4 ms·

> “Normal businesses make more money when they cut costs. Utilities (typically) get to charge a fixed upsell percentage and so they make more money when they in

by szvsw 2y ago

> “Normal businesses make more money when they cut costs. Utilities (typically) get to charge a fixed upsell percentage and so they make more money when they increase their costs." Yeah this is a pretty essential thing to understand right now… utilities are licking their chops at the prospect of heat pump electrification (which is absolutely necessary) because in the northeast for instance, it will mean shifting peak demand to winter and greatly increasing the size of the peak, which means grid expansion, which means more profit in absolute terms, even if the margin stays the same, with the added costs passed onto the customers. This is one of the reasons why state and municipal governments need to be funding deep energy retrofits (insulation, weatherizing via air sealing etc) in conjunction with heat pump electrification (ie to help control winter peaking, and thus keep grid expansion to a minimum and control costs passed onto customers).

jncfhnb 2y ago
Why would you be opposed to grid expansion?
- szvsw 2y ago
  Definitely not opposed to grid expansion! Obviously we need to massively increase the capacity of our grid and hook up as much solar and wind as possible (and the queue to do so is already massive). I am opposed to people who are already energy-burdened (ie their energy bill is over a specific threshold of their annual income) baring the cost of grid expansion due to heat electrification in high-income areas! In a lot of cases, heat pump electrification will rapidly occur in high-income areas but the resulting cost of grid expansion will be spread out over an entire state, resulting in significantly higher energy burden. I was just trying to point out that things like heat pump installation really need to be paired with other mechanisms for moderating demand, like adding more insulation to a building and sealing up the building, and that states and local governments ought to be providing incentives to do that as well (which many are) as opposed to just providing rebates for heat pump installs. It is in the utility companies’ interest to advocate for the latter but not the former.
thelastgallon 2y ago
We can have a very different outcome with the right policies. Instead of natural gas peaker plants raking in more than 90% of the pricing, that money can go to people directly -- who can supply power from solar panels on their roofs and from their car batteries connected to the grid (V2G). A powerwall is a small battery (13.5 KWH), car batteries are 100KWH, with 250+ mile range. Only 1% of trips are over 70 miles, for 99% of the trips the battery is a LOT more than required. Just carving out a small portion of car battery to supply power back to the grid can net a lot of money (no need to install powerwalls): https://electrek.co/2023/07/05/tesla-electric-customers-report-making-150-day/ https://electrek.co/2023/07/05/tesla-electric-customers-repo... So far, folks have only been doing rooftop solar, but vertical solar is just as efficient, if not more. If we break the utility monopolies, people will put in vertical panels (fences, walls facing west, etc) and supply solar power during peak demand until sunset.

by szvsw 2y ago

jncfhnb 2y ago

Why would you be opposed to grid expansion?

szvsw 2y ago
Definitely not opposed to grid expansion! Obviously we need to massively increase the capacity of our grid and hook up as much solar and wind as possible (and the queue to do so is already massive). I am opposed to people who are already energy-burdened (ie their energy bill is over a specific threshold of their annual income) baring the cost of grid expansion due to heat electrification in high-income areas! In a lot of cases, heat pump electrification will rapidly occur in high-income areas but the resulting cost of grid expansion will be spread out over an entire state, resulting in significantly higher energy burden. I was just trying to point out that things like heat pump installation really need to be paired with other mechanisms for moderating demand, like adding more insulation to a building and sealing up the building, and that states and local governments ought to be providing incentives to do that as well (which many are) as opposed to just providing rebates for heat pump installs. It is in the utility companies’ interest to advocate for the latter but not the former.

thelastgallon 2y ago

We can have a very different outcome with the right policies. Instead of natural gas peaker plants raking in more than 90% of the pricing, that money can go to people directly -- who can supply power from solar panels on their roofs and from their car batteries connected to the grid (V2G). A powerwall is a small battery (13.5 KWH), car batteries are 100KWH, with 250+ mile range. Only 1% of trips are over 70 miles, for 99% of the trips the battery is a LOT more than required. Just carving out a small portion of car battery to supply power back to the grid can net a lot of money (no need to install powerwalls): https://electrek.co/2023/07/05/tesla-electric-customers-report-making-150-day/ https://electrek.co/2023/07/05/tesla-electric-customers-repo... So far, folks have only been doing rooftop solar, but vertical solar is just as efficient, if not more. If we break the utility monopolies, people will put in vertical panels (fences, walls facing west, etc) and supply solar power during peak demand until sunset.