3 ms·
For some homeowners looking at a residential installation, the added independence itself is a feature (as is the autonomy to be able to slightly accelerate the
by BHSPitMonkey 3y ago
For some homeowners looking at a residential installation, the added independence itself is a feature (as is the autonomy to be able to slightly accelerate the world's shift to renewables -- the average person does not get to participate in deciding when and where to build a grid-scale solar installation).
Of course, reducing a home's energy consumption would be even more preferable than just offsetting it with localized generation - but reality is complicated.
- toast0 3y agoI think the autonomy is the big thing. Redundancy is nice, but many or possibly most residential rooftop solar installs are grid tie only; adding the ability to power locally when the grid is down adds signifigant expense. Tarriffs are a thing to. It's common for rooftop generation to offset grid usage, but if you used your construction budget to buy into a larger project, you would likely not be able to offset usage, you'd more likely earn wholesale rates on generation at the facility and pay retail rates on usage at home. Probably you get more generation capacity, and maybe that works enough, but probably not. There's also a lack of these projects to buy into.
- SoftTalker 3y agoAs a homeowner, the last thing I want to do is own and maintain the equipment to provide electric power. I will gladly pay a utility to take care of this for me. A home solar system with battery storage and an automatic transfer switch and interconnected to feed power back to the grid is a complicated setup and I want no part of owning or maintaining that.
- Scoundreller 3y agoAll comes down to reliability, no? People probably said the same in the transition from simple and reliable ice boxes with ice block delivery to electric fridges.
- idiotsecant 3y agoI think that's why parent post said some home owners. Some people like coconut. As a person i, however, hate coconut.