bsmithwood.bsky.social
Here to nerd out on energy policy. Occasional commentary on parenting and politics.
47 posts
121 followers
146 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Yup. But real ones also didn’t manage their most vocal association. Shame on us. It has also helped make all other DERs collateral damage
comment in response to
post
*will
comment in response to
post
My baby sister back in 2017 did an international law rotation during law school and her take away was “it’s BS”. To which I said “no, it’s norms based. And frankly all law is ultimately norms based”. I hate being right.
comment in response to
post
Their master electrician in MA straight up told me it was not code to use SPAN to avoid a service upgrade in which case…what is the point?
comment in response to
post
Ppl talk about these data centers insane capex costs and price insensitivity as if that is going to be a long-term situation. This sector will rationalize and they’ll need to contain a huge variable cost
comment in response to
post
Nice!
comment in response to
post
Wired seems to be doing actual reporting these days
comment in response to
post
Do hybrid. In winter you’lil want the option for it to switch over when temp runs low
comment in response to
post
Thanks for your service, Costa
comment in response to
post
I think this is a great time. It is an important issue with real impacts for real people. But turning problems
Into policy positions and that into election results has been a real challenge, at least in the states where I work
comment in response to
post
First fusion plant will be basically be in my backyard in Devens, MA …if it works
comment in response to
post
So as a geriatric millenial I can say that as I get older I going more analogue, not because I want to but out lack of patience. If a place will take a check, insteading of doing some bS to make passwords in an app to make a payment…check is in the mail!
comment in response to
post
Preach! One of the things I love about working for a solar developer is seeing the benefits a solar project brings to families. Literally keeps the farm a farm into the next generation.
comment in response to
post
Like $1800/yr for two power walls. Car gets $.03 off peak charging credit. My thermostat can’t do demand response but if it could that is like a flat $25 a season credit
comment in response to
post
What is average wholesale price? 3c? Then add maybe a bit of T&D (that still is earlier in day than caiso net peak) and line losses…people shouldn’t be surprised that it lands at like 5c
comment in response to
post
Yeah I think many people
Still get this. The 75% haircut comes from two things: 1) rates =/= avoided costs; 2) solar used to coincide wit the hours that drove G,T, and D capicty needs. Now it mostly out of those hours and just avoiding energy….
comment in response to
post
First focus of the rooftop people
Needs to be being taken seriously as constructive professionals. Until that happens these kind of reports won’t mean anything, even if they are of better quality
comment in response to
post
3) I am sympathetic to doing a look back that uses historical grid conditions and avoided costs. Early NEM solar was just what the doctor ordered. Incremental solar-only is pretty low value now.
comment in response to
post
Some things I can support conceptually:
1) you can’t treat self consumption
As a cost shift a priori. If you want to debate whether people pay a fair share that is a cost of service study.
2) the fact that care customers get paid less and their nem reduces care subsidy is a reasonable point
…
comment in response to
post
I am not going to get into the avoided cost (benefits) analysis cause he just ignores how California parties and the commission calculate these things.
comment in response to
post
The author says he is correcting the Rate Impact Measure test but this is not a RIM test.
comment in response to
post
So messenger is a no go. Since I did get some inquires about it (all from solar people…none of the non solar people asked of course), I did take a Quick Look. Some observations: 1) what kind of study is this? It’s not a VOs, it’s not a C/B study, it’s not a cost of service…it’s a a cobbled set of #s
comment in response to
post
So as a legislative/regulatory person, first thing I look at when I see a report is who is sponsoring it. Whether or not they paid for it, CALSSA took the bullhorn on this report, so my interest immediately ended. Not only do I not find them credible, no one with any control over energy does.
comment in response to
post
I agree with the path forward but not the premise
comment in response to
post
It’s gonna happen in CA too…
comment in response to
post
Vderlove is still hot!
comment in response to
post
i too was underwhelmed by that study John cites. But I disagree that reducing usage = cost shift. A cost of service study is what is needed to determine whether self consumption leads to unfair underpayment
comment in response to
post
A lot of this spend is just scapegoating DERs. Some distribution utilities don’t even have accurate maps of their distribution systems. DERs work fine with the analogue grid.
comment in response to
post
Oh man, Xiao. I shouldn’t have posted right before bedtime! Ha! I will read this all