Posted by Rory on March 25, 2009, 3:32 pm
Eliminating more of other people's carbon emmissions too, not to mention less
reliance on our enemies for oil.
Posted by Eeyore on March 25, 2009, 6:15 pm
But unsustainable in large scale long term operations unless you want to pay say
Carbon emissions are irrelevant. The IPCC only has a weak hypothesis that CO2 has
ANY effect on climate. There is increasing evidence it plays only a MINOR part in
climate and high CO2 has some GOOD effects like enhanced agricultural output.
Right now, global temps are falling and ocean level is too. Funny that. I suggest
you look at some FACTS !
Posted by stevey on March 26, 2009, 4:32 pm
On Mar 15, 6:15pm, Old Dirtybeard wrote: '19300kWn in 24 months...'
Because we were running 200% over baseline on Edison's tiered billing
structure, we should break even on the purchase price of the system in
more years (seven years from date of install).
Before we stray too far from the thread topic --I think few people
the convoluted PG&E rate schedules, ..terms like Territory, Code B
Quantities (kWh per day)...
Most PV projects that took advantage of the CEC's incentive dollars
NetMetering --you get to sell excess solar power during Noon-6PM to
at 'Peak' period rate, usually around $.30 per kWh. This is what
monthly bill down, sometimes into the negative balance, as in the case
Old Dirtybeard's exceptional PV system.
In a nutshell, most coastal California is in the Q Territory, and for
schedule (most Netmetering accounts opted for this plan), the Baseline
is 8.2 kWh per day Summer (May thru Oct.) and 12.6 kWh perday rest or
the year. The over 200% Baseline rate would be $.306 per kWh until
Summer then it becomes $.485 per kWh, during peak period.
There is rather messy calculations if one wants to get to the bottom
See www.pge.com and search by some of the terms mentioned earlier.
The millions of 'Smart meters' being installed throughout the state
ones Google is working on should help us understand the consequences
of our habitual power usage patterns and see the effect of changes we
I'm waiting to get it soon--if it applies to PV owners.
Posted by old dirtbeard on March 27, 2009, 4:29 am
I seriously doubt this will help, but I am blocking any further
communications from you, so I will not know if you respond.
Last year I surplused 300 kWh to the grid for which I received nothing in
This year I surplused 500kWh to the grid for which I received nothing.
Edison charges me$/mo to connect to their grid even if I am powering my
neighbor's homes for them.
At the end of the year, if I generate less than I consume, I have to "settle
up." If I generate more than I consume, they take it and zero out the
account.They don't even say "thank you."
I am powering my neighbor's houses for Edison and Edison is charging my
neighbors for the electricity I generate, and Edison is not paying me for
I think you have the "who is paying for whom" reversed.
Again, though, I have filtered your account and will not if you respond.
May God bless you.
Posted by Mel on March 27, 2009, 8:22 am
I can't aford to invest in a whole PV system myself at the moment, so
I'm quite happy to pay a couple of eurocents a month to contribute to
the production of PV kWhs.
old dirtbeard a crit :