HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Environment & Energy » Environment & Energy (Group) » The heated debate over so... » Reply #9

Response to kristopher (Reply #8)

Sun Feb 26, 2012, 01:59 AM

9. You are so, so wrong

This is the bill currently in the Senate:

Your statements that are wrong:

What this bill does is allow me and my farming buddies to force the local utility to buy my excess power, charging the only the direct costs of metering or connecting the energy source. The cost cannot include any insurance charge or capacity or interconnection charge that is not also charged to customers who are not generating their own power. What this means is that the utility could charge me for upgrading the capacity on the line to my house, but would have to bear the cost of upgrading the local lines (which could not carry the joint output of my neighbor and me). Regardless of whether my production routinely blows up my neighbors down the street (which my simulation showed it would every spring, when my own usage and my neighbor's usage is low), the utility MUST BUY MY POWER AND CANNOT CHARGE ME FOR THE LINE COSTS IT HAS TO RERUN FOR FOUR or FIVE MILES. That is not a direct cost.

FURTHER, the bill creates the "customer generator", who may be a customer 200 miles from me and my neighbor. That customer is allowed to contract with ME DIRECTLY through a power purchase agreement.

This is a sweetheart deal for me. The power company has to pay all the costs from the road on. I get the profits, because I can now contract with a customer in Athens (I live close to the Florida line) to buy my excess power as metered by the power insurance company.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Please login to view edit histories.