Slashdot Mirror


Utilities Battle Homeowners Over Solar Power

HughPickens.com writes Diane Cardwell reports in the NYT that many utilities are trying desperately to stem the rise of solar power, either by reducing incentives, adding steep fees or effectively pushing home solar companies out of the market. The economic threat has electric companies on edge. Over all, demand for electricity is softening while home solar is rapidly spreading across the country. There are now about 600,000 installed systems, and the number is expected to reach 3.3 million by 2020, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association. In Hawaii, the current battle began in 2013, when Hawaiian Electric started barring installations of residential solar systems in certain areas. It was an abrupt move — a panicked one, critics say — made after the utility became alarmed by the technical and financial challenges of all those homes suddenly making their own electricity. "Hawaii is a postcard from the future," says Adam Browning, executive director of Vote Solar, a policy and advocacy group based in California.

But utilities say that solar-generated electricity flowing out of houses and into a power grid designed to carry it in the other direction has caused unanticipated voltage fluctuations that can overload circuits, burn lines and lead to brownouts or blackouts. "At every different moment, we have to make sure that the amount of power we generate is equal to the amount of energy being used, and if we don't keep that balance things go unstable," says Colton Ching, vice president for energy delivery at Hawaiian Electric, pointing to the illuminated graphs and diagrams tracking energy production from wind and solar farms, as well as coal-fueled generators in the utility's main control room. But the rooftop systems are "essentially invisible to us," says Ching, "because they sit behind a customer's meter and we don't have a means to directly measure them." The utility wants to cut roughly in half the amount it pays customers for solar electricity they send back to the grid. "Hawaii's case is not isolated," says Massoud Amin. "When we push year-on-year 30 to 40 percent growth in this market, with the number of installations doubling, quickly — every two years or so — there's going to be problems."

31 of 533 comments (clear)

  1. Help me out here a little... by NecroPuppy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    IT's early (for me) and my standard disclaimer of "the caffeine hasn't kicked in yet" applies, but "a power grid designed to carry it in the other direction" doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me.

    I admit that circuits was a long time ago, and I never took (or had to take) the high power courses... But what does that even mean? The system is still AC, isn't it? So it's been handling carrying things in both directions forever.

    Is this industry BS, or is there something to this claim?

    --
    I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
    1. Re:Help me out here a little... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 5, Informative

      There's something to this claim. The power electric companies traditionally have control over all inputs to the system. Home solar changes that.

      Unfortunately, the power company is still expected to make sure that the power comes in at the right voltage and frequency. And with control on only part of the inputs, that's a lot harder. The fewer inputs they control, the harder...

      Theoretically, you can design a control system that'll handle the problem. But, so far, noone has bothered to, because noone's had a need to. As solar becomes more common that'll change, and the problems will go away.

      One part of the problem is NOT going to go away however - they have to pay to maintain the lines. Right now, that cost if covered by your electric bills. As the amount of electricity you draw from their generators goes down, they're going to reach the point of needing to charge you a flat fee just for the connection to the power lines, plus the usual fees for actually using their electricity.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    2. Re:Help me out here a little... by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      To really handle it, you have to be able to prevent solar producers from putting power on the lines if there's too much production for the consumers. That means there need to be some restrictions on the design of solar systems so they don't keep dumping excess power into the grid when it's not needed. Ultimately this may mean that for cities with lots of solar systems, there will be parts of the day when your system limits itself to only producing what you can use in your house and puts no power back on the line.

    3. Re:Help me out here a little... by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Theoretically, you can design a control system that'll handle the problem. But, so far, noone has bothered to, because noone's had a need to.

      Why don't you ask the Germans how they have manage to do this already . . . ?

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    4. Re:Help me out here a little... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      EE working for a utility here, and I agree with all of this. The utility I work for, and a lot of others, don't even generate any power, we just do transmission and distribution, i.e. "poles and wires". Solar still causes us headaches. Don't get me wrong, I love solar, and I want reduced fossil-fuel usage, but the issue really is more nuanced than the public perception of "the utility just doesn't want us making our own power so they can keep charging us money".

      Most people seem to operate under the assumption that power distribution is a network, where it flows in any direction. On the transmission side, yes, this is true. For distribution, it's generally false, except in large cities. More common are radial feeds, where several circuits, also called feeders, come out of the substation, each one typically having multiple branches and serving a certain area. Think of it like an artery system. The main trunk of the feeder has larger size wires that can handle more current, the branches have smaller sizes, etc. It's designed for power flowing from the substation to the customers, and not vice versa. There are a number of issues that arise when this expectation is violated. As a few examples:

      If the homeowner at the end of the branch puts in a large solar installation, the wires and distribution equipment may not be sized to handle the power he's producing.

      The variability of generation and inability to measure it is definitely an obstacle. Let's say there's an area with 20MW of load, and 15MW is being provided by solar. The solar output is unpredictable, but to the utility, who probably only has real time metering at the substation, it just looks like 5MW of load, so they don't know that when the sun goes down or a storm passes through they're going to see a major load increase.

      It's a safety issue. The utility does not, and absolutely never will, assume that a customer has a properly functioning transfer switch that prevents backfeed during outages, which can be hazardous to both linemen working to restore power. There are certainly safety precautions that linemen can take, but it's still a danger.

      On the billing side, the utility still needs to maintain equipment to provide whatever class of service the homeowner has. They need to be able to provide, for example, 400 amps, even if the homeowner gets solar and winds up having a bill of $0 from the utility. The O&M costs for such customers wind up being effectively subsidized by people who don't have solar.

      I like solar, and I'm not afraid of it putting me out of a job, at least in my lifetime. I think when battery technology is more mature, it could help alleviate a number of issues that currently exist. But the public perception that its conspiracy by big bad utility is just trying to stifle competition is untrue. I'm not going to say that anticompetitiveness could never be the motivation for a utility to fight the proliferation of solar, but from an engineer's perspective, there are real obstacles that exist that many people don't realize or appreciate.

    5. Re:Help me out here a little... by BLKMGK · · Score: 5, Informative

      There are already strict requirements that must be met in order to connect a solar system to the grid. The devices that do this have all sorts of requirements regarding what the power must look like regarding conditioning and interesting things like disconnection should power drop in order to prevent energizing an electrical line that a worker thinks is dead because he doesn't expect you to push power. Meters that "run backwards" are also used with grid-tie connections already.

      As it stands today in our existing system if an electric producer has excess they sell it to OTHER grids tied to their system, it doesn't simply go to waste. On an island like Hawaii that may not be possible but on the mainland it certainly is and those connections also stretch into other countries like Canada.

      In short - most all of your assumptions about how power is just being thrown willy-nilly onto the grid are incorrect and already accounted for. If you think an electric company is going to allow you to (legally) connect without having passed those standards you haven't done your research. Look up Grid-tie to learn more.

      --
      Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
    6. Re:Help me out here a little... by Luckyo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not just some but essentially full agreement. The problem here is that when solar starts a production spike, all houses in the region with solar will suddenly spike at once. That is what causes the overloads in the residential circuit which was never designed to handle such spikes because they were never considered when grid was built.

      The only solutions are:
      1. Massive investment into grid upgrades, which comes with increase in maintenance costs.
      2. Capping solar's ability to dump into the grid while keeping the current grid and it's relatively low maintenance costs (solution proposed here).

      Problem with #2 is that it significantly reduces ROI of solar installation, as it's being actively marketed with ROI that enables solar microproducers to dump excess into the grid at a good price. This was lobbied in back when solar was just starting, and no one thought of the current scenario - solar that is popular enough to threaten grid stability.

    7. Re:Help me out here a little... by Luckyo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There is another problem here as well, which has caused significant upheaval in Australia. Solar subsidies have effectively ended up as a tax on the poor which is subsidising the rich. This is because poor are forced to pay full price for all electricity they use, while rich can simply buy the microproducer plant to put on their roof and use net metering to effectively get paid from common pool paid mostly by poor who can't afford those.

      Since we're talking about infrastructure that is necessary for everyone, it ends up as excessive tax on poor that is used to subsidise the rich on costs of infrastructure used by everyone.

    8. Re:Help me out here a little... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 4, Informative

      But germans on average just use a tenth of the power an american uses, so bottom line we pay less than you.

      My yearly bill is like 650EURO for electricity and roughly the same for gas.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    9. Re:Help me out here a little... by savuporo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Coordinating the power grid needs information, today the information carried for proper coordination ( AC waveform detecion by grid inverter ) is not sufficient to make things work at large scale.
      Whether you transmit the coordination signals ( i.e. extra bits of information ) in-band ( over powerline, superimposed on the AC wave ) or out of band on a separate carrier is the question of implementation. Both in-band and out of band would have their upsides and downsides.
      Fact of the matter is that todays grid is not built for that.

      Simple case, assume there is a dozen or so high power solar installations in my neighborhood, delivering most of the peak power output. The requirement for grid-tie inverters is matching the phase within 1% of the 50/60hz waveform read at the connection point. The question is, _whose_ waveform is mine really following ? Is it the neighbors ? Which one is his following ? How does the error propagate and does it multiply ? That is the gist of the coordination problem.

      --
      http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashdot.org Errors found while checking this document as HTML5!
    10. Re:Help me out here a little... by presidenteloco · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you have one large lake located up high somewhere and can pump water uphill to it, problem solved.

      Does Hawaii have any high ground? Thought so.

      Or if you're concerned about ecosystem alteration due to changing water flows, then

      if you have one very large hydrogen tank facility somewhere with an electrolysis system (new efficient designs are here or almost here) and fuel cells, problem solved.

      Or if you have an ocean floor where you can store a whole bunch of large balloon bags full of air, problem solved.

      It's true that these storage methods have a low round-trip energy efficiency, but that energy is coming from the fricking sun - photosynthetic life is about 2% efficient at using solar energy). PV with inefficient storage of its peak generation is still a way better idea than continuing to burn coal and gas to make electricity.

      --

      Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
    11. Re:Help me out here a little... by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 4, Informative

      Besides, unless I'm misremembering my basic electronics, having extra power available is usually not a problem unless there is someone to consume it (*). I can hook up one side of a 110 volt outlet to a piece of aluminum foil, and until someone is stupid enough to touch it, it won't burn up. Overloads are caused by demand exceeding the available supply as it passes through some resistance (the wiring, for example).

      You've got most of the right answers in there, but a little mixed up. The aluminium foil survives because it has low resistance, so little power is delivered over it. Electrical power is distributed across a circuit in proportion to resistance : P = I^2 * R. Low-resistance components (eg wires, and your foil is just a flat wire) are therefore less susceptible to oversupply. But put more power into the system, and more power will be delivered to all components, and some of them will fail and catch fire. Don't believe me? Get a 3V filament bulb and connect a 12V battery to it -- it will pop because too much power is delivered across the resistive filament.

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    12. Re:Help me out here a little... by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I disagree in there really isn't such a thing as too much grid power,

      Thousands of electrical fires say you're wrong.

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    13. Re:Help me out here a little... by pem · · Score: 4, Informative
      If you're batteries are completely full, and you don't need any power, your controller simply won't pull any power from the solar panels, so the "heat sink" is merely your panels getting slightly warmer than they would have.

      Household inverters will dump power into the grid as long as the grid is being maintained within some tolerance of voltage and frequency. This tolerance is quite wide, because otherwise inverters wouldn't work a lot of the time.

      But the utility company would ideally like to be able to control the grid to whatever tolerance makes sense under current conditions, and this problem is not simplified by random (from its perspective) energy sources dotted around.

      Also, the utility company has to maintain generation for the base load, and when a cloud greatly reduces the solar it has no control over, it has to quickly ramp generation up and then back down when the cloud goes away.

  2. Ok.... Here's the thing, though ..... by King_TJ · · Score: 5, Informative

    The complaints that the rooftop systems are invisible to the power companies "because they sit behind a customer's meter and we don't have a means to directly measure them" can be addressed pretty easily with updated electric meters.

    The power companies are all moving towards "smart meter" technologies anyway. Why not make sure they've put one in that can monitor the output of a PV solar (or even a wind turbine) installation while they're at it?

    When I had my solar system installed, the power company had to switch out my meter. And even though we're one of the last remaining areas around here that doesn't yet use smart meters, they still upgraded me to a bi-directional meter so my power generation vs. usage can be tracked. So they're spending $'s on labor and hardware to mess with your meter each time a new solar system is put in. It's their short-sightedness if they don't put more useful equipment in place while they're doing that anyway!

    And when it comes to solar, I think the output is fairly predictable too. The only real "fluctuations" you get with the output are based on the day's weather conditions. If you compare my panels to my friend who lives on the other side of town and has a PV solar installation, our daily power generation numbers are within 2-3KWh of each other, and the hourly rates on a graph look almost identical. The power company receives and has to sign off on a registration form stating you've installed a small power generation system and they're made aware of its exact size/maximum output at that time. So even with NO other metering capability, they'd be able to predict that in a certain part of the circuit, they now have someone who will add, at most, a specific amount of power back to the lines between the hours of 10AM and 2PM (when the panels produce the most power). It seems like this is data they should be able to work with.

    1. Re:Ok.... Here's the thing, though ..... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 4, Funny

      They're businessmen.

      Dealing with that requires a change to their process, which means costs (ie: new meters, people smart enough to handle monitoring the system, etc.). They will whine to high heaven about it until a) the government steps in and writes them a check in exchange for shutting the fuck up, or b) the Courts order them to do it anyway.

    2. Re:Ok.... Here's the thing, though ..... by swillden · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The power companies are all moving towards "smart meter" technologies anyway. Why not make sure they've put one in that can monitor the output of a PV solar (or even a wind turbine) installation while they're at it?

      For that matter, it seems perfectly reasonable to require the homeowner to install such a meter as part of a solar installation, as a condition of being able to sell power to the utility -- or even to push power into the grid at all.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    3. Re:Ok.... Here's the thing, though ..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem is not that the meters can't measure the power in both directions. The problem is the latency the communication network on the meters can deliver the information to the control room. Smart Meters typically send home a simple KWH "energy" import/export number every so often for the purposes of billing. What systems engineers in control rooms need is real time access to the instantaneous power being generated by roof top solar systems. Their meter reading infrastructure is not designed for this kind of response.

      Now all of a sudden meter paradigms change from a billing information collection program to a Power Quality program. Its a different system with different requirements.

      It gets even more complex because you have lots of coops that do not generate power but only transmit it. How in the world do they get that information to the person they are buying power from at any given moment?

      Its a HUGE issue that is not simply the evil power company wanting to stick it to the little guy. The Power companies have a big responsibility to keeping the grid stable. We take for granted the complexities involved to make stable 60hz ac power.

    4. Re:Ok.... Here's the thing, though ..... by haruchai · · Score: 4, Informative

      Just more lame excuses.
      Australia, a giant country that's almost as large as America but with only 1/15th the population went from nearly ZERO rooftop PV in 2009 to over 4GW by the end of 2015. It's true that the utilities there have been whining about voltage surges since 2011 but the amount of rooftop installations have increased 10x since that time and the grid hasn't melted down.

      In other words, if the utilities in the USA are only as marginally as competent as the ones down under, they should be able to deal with a 5-10x increase in solar across the same population / geographic area.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    5. Re:Ok.... Here's the thing, though ..... by Cassini2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Batteries are not cost-effective. The electrical grid must always be balanced. As such, utilities try to find methods of stabilizing the grid without using batteries. Technically this works. However, the economic impact of the guaranteeing a market for subsidized solar and wind power, is another set of hidden subsidies. Ironically, some of these hidden subsidies are going to fossil fuel companies.

      To make a complex story short, the grid must always be balanced. If the power source cannot be controlled (like solar), or if the power source is unreliable (like wind), then it is necessary to make up the difference in some other way. The cheapest methods are to remotely turn on and off loads, and to remotely turn on and off generating stations.

      The problem with starting and stopping loads is that there are not many loads that can be turned on and off remotely, and still accomplish something useful. Ontario has been experimenting with ways to turn off home air-conditioners during the day. Also, big consumers often get a preferred electricity rate, with the understanding that their electricity is "interruptible". However, there is only so much that this can be pushed. People want a cool house. The price of "interruptible" electricity is a few cents per kWh, which is often below cost.

      This brings us to starting and stopping generating stations. A nuclear station takes days to start and stop. A coal station takes on the order of a day to start and stop. A natural gas turbine take about 3 to 6 hours to start. Natural gas (NG) turbines have the ability to run at a "hot-idle", but this is expensive. At "hot-idle" an NG station is still running, it is just not producing power. Hydro power plants (hydro dams) can be started quickly, however unexpected rapid changes in water levels have killed people downstream. As such, very few generating stations can turn on and off as quickly as wind-power changes.

      Probably the best way to solve the problem is to have many small power plants, either small hydro-dams or small NG-turbines, and only turn on and off a fraction of those units at any one time. If the grid operator is required to purchase significant amounts of wind-power, then the grid-operator might have to go very far afield to find a sufficiently large enough pool of existing small generating stations that can be started and stopped quickly. In the case of Ontario, Canada, it needed to pay US power plants to not produce electricity to keep the grid balanced. Ontario has a large energy grid, however Ontario was not large enough to deal with wind-power's fluctuations without external help.

      In the case of Ontario, which is purchasing solar at 90 cents/kWh and wind at 17 cents/kWh under certain existing contracts, then a "hidden" solar/wind subsidy is going to mines and smelters and fossil fuel producers to keep the grid balanced. This subsidy is cheaper than battery and capacitor banks. However, conservation is far cheaper than many of the above schemes.

      Compared to solar/batteries, conservation is the way to go. LED light bulbs almost make sense at current electricity prices. At 90 cents/kWh, converting existing fixtures to LED light bulbs is cheap. Appliances can be moved from electricity to propane or natural gas. Stoves, hot water heaters, furnaces, and even the fridge and air-conditioner can be converted. This is cheaper than paying for battery storage. What little load is left, can then be powered off a roof-top solar / battery system. Conservation is by far the cheapest option.

    6. Re:Ok.... Here's the thing, though ..... by Luckyo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Australia's solar policy has been called an "unmitigated disaster". It's basically a method of subsidising the rich by taxing the poor which is approaching the point of collapse. Even the massively pro-green sites like reneweconomy have been forced to admit there is a significant problem (though they try to obfuscate this by talking up the other relevant points like spinning reserve that burns coal).
      http://reneweconomy.com.au/201...

  3. Batteries exist by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's pretty simple. If the excess power I generate has more value to me if I store it in a battery, rather than sell it to the grid, then I can just cut my connection to the grid. The fact that they're being such jerks would increase my incentive to cut them off.

  4. Solar is here to stay by Hadlock · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was island hopping in the Philippines last week. Coal there is very expensive. Oil there is very expensive. Power, in general, is very, very expensive. An AC unit is within financial means of many people who already own a flat screen TV and/or western game console. Yet they live without air conditioning in very hot/humid conditions. Malls there are really popular as a result.
     
    The first thing i noticed when I got in a taxi from the airport was the number of Solar + Wind advertisements. Solar has already arrived in SE Asia, and it is here to stay. There's about a billion people in SE Asia outside of China. Solar makes a heck of a lot of sense in the developing world or disconnected parts of the world, where a surprising number of people live. That's right you don't have to go back one sentence, I said a Billion with a 'B'. There's about 30 million people living in the Metro region of Manila without air conditioning because electricity is too expensive. The other half of the country is lucky to have reliable electricity.
     
    These places exist, and they're prime candidates for distributed solar in a big way. Solar is already cheaper than mains electricity, even installed, even with big import duties. Now they're just waiting for the products to arrive en masse.
     
    Why does this matter?
     
    America is still waiting for price parity of mains electricity and home grown solar, but while you can stem the tide of Solar in America temporarily, the price is going to drop like a rock as manufacturers race to supply the third world with Solar, and soon American electric companies will be competing against the price of affordable solar in the third world. It may be five or ten years before Solar truly takes off in the US, but as soon as someone rolls out a $500 "Air Conditioning assist" kit that tells your AC to run at full tilt whenever the solar panels have enough juice to keep it running (who doesn't love coming home to an icy cool house when it's 100F/35C out? especially if that AC was free?), the reasons not to go Solar are going to fall like dominos.

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
    1. Re:Solar is here to stay by erp_consultant · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "The other half of the country is lucky to have reliable electricity." - You're spot on with that assessment. Brownouts in the Philippines are a way of life. it is particularly bad in rural areas. Many of the condos in Manila boast of their own power supplies independent of government power. Like a lot of other things in the Philippines, rampant corruption and cronyism has ruined nearly every industry. Before cellphones took off there it would take literally years to get a land line phone installed and you would probably have to bribe someone at that. Now just about everyone has a cellphone and the coverage is actually pretty good. The technology literally leapfrogged the old technology and I believe the exact thing will happen with solar once the price of the panels comes down.

  5. Batteries are too expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Batteries need to come down in cost before it makes sense to switch to an off-grid solution. I have a 1kW battery/solar system (not grid-tied) as an emergency power source and I have to replace the lead acid AGM batteries aver 5-7 years at a cost of $500 to $1000.

    The only way to beat the utilities is to go completely off-grid, but that is too expensive at the moment.

  6. They have to put in safety equipment in any case by davecb · · Score: 4, Interesting
    To connect a power source to the grid, there has to be a cutoff that disconnects it when the grid voltage drops to zero due to, for example, a tree falling and shorting it to ground. If there isn't a cutoff
    • - the grid sucks all your power and probably blows your fuses and/or rectifier diodes, and
    • - the hydro guy who expects to be handing a dead line suddenly has it jump to 110 or 220V, the instant he lifts it off ground.

    Linemen don't like becoming part of the circuits, so they successfully called for the disconnect-if-zero laws.

    Power companies (at least in Canada and large parts of the world) already have equipment to deal with the fact that the power can flow both ways. In fact, claiming they don't have equipment is only true IFF the power companies are the ones who like electrocuting their employees (;-))

    --
    davecb@spamcop.net
  7. Re:Varies, I suppose by xeoron · · Score: 4, Interesting

    National Grid has capped the amount of energy people/companies/government buildings can put into the grid in Nantucket, MA way below then any other part of the state. One would think that due to high demands in the summer for energy in a tourist town they would be for more people adding energy to the grid, since there is talk about running new power cables to the island. NG has the contract for fixing the lines in the region and is the main energy broker, unfortunately. But with their recent double price increase people are switching to cheaper brokers and adding more solar to their homes.

  8. Re:Varies, I suppose by Dragon+Bait · · Score: 4, Insightful

    NG has the contract for fixing the lines in the region and is the main energy broker, unfortunately.

    This is the ultimate problem: having the power lines and the energy broker/provider be the same entity. The power lines are an obvious natural monopoly. The supply of energy across those power lines is not a natural monopoly. The lines should be owned by one company and the power selling/brokerage should be by a different company.

  9. Re:Varies, I suppose by rahvin112 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The grid can't handle micro-generation.

    Bullshit. Hawaii power was forced to do an ACTUAL study instead of pulling number out their ass like you. They have areas with 50% of the power solar and the study found they can handle it just fine.

    The utilities should keep in mind here, they push back hard enough and the cost savings of going completely off-grid will eventually reach the point that people just unplug entirely. It's better to offer backup power than no power at all.

  10. Re:Varies, I suppose by Immerman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're making it way too complicated. The power-line company can buy power from whoever is providing, and sell power to whoever is consuming. Just like they do now with home solar power. They can make whatever agreements they like with generating companies as to who gets what share of demand, what response times are required, etc. Add some grid-scale power buffers, even just a few minutes worth, and things get even simpler. While the electrons are on the line they belong to the distribution company, just like while products are in Walmart's distribution channel they belong to Walmart.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  11. Re:Varies, I suppose by ChrisMaple · · Score: 4, Funny

    In an unregulated market the power line company charges a flat government regulated fee to carry the power and maintain the lines.

    Seldom are contradictions so obvious.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate