Another example of how utilities are total dirtballs

[Alan Lightstone]

So, got my Duke Energy Florida bill today. And guess what - the started adding a minimum charge of $30 plus tax per month if your charges are less than $30.00/month.

Why is this important? Well, in my case, I have a large solar array and produced a surplus of 8798 kWh of electricity that was sent to Duke last year. They will only pay me back $0.0325/kWh for that surplus, or approximately $286 for that. Of course, that surplus they sold to other customers at the typical electric rate here of $0.13/kWh (4 times as much as they pay me for it), or a profit of $858.

So next year, I will actually owe them about $74 for the honor of them profiting an additional $858 off my energy production. It actually costs me to make them money.

Just another example of utilities trying their best to prevent people from putting up solar panels.

[Sam Force]

I have a cabin on a small lake about 40 miles from home. The utility company charges me $50 per month just to have their service. Most months my bill is under $65 dollars, so to be able to keep a refrigerator running and have lights and a water pump so I can do dishes and flush the toilet I pay them $50. I don't have a TV there, or internet service as I might as well stay home if that's what I would use. Very seldom run the AC as I can sit inside at home too.

[Frank Pratt]

I can accept the logic that there be fixed monthly charges from the utility if there is no energy cost because they still have their infrastructure to the customer's premises that is just sitting idle. But in your case, that infrastructure is not sitting idle. It is being used to deliver energy to them that they are making a profit from. And I dare say they make more from reselling your energy to others than they do selling their own. The energy from your source goes directly to the nearest user, literally your next door neighbor. It doesn't need to be transmitted from some power plant on the other side of the state.

I'd love to see a class action suit over this issue.

[Keith Outten]

Whenever your service goes into output mode its reasonable for the power company to charge you a fee for the transmission and distribution costs and they are very expensive. There is also a matter of billing services and other business expenses that have to be satisfied. I think the deal your getting is pretty good when you consider all of the costs involved.

I should tell you that I used to work for Virginia Power so you might consider my point of view a little different from the average consumer. Production and distribution of electricity is very expensive. I never complain about my power bill after working in the industry, its a bargain when you consider what it takes to deliver reliable energy.

[Malcolm McLeod]

Simple solution is to disconnect from the grid. I trust that the BIG EVIL would not be able to bill you for anything at that point.

I would also assume you may need to provide a DIY solution for the intermittency of your generating capability, but surely you can do that for less than $30/mo.

[Mike Henderson]

The problem, as Keith points out, is that there's a grid to maintain. If people who have solar don't pay to maintain the grid - and those people need the grid - others have to pay the costs. That means the cost falls on people without solar, renters, etc., and those people are usually the less wealthy. As more people install solar, the cost to those without solar would increase because the cost to maintain the grid doesn't go away.

In my opinion, it's only fair that all users who depend on the grid help pay for it.

Mike

[Alex Zeller]

I wouldn't expect to see a class action suit over being paid the same rate they would pay a supplier. My guess is we'll see a class action suit to force the end of net metering as more and more people get solar panels and those who can't get sick and tired of supporting them. Most electric companies would rather not have customers feeding power into the grid as it's unregulated. As the sun comes up they start making power but that power is dependent on the weather. So if it's nice and sunny there's lots of it and the other sources of power need to be throttled back. A sudden downpour on an otherwise sunny day impacts the grid. Of all the big businesses out there electrical companies are probably the most regulated.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

For the record, one of the SMC members, I forget his name, is an engineer for Avista in Spokane, Wa who is my utility provider. 6 years ago, we contracted a bump out on our kitchen and had every window in our home replaced. Though they were only about 30 years old thermal panes, they had lost their seal I discovered while washing them on the outside one day. We also had additional insulation blown into our attic. As a result, our monthly utility bill showed that over the span of a year, we reduced our utility usage by 18% as reported on our monthly statement. I posted about this reduction here on SMC. This SMCer to whom I referred PM'd me to tell me his occupation and thanked me as he said the biggest expense the utility company incurs is the distribution system. Look at the posts here at SMC on the increasing cost of plain old copper wire for wiring shops, homes ,etc.

[Maurice Mcmurry]

The minimum charge seems to be a common thing. We have the "Grain Belt Express" controversy raging around here. I have not researched it enough to know how to think about it. I built a rural spec house in the 90s. I still get small dividend checks from the rural electric CO-OP. I wonder if land owners would capitulate if they were offered shares. I wonder if we would like our utility providers better if they were not private?

[Jim Becker]

They can only do things like that because your state PUC permits it. There are other states that also have permitted policies that are detrimental to folks who generate their own power, unfortunately.

[Alan Lightstone]

I wouldn't expect to see a class action suit over being paid the same rate they would pay a supplier. My guess is we'll see a class action suit to force the end of net metering as more and more people get solar panels and those who can't get sick and tired of supporting them. Most electric companies would rather not have customers feeding power into the grid as it's unregulated. As the sun comes up they start making power but that power is dependent on the weather. So if it's nice and sunny there's lots of it and the other sources of power need to be throttled back. A sudden downpour on an otherwise sunny day impacts the grid. Of all the big businesses out there electrical companies are probably the most regulated.

The utilities in Florida tried 2 years ago to pass a statewide constitutional amendment to end net metering. Rumor was they spent $7 million on their ad campaigns. Much to my amazement, it didn't pass. But I have no doubt they'll try again.

[Alan Lightstone]

Simple solution is to disconnect from the grid. I trust that the BIG EVIL would not be able to bill you for anything at that point.

I would also assume you may need to provide a DIY solution for the intermittency of your generating capability, but surely you can do that for less than $30/mo.

The urban legend here was that it is illegal to go off grid in Florida. I just read today that not true for electricity. Possibly true, and more likely for water/sewer. And all dependent on local zoning, and I am in a very urban county, the most densely populated county in Florida, so no clue how that would go.

With the size of my house, the climate, etc... I would need at least 3 Tesla Powerwalls to power the house at night. So, roughly $32-36K for batteries for night. And, with a few cloudy days in a row (unusual, but certainly not unheard of here), I might need 4 Powerwalls. So potentially close to $50K.

Certainly not economically reasonable with net metering - even with the measly amount they pay me for surplus. There really is no scenario where they will ever pay for themselves with net metering. But if net metering disappears in Florida, I'll be buying battery backup the next day. I could easily charge the batteries with the daily solar output (again, except with a very cloudy/rainy day or two).

[Maurice Mcmurry]

We generate 1000 KWH+ more than we use every year. We still can't make it through the night without the Grid. I sure do not want the government to tell me what to do. However if the government does not stand up to old Montgomery Burns no one can (Or is old Monty the one pulling the strings?) What a dilemma.

[Nicholas Lawrence]

So, got my Duke Energy Florida bill today. And guess what - the started adding a minimum charge of $30 plus tax per month if your charges are less than $30.00/month.

Why is this important? Well, in my case, I have a large solar array and produced a surplus of 8798 kWh of electricity that was sent to Duke last year. They will only pay me back $0.0325/kWh for that surplus, or approximately $286 for that. Of course, that surplus they sold to other customers at the typical electric rate here of $0.13/kWh (4 times as much as they pay me for it), or a profit of $858.

So next year, I will actually owe them about $74 for the honor of them profiting an additional $858 off my energy production. It actually costs me to make them money.

Just another example of utilities trying their best to prevent people from putting up solar panels.

Sounds like you have a product you want to sell, but have no customers, no distribution system, and none of the knowledge or experience that would be required to solve either of those problems.

The propaganda must be pretty effective if you really think they should have to find customers for you, transport the product to them, handle billing, deal with complaints, maintenance, and do it all for free.

[Maurice Mcmurry]

The North American Electrical Grid is the biggest machine on earth. The implications of this fact are equally enormous.

[glenn bradley]

I agree with Mike. I have no school age children but I want education in my community so I pay taxes for that. Same for paying for the the grid whether you use a lot or a little. This can be the little discussed downside to residential solar. The original cost model that you made the decision on is still in place but the utility is allowed to change the rules.

[Alan Lightstone]

Sounds like you have a product you want to sell, but have no customers, no distribution system, and none of the knowledge or experience that would be required to solve either of those problems.

The propaganda must be pretty effective if you really think they should have to find customers for you, transport the product to them, handle billing, deal with complaints, maintenance, and do it all for free.

So many problems with these statements.

One. I already sell my product. To the only buyer I am legally allowed to sell it to - Duke Energy. By paying me below market rates, they make the choice to use their own distribution system to buy it from me.

But now, they aren't really buying it from me any more, they are confiscating it. They are taking the surplus, but not paying me for it any longer. They are doing this by charging me $360/year, but only paying me back $286/year.

I could understand a minimum rate if I wasn't supplying them with a large surplus of energy which they then profit from. I should be able to charge them $30/month for the right to buy that energy from me at 75% discounted rates compared to what they are then charging customers for the energy I just provided them. How is that any different?

[Frank Pratt]

Those who argue that the utility must be paid for use of their distributions system, I agree that they should. But to compare the cost of distributing their own generated energy to that produced by a homeowner is just ridiculous. As I said earlier, the power produced by the guy with a solar array only has to go as far as the nearest neighbor, not 100s of miles.

[Mike Henderson]

Around here, when you get your permit for solar, they will only approve enough to meet your historical demand*. That avoids the situation you face. You made a choice to put in more solar than you need, and now you're complaining that you aren't getting paid enough for it.

But in any case, whether you generate just enough for your own needs, or if you generate in excess of your needs, you need the power grid and you should pay your fair share for that.

In the old days, before solar, the support for the grid was included in the price you paid for electricity, and it was graduated based on how much power you used. Now, we have to find a new way to pay for the grid in a fair manner. I expect we'll see a fixed charge for every home with a solar installation. The fight will be about the size of that charge. I'd be content with $10/mo but I'd oppose $50/mo.

Mike

*You can get a bit excess if you claim that you're going to purchase an electric vehicle.

[Monte Milanuk]

Without getting into the specifics of how a particular utility does business... there's a little more to it than them just re-selling what you are 'giving' them. O&M costs on lines - particularly distribution systems, as someone noted above - are considerable. Some of that isn't just the cost of the copper wire between you and wherever the electrons eventually end up; it's maintaining all the protective devices that keep you, the supplier, and the customer, safe from shenanigans on either end of the line. Some of it's federally mandated requirements to maintain a certain amount of reserve power available, simply in the event that there is a large grid fluctuation, ready to help recover the system voltage and frequency. While on the one hand, it would seem like customer sell-back power would be a great booster for that reserve requirement... I have some serious doubts about it's viability in a practical sense. Solar (and wind, and most 'renewables' other than large scale hydro) pretty much sucks at providing grid stability. Kinda need stuff with 'big iron' behind it somewhere in the system to provide that kind of resilience.

Add to that that the utility has no idea - and no control - over how much you might be supplying at any point in time, or how reliable your system actually is or isn't... it doesn't surprise me that they put such a low $$$ value on your power. Power prices can fluctuate wildly throughout the day, dependent on all manner of things. Supplying them with 'extra' power that they don't really need just means they have to jump through hoops to keep it from adversely affecting things. Most of the time they've already bought and paid for their expected power needs on long-term contracts at bulk rates which are very, very cheap.

Why would they pay you a premium for your excess, simply because you couldn't calculate your power needs better and need to get rid of it?

Spoiler: yes, I do work 'in the industry', albeit about as far away from Florida as you can get and still be in 'CONUS' aka WA state, and no, I don't work in retail/distribution (any more) - I'm in the (hydro) generation side of things.

[Mike Henderson]

Those who argue that the utility must be paid for use of their distributions system, I agree that they should. But to compare the cost of distributing their own generated energy to that produced by a homeowner is just ridiculous. As I said earlier, the power produced by the guy with a solar array only has to go as far as the nearest neighbor, not 100s of miles.

Actually, you can't tell where your electricity will be used. Could be next door, could be the next state. The grid is a "unit" and you can't break it down as you suggest.

In any case, there are times when you'll have to pull power from the grid and that will likely come from a generating station (because you likely won't pull power while the sun is shining - because you're generating). All of us depend on "the grid" - the whole grid, not just the part in our neighborhood - and we have to pay to support all of it.

Mike

[Mike Henderson]

Without getting into the specifics of how a particular utility does business... there's a little more to it than them just re-selling what you are 'giving' them. O&M costs on lines - particularly distribution systems, as someone noted above - are considerable. Some of that isn't just the cost of the copper wire between you and wherever the electrons eventually end up; it's maintaining all the protective devices that keep you, the supplier, and the customer, safe from shenanigans on either end of the line. Some of it's federally mandated requirements to maintain a certain amount of reserve power available, simply in the event that there is a large grid fluctuation, ready to help recover the system voltage and frequency. While on the one hand, it would seem like customer sell-back power would be a great booster for that reserve requirement... I have some serious doubts about it's viability in a practical sense. Solar (and wind, and most 'renewables' other than large scale hydro) pretty much sucks at providing grid stability. Kinda need stuff with 'big iron' behind it somewhere in the system to provide that kind of resilience.

Add to that that the utility has no idea - and no control - over how much you might be supplying at any point in time, or how reliable your system actually is or isn't... it doesn't surprise me that they put such a low $$$ value on your power. Power prices can fluctuate wildly throughout the day, dependent on all manner of things. Supplying them with 'extra' power that they don't really need just means they have to jump through hoops to keep it from adversely affecting things. Most of the time they've already bought and paid for their expected power needs on long-term contracts at bulk rates which are very, very cheap.

Why would they pay you a premium for your excess, simply because you couldn't calculate your power needs better and need to get rid of it?

Spoiler: yes, I do work 'in the industry', albeit about as far away from Florida as you can get and still be in 'CONUS' aka WA state, and no, I don't work in retail/distribution (any more) - I'm in the (hydro) generation side of things.

California has so much solar that they occasionally have to PAY another power company to take it.

Mike

[Jack Frederick]

I agree with Alan. Yes we need a reliable grid, but Alan and I are net producers at a very low return rate as it is, given the cost PG&E and Florida Power charge other customers for the power we produce. The net effect of this is summed up in a NYT column, could have been the WP, this week by Arnold Schwarzenegger detailing the creation of his program to drive solar power. It has been successful in CA where he was Gov. Soon I expect to see the PUC will do the same as Florida but our charge is to be in the $57/mo range (CA). The net effect of this is it will dramatically reduce the amount of residential solar being installed and that is a problem for our children, our grands and the world. The issue here, one of the issues here, is that PG&E in not a reliable supplier. With fires, largely begun by a lack of investment in utility infrastructure, after all, they must protect shareholder value. I was recently out of power for 12 days with this last storm and this last summer several more days with fires. As monopolies these utilities have a responsibility to the public AND the environment. The transition to a more diverse grid is going to be difficult, costly and complicated. They can do better than kill the investment value of the early adopters. If this PUC change goes in I can give in to my remarkable case of the true red-ass and add batteries going off grid or suck it up. Batteries are very costly and screw up what was a good investment. Hey, we’ll just change the playing field. Fossil fuels rule the day and certainly the shallow halls of congress. I built my own system buying direct and installing it myself. I have a six or seven yr or so pay-back. I installed it not for the $30k both local solar companies quoted me for a 6 kWh system but for $15.5K for my 7.5kwh system.

[Monte Milanuk]

California has so much solar that they occasionally have to PAY another power company to take it.

Funny then that much of the hydro power in the PNW is sold to Kali... if they have so much excess ;)

Probably a matter of not having the power they actually need, *when* they need it. Much like residential buy-back programs.

Just to be clear - I'm not against solar. I have a pretty fair-to-middling solar array on my truck camper. Makes perfect sense for that. Makes sense for residential use in areas with high power prices, and consistent reliable sun (generally *not* the PNW). What I don't like is some of these all out pushes for systems that are heavily reliant on solar... to the point where if something goes awry, they founder. Having a mix of power sources available - and like I said, something with 'big iron' backing it up, is a better idea in terms of reliability.

[Mike Henderson]

Funny then that much of the hydro power in the PNW is sold to Kali... if they have so much excess ;)

Probably a matter of not having the power they actually need, *when* they need it. Much like residential buy-back programs.

Just to be clear - I'm not against solar. I have a pretty fair-to-middling solar array on my truck camper. Makes perfect sense for that. Makes sense for residential use in areas with high power prices, and consistent reliable sun (generally *not* the PNW). What I don't like is some of these all out pushes for systems that are heavily reliant on solar... to the point where if something goes awry, they founder. Having a mix of power sources available - and like I said, something with 'big iron' backing it up, is a better idea in terms of reliability.

The excess is only during the peak solar generation time. As you pointed out, the power companies have long term contracts for power, and I guess hydro power from the PNW is a significant one.

My guess is that it's cheaper to pay someone else to take the excess power than to try to adjust the major generating units.

Mike

[Doug Garson]

So many problems with these statements.

One. I already sell my product. To the only buyer I am legally allowed to sell it to - Duke Energy. By paying me below market rates, they make the choice to use their own distribution system to buy it from me.

But now, they aren't really buying it from me any more, they are confiscating it. They are taking the surplus, but not paying me for it any longer. They are doing this by charging me $360/year, but only paying me back $286/year.

I could understand a minimum rate if I wasn't supplying them with a large surplus of energy which they then profit from. I should be able to charge them $30/month for the right to buy that energy from me at 75% discounted rates compared to what they are then charging customers for the energy I just provided them. How is that any different?

Do you actually believe $360 worth of electricity is "a large surplus of energy" to a utility like Duke? Their revenue is over $25 million, you are insignificant to them. They could burn up $360 in admin costs in a day if they had to treat you like a major supplier when you are supplying them with 0.0014% of their annual revenues.
You say you are only legally allowed to sell to Duke. What prevents you from selling your product other than you have no way of distributing it? Unless you want to buy a trailer, load it up with batteries and a charging control system, charge up up and go door to door looking for someone who wants to charge up their home battery system from it or invest in a power cable to a neighbor who wants to buy power from you. I don't think your complaint is realistic.

[Bill Dufour]

.
Telsa batteries should last ten years so will they save $5,000 per year for you?

With the size of my house, the climate, etc... I would need at least 3 Tesla Powerwalls to power the house at night. So, roughly $32-36K for batteries for night. And, with a few cloudy days in a row (unusual, but certainly not unheard of here), I might need 4 Powerwalls. So potentially close to $50K.

Certainly not economically reasonable with net metering - even with the measly amount they pay me for surplus. There really is no scenario where they will ever pay for themselves with net metering. But if net metering disappears in Florida, I'll be buying battery backup the next day. I could easily charge the batteries with the daily solar output (again, except with a very cloudy/rainy day or two).[/QUOTE]

[Greg Funk]

California has so much solar that they occasionally have to PAY another power company to take it.

MikeWe've got giant hydro batteries in BC and buy California power when rates are low and ship it back down when rates are high.

[Monte Milanuk]

We've got giant hydro batteries in BC and buy California power when rates are low and ship it back down when rates are high.

'hydro batteries'?

I think you're referring to 'pumped storage'... Kinda like a battery ;)

[Doug Garson]

We've got giant hydro batteries in BC and buy California power when rates are low and ship it back down when rates are high.
I wasn't aware of any pumped storage installed in BC, where's it located?

[Maurice Mcmurry]

The rules were carefully outlined in the agreement we signed when we had our grid tied P.V. system installed. We still went as big as we could. The big part of our motivation is to do as much as we can to reduce our footprint. The economics do not make sense. Having participated in "caring" is uplifting to us even though it is mostly a gesture.

[Alan Lightstone]

The rules were carefully outlined in the agreement we signed when we had our grid tied P.V. system installed. We still went as big as we could. The big part of our motivation is to do as much as we can to reduce our footprint. The economics do not make sense. Having participated in "caring" is uplifting to us even though it is mostly a gesture.

Similar here, except with my grid tied PV system the utilities through the state utility commission could choose and raise prices as they see fit, as long as they get approved by the commissioners they lobbied to get appointed. The usage fees are largely irrelevant to me as I run a surplus, but escalating monthly fees and minimum charges...

Energy is generally reliable here. My neighborhood is at risk because all the feeding cables to my neighborhood (which has underground cables) are overhead, laced through countless, untrimmed oak trees. Needless to say, in a hurricane, we'll be without power. As has happened before. The utilities and county do virtually nothing about that issue. Of course, not nearly as huge an issue as PG&E in California with transmission cables and wild fires. I truly feel very bad about people confronted with the risk of wildfires, and rotating blackouts. My understanding is that solar arrays and battery backups are fairly common in those areas. I could rant and rave about the issue of "Islanding" which makes my array useless to help my neighbors after a hurricane, but that's another story.

I chose a large PV system because I have the roof space for it, and in an unusually tall house which has no issue of shade, ever from trees. We had no ability to guess what our electric bills would be in our new house as we bought a pre-existing house with an absentee owner, and our last house was so different (pool, large aquarium, much larger), that a comparison was just a wild guess. And I renovated my house to be incredibly energy efficient. Also, I would think a good thing.

So I have a 30kWh array on the house. It provides some surplus some months, and on a few occasions we run a deficit. I don't see that as a bad thing, like I made a mistake as to sizing my array.

The system cost $75K. Certainly not cheap. And I truly feel that I am doing my personal little thing for the environment. I also drive a Tesla, so also, not inexpensive, but doing my little part for the environment.

[Malcolm McLeod]

... So potentially close to $50K.


So w/ a wee bit of Jethro Bodine math, that's ~136yr payback, ignoring the time-value of money. Sorta makes $30/mo look cheap?


...depend on "the grid" - the whole grid, ...

For those so inclined, or sufficiently incensed, just disconnect. No more dependence. Simple.

And to no one in particular, I'm intrigued by the safety aspects of CA's mega-micro-distribution ('mega'? sources of 'micro'? capacity). If the owner of the distribution system needs to maintain their wires & poles, that the PV-owner is just barely using to distribute their excess production, and which maintenance is, as some have said, so desperately necessary, how do they de-energize them? Do they politely call all of the PV providers (thousands? - and everyone answers the phone, of course) and ask them to pull the main breaker? Can they ID these providers, and remotely open the circuit at the meter base? Or, do the service crews just have to work the system hot? ...Maybe wait for a really cloudy day??

Note to self: scratch 2nd career as CA lineman from bucket list.

And I wonder what it costs to keep 2 or a dozen 500MW (average-sized) combined cycle gas fired power plants on hot standby*? You know.... For when a big cloud drifts by, or the sun so rudely dips below the horizon, during the turkey-cooking-big-game-on-the-TV-existentially-hot-out-AC-on-max-forest-fire-fleeing-havin-a-baby-gotta-go-to-ER-but-EV-is-dead kinda day. Sorta makes $30/mo look cheap, I bet.

*-Let's ignore construction costs.

[Jim Becker]

Alan, if you do consider batteries, look at the Generac solution. Also, I believe that Tesla recently changed their policies and their battery solution can only be had if you also have their solar solution. (I don't know who did your solar) I was considering solar for here at our new property, but have decided to just go with a whole house backup generator because I don't believe we will be living here long enough to justify the added cost of using solar for backup...it's three to four times the cost of the generator.

[Alan Lightstone]

Alan, if you do consider batteries, look at the Generac solution. Also, I believe that Tesla recently changed their policies and their battery solution can only be had if you also have their solar solution. (I don't know who did your solar) I was considering solar for here at our new property, but have decided to just go with a whole house backup generator because I don't believe we will be living here long enough to justify the added cost of using solar for backup...it's three to four times the cost of the generator.

I had heard that about Tesla Energy also, but my solar installer said that wasn't an issue, FWIW..

I had briefly looked at the Generac solution a while ago. I think it didn't have the capacity I needed, or was much more expensive for that capacity. But that was a while ago.

Already having a propane tank in the house, I could spend $15K on a whole house propane generator, or spend an equivalent amount of money (or a little more) to power about half of my needs every night and have backup for a hurricane. The economics of this never justify themselves. It will never pay for itself with the utility only paying me $0.0325/kWh.

I just can't pull the trigger on a propane generator that may never be used, or once every 10 years in a hurricane. I'd rather it be a battery solution, and would definitely seriously consider that if/when the utilities in Florida succeed in getting rid of net billing.

[Jim Becker]

The current Generac battery solution is honestly more technically attractive and a lot more modular than the Tesla PowerWall. It really is worthy of your consideration, IMHO, and what I would have used had the decision been different here. Professor Dr SWMBO and I really would prefer the battery solution tied to solar because of our personal views. But $13K for the generator compared to about $45 K for the solar and battery solution (after incentives) is too big of a gap for a property that may only be ours for 10-15 years, especially given we "took it in the shorts" financially selling our previous property. (Yes, the RE market is hot, in general, but not so much for unique properties)

[Malcolm Schweizer]

I went with solar, and I said when I did that it would only be a matter of time before they started charging minimum fees. My utility did have a small one, but I strongly expected it to go up within a few years as more and more people went solar.

[Bill Dufour]

I understood the Tesla solar thing is they no longer sell just the solar. You must buy their battery as well.
Bill D

[Alan Lightstone]

The current Generac battery solution is honestly more technically attractive and a lot more modular than the Tesla PowerWall. It really is worthy of your consideration, IMHO, and what I would have used had the decision been different here. Professor Dr SWMBO and I really would prefer the battery solution tied to solar because of our personal views. But $13K for the generator compared to about $45 K for the solar and battery solution (after incentives) is too big of a gap for a property that may only be ours for 10-15 years, especially given we "took it in the shorts" financially selling our previous property. (Yes, the RE market is hot, in general, but not so much for unique properties)

Looking at the Generac specs. Have to dive in them for a while, but two can be bundled together with 6 batteries in each to produce 36kWh. Interesting that they offer them with either Nickel Manganese Cobalt batteries or with Lithium Nickel Manganese Cobalt batteries. Or that's perhaps a typo.

Of course each module weighs 459# with 6 batteries in it. :eek:

Installers much just love that.

That is the first one that I've seen that can scale up that high, outside of Tesla Powerwalls.

I wonder what the comparable costs are...

Plus I just looked at my average energy usage. Over the last 3 years I used an average of 110kWh of energy per day. Ah, South Florida... So assuming that my panels produce the average of 125 kWh per day (which they did over the past 3 years), how would this work at night if I wanted the panels to power the house during sunlight as well as charge the batteries, and discharge at night feeding the house and potentially needing no energy from the grid.

Could the Generac or Tesla do that? I really don't know the energy usage day vs night in my house, but lets assume it's 60% daytime, and 40% nighttime. So I would need 44 kWh of battery capacity (somewhat more, considering they won't totally discharge) to totally power the house at night. I'm not aware of any battery system that can do that. The Generac comes close, and on winter days would easily accomplish this. But on those hot summer Florida days - no way.

And as far as charging the batteries fully during sunlight and power the house. I would need 66kWh of solar production to cover daytime electricity usage and an additional 44kWh of solar production to charge the batteries for nighttime electric usage. There are a number of days where that could occur, but throw in a cloudy day, or afternoon showers which happen almost daily here in the summer - no way.

So at least in my house, going totally off grid really won't work. Unless I'm missing something. And the cost of the battery system would be astronomical.

[Jim Koepke]

The utilities in Florida tried 2 years ago to pass a statewide constitutional amendment to end net metering. Rumor was they spent $7 million on their ad campaigns. Much to my amazement, it didn't pass. But I have no doubt they'll try again.

Most likely the rate payers ended up paying for the ad campaign.

Most likely they will keep putting the statewide constitutional amendment on the ballot until the voters "get it right."

Every state has its own state utility commission that tends to dance to the tune of states politicians who dance to the tune of those who have the most money to give to politicians.

An investment manager once said, “The main problem with moving to Florida is you have to live in Florida.” That can be said about the unseemly underbelly of every state that is run by politicians who are run by money.

jtk

[Alan Lightstone]

That can be said about the unseemly underbelly of every state that is run by politicians who are run by money.

jtk

That can be said of any state I have lived in. Both Northeast, Midwest, and South. :(

[Mike Henderson]

Looking at the Generac specs. Have to dive in them for a while, but two can be bundled together with 6 batteries in each to produce 36kWh. Interesting that they offer them with either Nickel Manganese Cobalt batteries or with Lithium Nickel Manganese Cobalt batteries. Or that's perhaps a typo.

Of course each module weighs 459# with 6 batteries in it. :eek:

Installers much just love that.

That is the first one that I've seen that can scale up that high, outside of Tesla Powerwalls.

I wonder what the comparable costs are...

Plus I just looked at my average energy usage. Over the last 3 years I used an average of 110kWh of energy per day. Ah, South Florida... So assuming that my panels produce the average of 125 kWh per day (which they did over the past 3 years), how would this work at night if I wanted the panels to power the house during sunlight as well as charge the batteries, and discharge at night feeding the house and potentially needing no energy from the grid.

Could the Generac or Tesla do that? I really don't know the energy usage day vs night in my house, but lets assume it's 60% daytime, and 40% nighttime. So I would need 44 kWh of battery capacity (somewhat more, considering they won't totally discharge) to totally power the house at night. I'm not aware of any battery system that can do that. The Generac comes close, and on winter days would easily accomplish this. But on those hot summer Florida days - no way.

And as far as charging the batteries fully during sunlight and power the house. I would need 66kWh of solar production to cover daytime electricity usage and an additional 44kWh of solar production to charge the batteries for nighttime electric usage. There are a number of days where that could occur, but throw in a cloudy day, or afternoon showers which happen almost daily here in the summer - no way.

So at least in my house, going totally off grid really won't work. Unless I'm missing something. And the cost of the battery system would be astronomical.

I think you'd have to install a backup generator to the batteries and use that when the batteries are depleted. If you go with a natural gas generator, the fuel cost is not too high.

But the installed cost of a battery system plus a generator backup would be high. You'd probably only do that if you had no access to the grid. Almost any monthly grid charge would probably be cheaper.

Mike

[Mike Henderson]

And to no one in particular, I'm intrigued by the safety aspects of CA's mega-micro-distribution ('mega'? sources of 'micro'? capacity). If the owner of the distribution system needs to maintain their wires & poles, that the PV-owner is just barely using to distribute their excess production, and which maintenance is, as some have said, so desperately necessary, how do they de-energize them? Do they politely call all of the PV providers (thousands? - and everyone answers the phone, of course) and ask them to pull the main breaker? Can they ID these providers, and remotely open the circuit at the meter base? Or, do the service crews just have to work the system hot? ...Maybe wait for a really cloudy day??



Solar systems are designed to disconnect automatically when there is no voltage from the feed to the house.

If the grid is energized, the line workers do their work hot. I've watched a lot of installations of new power poles. They do that on 44kV lines with the lines energized. Scares the heck out of me.

Mike

[Keith Outten]

Earlier someone mentioned regulatory agencies that govern power production. When I left Virginia Power in 1983 we had 128 regulatory agencies to satisfy over our nuclear, coal, gas and hydro/pumped storage power plants. It's a nightmare on steroids dealing with so many organizations with so many politicians in the mix. I worked for the Multiple Power Plant (MPP) group. We were responsible for all construction and repair of power plant facilities. It wasn't uncommon for me to leave a nuclear station and report to a coal burner or have to jump back and forth depending on manpower requirements. Everyone in our group had a "Home Station" but we all traveled when it was necessary. Our annual budget included the contracts for all of our contractors and it was staggering what it costs to maintain our state wide power production system and build new power plants.

I know this from personal experience. The most powerful person in any state is not the governor or even the state legislature, its the president of your power company. He tells the governor how its going to be and there isn't any discussion. If private solar installations become a problem for the power company it won't be one for long.

[Malcolm McLeod]

Solar systems are designed to disconnect automatically when there is no voltage from the feed to the house.

If the grid is energized, the line workers do their work hot. I've watched a lot of installations of new power poles. They do that on 44kV lines with the lines energized. Scares the heck out of me.

Mike

Good to know.

I had (college) summer job(s) with a rural electric co-op, predating any PV installs, so too familiar with the basic pre-PV risks. Obviously, as pervasive and necessary as electrical power is to modern life, providers try to minimize outages. But some work just requires turning things off - large area or small - no way around it; easy to isolate the 'trunk' from feeding a 'branch'; not so easy if every 'leaf' feeds the branch.

(We can federalize the grid, then it will be free :: Tesla's dream fulfilled.);)

[Jim Becker]

Alan, watch the Generac installation video(s) on the 'Tube...the weight isn't a factor because each of the up to six batteries is installed one at a time and that doesn't happen until the cabinet is placed and secured. ;) If I went that route, it would have been two battery setups (either two Tesla PowerWalls or two Generac battery setups fully loaded) to cover our backup needs. BTW, relative to the transfer switch, the Generac auto transfer switch used with their solar setup is "very similar" to the excellent whole house auto transfer switch that has been part of generator installations for some time now. It can even support both solar/battery and generator for those folks out there that want a power company connection but otherwise want/need to be "off grid" for longer periods of time during an outage.

[Alan Lightstone]

I think you'd have to install a backup generator to the batteries and use that when the batteries are depleted. If you go with a natural gas generator, the fuel cost is not too high.

But the installed cost of a battery system plus a generator backup would be high. You'd probably only do that if you had no access to the grid. Almost any monthly grid charge would probably be cheaper.

Mike

I agree. It's crazy economically to do this.

[Alan Lightstone]

Solar systems are designed to disconnect automatically when there is no voltage from the feed to the house.

If the grid is energized, the line workers do their work hot. I've watched a lot of installations of new power poles. They do that on 44kV lines with the lines energized. Scares the heck out of me.

Mike

I realize that. They call it "islanding". But, of course, a cheap contactor would eliminate the danger. In fact, two were installed on my system by the solar installers. So it really shouldn't be an issue, but they make it one.

That thought scares the heck out of me too. Having see a couple of severe electrocution patients in my career, the burns are devastating. Assuming you survive the initial shock.

[Alan Lightstone]

Alan, watch the Generac installation video(s) on the 'Tube...the weight isn't a factor because each of the up to six batteries is installed one at a time and that doesn't happen until the cabinet is placed and secured. ;) If I went that route, it would have been two battery setups (either two Tesla PowerWalls or two Generac battery setups fully loaded) to cover our backup needs. BTW, relative to the transfer switch, the Generac auto transfer switch used with their solar setup is "very similar" to the excellent whole house auto transfer switch that has been part of generator installations for some time now. It can even support both solar/battery and generator for those folks out there that want a power company connection but otherwise want/need to be "off grid" for longer periods of time during an outage.
I assumed they installed the batteries separately, Jim, but it is stunning how heavy the completed panel would be. Clearly have to be fastened properly.

I have a friend with that Generac natural gas generator in his house. Every week when it tests and runs, that switch operates flawlessly.

[Tom M King]

I know we need to do that, but the to-do list if just too long. Last month, our electricity bill was $565, and that's with a super insulated house that doesn't take much to heat. Four meters here spinning though, and that doesn't include the rental house.

[Greg Funk]

So I have a 30kWh array on the house. It provides some surplus some months, and on a few occasions we run a deficit. I don't see that as a bad thing, like I made a mistake as to sizing my array.It's a good thing you don't live in CA. It appears they are proposing to charge a monthly fee of $8/kw which would be 240/month for your system. Seems like they are trying to discourage installation of larger solar systems.

[Mike Henderson]

It's a good thing you don't live in CA. It appears they are proposing to charge a monthly fee of $8/kw which would be 240/month for your system. Seems like they are trying to discourage installation of larger solar systems.

There's a difference between the kWh of a solar array and the kW of an array. A single solar panel might be rated for 300 watts but if it has sun directly on it for 8 hours, it will produce 2400Wh or 2.4kWh.

As you stated it, the charge would be $8/kW, so each panel would be charged $2.40. Multiply that by the number of panels you have.

I haven't heard of that $8/kW charge - that seems pretty high to me.

Mike

[If Allen had a 30kW system (not 30kWh system) that would be about 100 panels. If his solar panels were rated at 250W, that would be 120 panels.]

[Alan Lightstone]

There's a difference between the kWh of a solar array and the kW of an array. A single solar panel might be rated for 300 watts but if it has sun directly on it for 8 hours, it will produce 2400Wh or 2.4kWh.

As you stated it, the charge would be $8/kW, so each panel would be charged $2.40. Multiply that by the number of panels you have.

I haven't heard of that $8/kW charge - that seems pretty high to me.

Mike

[If Allen had a 30kW system (not 30kWh system) that would be about 100 panels. If his solar panels were rated at 250W, that would be 120 panels.]
81 panels at my house, FWiW.

I had heard that thereÂ’s a proposal in California to massively charge present solar panel owners to pay for installation of panels in low income houses. Elon Musk said it was an incredibly stupid proposal and would cause a tremendous decrease in solar installations, to paraphrase.

In theory 30kW peak output here, but at most 24kW peak in practice. Record daily output was 198kWh. So not a small array, but not record setting.

[Greg Funk]

There's a difference between the kWh of a solar array and the kW of an array. A single solar panel might be rated for 300 watts but if it has sun directly on it for 8 hours, it will produce 2400Wh or 2.4kWh.

As you stated it, the charge would be $8/kW, so each panel would be charged $2.40. Multiply that by the number of panels you have.

I haven't heard of that $8/kW charge - that seems pretty high to me.

Mike

[If Allen had a 30kW system (not 30kWh system) that would be about 100 panels. If his solar panels were rated at 250W, that would be 120 panels.]I don't think they care about how many panels you have just the peak output which in this case is about 30kW. It's expensive but the electricity is also probably more expensive in CA than FL. The previous system was too generous to those who could afford solar panels and the new proposal is intended to make it more equitable. No doubt the rate of solar installations will go down but it could still be economically viable but the payback might be 10 yrs instead of 5.

[Jim Becker]

I assumed they installed the batteries separately, Jim, but it is stunning how heavy the completed panel would be. Clearly have to be fastened properly.

I have a friend with that Generac natural gas generator in his house. Every week when it tests and runs, that switch operates flawlessly.

Yes, the weekly test always worked flawlessly to insure the generator starts and runs, but it doesn't actually trigger transfer the switch because mains power is still up. I think there's a manual transfer button inside the locked transfer switch cabinet, but I don't have access to that property anymore to even look...closed on it last Friday. (Finally) I'm about to order the same system for here, although it will be propane rather than NG. NG is in the street but not to our house. The power company (handles both electric and gas) wants a super major commitment on our part to replace nearly everything within 12 mos to install the NG for free and there's still a 12-18 month backlog. Nope. Not going to do that.

[andrew whicker]

In Utah, I went to a few city council meetings while other locals put untold hours into getting our city to simply study the effects of letting our utility companies invest in solar and wind. The ultimate proposal was the utilities wanted to invest in this tech and then give customers the option to buy energy from 1) coal or 2) solar and wind. if my memory is correct, consumers would be opted into 'green', but could opt to use coal whenever they wanted. (This happened in pre-covid times, it might have been visa versa) According to science, the price of solar and wind energy would actually be less than coal by the time utilities were installed (or maybe they are already cheaper?).

Anyway, just getting our city to STUDY this took a ton of hours and resources (relatively little from me). It may not go any further than this. The idea has received a lot of pushback. The utilities were pushing for this, btw. They see the writing on the wall.

so, kind of on and off topic at the same time... It seems like the Utah mindset is just squarely against helping the environment even if it is cheaper. Seems like a slam dunk to use something cheaper and with the potential to be better for the environment vs coal.

I'm curious who draws the arbitrary line between 'unquestionably amazing' innovation and 'I'm going to try to dismantle every little aspect of this tech to prove I'm right' innovation.

[Jim Koepke]

I'm curious who draws the arbitrary line between 'unquestionably amazing' innovation and 'I'm going to try to dismantle every little aspect of this tech to prove I'm right' innovation.

"Those who can make people believe absurdities can cause them to commit atrocities," is often attributed to Voltaire. There is no record of him ever expressing this. It does seem to be true in many ways and may be applicable to your curiosity about the arbitrary line.

jtk

[Kev Williams]

"Those who can make people believe absurdities can cause them to commit atrocities," is often attributed to Voltaire.
...Don't really care who said it, but the déjà vu is dripping off my monitor...;)

--might not fit the topic of 'utilities', but 'dirtballs'-- slam dunk...

[Bill Dufour]

San Francisco California has a program to help pay for poor folks to install solar panels. the city is well known for fog. They will not pay to let you install them in the Mojave desert which is only a few hundred miles away. Well within the distance that electricity is shipped from.
Bill D

[Myk Rian]

I'm trying to think of when California did something that actually made sense.

[Lawrence Duckworth]

Our city council says blue fire trucks never crash so they want to repaint all the fire trucks baby blue. critics are saying painting them blue is political.....

[Mike Henderson]

San Francisco California has a program to help pay for poor folks to install solar panels. the city is well known for fog. They will not pay to let you install them in the Mojave desert which is only a few hundred miles away. Well within the distance that electricity is shipped from.
Bill D

Well, San Francisco is a city and the programs they institute are generally intended to help their residents. Installation of solar on the house of a less fortunate family is intended to help that family reduce their electricity bills.

Seems to me that the governing body of the Mojave should do a similar program for their poorer residents. They could help them reduce their electric bills and the power company could sell the power to San Francisco. it would be win-win.

Mike

[Jim Becker]

Focusing back on Florida, there's an article on CNN.com "as we speak" about the situation down there in the sunny state. It talks a lot about a subject we can't discuss here, but is a good read relative to what's driving things and the potential impact. Apparently, Nevada tried the same thing a few years ago and had to, um...revert...two years later. It really makes me sad to see these things happen, particularly when big business needs/desires overrule folks trying to keep the world livable.

[Jim Koepke]

Our city council says blue fire trucks never crash so they want to repaint all the fire trucks baby blue. critics are saying painting them blue is political.....

How many blue fire trucks do they have in their sample?

The number of departments with blue fire trucks could be a factor as well as the localities response to lights and sirens. I've been in areas where I was the only one to pull over for lights or sirens. In some places idiots seem to think the lights and sirens are a challenge to a race.

jtk

[Rollie Meyers]

Without getting into the specifics of how a particular utility does business... there's a little more to it than them just re-selling what you are 'giving' them. O&M costs on lines - particularly distribution systems, as someone noted above - are considerable. Some of that isn't just the cost of the copper wire between you and wherever the electrons eventually end up; it's maintaining all the protective devices that keep you, the supplier, and the customer, safe from shenanigans on either end of the line. Some of it's federally mandated requirements to maintain a certain amount of reserve power available, simply in the event that there is a large grid fluctuation, ready to help recover the system voltage and frequency. While on the one hand, it would seem like customer sell-back power would be a great booster for that reserve requirement... I have some serious doubts about it's viability in a practical sense. Solar (and wind, and most 'renewables' other than large scale hydro) pretty much sucks at providing grid stability. Kinda need stuff with 'big iron' behind it somewhere in the system to provide that kind of resilience.

Add to that that the utility has no idea - and no control - over how much you might be supplying at any point in time, or how reliable your system actually is or isn't... it doesn't surprise me that they put such a low $$$ value on your power. Power prices can fluctuate wildly throughout the day, dependent on all manner of things. Supplying them with 'extra' power that they don't really need just means they have to jump through hoops to keep it from adversely affecting things. Most of the time they've already bought and paid for their expected power needs on long-term contracts at bulk rates which are very, very cheap.

Why would they pay you a premium for your excess, simply because you couldn't calculate your power needs better and need to get rid of it?

Spoiler: yes, I do work 'in the industry', albeit about as far away from Florida as you can get and still be in 'CONUS' aka WA state, and no, I don't work in retail/distribution (any more) - I'm in the (hydro) generation side of things.

Just a little note, utilities use very little copper wire in their distribution system, aluminum alloy conductors are the conductor of choice, copper is much more costly, weighs a lot more then AL, and theft would be a major concern, but a lot of them would be Darwin Award statistics when they did their thievery.

[Kev Williams]

Our city council says blue fire trucks never crash so they want to repaint all the fire trucks baby blue....
LOL... purple police cars never seem to crash either, so... ;)

So, just how many blue fire trucks ARE there? Google can only find a blue fire truck in Montgomery (AL?), Swampscott MA and Chapel Hill NC. Most people own more cars than that... :D

[Bill Dufour]

Many cities went to yellow fire trucks when a study said that was the most visable color. Many departments went back to traditional red because they have so many lights the paint color does not matter much, they claim.
Caltrans pickups used to be Yellow/orange for visibility. Group buys with county city trucks for a custom color. They dropped it and went to white since it was. a standard color and no extra $500 paint fee per vehicle.
Bill D

[Tom M King]

Chapel Hill should not be included in any study of blue fire trucks. Carolina Blue is like camouflage there.

[Lawrence Duckworth]

LOL... purple police cars never seem to crash either, so... ;)

So, just how many blue fire trucks ARE there? Google can only find a blue fire truck in Montgomery (AL?), Swampscott MA and Chapel Hill NC. Most people own more cars than that... :D


The second half of my joke is just as dumb and funny as the first half.... :) Florida went with the lime green fire trucks

[Bill Dufour]

The blue meanies of Alameda county sheriff have black and white cars.
Bill D

[Jim Koepke]

The blue meanies of Alameda county sheriff have black and white cars.
Bill D

In Oregon and Washington many of the patrol cars are stealth. The banner stripe with 'POLICE' on it is often in a satin clear coat. It can not be seen unless the light is hitting it at an opportune angle. The cars are technically marked, it is just dang near invisible marking.

Of course there are clearly marked black and white vehicles. It is the ones you don't notice that all of a sudden light up like it's Christmas.

If you are familiar with Jane's Fighting Ships and other such books, you might agree there would be a market for a book on spotting law enforcement vehicles in various cities, counties and states.

jtk

[Jack Frederick]

There was another column in the NYT yesterday on the CA utility solar battle. I will have a minimum connect charge of $56/mo or $672/yr. Estimates are that it would reduce roof top solar installs by as much as 80%. Hawaii and Nevada made these changes in rebate structure but due to the uproar reversed their position. At $672/ yr I will look into batteries.

[Mike Henderson]

There was another column in the NYT yesterday on the CA utility solar battle. I will have a minimum connect charge of $56/mo or $672/yr. Estimates are that it would reduce roof top solar installs by as much as 80%. Hawaii and Nevada made these changes in rebate structure but due to the uproar reversed their position. At $672/ yr I will look into batteries.

I haven't seen anything that would indicate that installing a battery would reduce the monthly "grid tax" charge. Installing a battery would reduce the amount of power you send to the grid because you'd store your excess during daylight and use it at night so you'd essentially get no credit from the power company. The power company would benefit because they wouldn't have to deal with an excess of power during the middle of the day (and they wouldn't have to pay you anything).

That looks like a real negative for the homeowner - you have to pay quite a bit for the batteries, you no longer get any credit for power fed to the grid, AND you have to pay a monthly "grid tax" based on the installed kW of your solar array. I don't see ANY advantage for the homeowner in this situation. It would certainly kill home solar.

And installing a battery doesn't mean you can go "off-grid" To do that you'd almost certainly have to install a backup generator because your batteries are limited. The total cost of all that would probably be prohibitive.

Mike

[Brian Elfert]

There are zero benefits to batteries if you have full retail net metering. However, batteries can have great benefit if you are only paid wholesale prices for excess production. Let's say you produce an excess of 20 KWH per day and then use 20 KWH when the sun is not shining. Your utility will give you say three cents per KWH (60 cents) for over production. They then charge you a retail rate of say 12 cents per KWH ($2.40) for power used when the sun isn't shining.

If you have batteries you won't get the 60 cents for over production, but you also won't pay the additional $1.80 for power at night. Batteries really don't make any financial sense unless you are charged really high prices for peak power and can use batteries to avoid the high peak prices.

[Jim Becker]

Brian, I agree with you relative to normal power supply, but batteries also can serve as backup power during power outages instead of a generator. That was going to be my purpose for installing solar, actually, but I can't justify the cost for the amount of time we will likely live at this address.

[Mike Henderson]

Brian, I agree with you relative to normal power supply, but batteries also can serve as backup power during power outages instead of a generator. That was going to be my purpose for installing solar, actually, but I can't justify the cost for the amount of time we will likely live at this address.

The disadvantage of batteries for use during a power failure is that they have a limited supply time, usually measured in hours. With a generator you can run as long as you have fuel. If you use natural gas and the gas is not interrupted, you can run almost indefinitely.

Of course you can put in a lot of batteries, to the point where you could go several days on them, but that could get expensive. Especially if you live in a hot climate and want to run your air conditioning.

Mike

[Brian Elfert]

I forgot about the backup aspect of batteries. Batteries are good if you get minor power interruptions measured in minutes or hours, not for outages of days or weeks. If you're worried about long term outages from a major storm, ice event, or hurricane then you will want a generator. In rare cases some have both batteries and a standby generator.

I have a whole house standby generator, but I have only had about 15 minutes of power outages since it was installed in 2015 or 2016. Luckily, I only spent about $3,000 between a used generator and a DIY install (with permits). The generator has been disabled for the past few years as the gas valve needs to be replaced. I have the valve, but I haven't figured out how to re-pipe the gas as there is no vibration isolation for the gas supply.

[Michael Schuch]

I do sympathize with you some. My residence is rural and I am fortunate to be served by a co-op. Being at the mercy of the commercial utilities is very frustrating as politicians are more interested in protecting their campaign contributions than their constituency. I would be furious if I lived in California like my sister and her family where Edison prioritizes profits over customers and institutes rolling blackouts to protect themselves from their own neglected infrastructure. Why maintain and strengthen the grid when there can be money to be made by not doing so! Just the salaries of the CEO and other high ups would make me sick! But with a captive audience what is the public going to do? They got you and they know it and this mentality saturates their entire organization. Maybe there are businesses that are actually run considerably worse than the government?

[Michael Schuch]

In Oregon and Washington many of the patrol cars are stealth. The banner stripe with 'POLICE' on it is often in a satin clear coat. It can not be seen unless the light is hitting it at an opportune angle. The cars are technically marked, it is just dang near invisible marking.

Of course there are clearly marked black and white vehicles. It is the ones you don't notice that all of a sudden light up like it's Christmas.

If you are familiar with Jane's Fighting Ships and other such books, you might agree there would be a market for a book on spotting law enforcement vehicles in various cities, counties and states.

jtk

I believe radar detectors are banned in Washington state? Fortunately they are not banned in Oregon. Central Oregon sheriffs seem pretty mellow for the most part but Salem and Portland are the exact opposite. When I lived in Texas the cops were down right criminal!

[Brian Elfert]

I am served by a CO-OP and most Co-OPs in Minnesota hate distributed solar installations because of retail net metering. The state legislature passed a law that CO-OPs can charge essentially any amount they want as a solar grid access fee. I pay about $10 per month as a grid access fee for my 10 KW solar array. Currently the fee doesn't go up once you go over 10 KW. Some CO-OPs charges as much as $80 a month for their grid access fee. (For profit utilities are not allowed to assess such a fee.)

To be clear, I am not upset by the fee. It is not fair for me to pay nothing toward maintaining the grid. I knew about the fee when I decided to do solar in 2017. Even if retail net metering went away tomorrow I would still be fine. My solar was mostly DIY and I paid cash for the system. The money is already spent and if the system never pays for itself it is what is.

[Bill Dufour]

I have the valve, but I haven't figured out how to re-pipe the gas as there is no vibration isolation for the gas supply.[/QUOTE]

I would use a corrugated metal flex connector. I suppose a hose made for NG would be okay as well but I do not know how they last outside in the sun. Put a blow out preventer upstream of the flex connector for safety.
NG is about 1/2 PSI, Propane double that pressure.
I have held my thumb over a open pipe connection while fishing around to get the valve screwed in.
Bill. D

[Jim Becker]

I forgot about the backup aspect of batteries. Batteries are good if you get minor power interruptions measured in minutes or hours, not for outages of days or weeks. If you're worried about long term outages from a major storm, ice event, or hurricane then you will want a generator. In rare cases some have both batteries and a standby generator.

The battery backup design that I had in our solar proposals would cover our normal "reasonable" usage for about three days if necessary as that was my requirement. That was by using two full Generac battery banks. If the days are sunny, that can be longer. But yes, a whole house backup generator, at least on NG like we had at the old property can run "sorta forever" and one on LP like we will have here can run until the tanks are dry. (which is coincidentally not much more than three days or so. Fortunately, the vast majority of power outages here are not long term; hours usually and sometimes a rare day or two.

[Brian Elfert]

The battery backup design that I had in our solar proposals would cover our normal "reasonable" usage for about three days if necessary as that was my requirement. That was by using two full Generac battery banks. If the days are sunny, that can be longer. But yes, a whole house backup generator, at least on NG like we had at the old property can run "sorta forever" and one on LP like we will have here can run until the tanks are dry. (which is coincidentally not much more than three days or so. Fortunately, the vast majority of power outages here are not long term; hours usually and sometimes a rare day or two.

I couldn't even imagine the cost of three days of backup power for my house with batteries. I use around 10 KWh per day of usage that is not from the sun. The 36Kwh setup from Generac appears to cost around $30,000.

[Jim Becker]

Yes, it's not inexpensive but the Federal tax benefit combined with "not buying" a generator helps balance a nice chunk of that. The proposals I was considering were all in the $35K range (after tax benefits) for both the 27-28 panels plus two full battery units and all the other associated mishegas. If I knew we were going to be here 20 years, I might have chosen to do that, but that is unlikely due to our ages. So just a generator got the nod.

[Alan Lightstone]

I couldn't even imagine the cost of three days of backup power for my house with batteries. I use around 10 KWh per day of usage that is not from the sun. The 36Kwh setup from Generac appears to cost around $30,000.

If my spreadsheet is right, we use on average 108 kWh per day. Ah, welcome to sunny Florida. I can't imagine the cost of 3 days of battery backup. Although, we did have the breakers switched on the panels so that only one panel was needed during a power outage. Living in hurricane country for the last 25 years, you realize that what you need to survive without power after a hurricane is one room of HVAC, a working refrigerator and freezer combo, a working rangetop, and lights for that area.
In my house that would involve one floor of power. So lets say 54kWh per day. If it was sunny after the hurricane (which usually happens), and the solar panels produce about approximately 114 kWh during sunlight, that should easily be able to recharge the batteries and power the house all day (unless we start using stupid amounts of energy). But it's really about nighttime energy usage. And if its rainy/cloudy even more battery capacity would be needed.

So a minimum of 50kWh of storage, likely 100kWh. I can't even imagine, if possible, what that would cost.