Here's the problem with net metering as I see it:
Today, the simplistic net metering rules which were enacted basically
require the utility company to take energy from you, "store it" somehow,
and then return it to you at no cost to you. So the utility company is
stuck with footing the bill for maintaining the line to you and all the
infrastructure needed to fulfill your needs when the sun isn't down.
This just doesn't seem fare, and yes, it drives the cost up for all of
the 'solar have-nots'.
On the other hand, some of the stuff the utility companies are trying to
get away with is also highway robbery. Buying at wholesale rates from
customers and selling it back to them at retail seems unfair. Charging
"capacity fees" seems bad as well. The really irritating thing is the
utilities who are starting to charge a 'solar used on the premises'
charge which basically means if you are using solar to reduce your grid
energy consumption and not selling excess back to the grid, they'll
still charge you for being tied to the grid based on how much capacity
you have.
The quicker that the energy companies figure out that they are not only
energy providers, but that they should be energy storage companies as
well the better. That way, you could have a 'buy energy from the
energy company' rate, and a 'store energy for me rate'. And none of
this crap they're trying to pull right now. If you don't want to have
the utility company store it for you at whatever rate they're charging,
then you go buy a powerwall and then only buy energy from the utility
company when you need a bit here or there (subject to a meter minimum or
similar).
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Robert Andrews <i...@avantwireless.com
<mailto:i...@avantwireless.com>> wrote:
What really sucks about this deal is that they claim that they do
this so rich people who can afford solar are still contributing to
the cost of maintaining the grid instead of transferring that burden
to poor people. Cry me a fkn river... They kind of neglect that
they are making up more than 20% line loss from solar plants
distributing source power closer to the loads. This is a YUGE
savings off losses that they don't get compensated for and goes
straight into their pockets. Fuel savings, build savings, wear and
tear savings... They are a bunch of thieves looking in our pockets
for their next golden parachute..
On 02/07/2017 08:55 AM, Harold Bledsoe wrote:
Apologies to Eric for hijacking his thread...
It does suck and the logic is flawed. Do they charge more
for folks
that switched to LED bulbs? No. Do they charge more for
folks that
have smaller houses, better insulation, or choose not to run
the AC
sometimes? No.
If I had more free time I'd stand up for the principle but at
the
moment, islanding will just have to do. :-) I suppose I could
try to
summon the reddit but I do still need electricity for now.
-Hal
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 11:31 AM Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com
<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>
<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>>> wrote:
I have 10 kW so it would be an extra $70... that sucks.
Yeah, I would be buying batts and inverters too.
*From:* Harold Bledsoe
*Sent:* Tuesday, February 07, 2017 9:24 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Particularly good recent battery
deals?
When we first did it, we had to pay a $5/mo "administrative"
fee for
having net metering. Effective Jan 1, they charge an
additional
$7/kw of installed capacity to offset the lower power usage.
I think this new charge literally effects only 1 of their
customers. I believe their fear is that things like Tesla
powerwall
will take off and they won't be able to afford their current
lifestyle. ;-)
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 9:32 AM Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com
<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
I pay 8.50/month. Flat rate.
So you are getting a demand charge added?
*From:* Harold Bledsoe
*Sent:* Monday, February 06, 2017 5:37 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Particularly good recent battery
deals?
Agreed!
I'm going to pull the trigger and try the forklift
batteries.
Supposedly they will last 3-5x longer than regular deep
cycle
golf cart batteries. I'll let you guys know in 10-15
years.
My motivation is that my home grid tied system saves too
much
power so the power company added a net meter fee of
$7/kw/mo to
make up the difference.
Alrighty then, guess I'll take half my house off
grid. :-)
Hal
On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 1:27 PM Eric Kuhnke
<eric.kuh...@gmail.com <mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>>
wrote:
Anything rated in CCA (cold cranking amps) is not
suitable
for cyclic solar/wind power applications. If the
manufacturer hasn't clearly specified Ah capacity in
a table
at 5, 10, 20 hour rates it's not designed for
repeated
discharge.
On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 5:01 AM, Harold Bledsoe
<hbledso...@gmail.com <mailto:hbledso...@gmail.com>>
wrote:
Beware of deep cycle marine batteries. These
typically
are not true deep cycle batteries. At 50%
depth of
discharge, you can expect around 300 cycles (or
1 year
if doing it daily). A true deep cycle battery
will do
about 3x that number.
On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 9:00 PM Keefe John
<keefe...@ethoplex.com
<mailto:keefe...@ethoplex.com>> wrote:
Exide has a 105 AH battery for $81
http://www.menards.com/main/electrical/batteries-battery-chargers/automotive-lead-acid-batteries/exide-regng-27-12-month-nautilus-marine-deep-cycle-battery/p-1444430136307-c-9100.htm?tid=-3310133469912273928
<http://www.menards.com/main/electrical/batteries-battery-chargers/automotive-lead-acid-batteries/exide-regng-27-12-month-nautilus-marine-deep-cycle-battery/p-1444430136307-c-9100.htm?tid=-3310133469912273928>
On February 5, 2017 4:55:55 PM CST, Eric
Kuhnke
<eric.kuh...@gmail.com
<mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Found this, sunelec.com
<http://sunelec.com> <http://sunelec.com>
(big solar equipment dealer for off
grid) is
selling the 106Ah version of these for
$185 a
piece plus pallet shipping:
http://www.outbackpower.com/downloads/documents/Store_the_Energy/energycell_re_top_terminal/energycellREtopterminal_specsheet.pdf
<http://www.outbackpower.com/downloads/documents/Store_the_Energy/energycell_re_top_terminal/energycellREtopterminal_specsheet.pdf>
Outback, as far as I know, doesn't
actually have
a battery factory. But they are a fairly
large
company so they are relabeling somebody
else's
deep cycle off grid design AGM battery.
In terms
of $/Wh stored the only thing that beats
it is
the 6V 225Ah wet cell batteries from
Trojan.
On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 6:00 AM, Harold
Bledsoe
<hbledso...@gmail.com
<mailto:hbledso...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I can across an interesting tip /
option -
Have you considered going with
forklift
batteries? They are flooded lead
acid
however I'm reading that they can
last 3x
longer than golf cart batteries
in PV
applications.
http://gbindustrialbattery.com/Forklift_Battery_Sizes_and_Specifications_Zone15.html
<http://gbindustrialbattery.com/Forklift_Battery_Sizes_and_Specifications_Zone15.html>
I guess the weight is a downside.
Just make
sure the whole family eats their
Wheaties on
moving day. :-)
Hal
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 7:11 PM Eric
Kuhnke
<eric.kuh...@gmail.com
<mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Looking for a bunch of 12V 100Ah
AGM top
terminal batteries for off
grid PV.
Wondering if anyone has recently
got a
particularly good deal for
something
like the Trojan T31 or similar.
--
Harold Bledsoe
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail.
Please
excuse my brevity.
--
Harold Bledsoe
--
Harold Bledsoe
--
*Forrest Christian* /CEO//, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc./
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com
<mailto:forre...@imach.com> | http://www.packetflux.com
<http://www.packetflux.com/>
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian>
<http://facebook.com/packetflux> <http://twitter.com/@packetflux>
