{"items": [{"author": "Jess", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272", "service": "fb", "text": "So just the generation incentives double the revenue for the first decade? That is some intense subsidizing.", "timestamp": "1574437093"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123141440402", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123141440402", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Net metering is a much larger percentage subsidy: we're producing power that's worth $0.04/kWh but net metering requires our electric company to compensate us at $0.21/kWh.", "timestamp": "1574438053"}, {"author": "Jess", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123143281712", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123143281712", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I guess I don't really get that part. If you're getting compensated at the rate $0.21/kWh you pay at your house (rather than the wholesale rate), how is this different than saying the panels simply reduce your draw on the grid by 4 MWh, so your bill obviously goes down by 4 MWh * $0.21/kWh? Is it that at your peak productivity times you produce more power than your house is using?", "timestamp": "1574438706"}, {"author": "Hollis", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123144224822", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123144224822", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Panels don't generally produce power that actually runs things in your house--your house electricity stays the same as it always was and the panels are just a small generating station that happens to be colocated with your house.", "timestamp": "1574439242"}, {"author": "Hollis", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123144244782", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123144244782", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Off-grid solar is a different animal.", "timestamp": "1574439269"}, {"author": "Jess", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123146225812", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123146225812", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I get what you're saying, but from the perspective of the power company is this very different? Like if I took a multimeter and put it across the power lines going into and out of your combo-house-generator installation, can you tell the difference between reducing the house load versus increasing the solar output? (Obviously, you will be able to tell the difference by how it changes with the time of day, or if the load goes negative, i.e., the combo-house-generator becomes net power producer.)", "timestamp": "1574440505"}, {"author": "Bill", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123148421412", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123148421412", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Unless you are a net producer, mostly you are simply avoiding purchases at the 0.21 rate, not being compensated at that rate. And \u201cworth\u201d depends on where you are in the value chain. Power is worth 0.21 to consumers; one could say it\u2019s worth 0.17 to the power company (gross profit of 0.21-0.04). Of course, all of those costs include numerous subsidies (and externalities) not accounted for.", "timestamp": "1574441698"}, {"author": "Jess", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123153511212", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123153511212", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Bill summarizes well my understanding, and why I am confused as to why people are calling this a subsidy (modulo the important fact that the power company is probably providing solar-equipped houses with technical support whose costs are disproportionate to the amount paid for net power draw by those houses)", "timestamp": "1574444106"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123154958312", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123154958312", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Jess, Bill: for figuring out why it's a subsidy, think about the difference between retail and wholesale power. What service does the power company provide? Part of it is that they move the power from the generation point to your house, but that's actually a pretty small part of the benefit. The main benefit is that you can draw as much or as little power as you need at any time, and the power company has to make it work. We don't want a brownout when it's 5:30pm on the hottest day of the year and everyone's coming home and turning on their AC, and the way we handle that is the wholesale cost of power rises dramatically for a short period to pull additional capacity online.

My panels will make power or not depending on the sun, and they'll be correlated with a lot of other people's panels. This isn't terrible, since those are times with higher AC usage (though not on an instantaneous basis, and I could have east-facing panels that aren't so useful) but it's still not worth very much.", "timestamp": "1574444651"}, {"author": "Peter", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123155342542", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123155342542", "service": "fb", "text": "→ A lot of what people are paying for is reliability, but that's not how power is priced. A price tied to what value people are getting would be closer to $25/month/unit plus $0.10/kWh. Net metering at those rates would be less of a subsidy--maybe none at all.", "timestamp": "1574444815"}, {"author": "Jan-Willem", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123158601012", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123158601012", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Bill We're net producers (5MW system not far from Jeff), but net metering just causes you to build up a credit with the electric company. You can agree to split the net metering with a neighbor, though \u2013 we explored this with the downstairs condo but never worked anything out with them.", "timestamp": "1574446664"}, {"author": "Jess", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123159608992", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123159608992", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Jeff, you're describing how people who use electricity when demand is low usually are subsidizing people who use electricity when demand is high in places where the consumer-facing price does not fluctuate during the day in response to demand. (And this effect applies to a lesser extent when the there is a fixed schedule to pricing, say with a 2 or 3 time periods in the day, which only crudely approximate the real-time market.) However, this subsidy only depends on their usage throughout the day, and does not distinguish between people (1) with low usage at noon vs. (2) high usage at noon offset by personal solar.

In other words: would your bill be different if your house's electrical system intelligently used the solar power \"first\" and only drew the additional power it needed to cover the load? If not, this doesn't seem like a solar-specific subsidy (as people normally mean that term). I guess maybe you could say it's a long-standing subsidy that is easier to exploit if you use solar (and hence, I agree, will lead to over-installation of solar from a market perspective) but that could just as well be exploited by non-solar people preferentially drying their clothes during peak times.", "timestamp": "1574447158"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123161779642", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123161779642", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Jess there's a long-standing mismatch between what power costs you (flat rate) and what it costs the power company (highly variable rate). Historically there haven't been many ways to exploit this; you can't sign up as both a residential consumer and a wholesaler and at high demand times pull power from the grid at residential rates and sell it back at wholesale rates.

But you're right that you can think of net metering as two levels of subsidy:

1. Full credit for the amount solar decreases your demand, but not below zero instantaneous usage

2. The same, down to zero average usage

We have #2, and our solar system wouldn't be worth it without that, even if we were careful to do things like save clothes-drying loads for times when our solar panels were producing a lot.", "timestamp": "1574447696"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123161879442", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123161879442", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Even though our solar only produces about 1/4 of the power our two-family building uses over the course of a year, at times when it's at full production it's making *much* more power than we're drawing.", "timestamp": "1574447757"}, {"author": "Jess", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123163381432", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123163381432", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Ahh, yea I agree the distinction between #1 and #2 is important; at that point it is probably better to think of it as a solar-specific (or home-power-generation-specific) subsidy. Thanks! How much more is your solar producing at maximum than you're drawing?", "timestamp": "1574448278"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123168600972", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123168600972", "service": "fb", "text": "→ On a nice sunny afternoon (we have west-facing panels) we'll typically be producing about 2700W and if we're not using the (electric) stove or (electric) dryer we're probably only drawing about 1/10 of that (lighting, laptops, occasional fridge, ceiling fans)", "timestamp": "1574449845"}, {"author": "Aryeh", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123266534712", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123266534712", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Another framing: a good portion of your rate goes toward the fixed costs of the electricity system. Just because you are producing solar, that doesn't mean you are less reliant on these assets. But you do wind up paying less toward them.", "timestamp": "1574470994"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123266689402", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123266689402", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Aryeh and in the absence of something like solar, keeping the \"per-unit\" charge low and the \"per-kwh\" charge high means people conserve power a bit more than they would if you set those two charges based on your actual costs", "timestamp": "1574471143"}, {"author": "Aryeh", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123139509272&reply_comment_id=10100123267617542", "anchor": "fb-10100123139509272_10100123267617542", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Jeff, indeed. Fixed costs are pretty unpopular in rate design, even though they better reflect the underlying system costs. It's interesting to think of rate design as a policy tool, whether for solar development, conservation, or even economic redistribution (e.g. through tiered rates and low-income programs)", "timestamp": "1574471487"}, {"author": "Bill", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123143960352", "anchor": "fb-10100123143960352", "service": "fb", "text": "Be careful about generalizing from a single data point. Our install this spring cost 1/2 of yours per kWh. With considerably more solar insolation in So Cal than New England, my solar is a good ROI (from both a capital and carbon perspective) even before incentives. With only the federal incentive here in CA and similar electric rates to you, I\u2019m looking at at a first year (after incentives) return of about 18%.", "timestamp": "1574439099"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123143960352&reply_comment_id=10100123156380462", "anchor": "fb-10100123143960352_10100123156380462", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Houses in CA get more sun than in Boston, so it makes much more sense to build solar there then here!

But utility-scale solar is still more reasonable than the best rooftop residential solar.", "timestamp": "1574445368"}, {"author": "Deepu", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123146420422", "anchor": "fb-10100123146420422", "service": "fb", "text": "Is it better than solar roof from Tesla ?", "timestamp": "1574440616"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123146420422&reply_comment_id=10100123155871482", "anchor": "fb-10100123146420422_10100123155871482", "service": "fb", "text": "→ You're talking about things like https://www.tesla.com/solarroof ? The main advantage of solar tiles is that they're more attractive than panels. Otherwise they're more expensive and less efficient. Especially if, for consistency, you put them on parts of your roof that don't get good sun.", "timestamp": "1574445105"}, {"author": "Phillip", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123146420422&reply_comment_id=10100123184743622", "anchor": "fb-10100123146420422_10100123184743622", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Jeff Kaufman They have the virtue of replacing roofing, so, from an economic perspective, they only make some sense when replacing a roof.", "timestamp": "1574455905"}, {"author": "Wolf", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123149469312", "anchor": "fb-10100123149469312", "service": "fb", "text": "\"resiliency advantages\"

What is that?", "timestamp": "1574442231"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123149469312&reply_comment_id=10100123155522182", "anchor": "fb-10100123149469312_10100123155522182", "service": "fb", "text": "→ In the web version of the post it's a link to https://www.jefftk.com/p/home-solar-resiliency

If you have solar panels that produce power when the grid is down (which is not standard) that is useful in a range of emergency situations.", "timestamp": "1574444908"}, {"author": "Jan-Willem", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123149469312&reply_comment_id=10100123159129952", "anchor": "fb-10100123149469312_10100123159129952", "service": "fb", "text": "→ This is the big attraction of systems like the Tesla Powerwall (if you have net metering rather than varying electric rates that let you push power to the grid during demand peaks when the rate is higher). Last I checked it wasn't clear to me that MA regulations would even let you install something like this and still maintain a grid connection. But that was about 5 years ago now.", "timestamp": "1574446917"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123149469312&reply_comment_id=10100123159988232", "anchor": "fb-10100123149469312_10100123159988232", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Jan-Willem MA allows it, and we have one!

High-level FAQ: https://www.smainverted.com/how-to-explain-secure-power.../

Technical details: http://files.sma.de/dl/18726/EPS-US-TB-en-11.pdf", "timestamp": "1574447252"}, {"author": "Peter", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123149469312&reply_comment_id=10100123196834392", "anchor": "fb-10100123149469312_10100123196834392", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Under a net-metering regime, I think the only benefit of a powerwall is resiliency: net metering in effect provides the homeowner with an infinite-capacity battery for free.", "timestamp": "1574460864"}, {"author": "Bill", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123152882472", "anchor": "fb-10100123152882472", "service": "fb", "text": "Why do you think that \"rooftop solar does not make much sense for society\"?", "timestamp": "1574443908"}, {"author": "Peter", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123152882472&reply_comment_id=10100123155602022", "anchor": "fb-10100123152882472_10100123155602022", "service": "fb", "text": "→ The cost rate payers pay is much more than if utilities built large scale solar or even invested in roof top solar on their own terms--ie. only where the roof was well situated for solar radiation.", "timestamp": "1574444934"}, {"author": "Bill", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123152882472&reply_comment_id=10100123158531152", "anchor": "fb-10100123152882472_10100123158531152", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Peter Agreed. But that is a problem with the reimbursement scheme for the solar power (net metering), not with the rooftop location. Net metering has the advantage that it is politically popular, and therefore empirically possible, even if it leads to \"unfair\" allocation of costs.

Agreed also, that rooftop solar may be attractive for a homeowner who prizes \"resilience\" - one who wants to maintain power when the utility grid goes down. They must be willing to pay extra for the electronic controls and battery storage that are required to do this safely. (And they would be wise to assess their critical power needs, to minimize their extra cost.)

I definitely think a carbon tax would help society.", "timestamp": "1574446645"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123152882472&reply_comment_id=10100123159349512", "anchor": "fb-10100123152882472_10100123159349512", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Bill if we fixed the subsidy system better match what we want (less CO2) then residential rooftop solar wouldn't be economically viable, even though utility-scale solar would. That's what I mean by \"not much sense for society\".", "timestamp": "1574447054"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123152882472&reply_comment_id=10100123159474262", "anchor": "fb-10100123152882472_10100123159474262", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Bill almost all solar systems installed in the US don't even provide best-effort power when the grid is down. You don't need batteries for this, just some relatively simple electronics.", "timestamp": "1574447096"}, {"author": "Bill", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123152882472&reply_comment_id=10100123167852472", "anchor": "fb-10100123152882472_10100123167852472", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Jeff Kaufman I know that, Jeff, I just didn't express it in great detail. When the grid is down, you can run on the sun during the day; but if you're going to run into the night, you need batteries on your side of the disconnect switch.", "timestamp": "1574449633"}, {"author": "Bill", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123152882472&reply_comment_id=10100123169394382", "anchor": "fb-10100123152882472_10100123169394382", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Jeff Kaufman Rooftop vs. utility-scale becomes a site-specific question. Meeting the solar power desires of Massachusetts (economic or not) would require a very large land area, which would have limited other uses.

In Eastern Mass, land is too expensive; so solar only goes on carports, big-box rooftops, capped landfills, and waste land on Pike roadsides. (150 Royall St in Canton; Ikea; Stoughton landfill; and Framingham, respectively) Also these sites are closest to the biggest load (Boston) and benefit from Locational Marginal Pricing in ISO-NE.

But in Central Mass, land is cheaper, so in the last few years, some large areas (a few hundred acres) have been cleared and dedicated to solar power. One was forest, but was clearcut for the panels; another was also a capped landfill. These are also in view of the Mass Pike, which I have been driving for a very long time; but they are not Pike property like the Framingham sites.

(Does it count as mansplaining when I explain to another man? Electric power is actually my professional field, so please excuse me.)", "timestamp": "1574450249"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123152882472&reply_comment_id=10100123177108922", "anchor": "fb-10100123152882472_10100123177108922", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Bill There's not much of a reason to have solar generation near people. Land being expensive in Eastern Mass is a reason to put solar in other places, not a reason to try really hard to find places that work. Mass is really not a great place for solar: land values are high, and sunlight is low. We should be building large amounts of solar in the southwest: https://www.nrel.gov/gis/solar.html", "timestamp": "1574453372"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123152882472&reply_comment_id=10100123177303532", "anchor": "fb-10100123152882472_10100123177303532", "service": "fb", "text": "→ \"Does it count as mansplaining when I explain to another man?\"

I'm completely fine with explanation-culture, and am generally much happier if people who are uncertain whether I know something just lay things out fully and not try to avoid offending me by assuming I already know things", "timestamp": "1574453518"}, {"author": "Bill", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123152882472&reply_comment_id=10100123187088922", "anchor": "fb-10100123152882472_10100123187088922", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Ah! But if we built a lot of solar in the SW, we would need to expand the transmission network to transfer the power to the load centers in the East, and that has proved to be difficult, expensive, and politically fraught.

(Apropos, Arizona now requires 12% of its power be generated from renewable sources, and last year rejected Prop 127 which would have raised that to 50%. So they're not likely to build it for out-of-staters.)", "timestamp": "1574456848"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123152882472&reply_comment_id=10100123190232622", "anchor": "fb-10100123152882472_10100123190232622", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Bill bigger picture: if the subsidy were implemented by requiring the power company to cover X% of its production through solar (or, better, pay $X per ton of CO2e they produced) there is *no way* they would choose residential solar. What exactly they would choose instead I don't know enough about to tell, but it's very clear that panels on MA houses are silly.", "timestamp": "1574458147"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123156485252", "anchor": "fb-10100123156485252", "service": "fb", "text": "Mostly I think we should have a (high) carbon tax, and utilities can build solar if that's what makes sense for them.", "timestamp": "1574445424"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123199394262", "anchor": "fb-10100123199394262", "service": "fb", "text": "Note: MA incentives are lower now, since SREC II has ended and now we have SMART", "timestamp": "1574461857"}, {"author": "Chris", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123337302892", "anchor": "fb-10100123337302892", "service": "fb", "text": "Bill mentioned that MA clear cut some forests to make way for solar. So, I started poking around those numbers. Turns out an acre of forest consumes about 15 tons of CO2/yr. An acre of solar panels saves about 180 tons of CO2 / year. So, based solely on the numbers, it seems like a no brainer to cut down forest. Yet at the same time, one need only plant 12 acres of forest to have the same net effect as an acre of solar. Certainly planting trees is far less expensive than installing solar. Of course acres in MA are expensive; but, unlike solar panels, you can plant trees anywhere in the world. So, why not take all these silly, inefficient subsidies, and plant trees in parts of the world where land is cheap? And/or at the least buy up current forests to protect them. Forests and trees have many other advantages too. These aren\u2019t new ideas in any way, but worth a mention...", "timestamp": "1574522546"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123337302892&reply_comment_id=10100123337507482", "anchor": "fb-10100123337302892_10100123337507482", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Where are you getting 15T? My understanding was that an acre of mature forest is in carbon equilibrium, neither consuming nor releasing carbon.", "timestamp": "1574522734"}, {"author": "Chris", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123337302892&reply_comment_id=10100123339762962", "anchor": "fb-10100123337302892_10100123339762962", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Ha- you\u2019re right to question- it\u2019s a number from a Cornell ecology professor- but it\u2019s quoted by the New York Times! So it\u2019s therefore subject to a gross liberal bias (clearly the Times just found an \u2018expert\u2019 to say what they want to hear)! Therefore lets say we actually need 30 acres. Still has to be infinitely cheaper than a solar installation (with far fewer chemicals involved). Seriously though; in a mature forest, most of the CO2 probably gets sequestered in to leaves, which then decompose in to dirt (good) and CO2 (not helpful). But some of it probably goes in to wood. So between dirt and wood, you probably get something. In any case; immature forest certainly actively sequesters carbon, and probably a lot of it (the sources that came up when I was googling said the forests peak at 10 years). So, don\u2019t let them mature. Plant them, grow them, cut them down, build more houses, ease the housing crisis too.", "timestamp": "1574523833"}, {"author": "Chris", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123337302892&reply_comment_id=10100123340052382", "anchor": "fb-10100123337302892_10100123340052382", "service": "fb", "text": "→ PS here was the source for that. I looked at other sources too; on the whole from what I see that looks legit (forest service, universities) vs sketchy (treelovers.org) it seems like forests actively sequester a lot of carbon (esp tropical ones). https://www.nytimes.com/.../how-many-pounds-of-carbon...", "timestamp": "1574523993"}, {"author": "Chris", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123337302892&reply_comment_id=10100123340142202", "anchor": "fb-10100123337302892_10100123340142202", "service": "fb", "text": "→ ok wtf; i pasted nytimes but since i mentioned treelovers (which I made up but of course it exists) it popped up too! \ud83e\udd37\ud83c\udffb\u200d\u2642\ufe0fignore dat!", "timestamp": "1574524070"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123337302892&reply_comment_id=10100123340950582", "anchor": "fb-10100123337302892_10100123340950582", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Chris could you just say what you think, without the self-questioning and source-questioning? Like, what do you think is the source on this you'd like me to go look at?", "timestamp": "1574524449"}, {"author": "Chris", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123337302892&reply_comment_id=10100123341918642", "anchor": "fb-10100123337302892_10100123341918642", "service": "fb", "text": "→ It sounds like what you mean is can I NOT say what I\u2019m thinking. Always a problem for me... Anyway, I also posted the link to the source... (although I don\u2019t necessarily want you to look at it, that\u2019s up to you). You can also find many other sources of course. As usual, so many, that I bet both of us could find many sources which seem legit but are also contradictory. Anyway it seems common sense to me if you plant a lot of trees, it will sequester a lot of CO2, in rough proportion to the current weight of the tree, and also create a lot of useful building material.", "timestamp": "1574525100"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123337302892&reply_comment_id=10100123342218042", "anchor": "fb-10100123337302892_10100123342218042", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Chris: leave existing mature forest alone: neutral

burn forest or otherwise have it decompose: emission

plant trees in places where there weren't any: sequestration

cut trees, and use the wood for something like housing where it won't decompose: neutral

Is there any of that you think is incorrect?", "timestamp": "1574525393"}, {"author": "Chris", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123337302892&reply_comment_id=10100123344044382", "anchor": "fb-10100123337302892_10100123344044382", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Leave: uncertain; seems like some sources say mature forest still actively sequester; again makes some sense to me since even mature trees still grow, and, some of the leaves decompose to dirt.

burn: obvi desequesters

plant: agree

cut/build: why is this neutral? the energy that goes in to harvesting? the eventual decay of housing? for the short term (few hundred years) seems like net sequester to me.

The overall goal atm I think should be to sequester as much as possible as cheaply as possible, in the hopes that in the next 50 years renewables will become more cost effective or we perfect fusion or such. Meanwhile, any money we put toward subsidies should probably be put toward things that I think (sorry I\u2019m telling you what I think again! \ud83d\ude0b) have a higher societal ROI, like education and infrastructure.", "timestamp": "1574526346"}, {"author": "Josh", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123346973512", "anchor": "fb-10100123346973512", "service": "fb", "text": "Our rooftop is great for solar; we have 22 panels, and made 8.565 MWh our first year, 8.579 our second.", "timestamp": "1574528225"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100123966092792", "anchor": "fb-10100123966092792", "service": "fb", "text": "I just checked the meter in the basement, and it's says 3.375MWh. I'm not sure why this is lower than what the online monitoring system records; I would expect them to agree.", "timestamp": "1574823885"}, {"author": "Edward", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100124005987842", "anchor": "fb-10100124005987842", "service": "fb", "text": "Hey Jeff! As an installer, I find the cost to you for the system was a little high. We install systems up here in maine for right around the $2/watt mark.
In my experianc, I find and would love for you to do a study on... the comparison of going solar as residential, or investing in solar credits from well established more efficient solar farms. As you know, these farms are popping up all over the place. Well built and well suited to solar gain.
What's your thoughts on this?", "timestamp": "1574857228"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100124005987842&reply_comment_id=10100124020393972", "anchor": "fb-10100124005987842_10100124020393972", "service": "fb", "text": "→ \"We install systems up here in maine for right around the $2/watt mark.\"

This sounds like a mix of (a) things are cheaper in Maine and (b) this was a relatively small system. I got similar quotes from multiple companies.", "timestamp": "1574866019"}, {"author": "Kate", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100124005987842&reply_comment_id=10100124061541512", "anchor": "fb-10100124005987842_10100124061541512", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Edward, one of my friends runs a local equity non-profit that helped build a neighborhood solar farm, co-created/invested in by all the residents similar to a tech-style community garden. It was a pretty cool use of co-op structure! Let me know if you'd like to talk to him (or if you ever see a study like the one you're looking for).", "timestamp": "1574882395"}, {"author": "Edward", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100124006012792", "anchor": "fb-10100124006012792", "service": "fb", "text": "Also..... what type of system did you have put in? Micro inverter? String inverter? Optimizer?", "timestamp": "1574857304"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100124006012792&reply_comment_id=10100124020299162", "anchor": "fb-10100124006012792_10100124020299162", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Edward 14 LG Neon-R 360 watt panels with three strings and per-panel optimizers, a single central inverter inside the house (SMA SunnyBoy 5.0)", "timestamp": "1574865937"}, {"author": "Adam", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100124009850102", "anchor": "fb-10100124009850102", "service": "fb", "text": "I have a premium system that's about the same size- 3.9kw and the retail starting price was $18.3k before any incentives or tax deductions, so I agree with Ed, the cost seems high. I presume your numbers are correct about the ~9% return and if that's the case, is not 9% a darn good yield, especially considering the minimal risks? I've not had and electric bill since March and I probably won't have one again until January. In order to make solar more effective though, it would be ideal to have on-site storage to act as a buffer to power demands on the grid as this would potentially make the house \"invisible\" in terms of grid load as well as giving homeowners short term power backups. Typically these systems require that utilities be able to access the stored power when needed, but this shouldn't be an issue during storm events, when power is often out and there is homeowner need. Further, if backup systems like this became more prevalent, it would allow to generation plants to throttle back to a lower minimum level. In the current arrangement, plants are actually idling at a higher point than the pre-solar days because plants need to respond quickly to highly variable input from renewable sources (e.g. clouds passing over panels, a drop in wind speed for turbines) and onsite storage would alleviate some of these issues. With respect to solar farms, I have reservations about essentially covering (agriculturally valuable) farmland with yet more restricted use infrastructure. MA laws require solar fields to be individually protected through scrim or with a perimeter fence. Large solar farms always use the perimeter fence as the cost is dramatically lower. This means that there is no grazing or crops and wildlife paths for large animals are disrupted.", "timestamp": "1574859848"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100124009850102&reply_comment_id=10100124025493752", "anchor": "fb-10100124009850102_10100124025493752", "service": "fb", "text": "→ 9% is a good yield for me, but only selfishly. It's only that good because of misplaced incentives.

Batteries in people's basements are far more expensive for balancing grid demand than centralized batteries.

You don't have to cover agriculturally valuable farmland with panels; the parts of the country with the most hours of sunshine have lots of very cheap land.", "timestamp": "1574868770"}, {"author": "Adam", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100124009850102&reply_comment_id=10100124028677372", "anchor": "fb-10100124009850102_10100124028677372", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I think you missed my point about covering the land- farmland or other, in its current iteration, using land for solar, at least in MA, creates a single or minimal use environment, which, to me, seems selfish and short sighted within the construct of the natural environment. As far as incentives are concerned- how are they misplaced? The whole idea of creating incentives was to push the market in a more sustainable direction and one that was less dependent on fossil fuels. Battery backup is currently about $6-8k. There is little line loss, installation is often a day and almost no maintenance is required. I imagine that a scaled up system would be more cost efficient, but it also means a that a lot of other upgrades will be needed. I am not advocating against large scale storage at solar and wind farms, just that it's only part of the mix. If we could essentially zero out the electrical load of 10% of the houses in MA, it would seem that this would go a long way toward increasing grid headroom.", "timestamp": "1574870786"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100124009850102&reply_comment_id=10100124030763192", "anchor": "fb-10100124009850102_10100124030763192", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Adam: \"creates a single or minimal use environment\"

I don't see why \"number of uses a location has\" is something to maximize. There are cases where increasing the number of concurrent uses is more efficient, and cases where it isn't. What makes it good in itself?

\"As far as incentives are concerned- how are they misplaced?\"

Batteries in people's basements are less valuable for grid balancing because the power company can't depend on or control them. Example of the kind of utility-scale system I'm talking about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hornsdale_Power_Reserve

\"If we could essentially zero out the electrical load of 10% of the houses in MA, it would seem that this would go a long way toward increasing grid headroom.\"

We need to dramatically reduce carbon emissions. Since solar can be a way to do this, there are cases where I think subsidizing solar makes sense. (Though I'd strongly prefer to see a stiff carbon tax.) Avoiding needing to move power through the grid by distributing batteries seems unrelated.", "timestamp": "1574871971"}, {"author": "Adam", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100124009850102&reply_comment_id=10100124068302962", "anchor": "fb-10100124009850102_10100124068302962", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I don\u2019t have time to fully read at the moment, but it\u2019s my understanding that the agreement that Green Mtn Power has with its customers is that the utility may access the battery in times of need.", "timestamp": "1574884374"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100124009850102&reply_comment_id=10100124068772022", "anchor": "fb-10100124009850102_10100124068772022", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Adam I wonder whether that's \"we do this on a daily basis, with ms response time\" or \"we reserve the right to do this in emergencies\"?", "timestamp": "1574884558"}, {"author": "Adam", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100124009850102&reply_comment_id=10100124082739032", "anchor": "fb-10100124009850102_10100124082739032", "service": "fb", "text": "→ As long as your home has power, does it matter? Seems largely semantics. The time it might matter would be if you lost power after a withdrawal, which could be argued as an infrequent occurrence.", "timestamp": "1574889185"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100123137198902?comment_id=10100124009850102&reply_comment_id=10100124088856772", "anchor": "fb-10100124009850102_10100124088856772", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Adam what I'm getting at is that by far the most valuable thing batteries can do for the grid is be extremely responsive in matching supply to demand. But they can only do this if they're set up for it, and while centralized battery systems always are I suspect home systems almost never are.", "timestamp": "1574891481"}]}