3 ms·
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,
by 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 agoThe 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.