Lost revenue?? Surely you jest + [RE-wrenches]

asap at podnine.com asap at podnine.com
Tue Oct 8 11:35:34 PDT 2002


Here's a link to a page just recently posted at our servers while testing
some new templates.

This discusses the economic "turn-around" factor, which should be
interesting to everyone reading in this thread.

Pop up explanations should come up with the roll-over links, which are the
numbers in the chart.

http://www.podnine.com/asap_power/economy-of-life.html

Some relatively basic but often overlooked economic principles...applied by
a true think-globally-act-locally kind of guy.  It's a "case study" for San
Diego but I would argue applicable for almost any large metro.  Just shows
to go ya: a billion dollars goes a long way when spent in the opposite
direction too.  The author of the research would have been the first to tell
you that the savings extend well beyond this, when you consider things like
Jeff's #6 items mentioned below.  I think it's a powerful argument, can
anyone shoot it down or does it make too much sense?

I forwarded the link to Tony Brasil at CEC and reminded him that it really
is ok to give out state money for solar PV.    But I can't get him to rebate
a system sold by my company to myself.  He wanted my wholesale costs.  Is
this fair?  As far as i know it's still 50% of installed costs or $4.50 per
W.  Any CA retailer/installer have experience here with their own recently
installed system?  Pleeeeeease email me and let me know what magic
words/number combinations were used.

Here's another interesting link discussing the $130B of imported oil our
country is supporting and what seems to be an honest report on the history
and depletion of reserves.  Yes, it will happen...
http://evworld.com/databases/storybuilder.cfm?storyid=424&subcookie=1

Meanwhile, us San Diegans are waiting for our next energy crisis as early as
summer 04!  That's only 18-21 months away!  And this county is already at
the top of the US and CA charts in gasoline and electricity costs.  Lost
revenue??  No, I know exactly where it went...

Peter Duchon
ASAP POWER!

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeffery Wolfe, Global Resource Options
[mailto:jeff at globalresourceoptions.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 9:44 AM
To: RE-wrenches at topica.com
Subject: RE: Lost revenue?? Surely you jest [RE-wrenches]


Arguments in response:

1.  Unless they pay time of use rates on the PV generation, you are
providing kWh's when they need them most, and when they cost the utility the
most to buy. Depending upon region, this is a substantial subsidy that PV
owners provide TO the utility.
2.  PV adds good stabilization voltage to the grid. As more PV is added, it
will assist in grid stability.
3.  Since our kWh's typically do not flow very far down the line, D&T losses
are reduced. Thus each kWh that the PV generates is equal to more than one
kWh from the utility, yet they pay us for only 1 kWh for each generated.
4.  The utilities receive tremendous subsidies. Tell them you would be
pleased to remove any possible form or appearance of subsidy from PV when
they do the same. We'd win hands down.
5.  Utility ratepayers subsidize a whole lot of things. The folks in the
backwoods who have 1/2 mile of power line going only to them cost the
utility a lot of money in maintenance and added line loss, yet do not pay
different rates. Our most rural electric company has significantly higher
rates than other companies, at least in large part due to the very low
density of customers per mile. What's up with the big stink over this one
item?  (  :)
6.  Tell them that the value of the direct subsidy due to direct
environmental and health costs caused (directly) by the generation of the
electricity is far in excess of the "subsidy" that PV gets.

There's more, but that's all I can think of now...

However, no matter what you tell them, they will not believe. They work for
the utility... Tell them that net metering is the law, and that you're there
to assist in implementing the law, not debating whether or not the law is
valid. Perhaps you should ask them about the laws that create subsidies for
them, such as the monopoly authority provided to them by the state.

Good luck.

Jeff
***********
Folks,

I hope this is an appropriate question for the group.

I'm working on an interconnection agreement with a utility.  They are
cooperating but they keep repeating the stone-age mantra that each RE system
translates into lost revenue and that the other ratepayers wind up
subsidizing the RE system owner.  Further, they claim that if too many
people add RE systems, it will mean higher rates for everyone since there
will be less kWh sales with which to recover fixed costs.

Have you encountered similar arguments?  If so, have you found any solid
arguments in response?

David

- - - -
To send a message: RE-wrenches at topica.com

Archive of previous messages: http://www.topica.com/lists/RE-wrenches/

List rules & etiquette: http://www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/etiquete.htm

Check out participant bios: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/index.html

Hosted by Home Power magazine

Moderator: michael.welch at homepower.com

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: michael.welch at homepower.com

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bz8Qcs.bz9JC9
Or send an email to: RE-wrenches-unsubscribe at topica.com

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================





More information about the RE-wrenches mailing list