Re: Making 'Clean Energy' Pay
From: Andrew Netherton (andrewnethertongmail.com)
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 16:22:51 -0700 (PDT)
That is a question only the Ontario Ministry of Energy can answer.  My
guess?  It's what the government is willing to pay to establish
decentralized renewable energy production.  It may be more costly to
do it this way, but the government bears no risk.  Just my guess.

In any case, it will sure go a long way to making an RE system more
affordable for cohousing communities, and everyone.

Andrew

On 10/13/06, Brian Bartholomew <bb [at] stat.ufl.edu> wrote:
> Net metering isn't the point of the program in question - the point
> is to enable small producers to sell their energy back to the grid.

I believe net metering in the US handles the situation where the small
producer is entirely a net producer.  Once the net metering
arrangement is set up, the utility will charge you a connection fee,
but if you only put power in that's ok.

> Instead of trying to make solar power practical at our currently
> rock-bottom rate of less than $0.06/kWh, you get a guaranteed buyer
> at $0.42/kWh.  MUCH more attractive.

This 7X difference in price is claiming that, ALL THINGS CONSIDERED,
the renewable energy costs 7X less resources per kWh to make than at
the big fossil plant (or in Canada, perhaps big hydro).  Is this true?
Who knows and how do they know it?

Where did this 7X number come from, and why is it 7.0 and not 0.7 or
70?  Does the number change if a big fossil plant changes from oil to
coal to natural gas?  What if the Summer is cool and there's less
demand from AC, so a higher percentage of the more efficient baseload
plants run?  How can a fixed number possibly reflect ever-changing
reality?
                                                        Brian
_________________________________________________________________
Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/




Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.