What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

POTUS 45.39: Dick Pictures for Everyone!!!!!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: POTUS 45.39: Dick Pictures for Everyone!!!!!!!

What incentive does the power company have to service your house if you have solar on the roof? They'll put in significant infrastructure to only see their meter turn (meaning revenue) on a few days. The power companies/cooperatives have to protect themselves and their investments.

Don't be surprised if you start to see power companies adopt pricing structures like ISPs or cell phone providers, meaning not based on just consumption, but on a combination of "connection charge" (with a based level of use included) plus an overage charge for usage beyond the base level. Think like your cell phone: $40 bucks a line for 4 GB, and if you go over 4 GB you get hammered at like $15/GB. How do I know this? No comment.

That's fine. I'm expecting them to charge for the hook up. It would still be cheaper in the long run and cleaner. This is what government is for.
 
I stand by 50 years, stand alone, broad implementation, with no tax breaks or subsidies to aid it. (If you don't believe solar is subsidized, look at the first table in your link and explain why there are 152 solar bids otherwise.)

Next, again look at the first table in that article. It is 4 to 10 times the cost to do renewables with storage than combustion. That will come down with time, and faster than we'd believe, but again to get that broadly implemented takes time and capital. I'd speculate ... about fifty years.

If you don't believe fossil fuels are subsidized, I have a bridge to sell you.
 
What incentive does the power company have to service your house if you have solar on the roof? They'll put in significant infrastructure to only see their meter turn (meaning revenue) on a few days. The power companies/cooperatives have to protect themselves and their investments.

Don't be surprised if you start to see power companies adopt pricing structures like ISPs or cell phone providers, meaning not based on just consumption, but on a combination of "connection charge" (with a based level of use included) plus an overage charge for usage beyond the base level. Think like your cell phone: $40 bucks a line for 4 GB, and if you go over 4 GB you get hammered at like $15/GB. How do I know this? No comment.

Power companies already charge flat fees. The only question is the ratio of flat fee vs usage fee by customer class.
 
Re: POTUS 45.39: Dick Pictures for Everyone!!!!!!!

What incentive does the power company have to service your house if you have solar on the roof? They'll put in significant infrastructure to only see their meter turn (meaning revenue) on a few days. The power companies/cooperatives have to protect themselves and their investments.

Don't be surprised if you start to see power companies adopt pricing structures like ISPs or cell phone providers, meaning not based on just consumption, but on a combination of "connection charge" (with a based level of use included) plus an overage charge for usage beyond the base level. Think like your cell phone: $40 bucks a line for 4 GB, and if you go over 4 GB you get hammered at like $15/GB. How do I know this? No comment.

I'm skeptical of this.

First, a sizable portion (although not a majority) of the electric supply in this country is provided by either municipal or publicly owned power companies, or electric cooperatives (owned by the customers themselves). By definition they are not able to make a profit. The incentive they have to service your house, even if you have solar on your roof, is that "they" are "you." You are selling electricity to yourself.

Second, those power companies that are investor owned are pretty heavily regulated with respect to rates and fees by public service commissions. They operate as a state sponsored monopoly, so whatever direction the state wants to go, they're going to have to go along.
 
Re: POTUS 45.39: Dick Pictures for Everyone!!!!!!!

I'm skeptical of this.

First, a sizable portion (although not a majority) of the electric supply in this country is provided by either municipal or publicly owned power companies, or electric cooperatives (owned by the customers themselves). By definition they are not able to make a profit. The incentive they have to service your house, even if you have solar on your roof, is that "they" are "you." You are selling electricity to yourself.

Second, those power companies that are investor owned are pretty heavily regulated with respect to rates and fees by public service commissions. They operate as a state sponsored monopoly, so whatever direction the state wants to go, they're going to have to go along.

Works for me.
 
Re: POTUS 45.39: Dick Pictures for Everyone!!!!!!!

Power companies already charge flat fees. The only question is the ratio of flat fee vs usage fee by customer class.

Expect to see the flat fee* go up in the ratio significantly as home/business based renewables (roof-top solar) become more and more viable and pervasive.



*Pick your "nice words": connection charge, grid access fee, base service fee.
 
Re: POTUS 45.39: Dick Pictures for Everyone!!!!!!!

Then why are you complaining about renewables having to stand on their own without subsidies without requiring fossil fuels to do the same?

The ratios and quantities and types are more favoring the renewables right now (which is not to say the others aren't getting something as well).
 
Re: POTUS 45.39: Dick Pictures for Everyone!!!!!!!

The ratios and quantities and types are more favoring the renewables right now (which is not to say the others aren't getting something as well).

And what were the ratios when fossils were just getting started? Seriously, dude. Get a better argument. The renewables are getting more juice because that's the way we need to go. That's the governments job. I know you think the private sector will take care of it but that's just not true. Never has been, never will.
 
Re: POTUS 45.39: Dick Pictures for Everyone!!!!!!!

I'm skeptical of this.

First, a sizable portion (although not a majority) of the electric supply in this country is provided by either municipal or publicly owned power companies, or electric cooperatives (owned by the customers themselves). By definition they are not able to make a profit. The incentive they have to service your house, even if you have solar on your roof, is that "they" are "you." You are selling electricity to yourself.

Second, those power companies that are investor owned are pretty heavily regulated with respect to rates and fees by public service commissions. They operate as a state sponsored monopoly, so whatever direction the state wants to go, they're going to have to go along.

They still have to pay to own (maintain, debt service, operations) the infrastructure, be they public, coop, IOU, whatever.

If their rate structure is consumption based, they'll go broke when people are not purchasing from them. The way to combat this? Larger base service/connection fees.
 
Re: POTUS 45.39: Dick Pictures for Everyone!!!!!!!

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration on Tuesday made public the details of its new pollution rules governing coal-burning power plants, and the fine print includes an acknowledgment that the plan would increase carbon emissions and lead to up to 1,400 premature deaths annually.

The Clean Power Plan (Obama's plan that has been rescinded) aimed to curb planet-warming greenhouse gases by steering the energy sector away from coal and toward cleaner energy sources like wind and solar. According to its calculations, the decreased coal burning also would reduce other pollutants like sulfur dioxide, which poses respiratory risk, and nitrogen oxides that create ozone, better known as smog, which can damage lung tissue.

Mr. Obama’s E.P.A. also estimated that, by 2030, the Clean Power Plan would result in 180,000 fewer missed school days per year by children because of ozone-related illnesses. Asthma instances would also drop significantly, according to the analysis.

By contrast Mr. Trump’s analysis finds its plan would see 48,000 new cases of exacerbated asthma and at least 21,000 new missed days of school annually by 2030 because those pollutants would increase in the atmosphere rather than decrease.

“With the Trump dirty power plan we see again that the Trump administration cares more about extending the lives of coal plants than the American people,” said Conrad Schneider, advocacy director of the environmental nonprofit group Clean Air Task Force, an environmental nonprofit group.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/21/climate/epa-coal-pollution-deaths.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Big Rally tonight in West Virginia. Patrick Morrisey is running a GREAT race for U.S. Senate. I have done so much for West Virginia, against all odds, and having Patrick, a real fighter, by my side, would make things so much easier. See you later. CLEAN COAL!!!!</p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1031872877514121216?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 21, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

****ing idiot.
 
Re: POTUS 45.39: Dick Pictures for Everyone!!!!!!!

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">A Blue Wave means Crime and Open Borders. A Red Wave means Safety and Strength!</p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1031852996567748613?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 21, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Re: POTUS 45.39: Dick Pictures for Everyone!!!!!!!

I stand by 50 years, stand alone, broad implementation, with no tax breaks or subsidies to aid it. (If you don't believe solar is subsidized, look at the first table in your link and explain why there are 152 solar bids otherwise.)

Next, again look at the first table in that article. It is 4 to 10 times the cost to do renewables with storage than combustion. That will come down with time, and faster than we'd believe, but again to get that broadly implemented takes time and capital. I'd speculate ... about fifty years.

Solar(and wind) should be subsidized. Most major technological development in this country has been subsidized to some extent.
 
Expect to see the flat fee* go up in the ratio significantly as home/business based renewables (roof-top solar) become more and more viable and pervasive.



*Pick your "nice words": connection charge, grid access fee, base service fee.

Most distributed generation users (aka home solar) are on a separate tariff to begin with. The monthly fee is negligible in that fight. The bigger issue is net metering vs. avoided cost as far as what they get paid when putting energy back into the system.

The next biggest fight is whether utilities make them pay a demand charge or time of day rates vs a standard residential rate for the energy they use.

Compared to those issues, the monthly service charge is nothing.
 
Last edited:
Solar(and wind) should be subsidized. Most major technological development in this country has been subsidized to some extent.

Agreed. Think it makes sense for local governments to pay above market rates to develop/buy renewable energy too.
 
Re: POTUS 45.39: Dick Pictures for Everyone!!!!!!!

Agreed. Think it makes sense for local governments to pay above market rates to develop/buy renewable energy too.

Drew, this is where your strangled government approach falls apart.

1) The public sector subsidizes new renewable power implementation (rather than fossil fuels). 2) New renewable power puts the cost of energy production at much less than existing coal plants as we've seen here (https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/1/16/16895594/colorado-renewable-energy-future). 3) This ongoing lower energy cost quickly covers the cost of the subsidy and 4) for the life of the installation, renewables greatly reduces energy costs for all 5) and it doesn't pollute or contribute to global warming.

Investments like this is where states with proactive public sectors waay outperform places like Kansas and Wisconsin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top