Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

kaminaowner2 t1_isdxi5y wrote

Reply to comment by the8thbit in FREE ELECTRICITY! Credit Suisse analysis says Inflation Reduction Act will produce solar modules for two pennies a watt in Ohio, while federal tax credits will cover 50% of project costs. by manual_tranny

The electric system has to become a subscription service, the grid can’t be replaced, and can’t be repaired for free. Unless we find a magic way to fix the grid their has to be a minimum charge. It’s not anti competition because you aren’t competing with the electric company, your dependent on it. Wake up and recognize we have to work together still in order for this solar thing to work, you charge my house when it’s dark here, I charge yours later.

2

Open-Gazelle-3774 t1_isf28gj wrote

Before we have to pay that $90 fee we should be given the option to go off grid… I have to batteries and a gen. I would rather go off then pay close to half of what my normal electric bill would be. A $10-15 monthly fee I understand but $90?

1

kaminaowner2 t1_isf6e2z wrote

I do believe the amount is to high, it also is different state by state. Going off grid is nice but does cut into the promise of solar, you charge my house when it’s dark here, and I charge yours when it’s dark there, and we both charge the city’s. We need more humans working together not more going our own way, but there is room for some of us to cut ties, just not all or even most.

1

the8thbit t1_isfj7qj wrote

>The electric system has to become a subscription service, the grid can’t be replaced, and can’t be repaired for free.

Of course. So charge everyone the same subscription fee. Why should solar panel owners be forced to bear a larger portion of the cost for the same service that everyone gets?

>It’s not anti competition because you aren’t competing with the electric company, your dependent on it.

You can be both dependent on a company, and competing with them. Chrome is (mostly) dependent on an operating system ecosystem provided by Microsoft. That doesn't mean Google and Microsoft aren't competitors, and if Microsoft instituted fees for installing Chrome, that would be blatantly anticompetitive.

A home solar operator sells power to people (themselves and their other nearby people on the grid) when its more economical to get it from them than from the power company. The home solar operator gets that money, and the power company does not. If the home solar operator didn't exist, the power company would be getting that money as they wouldn't have to compete with the solar operator. Home solar installations take customers away from power companies. That's about as cut and dry competition as it gets.

1