7 ms·

I have solar on my roof, but I had to negotiate a net metering agreement with my utility company. I have friends saying the same utility company is now pushing

I have solar on my roof, but I had to negotiate a net metering agreement with my utility company. I have friends saying the same utility company is now pushing back on new agreements. It seems that stupid issues will need to be resolved before solar hits a critical mass. That said, batteries help.

thehappypm 4y ago
Net metering is a bad deal for utilities, though. The “delivery” part of the cost of electricity is more than half; it accounts for the maintenance of the grid etc. People dumping energy into the grid doesn’t lower that cost.
- epistasis 4y ago
  This is an important point that applies more broadly: anything that lowers electricity costs for consumers is a "bad deal" for utilities. Since in most areas, utilities are monopolies that are not subject to competition, they should not be allowed to deny cost-saving tech advances just because it lowers overall system cost and their overall percentage of revenue and profit goes down.
  - pyrale 4y ago
    The thing is, there are issues with handling a grid that go beyond the money aspect. Balancing a grid that relies on a few production plants is already a non-trivial endeavour. Changing the network is usually a slow process. Adding a new power line to fix some topologic issues can take years to plan and millions to build. Having a robust grid means grid operators have to know details of the network, and be able to know how to reroute power when a line becomes too close to its limits or (worse) when a circuit-breaker opens. Studying the current network takes time. That's why adapting to frequent changes isn't realistic, purely from the carrier's perspective, without even looking into power production aspects.
- throwaway2037 4y ago
  Thank you for saying this out loud. Let me preface by saying that I am not a shill for big electricity companies. The cost of electricity, including green energy, and "net metering" needs to including the cost of transfer -- basically "big wires". Most people are delusional about the cost of transfer. One idea: Force generation and electricity transfer to be separate companies. Today, they are frequently a single company. This might help to create more realistic "net metering" pricing. Also, it might help to have some gov't rules for "net metering" pricing contracts. Edit So typical here: Your comment is being downvoted. It still stands an important point to consider.
  - kragen 4y ago
    by 'transfer' do you mean distribution, transmission, or the kind of grid operation carried out by isos and rtos with the right pricing incentives, rooftop solar ought to decrease the amount of transmission capacity required rather than increasing it, by generating the required power closer to the point of use
    - landemva 4y ago
      Who transmits electricity to the house at night? The lines will be sized for full loads.
      - kragen 4y ago
        transmission lines do not connect to houses, so it is not clear that you understand the distinction i am asking about
        landemva 4y ago
        There are various lines at various voltages. Some are 18k+. In commercial manufacturing may be 13.8k, which is further stepped down to 480 and 220 and 110. The point is that unless a residence can independently provide for their own electricity every hour of the day, then the generation and distribution will be sized for full load.
- klyrs 4y ago
  > The “delivery” part of the cost of electricity is more than half; it accounts for the maintenance of the grid etc. People dumping energy into the grid doesn’t lower that cost. This sounds like a pretty good reason for utilities to be a public affair.
- vishnugupta 4y ago
  The transmission corporation in the state where I live India has had net metering option for a while now. They recently introduced grid maintenance cost chargeable to those exporting solar power to the grid. Despite that it's no brainer for us here to install roof top solar with net metering.
travisporter 4y ago
I live in the southeast and was quoted 35k for a 7kw Solar and 36k for two power walls. With tax credits,~50k
- voisin 4y ago
  I’m in BC, Canada and just pulled the trigger on 14.56 kw if ground mount for $42k CAD, tax included. Wondering why Solar is so much more expensive (ignoring the batteries) in your area? I’d think it would be a lot cheaper with more competition. Going with Longi bifacial panels - does the US restrict or add huge duties on Chinese panels?
  - ch4s3 4y ago
    Tariffs are a big part, but labor is a significant factor as well.
  - fbdab103 4y ago
    GP did not mention the mounting option, so I assume they were going for a roof installation. Which has to be a significant markup vs ground mount. I am only partially handy, but even I could throw some poles in the ground and a frame to hold solar panels. Doing the same for a roof would be significantly beyond my abilities.
    - voisin 4y ago
      From the quotes we received ground mount is usually quite a bit more expensive per installed watt. The frames cost more, there’s longer runs of cabling, etc.
      - fbdab103 4y ago
        Huh, never would have guessed. I assumed cabling was basically free, and the only difference would be the solar mounts were attached to poles vs a roof. There was a recent experiment[0] where a company is going to start putting panels directly on the ground without any mounting hardware. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33926683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33926683

thehappypm 4y ago

Net metering is a bad deal for utilities, though. The “delivery” part of the cost of electricity is more than half; it accounts for the maintenance of the grid etc. People dumping energy into the grid doesn’t lower that cost.

epistasis 4y ago
This is an important point that applies more broadly: anything that lowers electricity costs for consumers is a "bad deal" for utilities. Since in most areas, utilities are monopolies that are not subject to competition, they should not be allowed to deny cost-saving tech advances just because it lowers overall system cost and their overall percentage of revenue and profit goes down.
- pyrale 4y ago
  The thing is, there are issues with handling a grid that go beyond the money aspect. Balancing a grid that relies on a few production plants is already a non-trivial endeavour. Changing the network is usually a slow process. Adding a new power line to fix some topologic issues can take years to plan and millions to build. Having a robust grid means grid operators have to know details of the network, and be able to know how to reroute power when a line becomes too close to its limits or (worse) when a circuit-breaker opens. Studying the current network takes time. That's why adapting to frequent changes isn't realistic, purely from the carrier's perspective, without even looking into power production aspects.
throwaway2037 4y ago
Thank you for saying this out loud. Let me preface by saying that I am not a shill for big electricity companies. The cost of electricity, including green energy, and "net metering" needs to including the cost of transfer -- basically "big wires". Most people are delusional about the cost of transfer. One idea: Force generation and electricity transfer to be separate companies. Today, they are frequently a single company. This might help to create more realistic "net metering" pricing. Also, it might help to have some gov't rules for "net metering" pricing contracts. Edit So typical here: Your comment is being downvoted. It still stands an important point to consider.
- kragen 4y ago
  by 'transfer' do you mean distribution, transmission, or the kind of grid operation carried out by isos and rtos with the right pricing incentives, rooftop solar ought to decrease the amount of transmission capacity required rather than increasing it, by generating the required power closer to the point of use
  - landemva 4y ago
    Who transmits electricity to the house at night? The lines will be sized for full loads.
    - kragen 4y ago
      transmission lines do not connect to houses, so it is not clear that you understand the distinction i am asking about
      - landemva 4y ago
        There are various lines at various voltages. Some are 18k+. In commercial manufacturing may be 13.8k, which is further stepped down to 480 and 220 and 110. The point is that unless a residence can independently provide for their own electricity every hour of the day, then the generation and distribution will be sized for full load.
klyrs 4y ago
> The “delivery” part of the cost of electricity is more than half; it accounts for the maintenance of the grid etc. People dumping energy into the grid doesn’t lower that cost. This sounds like a pretty good reason for utilities to be a public affair.
vishnugupta 4y ago
The transmission corporation in the state where I live India has had net metering option for a while now. They recently introduced grid maintenance cost chargeable to those exporting solar power to the grid. Despite that it's no brainer for us here to install roof top solar with net metering.

travisporter 4y ago

I live in the southeast and was quoted 35k for a 7kw Solar and 36k for two power walls. With tax credits,~50k

voisin 4y ago
I’m in BC, Canada and just pulled the trigger on 14.56 kw if ground mount for $42k CAD, tax included. Wondering why Solar is so much more expensive (ignoring the batteries) in your area? I’d think it would be a lot cheaper with more competition. Going with Longi bifacial panels - does the US restrict or add huge duties on Chinese panels?
- ch4s3 4y ago
  Tariffs are a big part, but labor is a significant factor as well.
- fbdab103 4y ago
  GP did not mention the mounting option, so I assume they were going for a roof installation. Which has to be a significant markup vs ground mount. I am only partially handy, but even I could throw some poles in the ground and a frame to hold solar panels. Doing the same for a roof would be significantly beyond my abilities.
  - voisin 4y ago
    From the quotes we received ground mount is usually quite a bit more expensive per installed watt. The frames cost more, there’s longer runs of cabling, etc.
    - fbdab103 4y ago
      Huh, never would have guessed. I assumed cabling was basically free, and the only difference would be the solar mounts were attached to poles vs a roof. There was a recent experiment[0] where a company is going to start putting panels directly on the ground without any mounting hardware. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33926683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33926683