Being concerned about the social impacts of rate changes that favor one group over another isn't progressive? What about your own recent post about Duke Energy?
I tend to debunk the hyperbole and marketing crap that you and others push here. As someone hands on with solar (not a marketeer or someone with their head in the clouds claiming to be planning for the future) I feel that realism needs to be injected into some of the fantasies you are so enthralled with. Solar is a great thing, but the market and online forums are full of BS artists over promising what it can do on a practical level today. Most solar home owners I know feel it was oversold to them. I won't apologize for bringing realism into the discussion, especially since some of the schemes you push for would hurt the poor and those on fixed incomes.
Eventually we will have a distributed energy supply system, though there will be a great deal of expense and a lot of time needed to get there. It will still need infrastructure and maintenance. The companies that do that are the power utilities, and not all are privately owned. Those companies will change over time and it will be a good thing. However, in the process I am not willing to see people/consumers/users hurt. In your zealotry, you seem quite willing to throw them under the bus.
Explain this if you can:
If PV solar providers are paid at peak usage rates, where would the extra funds to cover the added costs come from? Remember that in the vast majority of cases, additional costs get passed on to the consumers and are not absorbed by the utilities.
Why are you so intent on enriching me?
= new reply since forum marked as read
