quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

Here as well as other places in the country we have to pay fees for our solar panels that we use on our houses.

quote:

Instead of this why don't we just encourage people to use solar panels and get rid of power companies. Then Obama would be happy, our air would be cleaner, and there would be a building boom installing these.

quote:

Of course, the number of batteries and chargers and regulators required would go up, making that business grow. I am sure the Chinese would appreciate all the business. They could even send their people over to install them for us.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/consumer/2015/08/17/california-utilities-copy-arizona-utilities-solar-panel-fees/31877997/

AZ being basically a Republican State and California being a Democratic State.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Ken I read where if there were to be a boon in solar energy we would not need to depend on China for the rear metals needed. What I don't understand is why with the writing on the wall about the finite amount of economically available oil, energy companies are not leading the way in alternate fuels. I sure would if i were in the industry.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
Here as well as other places in the country we have to pay fees for our solar panels that we use on our houses. Instead of this why don't we just encourage people to use solar panels and get rid of power companies. Then Obama would be happy, our air would be cleaner, and there would be a building boom installing these.
Of course, the number of batteries and chargers and regulators required would go up, making that business grow. I am sure the Chinese would appreciate all the business. They could even send their people over to install them for us.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
]

Gunny brought up an important point. The power companies maintain the electrical grid. Unless you are going off-grid completely, you are still relying on the grid, even if just for emergency backup. Anyone relying on the grid should also bear fiscal responsibility for grid maintenance, shouldn't they?

quote:


How that fiscal responsibility is divvied up, however, is another matter altogether. It can't be solely based on usage, as that doesn't take into account those who only rely on the grid only for emergency power (the grid has to be maintained whether you're actually using it or not). Additionally, if you produce more power than you use and send that back to the grid, you should bear fiscal responsibility for grid upkeep, too.

The fee associated with grid maintenance should not be higher for those who have a reduced usage due to self-generation than it is for those who rely on the grid 100%.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thegunnysez

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Gunny brought up an important point. The power companies maintain the electrical grid. Unless you are going off-grid completely, you are still relying on the grid, even if just for emergency backup. Anyone relying on the grid should also bear fiscal responsibility for grid maintenance, shouldn't they?

Absolutely not. I am a net supplier of power. I sell it to the power company. It is not my responsibility to supply them a warehouse to store it in.

quote:

How that fiscal responsibility is divvied up, however, is another matter altogether. It can't be solely based on usage, as that doesn't take into account those who only rely on the grid only for emergency power (the grid has to be maintained whether you're actually using it or not). Additionally, if you produce more power than you use and send that back to the grid, you should bear fiscal responsibility for grid upkeep, too.
The fee associated with grid maintenance should not be higher for those who have a reduced usage due to self-generation than it is for those who rely on the grid 100%.

The power company is a government monopoly that is guaranteed a fixed profit in exchange for being the only game in town. The cost of the grid has been figured and paid by the rate payers who utilize Edison power. As a vendor to the system, grid maintenance is not my responsibility.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thegunnysez
If I make ten K of electricity and use five the net has supplied none of my electricity and I have sold them five K of electricity. I am doing them the favor by selling them power.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

Here as well as other places in the country we have to pay fees for our solar panels that we use on our houses. Instead of this why don't we just encourage people to use solar panels and get rid of power companies. Then Obama would be happy, our air would be cleaner, and there would be a building boom installing these.

Of course, the number of batteries and chargers and regulators required would go up, making that business grow. I am sure the Chinese would appreciate all the business. They could even send their people over to install them for us.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thegunnysez

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/consumer/2015/08/17/california-utilities-copy-arizona-utilities-solar-panel-fees/31877997/

AZ being basically a Republican State and California being a Democratic State.

It would appear that the fees we are speaking of here are being sought by the power companies subject to the monopoly board approving them which may not float. They have to find some way to justify those charges. The kicker here is that the power companies may be shooting themselves in the foot. If the domestic producers opt for and inverter/battery set up then the power company gets noting. Tesla has brought the li-ion battery to the market at a price point that is more than competitive($2,500). New technologies in solar panels (stuff currently in production at low scale) will reduce the .50 cent per watt to less than .10

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
Here as well as other places in the country we have to pay fees for our solar panels that we use on our houses. Instead of this why don't we just encourage people to use solar panels and get rid of power companies. Then Obama would be happy, our air would be cleaner, and there would be a building boom installing these.
Of course, the number of batteries and chargers and regulators required would go up, making that business grow. I am sure the Chinese would appreciate all the business. They could even send their people over to install them for us.

Gunny brought up an important point. The power companies maintain the electrical grid. Unless you are going off-grid completely, you are still relying on the grid, even if just for emergency backup. Anyone relying on the grid should also bear fiscal responsibility for grid maintenance, shouldn't they?

How that fiscal responsibility is divvied up, however, is another matter altogether. It can't be solely based on usage, as that doesn't take into account those who only rely on the grid only for emergency power (the grid has to be maintained whether you're actually using it or not). Additionally, if you produce more power than you use and send that back to the grid, you should bear fiscal responsibility for grid upkeep, too.

The fee associated with grid maintenance should not be higher for those who have a reduced usage due to self-generation than it is for those who rely on the grid 100%.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
It should be noted that the majority of energy infrastructure in this nation is using 1950's technology. The energy companies have been very slow to make updates, since it would eat into their bottom line. Why would they wish to do something on the benefit of the United States of America, when it effects their profit?
However, bring up that infrastructure to 2015 technology and standards would create a real savings on 'energy lost'. Meaning, more energy is produced while not straining current system, and thus, lowering costs. But lowering costs for all people would mean...LESS REVENUE. Less revenue directly translates into less gross profit which yet again translates into less net profit. Why would a business want less net profit? Even though it would be good for America?
The only way this happens, is if the US Government forces these companies to update their systems. For that to happen, would take an act by Congress. You really think with Republicans in control of Congress that will happen?

quote:

Tesla accomplishes what Congress can not: skip the energy companies and their bullshit lobbying all together! The company creates a solar company that charges their li-ion batteries. When your battery is expired you go to Tesla, pay an exchange fee, giving your used battery to them for a new one. Its much like getting a gas tank for the grill from the local convenience store.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
But, does Congress have the authority to do so? I'm not sure about that part.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
Tesla accomplishes what Congress can not: skip the energy companies and their bullshit lobbying all together! The company creates a solar company that charges their li-ion batteries. When your battery is expired you go to Tesla, pay an exchange fee, giving your used battery to them for a new one. Its much like getting a gas tank for the grill from the local convenience store.

As long as you are completely separate from the grid, you shouldn't bear responsibility of maintaining the grid.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thegunnysez

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
]

Gunny brought up an important point. The power companies maintain the electrical grid. Unless you are going off-grid completely, you are still relying on the grid, even if just for emergency backup. Anyone relying on the grid should also bear fiscal responsibility for grid maintenance, shouldn't they?

Absolutely not. I am a net supplier of power. I sell it to the power company. It is not my responsibility to supply them a warehouse to store it in.

quote:


How that fiscal responsibility is divvied up, however, is another matter altogether. It can't be solely based on usage, as that doesn't take into account those who only rely on the grid only for emergency power (the grid has to be maintained whether you're actually using it or not). Additionally, if you produce more power than you use and send that back to the grid, you should bear fiscal responsibility for grid upkeep, too.

The fee associated with grid maintenance should not be higher for those who have a reduced usage due to self-generation than it is for those who rely on the grid 100%.

The power company is a government monopoly that is guaranteed a fixed profit in exchange for being the only game in town. The cost of the grid has been figured and paid by the rate payers who utilize Edison power. As a vendor to the system, grid maintenance is not my responsibility.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
But, does Congress have the authority to do so? I'm not sure about that part.

Who do you think created all the laws those energy companies have to follow in the first place?
Go look it up if you don't believe me....
Start with the Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3, in the US Constitution and go forward 220+ years of legal text.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
Tesla accomplishes what Congress can not: skip the energy companies and their bullshit lobbying all together! The company creates a solar company that charges their li-ion batteries. When your battery is expired you go to Tesla, pay an exchange fee, giving your used battery to them for a new one. Its much like getting a gas tank for the grill from the local convenience store.

As long as you are completely separate from the grid, you shouldn't bear responsibility of maintaining the grid.

From the stand point of the company, not the government. The two entities are separate in this manner of law. The government, to which you gain benefits from (directly and otherwise), buys energy from those companies. Therefore, your taxes go to help pay for the government's usage of that energy from the company. You might be off the grid, but your STILL be protected by the police, fire, hospitals, and such. Your kids go to the schools, parks, and playgrounds. You drive on the roads under those street lamps. All of these using energy provide by the local power company.
I'll give you credit, were credit is due. You tried to assume that if you were off the grid, you wouldn't have to pay taxes either. Nice try! Didn't work, but nice try all the same.....

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
But, does Congress have the authority to do so? I'm not sure about that part.

Who do you think created all the laws those energy companies have to follow in the first place?
Go look it up if you don't believe me....
Start with the Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3, in the US Constitution and go forward 220+ years of legal text.

I'm not convinced, Joether. I doubt we'll ever come to an agreement on this, except that you'll probably agree we won't come to an agreement. lol

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
Tesla accomplishes what Congress can not: skip the energy companies and their bullshit lobbying all together! The company creates a solar company that charges their li-ion batteries. When your battery is expired you go to Tesla, pay an exchange fee, giving your used battery to them for a new one. Its much like getting a gas tank for the grill from the local convenience store.

As long as you are completely separate from the grid, you shouldn't bear responsibility of maintaining the grid.

From the stand point of the company, not the government. The two entities are separate in this manner of law. The government, to which you gain benefits from (directly and otherwise), buys energy from those companies. Therefore, your taxes go to help pay for the government's usage of that energy from the company. You might be off the grid, but your STILL be protected by the police, fire, hospitals, and such. Your kids go to the schools, parks, and playgrounds. You drive on the roads under those street lamps. All of these using energy provide by the local power company.
I'll give you credit, were credit is due. You tried to assume that if you were off the grid, you wouldn't have to pay taxes either. Nice try! Didn't work, but nice try all the same.....

You're such an idiot. If a person is off the grid, he should not have to pay anything to the utility companies. That doesn't include taxes. How fucking stupid can you get? Wait. Don't answer that question.

This is the bullshit you always do, Joether. This discussion is about fees customers pay to a utility company. Those that use less because they generate their own power are assessed a fee (by the utility) for their share of the cost of maintaining the grid. This discussion is not about taxes. How you make the leap that my belief that someone that isn't connected to the grid shouldn't have to pay the utility a fee for grid maintenance also means that someone that isn't connected to the grid shouldn't have to pay taxes to government is beyond me.

I guess I just can't stop enough neural activity to be that idiotic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
If you make 100kW during the day, and use 1W from the grid at night, you're still using the grid. You're getting paid for your net generation portion, aren't you?

quote:

Go off-grid completely if you don't want to participate in grid maintenance.