customers are not compensated for any export of energy. --- Having too much power on the grid can be as damaging as not enough. There are systems that take longer to power up and down and corresponding issues with environmental regulations. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonbruner/2011/10/20/the-high-stakes-math-behind-the-wests-greatest-river/?sh=455c0a5b222b https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonbruner/2011/10/20/the-high-s... > But as large as the dams are, their margins are minuscule and operating them takes unerring foresight and subtle management: let too much water fill reservoirs and a rainstorm might flood Portland; keep the reservoirs too empty and you’ll parch farmers. Send too much water over a dam’s spillway and you’ll suffocate fish with dissolved gases; send too much through its turbines and you’ll overload the electrical grid. > ... > It’s also brought about tension when the BPA hasn’t been able to change its output. Both wind and hydro generation are subject to nature at the extremes. In May 2011, with near-record snowmelt swelling the Columbia River and spillways at their limits under environmental regulations, the BPA had to keep the Columbia’s hydro turbines spinning. It told regional wind power producers to curtail their output by 6%. The producers howled, and in June the BPA ended up the subject of a complaint before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. At issue is what happens when too much electricity is on offer. The enormous supply of hydroelectricity during spring runoff can push electricity prices to zero—the BPA gives away electricity to local utilities for free when it’s forced to produce more than it wants to. Since wind producers enjoy production subsidies, they can push rates below zero, effectively paying other utilities to switch off their generators. Last winter, the BPA told wind producers under its balancing authority that it wouldn’t pay negative rates to them during high-water events. Making sure that the water doesn't go over the spillways in a hydro plant during a spring peak to avoid killing fish means turning off power from other sources. In that example, it was primarily wind
- chiph 4y ago
  > reserve the right to shutoff power back into the grid for their own reasons. That's not unreasonable. They might shut off your PV panels as a safety measure to prevent backfeeding into the local lines when utility crews are working nearby. Or when there is a supply glut - it's faster/cheaper/causes less wear to turn off several thousand[0] residential PV panels than to shut down a major generating plant for a few hours. [0] Or maybe only a few hundred if that's all that is needed to balance the system.
  - bradknowles 4y ago
    I don't mind cutting off the feed from the solar panel to the grid, if there are crews working on the lines, or other reasonable events. I don't want them cutting off my solar panels from being able to feed my house or my batteries, unless all my batteries are all full and there's no power draw from my house. If they don't want my solar power, then it's fine for them to refuse to accept it, but the decision of what to do with that remaining power should be left entirely on my end.
    - mistrial9 4y ago
      agree -- no experimental evidence but I suspect that the power cutoff is "no more power from those panels" not "power is available but no grid connection"; secondly it is annoying to not have any say over when or how long that connection is off. I tend to view the relationship in cynical terms, I admit. The quality of the physical equipment though, is notable.