3 ms·
I've seen a lot of different numbers thrown around (and to be clear: I'm in Oregon and not part of the fight). Let it suffice that NEM3.0 makes the relative be
by ajross 4y ago
I've seen a lot of different numbers thrown around (and to be clear: I'm in Oregon and not part of the fight). Let it suffice that NEM3.0 makes the relative benefits of a battery for time shifting (and thus the costs of a solar system without a battery, as was typical for early installations) much, much higher.
- danans 4y agoI guess it depends on the rate structure you have. Higher rate variance between off and on peak periods definitely helps with the economic case for batteries, since it offers an arbitrage opportunity. I haven't done the math yet to figure out how that variance relates to payback time for batteries, but would be a fun exercise.