Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    az.politics    |    Arizona politics    |    3,153 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 2,744 of 3,153    |
|    Target Manure to All    |
|    Woke gay-run Denver to sweep homeless en    |
|    14 Oct 23 16:46:36    |
      XPost: alt.engineering.electrical, talk.politics.guns, talk.politics.misc       XPost: alt.solar.photovoltaic, misc.industry.utilities.electric, sac.politics       From: remailer@domain.invalid              Arizona regulators voted on Wednesday to consider lowering the rates       that electric utilities must pay homeowners with rooftop solar for       their excess power. Clean energy advocates say the move will       undermine the state’s booming solar industry and unfairly pad       utilities’ profits.              The decision follows a deep cut to solar benefits in neighboring       California, an indication of how states with high rates of rooftop       solar — regardless of their political leanings — are struggling to       integrate solar power with the legacy electric grid.              “It was a straight-up dumpster fire,” Jason Gallagher, chief       operating officer for Chandler-based solar installer Fusion Power,       told Semafor of the Arizona meeting.              Tim’s view       The decision in Arizona illustrates how solar power, in spite of its       plummeting global price and unprecedented federal backing, is still       subject to local political whims and the rehashing of decade-old       arguments.              In Arizona, as in most states, when a home’s rooftop solar panels       generate more electricity than the house needs, the excess can be       sold into the grid, a practice called net metering. The rate       utilities offer for that power differs between jurisdictions;       usually it’s the same rate the house would pay to buy power from the       grid, or a bit less. In 2016, after an expensive lobbying campaign       by the state’s biggest utility, regulators adopted a plan that would       gradually step down the rate over time (pre-2016 customers were able       to keep a grandfathered higher rate). The justification was that the       retail rate, being higher than the wholesale rate utilities would       typically pay to acquire electricity, raised utilities’ costs in a       way that was eventually passed on to non-solar customers.              Over the last few years, Arizona’s net metering rate has now fallen       the wholesale rate, such that excess rooftop solar power is actually       a bargain buy for utilities. Yet the perception that net metering       constitutes an unfair cost-shift or subsidy has persisted in some       corners. At Wednesday’s hearing of the Arizona Corporation       Commission, which regulates the state’s utilities, chairman Jim       O’Connor, a Republican, argued that anyone wanting a solar roof       “shouldn’t do that at the expense of their neighbors and       communities.” O’Connor, along with two other Republicans on the       five-member commission, voted to reopen the 2016 policy and       potentially allow for much steeper annual cuts in the net metering       rate.              The decision makes solar a hard sell for homeowners in one of the       country’s sunniest states, Gallagher said, because it makes it       impossible to calculate a realistic payback period, and most likely       extends any such period. That view was echoed in a filing by Tesla,       which sells solar and battery systems in the state and said the       decision will “harm investor and customer confidence in Arizona.”       Even the utility companies that originally pushed to lower the rate       were against reopening the existing policy.              “They’re setting a precedent that whatever they decide in one       meeting doesn’t really matter,” Gallagher said, because it’s liable       to be re-litigated every two years when the commissioners are up for       reelection. “There is no major renewable energy company in the       nation that, if they looked at what happened [on Wednesday], would       feel comfortable investing in Arizona.”              Room for Disagreement       In defending his vote, O’Connor pointed to the example of       California, which in April deeply slashed its net metering rates in       spite of its liberal, climate-focused politics. That state is by far       the country’s top solar market, and net metering had become a       legitimate problem for the grid. Midday peak solar production in       California is now so high that it sometimes more than covers the       entire state’s electricity needs — but then forces power companies       to massively ramp up other forms of generation as the sun goes down,       raising costs and the risk of blackouts.                     The View From New York              Notable       The global price of solar would be even lower, an Oxford University       lecturer wrote this week, if not for a century-old kidnapping.       George Cove was a Canadian engineer in New York who invented the       first solar panels in 1909, to much publicity, and was shortly       thereafter kidnapped, with a term of his release being that he give       up his solar patent. After his release, he never returned to the              [continued in next message]              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca