• Wholesale power prices are increasingly turning negative at times of high solar output
  • Observers say rooftop solar is “cannibalising” electricity prices and hitting large-scale solar hard
  • There are calls for storage and greater daytime demand to help soak up solar production
  • stabby_cicada@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    1 year ago

    Here in California, utility companies are “solving” this by instituting extremely high fees for the privilege of connecting your solar power to the grid. If I recall from the last time I ran the numbers, rooftop solar panels no longer make economic sense for the vast majority of residential customers - it costs more money to install me solar panels and pay the monthly connection fees then you’ll save by producing energy over the lifetime of the solar panels.

    Probably the one time in history PG&E tried to fix a problem ahead of time. 😆

        • nottheengineer@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, but you don’t necessarily need batteries. If you just have a bit of solar, you’ll use up all the power it produces as it does that.

      • stabby_cicada@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure! As far as I know, county and city ordinances permitting, you can be off grid in CA.

        However, if you’re on grid, and you connect your solar panels to your home electric system, your solar power is now connected to the grid. I don’t think you can segregate electricity by source. You could in theory have some of your home powered by your solar and some of your home powered by the grid, separate systems that don’t connect, but I think that would be both dangerous and illegal. Maybe you could have an ADU that’s totally solar powered while your house is on grid?

        And googling today - it’s been a while - it looks like CA regulators withdrew their shitty fee schedule and approved a slightly less shitty fee schedule, so good news there 😆

        • nottheengineer@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          There are solar inverters that will just take some load off the grid, but never put power into it for this use case. It’s technically connected to the grid but for the grid, there are no downsides or risks.

          If the fee also applies to that, it’s just straight up stupid.

    • AEMarling@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      They are at it again, trying to block solar on churches and schools. Tell Gavin Newsom to get his CPUC in line.

      • jballs@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        In Colorado, it’s actually illegal to disconnect from the grid once you’re on the grid. Yay capitalism!

  • elouboub@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The electricity network should be a public utility. Taxes should be used to make and maintain a network, not make a profit. If people can contribute to the network and decentralise generation, it shouldn’t be a problem. It being a problem is an indication of a broken system.

    It noted utility-scale solar plants were having to pare back generation or switch off entirely during such periods to avoid having to pay to maintain production.

    Bro, generate hydrogen with that abundant energy! Then when solar can’t provide energy (at night) and at the same time wind energy isn’t available, you can generate energy from the hydrogen. Hell, with that abundant energy, you could create a whole hydrogen economy and tank the petrol economy - make it completely obsolete. How the fuck is this a problem?

  • KᑌᔕᕼIᗩ@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    Meanwhile in Australia anyone without solar panels is paying record high prices for their power and are trying to conserve their power use as much as possible to try to make ends meet. There’s no “negative pricing” for consumers.

  • Da_Boom@iusearchlinux.fyi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    That’s why the calls for storage should be in the form of rebates for solar and battery systems for residential houses, rather than the big battery tech they keep on suggesting we use. Wholesale prices won’t go negative if solar users don’t sell the power they generate, and the solar users can save money too by using the power we’ve stored when the prices go up.

    It’s a win-win, albeit with the major exception of those who don’t have solar. Who won’t be able to take advantage of negative prices and will probably be hung dry with higher bills (keep in mind they are already pretty high to begin with)

    • Wooki@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Commercial cost are significantly cheaper at grid scale storage and also covers renters not just the elite ….

    • sbv@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Build 'em all. There will be winners eventually. Until then, let’s try everything.

  • sbv@sh.itjust.worksOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s pretty amazing. I guess it’s time to start moving on short-term energy storage solutions.