4 ms·
Consumer rooftop solar is the most expensive way ever thought of to provide electrical power. Money is fungible. A dollar tied up in building a one-off consumer
by opo 4y ago
Consumer rooftop solar is the most expensive way ever thought of to provide electrical power. Money is fungible. A dollar tied up in building a one-off consumer solar installation is exactly a dollar unavailable for building out utility grade solar which can be done at a fraction of the cost.
With net metering, wealthier home owners are essentially paid the retail rate for the electricity they sell to the grid which causes higher electricity bills for those who can't afford to put panels on their roof - sort of a reverse Robinhood scheme. I recall reading that with net-metering, non-solar households in CA pay an estimated extra $115 to $245 per year to cover the subsidies given to their wealthier neighbors.
- UncleEntity 4y ago> Money is fungible. A dollar tied up in building a one-off consumer solar installation is exactly a dollar unavailable for building out utility grade solar which can be done at a fraction of the cost. This makes the false assumption that those “fungible” dollars are somehow earmarked for solar and the homeowners wouldn’t just spend them on some other, non-solar, goods.
- opo 4y agoNo, I am not making that assumption in any way. I might not have been clear enough. I am saying that it is incredibly wasteful for the government to directly subsidize consumer solar when installed and then later forcing less wealthy consumers to subsidize their wealthier neighbors. If the government wants to encourage the development of solar power, those subsidies should have gone to encouraging grid based solar which costs a small fraction of the cost of one off consumer solar panel installations. A dollar tied up in building a one-off consumer solar installation is exactly a dollar unavailable for building out utility grade solar.