They're Frustrated with Power Utilities - So They're Leaving the Grid Altogether (msn.com) 239
Power blackouts and rising electricity costs have inspired "a small but growing number of Californians" to leave the power grid altogether for their own home-generated energy, reports the New York Times.
And thanks to "a stunning drop" in the cost of solar panels and batteries, "Some homeowners who have built new, off-grid homes say they have even saved money because their systems were cheaper than securing a new utility connection...." Nobody is quite sure how many off-grid homes there are but local officials and real estate agents said there were dozens here in Nevada County, a picturesque part of the Sierra Nevada range between Sacramento and Lake Tahoe. Some energy experts say that millions of people could eventually go off the grid as costs drop....
People going off the grid argue that utilities are not moving fast enough to address climate change and are causing other problems. In Northern California, Pacific Gas & Electric's safety record has alienated many residents. The company's equipment caused the 2018 Camp Fire, which killed dozens and destroyed the town of Paradise, about 70 miles north of Nevada City. The utility's effort to prevent fires by cutting off power to homes and businesses has also angered people. One of those residents is Alan Savage, a real estate agent in Grass Valley, who bought an off-grid home six years ago and has sold hundreds of such properties. He said he never loses power, unlike PG&E customers. "I don't think I'll ever go back to being on the grid," Mr. Savage said.
For people like him, it is not enough to take the approach favored by most homeowners with solar panels and batteries. Those homeowners use their systems to supplement the electricity they get from the grid, provide emergency backup power and sell excess energy to the grid.
The appeal of off-grid homes has grown in part because utilities have become less reliable. As natural disasters linked to climate change have increased, there have been more extended blackouts in California, Texas, Louisiana and other states.... Installing off-grid solar and battery systems is expensive, but once the systems are up and running, they typically require modest maintenance and homeowners no longer have an electric bill. RMI, a research organization formerly known as the Rocky Mountain Institute, has projected that by 2031 most California homeowners will save money by going off the grid as solar and battery costs fall and utility rates increase. That phenomenon will increasingly play out in less sunny regions like the Northeast over the following decades, the group forecasts....
Some energy experts worry that people who are going off the grid could unwittingly hurt efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. That is because the excess electricity that rooftop solar panels produce will no longer reach the grid, where it can replace power from coal or natural gas plants. "We don't need everybody to cut the cord and go it alone," said Mark Dyson, senior principal with the carbon-free electricity unit of RMI.... Scott Aaronson, a senior vice president for security and preparedness at the Edison Electric Institute, a utility industry trade group, said that while off-grid living might appeal to some, it was "like having a computer not connected to the internet.... You're getting some value but you're not part of a greater whole," he said. "When something goes wrong, that's wholly on you...."
Off-grid systems are particularly attractive to people building new homes. That's because installing a 125- to 300-foot overhead power line to a new home costs about $20,000, according to the California Public Utilities Commission. In places where lines have to be buried, installation runs about $78,000 for 100 feet.
The article ends by pointing out that off-the-grid residents will soon also have a handy alternative to the giant electric batteries that store the excess energy from their solar panels: electric cars like the Ford F-150 Lightning and the Hyundai Ioniq 5.
And thanks to "a stunning drop" in the cost of solar panels and batteries, "Some homeowners who have built new, off-grid homes say they have even saved money because their systems were cheaper than securing a new utility connection...." Nobody is quite sure how many off-grid homes there are but local officials and real estate agents said there were dozens here in Nevada County, a picturesque part of the Sierra Nevada range between Sacramento and Lake Tahoe. Some energy experts say that millions of people could eventually go off the grid as costs drop....
People going off the grid argue that utilities are not moving fast enough to address climate change and are causing other problems. In Northern California, Pacific Gas & Electric's safety record has alienated many residents. The company's equipment caused the 2018 Camp Fire, which killed dozens and destroyed the town of Paradise, about 70 miles north of Nevada City. The utility's effort to prevent fires by cutting off power to homes and businesses has also angered people. One of those residents is Alan Savage, a real estate agent in Grass Valley, who bought an off-grid home six years ago and has sold hundreds of such properties. He said he never loses power, unlike PG&E customers. "I don't think I'll ever go back to being on the grid," Mr. Savage said.
For people like him, it is not enough to take the approach favored by most homeowners with solar panels and batteries. Those homeowners use their systems to supplement the electricity they get from the grid, provide emergency backup power and sell excess energy to the grid.
The appeal of off-grid homes has grown in part because utilities have become less reliable. As natural disasters linked to climate change have increased, there have been more extended blackouts in California, Texas, Louisiana and other states.... Installing off-grid solar and battery systems is expensive, but once the systems are up and running, they typically require modest maintenance and homeowners no longer have an electric bill. RMI, a research organization formerly known as the Rocky Mountain Institute, has projected that by 2031 most California homeowners will save money by going off the grid as solar and battery costs fall and utility rates increase. That phenomenon will increasingly play out in less sunny regions like the Northeast over the following decades, the group forecasts....
Some energy experts worry that people who are going off the grid could unwittingly hurt efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. That is because the excess electricity that rooftop solar panels produce will no longer reach the grid, where it can replace power from coal or natural gas plants. "We don't need everybody to cut the cord and go it alone," said Mark Dyson, senior principal with the carbon-free electricity unit of RMI.... Scott Aaronson, a senior vice president for security and preparedness at the Edison Electric Institute, a utility industry trade group, said that while off-grid living might appeal to some, it was "like having a computer not connected to the internet.... You're getting some value but you're not part of a greater whole," he said. "When something goes wrong, that's wholly on you...."
Off-grid systems are particularly attractive to people building new homes. That's because installing a 125- to 300-foot overhead power line to a new home costs about $20,000, according to the California Public Utilities Commission. In places where lines have to be buried, installation runs about $78,000 for 100 feet.
The article ends by pointing out that off-the-grid residents will soon also have a handy alternative to the giant electric batteries that store the excess energy from their solar panels: electric cars like the Ford F-150 Lightning and the Hyundai Ioniq 5.
Don't worry, Mr. D.yson (Score:2)
If the market wants to get its hands on that surplus electricity from off-grid homes, it will pay for it.
For example an electricity company could pay for the utility lines to make it happen.
Frankly it's about bloody time these dinosaurc got detoothed and pulled into the 21st century.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If the market wants to get its hands on that surplus electricity from off-grid homes, it will pay for it.
The problem is that "the market", as so often, is a government construction. In this case, instead of either consumers being allowed to trade directly or alternatively the government taking responsibility for ensuring there's a sensible set of infrastructure, a bunch of private companies have been put in a joint-monopoly situation where they control market access but are deregulated enough that they can more or less do as they want.
It suits the companies to maintain their monopoly situation so they definite
Re: (Score:2)
...it's about bloody time these dinosaurc got detoothed and pulled into the 21st century.
*Clickbait headline highlights 0.000001% change in demand.*
In the big picture someone farted in the same building, as Greed.
We can hope, but not quite that hard.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, it's a really small change, and they're reporting on a restricted market. But it actually is a real change, and it may be a lot larger than they're reporting, because their reported (in the summary) method of collecting data is, frankly, anecdotal.
That said, if people are, indeed, saving money then one can expect the trend to grow. Actually, one can expect the trend to grow anyway, even at "not quite breaking even", because one of the payoffs is not having to deal with paying the bill every month or
Re: (Score:2)
If the market wants to get its hands on that surplus electricity from off-grid homes, it will pay for it.
For example an electricity company could pay for the utility lines to make it happen.
Frankly it's about bloody time these dinosaurc got detoothed and pulled into the 21st century.
Most utilities would be happy not to have them connected so they don't have to worry about them messing with grid stability if enough come on line; as well as pay more for their power than other generation sources as is sometimes mandated by the rate rules. Integrating them into the grid on a large scale basis would mean having a control system that makes homes 100% interruptible, something that would probably be politically diffiult and a PR problem teh first time a home gets disconnected and something bad
Not unlike giant propane tanks (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you have solar, you can get a battery big enough to run your house for a while that would be smaller than those tanks and can just as easily be buried as long as they're thermally suited. Heck you could have both and have a propane generator on hand just in case.
If you use solar for heating odds are you're gonna blow through that battery bank pretty fast. Heat pumps are quite efficient but a propane tank holds a whole lot of energy.
Re: (Score:2)
It's legitimate to point out that you'll need a lot more battery than you might expect. and that the battery needs to be sized to the appropriate expected usage (with a bit of spare). And that batteries are expensive. This means the costs are more than a simple direct size-for-size replacement. But if you've got sufficient space, it could quite well be a reasonable approach. My grandfather used to have a propane tank in the yard (perhaps 50 feet from other buildings). It was perhaps twice the volume of
Re: (Score:2)
Propane - 25.3MJ/L
Lithion Ion Battery ~ 2MJ/L depending on the chemistry used.
Your battery is going to need to be at least 10x as big as the propane tank to have the same capacity.
Maybe a lot more, because if the propane tank is running empty you just order some more, whereas with the battery, you need to wait for the next sunny day.
I can't make the math work here (Score:2)
Even using every incentive available to me, and pricing the absolute cheapest solar panels I can find, I can't make the math work on this. Even if I do all of the work myself, and even if I calculate in some pretty steep power cost increases - above the 10 year trend for increases - the cheapest system I can design still costs more than 30 years worth of power bills.
I see panel farms popping up all around me, but very few on houses. What I see going up are large-ish commercial operations. And I know why
Compared to connection costs... (Score:2)
If you are building a house and need to get it connected, then the costs of a grid connection can make the cost of a stand-alone, battery and solar system palatable.
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect this is only true if your new house requires several kilometers of new power line need to get strung to make your new home's electrical connection.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the current transformation capacity is fully loaded and they can't sell more power in the same "electric distribution" area (happened to a small company I worked for once, they proposed pulling a 12+km line from a less loaded transformer).
Maybe aerial lines are forbidden, so you must tunnel under a road (and around some water/sewage pipes).
Re: (Score:2)
LCOE for solar is $0.07; add battery and you have an extra $0.07 for the after-hours power. The more you can do to push your loads to solar hours the less your blended energy cost.
The challenge for being completely off-grid above latitude 30 or so is the gap between summer and winter production. You end up increasing your cost by 30-50% quickly.
House Prices? (Score:3)
Does the payback really matter? The main thing is that the panels pay themselves off within their operating life, and during that time period you have essentially prepaid your electricity and no longer care what happens to natural gas prices, the uselessness or otherwise of the grid operator, end of civil society etc. Over a 30 year period that is a lot of peace of mind.
I personally find it weird how, when house prices go up by $100's of thousands during the middle of a pandemic, everyone just shrugs, but w
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's a satisfying feeling that comes with being independent of the grid. Some might even call it smug.
But when your neighbours are throwing out the contents of their fridges and freezers due to an extended outage, and you sit on your verandah enjoying a cold beer, "smug" is the correct term.
Re: (Score:2)
and even if I calculate in some pretty steep power cost increases - above the 10 year trend for increases
My power cost increased by a factor of 3 above the 10 year trend recently, but I can't speak for California.
I think the thing you're missing is the "new" factor here. Initial provisioning of a grid connection can be insanely expensive. I know of one person where just the provisioning was more expensive than an entire off grid setup, to say nothing of the ongoing connection fee.
Re: (Score:2)
In the UK, electricity prices are currently increasing by more than 50% every six months. They are going up 54% from 1st April, and the next review after that will take place on 1st October.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but you are wrong about economic viability. I know because your own post proved it. You said "the cheapest system I can design still costs more than 30 years worth of power bills." These words proved that going solar was cheaper than power bills, because otherwise you would have said "Going solar cost me more than the power bill." If it didn't save you any money at all you would have mentioned it.
Your problem is you are pissed that the savings was too small, not that the savings did not exist.
Re: (Score:3)
I did a rough calculation right now, to verify if my last year's calculation still holds.
Last year, the cost would have paid off in 14 years. Today, it's 11 years: power bills went way up, solar panel costs (everything included) went down. Heck, I added a $2K genny to the cost in today's calculation to get 11 years. If I remove it, I'd get a wee bit over 9 years worth of power bills.
Re: (Score:2)
Some companies produce and sell "combined cycle" systems - you generate electricity and the residual heat from the thermal engine heats your house (or hot water, or ...).
Not extremely useful in the sun-kissed land of California, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Calinous observed:
Some companies produce and sell "combined cycle" systems - you generate electricity and the residual heat from the thermal engine heats your house (or hot water, or ...).
Not extremely useful in the sun-kissed land of California, though.
Actually, TFS is talking about a home in the Sierra Nevada mountains, where, depending on the altitude, it gets anywhere from cold enough to snow in the winter to butt-freezingly cold in the winter with snow up to your roof.
I speak from personal experience as the former owner of a home sited at 2100 feet above sea level, in Mariposa County ...
Re: (Score:3)
Propane generators are the shit, no more gunked up carburetors or worrying about storing gasoline long-term. It's also surprisingly easy to convert small engines.
Re: (Score:2)
I get the value of propane for small generators with little use -- as you say, you can more or less use it, put it away and then expect it to actually work the next time you haul it out (though engine oil is still an issue).
But they don't seem to be especially fuel efficient if you're going to use them with any frequency. Diesel fuel has some shelf life, especially with biocides and/or fuel polishing and the engines are more fuel efficient and have a longer life span.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How about a hybrid one?
Example: https://ks-power.de/en/ks-gaso... [ks-power.de]
How the fuck... (Score:2)
... does running overhead cable cost $66 a foot and burying it $780 a foot? Yeah, ok they might need to plant some poles or bury some conduit, but we're still talking residential conductors here. The cable is under $10 a foot, as is 3" schedule 40 PVC conduit (which you might not even need). Over $700 a foot to dig a 24" deep trench, I'm in the wrong business.
Also, according to the NEC the power company is on the hook for overhead service entrance cabling, not the customer. Buried cable costs are the cust
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
... does running overhead cable cost $66 a foot and burying it $780 a foot?
Ever done any trenching in the mountains, where the soil is full of rocks varying from pebble to boulder? It's more rock than dirt in some places.
Re: (Score:3)
You know what the most expensive part of laying anything? The hole you lay it in. Mainly in the cost of getting the right of way through the land.
When you string wires in the air in most places there are decades old laws that let power companies automatically have right away through places. These laws do not exist for burying lines. When they want to bury lines almost every foot of space has to be negotiated with someone for right of way.
Then there is the cost of research to see what is below the
Saved money? Not so simple (Score:2)
What will they do if their system breaks down?
Do they have the tools, time and money to fix things urgently?
Are the owners skilled enough to maintain their systems, and have they calculated that time and training in the costs?
They may have the skill and the tools and the time to maintain and fix it properly, but it must be included in the cost. It is far more than just the bill for the solar panels.
Re: (Score:3)
Solar panels are essentially large-scale semiconductors. There's not much to go wrong - no moving parts. They're also designed and built to sit in the hot sun for 20 years and still keep producing electrical energy. A well-designed system won't go down because 1 or 2 panels fail from hail damage. It's not all-or-nothing.
Maintenance consists of semi-regular inspections, and perhaps a wash.
Batteries come with controllers/battery management systems which look after the charge/discharge cycles, and prevent over
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
High water use in FLA batteries is caused by high C rates and/or overvoltage. They will just need more water if you're charging them near their maximums, period, but they will also go through more water if your charge voltage is excessive. These days it has become fashionable to apply much higher than recommended charge voltage to deeply discharged FLA batteries, like over 15 volts. Supposedly the studies have shown that most batteries can take the abuse without harm, but that doesn't mean they won't need m
Re: (Score:2)
What you say is what I would have expected, but you don't address the problem of "How do I get this fixed *IF* it does break down?". I accept that breakdowns are unusual and unexpected, but nothing's perfect. I somehow doubt that insurance payments would cover a quick emergency repair, but without that, e.g., medical devices would be down.
The best backup I've been able to think of quickly is to own (and keep charged) two electric cars. Switch off which one you're driving. If one of those breaks down, th
What?!?! (Score:2)
$78000 to install 100ft underground connection? How on earth???!?
Re: (Score:2)
Any number of issues, A highway or protected creek could be between point A and B, for example.
How under earth ? (Score:2)
>> How on earth???!?
You probably meant "How under earth ?"
Actual experience with off grid. (Score:2)
I live off grid, to build an off grid system, and write it off over 15 years, I get that power will cost me about $US 0.70 per kWh.
That sounds loopy, but it turns out that a modern house doesn't need much power, maybe 3 kWh per day, if your heating is provided otherwise, in my case wood and gas - for the hot water..
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For a house to have really proper insulation, it needs to have been designed with that in mind. Add on insulation is always either extremely bulky or rather poor. Possibly the best way to add on good insulation for many houses is to add a facade to all the walls (and roof).
Re: (Score:2)
I'm jealous - I'm also off-grid with PV and batteries, and wood for heating and hot water.
The daily consumption here for four adults is around 9kWh/day.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on how you live. Some people use a lot more power than others. Yes, insulation matters, but if you have a family of four that install a ton of vampire e-products (things that draw power even when not in use), your 3kwh per day is way too low.
Re: (Score:2)
I live off grid, to build an off grid system, and write it off over 15 years, I get that power will cost me about $US 0.70 per kWh.
That sounds loopy, but it turns out that a modern house doesn't need much power, maybe 3 kWh per day, if your heating is provided otherwise, in my case wood and gas - for the hot water..
That seems rather fanciful for the vast, vast majority of people. A refrigerator alone eats up most of that energy budget (at least 1.5 kWh per day).
I try to not run my AC or heat at all for a couple months each in the spring and fall (so ignoring the insutlation factor). When I do, my house's electrical usage tends to bottom out around 10-11kWh or so per day.
Refrigerator. Freezer. Dishwasher. Clothes washer/dryer. Range. Oven. Lighting (all LED, but still). TV. 4x computers. 3x cellphones. Fans. Hot water
Typical NY article about crazies in California (Score:2)
It follows the pattern enshrined in Slashdot lore:
1. Find something that does not happen within the boundaries of NYC, the further away the better. Extra bonus points for CALIFORNIA! Describe how weird and awful it is.
2. ???
3. PROFIT!!!
So how many wacky California residents have actually done this? The population of
Re: (Score:2)
If you read it with the filters you are using, that's an appropriate evaluation. I read it as reporting on a perceived trend, with explicit mention of only an anecdotal collection of data. (But this wouldn't work well in a city, or in most suburbs. The cost structure would be quite different.)
Surprised they can find a location to build. (Score:2)
Doublethink (Score:2)
In the excerpt, the authors kick things off by chanting the magic spell of "climate change":
But when you read the actual text which follows, it mentions not one single example of a natural disaster linked to climate change. The justifications for the expense of installing independent power instead are placed at the feet of extreme hook up costs (charged b
People living in a desert go solar (Score:2)
Who would have thought.
Other Things To Think About (Score:2)
My wife and I were investigating buying a house that was off the grid here in Colorado. My finance person was having an extremely difficult time finding a lender that would loan us the money, to the point that we decided to decline to continue with the purchase. The sellers had the house on the market since last January and I checked not long ago and it's still on the market.
[John]
Off-grid KISS (Score:2)
Just getting started with LED tea lights, battery hand torches and stop waisting grid electricity with every flick of the wall switch. That’s so last century. Battery lasts month ex. https://www.amazon.com/AMIR-Se... [amazon.com]
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08R... [amazon.com]
Grow your self-sufficiency and conservation from there. From emergency solar backup system. To battery backup, To car charging. To induction cooktop to grid tie solar to OFFgrid. Each is a progression in the right direction which begines with the first step
Where I live off-grid is illegal (Score:2)
If your home is not on the grid and you don't pay monthly fees to the power company even if you pull no electricity out your home can be condemned by the state.
Re: (Score:2)
Then one moves, and sends a nicely worded letter to the sate. "Hi, I'm moving to another state, taking my property taxes with me. Hopefully the utility that paid for that bit of legislation will make up the difference from it's share of the taxes. Sincerely yours, former [insert state here] property owner."
Re: (Score:2)
Once again California is ahead of the flyover shitholes they have to subsidise. That will trigger the rightards nicely.
Lol, read the text above. They were forced to do so, because their utility providers are shitty. And by disconnecting from the grid they are actually increasing carbon footprint. Being independent is only profitable in California by combination of it being very sunny and very poorly governed (enormous costs). Stated cost of a new power line is 35-40 times more expensive than in my region. I bet energy costs are enormous, too. And the sum of $78,000 for 100 feet of cable scares me - is it made of gold? No wo
Re: (Score:2)
And by disconnecting from the grid they are actually increasing carbon footprint
That part is true -- a municipal minigrid would almost certainly be more efficient (just like for example VMs on a larger server are more efficient compared to partially loaded dedicated smaller servers). But that still doesn't mean you *need* to connect to a national grid, for example.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
That doesn't increase anyones greenhouse emissions though. Yes, you will throw away some power because you can not store it, or sell it, but so what?
Sure, as long as those solar panels and batteries are created out of thin air and recycled back into thin air at their end of life. For everyone else, there was an environmental cost and greenhouse emissions.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
With a microgrid, all your panels are unproductive on a cloudy day because they are all in the same vicinity.
A national or regional grid reduces that problem. When it is cloudy in San Francisco, it is sunny in Barstow.
Re:Good (Score:4, Informative)
With a microgrid, all your panels are unproductive on a cloudy day because they are all in the same vicinity.
A national or regional grid reduces that problem. When it is cloudy in San Francisco, it is sunny in Barstow.
It's similar with wind. Although I'll note the Allegheny escarpment near me is extremely reliable 24/7 wind.
Solar panels don't completely shut down if it isn't sunny though. I live in one of the Cloudiest areas in the US, and we're still planting solar farms. They seem to be really popular around substations, and now new developments.
Despite the naysayers, this solar and wind stuff is here to stay. It's a lot easier to install panels or wind-if suitable - than build a new coal, gas, or nuc generating plant.
Re: (Score:2)
Batteries will be recycled, these aren't AA's thrown in the trash. Is the recycling process fully fledged right now? of course not. Technology will advance
Re: (Score:2)
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. It's still a lot better than most of the alternatives.
The batteries can be re-used from vehicles and other sources. There is a thriving DIY community doing just that, or you can simply buy the complete packs from China.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. It's still a lot better than most of the alternatives.
The batteries can be re-used from vehicles and other sources. There is a thriving DIY community doing just that, or you can simply buy the complete packs from China.
It's a lot better than the alternatives. The concept that producing the panels or building the wind turbines will produce more CO2 than alternative power generation is specious. Because producing anything that needs energy in it's production will release CO2.
Even the holy grail of nuc power - sorry folks - if people are wringing their hands over CO2 release producing solar panels, just imagine the CO2 released during mining and processing the or to make fuel, turning the fuel into useable form, the concr
Re: (Score:3)
The Solar panels are not used to their maximum, but are used moreso than if the same panels were placed in Alaska. Also, the batteries dont count in this tally because their use is irrelevant to the panel production. The battery sizing is considered based on the consumption at weakest production. If you overbuy on solar panels and throw some of the power away, a smaller battery or larger batter
Re: (Score:2)
Throwing some of the power away does not increase your emissions. It makes the grid slightly more emitting because they need to produce more power which may not be as green (in theory).
The swing power producer in California is gas. So the grid power is NOT green, and won't be green for at least a decade.
Overbuilding for reliable off-grid power means higher CO2 emissions elsewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
If you overbuy on solar panels and throw the power away, that means that someone else can't use it and has to buy probably gas or coal generated power from the grid instead.
Being self-sufficient may be viable for someone in a single-family home. It is less likely to be viable for someone living in an apartment, a business that uses more electricity than a typical household, an office block, a data centre, the transit network, etc. All those people could use the surplus electricity generated by single family
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. Wrong alternative. The alternative is connecting to California's grid which is about 50% emitting citation [ca.gov]. The Solar panels are not used to their maximum, but are used moreso than if the same panels were placed in Alaska.
And yet - Alaska has a growing solar panel production sector. This isn't to disagree, just noting an interesting use. During the summer, they use solar as much as possible. The whole paradigm is different - you might see a fuel tank with panels around it in a circle, because the sun pretty much describes a circle during the sunny season.
The reason is a lot of the small villages use expensive diesel power and heat production. And during the winter, it can be a serious matter if you run out of diesel fuel
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, as long as those solar panels and batteries are created out of thin air and recycled back into thin air at their end of life. For everyone else, there was an environmental cost and greenhouse emissions.
The panels will probably produce their rated output for at least ten years, will probably produce 90% of their rated output for 20-30 years, and so on. Panels frequently survive in sufficient condition to be sold to someone else. Batteries' ecological impact varies significantly depending on type. FLA batteries are actually recycled at a very low cost and typically with little pollution because the territory is so well-explored, and such a high percentage of them are recovered. The processes for efficiently
Re: (Score:3)
That doesn't increase anyones greenhouse emissions though. Yes, you will throw away some power because you can not store it, or sell it, but so what?
Sure, as long as those solar panels and batteries are created out of thin air and recycled back into thin air at their end of life. For everyone else, there was an environmental cost and greenhouse emissions.
Now tell us how these create more greenhouse gases over their lifetime.
What exactly is the greenhouse gas emissions of an installed solar panel or wind turbine? I'm certain that you can give the cites that show that a coal plant produces less emissions over it's lifetime than the lifetime of those nasty polluting solar panels.
Yes, building anything involves release of carbon - even a nuclear plant. Nuts and bolts and concrete and ore extraction and refining take energy, and will release carbon. Once
Re: (Score:2)
I have a 3000ft two-level home in CA with solar and 4 Powerwalls 2 / Plus.
I see the cost of the powerwalls but how much did the solar panels cost you? Did you install them yourself?
Re: Good (Score:3)
You could essentially use a vehicle like a cybertruck or f-150 lighting as a bucket for electric charge to make your house work pure off grid. Basically on the occasional days where the solar can't keep up you go load up on electric charge at the nearest DC fast charger and bring it back.
Re: (Score:2)
Southern California gets around 280 sunny days a year, and their peak energy needs coincide with peak need for air conditioning, so I think the overbuilding argument is pretty weak here.
The Smartest Guys in the Room (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I suggest you go and see "The Smartest Guys in the Room" on you tube. It's a long documentary, but it clearly shows how Californian power plants were shut down to pump up the price. So especially California was hit hard with high prices and hardly any service.
My memory is a bit hazy as its been 20+ years since I studied the Enron CA situation, but here is what I recall.. The whole Enron thing was enabled by the way CA's grid works and the legislature's deregulation approach. Pricing was set at highest cost plant, so if there was a way to bring those on line then prices go up. A routine planned outage all of a sudden could have a major impact on prices. Companies also had to buy on the spot market rather than enter into long term contracts. Enron then gamed the
Re: (Score:2)
That is a very accurate synopsis.
The only smart thing the politicians did was label their market rigging as "deregulation" to shift the blame.
Re: (Score:2)
That is a very accurate synopsis.
The only smart thing the politicians did was label their market rigging as "deregulation" to shift the blame.
Politicians are never at fault. Just ask any.
Re: (Score:2)
Errol backfiring urged:
I suggest you go and see "The Smartest Guys in the Room" on you tube. It's a long documentary, but it clearly shows how Californian power plants were shut down to pump up the price. So especially California was hit hard with high prices and hardly any service.
Gray Davis, then the governor of California, lost a recall election because of public anger about the skyrocketing cost of electricity - which wasn't at all his fault. The parties actually responsible were the legislature (which had passed by a veto-proof margin a bill that created the situation those "smartest guys in the room" exploited) and Enron (the company which was managed by those same "smartest guys," several of whom went to prison, because their "smartness" was, in reality,
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, so in the other states, the utilities are *less* shitty?
And by disconnecting from the grid they are actually increasing carbon footprint
That part is true -- a municipal minigrid would almost certainly be more efficient (just like for example VMs on a larger server are more efficient compared to partially loaded dedicated smaller servers).
I'm not sure that would be the case. You'd have to design for peak load, or else face problems when demand exceeds supply. Batteries or other storage s one partial solution, but even then you'd have to design them for highest demand and worse case charging conditions; and still may not have the reserves you need. As a result, some % of your capacity will set unused most of the time.
But that still doesn't mean you *need* to connect to a national grid, for example.
Sure you do, for grid stability purposes; otherwise you can't get power if you need it when your generation capacity is too l
Re: (Score:2)
What I want to know is why does it cost $78k per 100ft to lay a cable in California?
For that $300k where I am I'd not only put in enough Solar and batteries I pay for a swimming pool to be installed and enclose it for year round use
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe it was a specific case - the electric power is buried on one side of an important road, and your land starts on the other side.
Crossing "under" important roads is expensive (we're assuming power poles are not allowed, and all cabling MUST be buried).
And maybe "tunneling" horizontally is impractical due to other utilities being buried (water, sewage).
Even so, $78k seems steep.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I like this. The free market has provided a solution. Good on 'em. No one tear shed for fat, inefficient mega-utility companies with effective monopoly powers. These companies are the capitalist equivalent of a Homeowners Association full of Karens and Keiths.
Now, just need to work out a way to do the same for others in different living circumstances. Sounds like most of the ones able to go off grid had a nice big block, in a sunny area.
May not work so well in dense urban areas, with multi-story apartments,
Re: (Score:2)
The only problem is that as more people with the wealth to afford going off grid do so, it will leave those who can't afford to pay for solar panels and batteries up-front paying increasingly large bills to stay connected to the grid. The fewer grid users, the greater the proportion of the upkeep costs each user has to pay.
It's not insurmountable but it is something we need to deal with.
Re: (Score:2)
it will leave those who can't afford to pay for solar panels and batteries up-front
I live in California. There are plenty of companies eager to install panels on reasonable credit terms. No up-front money is needed.
You sign the agreement, they install the panels, and you pay for the panels over 20 years for smaller monthly payments than your former monthly electric bill.
Disclaimer: I paid for my panels up-front.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but then the savings are less the interest you pay on what is essentially a secured loan.
The other issue is apartments and people without suitable roofs or places to put a battery. Apartments will need something sorting out for car charging too.
Re: Good (Score:2)
There are so many homeless in California because it is better to be homeless in California than live in a house in some other state.
Re: (Score:2)
There are so many homeless in California because it is better to be homeless in California than live in a house in some other state.
I hope you're sarcastic or joking. Because if not, then that's some pretty serious brainwashing you must have gone through.
Re: (Score:2)
Note that the grid problems in California are a nasty hangover from a ham-fisted deregulation and privatization that happened years ago. Guess which party loves it some de-regulation and privatization.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm saying that somehow, the pivotal de-regulation push that doomed California's energy market JUST HAPPENED to be in the one year when the Rs were actually briefly in control. Perhaps that's why there hasn't been another such year in California.
Re: Good (Score:2)
I've had about 30 seconds of power outages in the last 12 years living in California. The California grid is fine.
What's not fine is assholes building homes in the desert wastelands where wildfires reign then expecting the rest of the grid to go out of their way keeping their unsustainable suburban lives lit.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The utilities don't do anything to stop you from putting up panels but they do continually fight net metering, where they have to pay you a fair price for power supplied. A lot of people have claimed that this would bankrupt them or something but that's nonsense, the price is demand-based so if everyone puts up solar then the amount paid will decrease and remain as fixed as demand, and they still get to collect a percentage so profit scales. The real problem for them is that they have to reduce the amount o
Re: (Score:2)
I was born and raised in the "wine country" in California. The only people that believe *everyone* wants to live there are Californians.
It's nice, but it's not like the entire state is San Diego. I personally prefer desert climates, some people like snow and others like to get 4 distinct seasons. Some like being out in the wilderness and I assume some people even love giant bugs and flop sweat.
Not just California (Score:2)
Just because this story is about California doesn't mean or imply that the same phenomenon isn't happening elsewhere.
I'm not sure whether you're an idiot or a troll, but I must admit that my first thought while reading the summary was about the same as yours (without the invidious comparison). So it did seem appropriate to respond.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I'm in the UK. I'm looking to buy a house again. I'm renting at the moment, for the first time ever, but I will be buying a house soon.
I'm literally looking at going all-electric and solar (with national grid backup, but mainly solar). I'm also looking at getting a campervan of some kind and making that entirely electric and solar.
It's viable now, and with energy price rises soon, even more viable than ever.
I have the ability to do the maths but I can make it very much simpler... I just overbuy. T
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can you imagine the hassle of making sure that your electricity consumption exactly matches your solar input?
Why would I do that? I'd overprovision as much as I felt I could afford, so that I would have production even on cloudy days. I'm putting 1850W on the RV, expect to get maybe 1500 max because I'm not going to tilt them in practice (I plan to build some tilt into the system, but I doubt I will use it except for maintenance or to remove leaf debris under the panels) and since they'll be a single string (which reduces wiring requirements) I will be able to produce charging voltage (for a 24V nominal bank, some