3 ms·

This is also supported by the Federal gov since recently power inverters were banned and there is no major US maker of power inverters this is purposely a polic

This is also supported by the Federal gov since recently power inverters were banned and there is no major US maker of power inverters this is purposely a policy designed to stymie Solar proliferation. This policy was bought and paid for by the energy sector.

cucumber3732842 20d ago
It's not just the energy sector though being big business I assume they do the bulk of the lobbying. The electrician's trade groups and that whole supply chain are also scared shitless of a future where you can't lord a meter connection over people. To an only slightly lesser degree building inspectors and Karens of all colors are also not fans for similar reasons. In exurban and rural areas (i.e. below a certain density depending on climate) the idea that some guy could just move into an old house or slap up a new building, throw up a bunch of panels on a stand, throw a bunch of batteries in a shed and live there without cutting checks to all sorts of parties and jumping through all sorts of compliance hoops and that you'd have to go after them after the fact is a big threat to these people's ability to micromanage how other people live.
- Schlagbohrer 20d ago
  But the US also has a large number of people who are extremely interested in "off grid" living (or even just LARPing it), I would expect them to be able to exert a lot of counter pressure
  - HappySweeney 20d ago
    Those people aren't wealthy enough to have any real political power, though.
    - cucumber3732842 20d ago
      Nor do they have much economic surplus worth extracting so there's no reason for the .gov to throw them a bone or otherwise curry favor with that demographic.
thijson 20d ago
Another policy is to charge EV's registration fees that are way higher than ICE vehicles.
- jjav 19d ago
  The argument, which isn't entirely unreasonable, is that ICE cars are obviously paying a per-mile usage fee in the form of fuel taxes which supposedly (not always in practice) are supposed to be used to maintain roads. And it works sort-of, since very light cars (which do least damage to road surface) often have good fuel economy so they pay less tax per mile, vs. heavy trucks which do more wear on the road have usually worse mileage so end up paying more per mile in taxes. Not perfect of course, but approximately reasonable. EVs break this system because they pay zero fuel taxes but are quite heavy (for their size) so they wear out the road like a heavier car but pay nothing.
  - thijson 17d ago
    I wonder if heavy trucks pay correspondingly higher then. I would imagine the damage they do is disproportionately higher.
    - jjav 14d ago
      If a truck is getting, say, 12MPG it is paying a lot more in per-gallon taxes than a car getting 40MPG. So yes. (Trucks also pay higher registration fees, but that's separate)

cucumber3732842 20d ago

It's not just the energy sector though being big business I assume they do the bulk of the lobbying. The electrician's trade groups and that whole supply chain are also scared shitless of a future where you can't lord a meter connection over people. To an only slightly lesser degree building inspectors and Karens of all colors are also not fans for similar reasons. In exurban and rural areas (i.e. below a certain density depending on climate) the idea that some guy could just move into an old house or slap up a new building, throw up a bunch of panels on a stand, throw a bunch of batteries in a shed and live there without cutting checks to all sorts of parties and jumping through all sorts of compliance hoops and that you'd have to go after them after the fact is a big threat to these people's ability to micromanage how other people live.

Schlagbohrer 20d ago
But the US also has a large number of people who are extremely interested in "off grid" living (or even just LARPing it), I would expect them to be able to exert a lot of counter pressure
- HappySweeney 20d ago
  Those people aren't wealthy enough to have any real political power, though.
  - cucumber3732842 20d ago
    Nor do they have much economic surplus worth extracting so there's no reason for the .gov to throw them a bone or otherwise curry favor with that demographic.

thijson 20d ago

Another policy is to charge EV's registration fees that are way higher than ICE vehicles.

jjav 19d ago
The argument, which isn't entirely unreasonable, is that ICE cars are obviously paying a per-mile usage fee in the form of fuel taxes which supposedly (not always in practice) are supposed to be used to maintain roads. And it works sort-of, since very light cars (which do least damage to road surface) often have good fuel economy so they pay less tax per mile, vs. heavy trucks which do more wear on the road have usually worse mileage so end up paying more per mile in taxes. Not perfect of course, but approximately reasonable. EVs break this system because they pay zero fuel taxes but are quite heavy (for their size) so they wear out the road like a heavier car but pay nothing.
- thijson 17d ago
  I wonder if heavy trucks pay correspondingly higher then. I would imagine the damage they do is disproportionately higher.
  - jjav 14d ago
    If a truck is getting, say, 12MPG it is paying a lot more in per-gallon taxes than a car getting 40MPG. So yes. (Trucks also pay higher registration fees, but that's separate)