HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Environment & Energy » Environment & Energy (Group) » The heated debate over so... » Reply #10

Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #9)

Sun Feb 26, 2012, 02:26 AM

10. It isn't what you say but neither is it an authorization for aggregators.

Line 44, 45 specifies that the generator must be primarily for meeting the on-premises needs of the entity doing the generating. That prohibits the kind of excess you are talking about.

It says nothing at all about allowing aggregators to negotiate power purchase agreements on behalf of multiple homeowners who are leasing. Instead it assumes that the lease or purchase arrangement for the homeowners is independent of the utility-homeowner agreement.

The purpose of this law as written is to break down artificial barriers created by utilities to discourage distributed generation. It still leaves the purchaser in the position of having to sell their power to the utility at a sub-prime value - most likely it would be a net metering where the homeowner trades their peaking power for the utilities coal or nuclear.

For what it's worth I don't know your case but USUALLY the main problem with rural areas is that the further you get from the centralized generating source the more the power fluctuates and the more it benefits from small, distributed systems. If the line you are on is so precarious that 10-15 KW of generation is going to cause the problems you relate, then that area is in need of an upgrade that has nothing to do with you.

You do know that solar inverters are able to help stabilize the local circuits and that your contribution to grid stability would in most cases have a pretty high value? See "regulation power".

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.