OT: Why is Germany so (apparently) stupid to give up nuclear

On Sunday, September 22, 2019 at 6:28:33 AM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 4:12:53 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 1:32:00 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 10:50:01 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:1c7c66e4-961d-48b7-
8133-f0104fde3211@googlegroups.com:

<snip>

It's not like you are right about everything. You just adamantly refuse to acknowledge when you are wrong in spite of the facts. You refuse or are unable to "see" what is put in front of you.

I was right about what I posted here, but you drone on.

Trader4 is always convinced that what he has posted is right, no matter how silly the right-wing propaganda he was recycling happened to be, and has no way of learning that he might be wrong (as he often is).

He suffers from the same kind of mental defect as krw - the total incapacity to imagine that he might be wrong.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 5:19:00 AM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 9:51:09 PM UTC+10, whit3rd wrote:

The power utility is trying to double-bill.

The 'distribution' cost is billed thus by the utility to the users: home A delivers solar power into the network, home A meter goes in reverse. That power then goes to his neighbor in home B, whose meter reports
the usage. B pays for electricity and distribution. Billing both A and B for the distribution is... excess, overbilling.

That depends on your point of view.

The utility company had to invest capital to construct the wiring that connects users A and B to each other, as well as the rest of the system, and spends more on maintaining that connection.

But the utility company can buy power at a rate that matches its marginal generating cost,
and is already charging users for the distribution overhead. The OTHER sources of
power that supply the utility , do THEY pay a fee for the wires they
don't own (don't control how it is used/structured/maintained)? I think not.

> It makes sense fro them to recover that cost from the people who are exploiting that connection, whichever way the current flows.

Extortion often makes sense. It isn't cost recovery if they already bill another way to cover that
same cost. Whichever way the current flows, it goes through a meter to a paying customer
who gets the bill. Utilities (regulated monopolies) typically operate on a cost-plus
rate schedule, and costs are NEVER neglected or forgotten, so they aren't now un-billed.
There is, therefore, likely no 'problem'.

There is, however, a complicated bit of verbiage that might support an artificial lowering of the
as-booked price for buying solar power, and THIS IS A MONOPOLY so the solar-producing
customers haven't got a competitive bargaining position, nor a lawyer nor lobbyists.
 
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 7:25:30 AM UTC-7, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 8:19:00 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 9:51:09 PM UTC+10, whit3rd wrote:
On Friday, September 20, 2019 at 10:48:10 PM UTC-7, Rick C wrote:
On Friday, September 20, 2019 at 2:41:08 PM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:
On Friday, September 20, 2019 at 11:19:25 AM UTC-7, Whoey Louie wrote:

... the fact that solar people aren't paying for distribution is a problem
that some states are starting to address.

Oh, no, there's zero marginal cost to 'distribution'. You have a paying
customer who already pays for distribution, who sometimes runs his 'consumption'
meter backward. The so-called problem is a money grab, pure and simple.

Not at all clear what you are trying to say. Who is making the money grab?

The power utility is trying to double-bill.

The 'distribution' cost is billed thus by the utility to the users: home A delivers solar power into the network, home A meter goes in reverse. That power then goes to his neighbor in home B, whose meter reports
the usage. B pays for electricity and distribution. Billing both A and B for the distribution is... excess, overbilling.

That depends on your point of view.

No it doesn't. It just depends on being able to do basic math
and understand income and expenses into a business.

It depends on more than that; it depends on the billing structure as approved
by the (monopoly utility) oversight agency, which fully covers costs
with a profit margin. Trying to second-guess the billing structure of
an unspecified utility, or perceive a 'problem', is akin to saying that the
local agency has made an error (even though such agencies have access to
the books and a mandate to keep a balance).

Which locale, which agency, is being criticized? Can you support the assertion in court?
Or, is someone just being anti-solar-power because he's invested in (other)?
 
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:72894b89-39dd-4fe2-8585-165529d5b959@googlegroups.com:

On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 10:27:49 AM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:80cf2716-e3c8-430c- bd0c-effd75e04deb@googlegroups.com:

ROFL

Still lost in the wilderness.

You always mouth immature, petty, stupid baby bullshit like
this.

It is one of your most pathetic major malfunctions.

Guys like you should feed ants out in the desert somewhere.
That would be a great contribution on your slut mother's part.
You fed some ants. Pretty much all fucktards like you are good
for.

Instead of three crosses on a hill where you are one of the
thieves, it would be three ant hills in the desert with a final
destination for your souls being Hell.

You, the dippy dumbfuck on the right, and KRW on the left, and
Donald J. Trump feeding the ant hill in the middle.

Of course at the neckline. That way, they start feeding from
the
ear canals in.


The above coming from the guy that started off with this:

"You always mouth immature, petty, stupid baby bullshit like
this."

And I see you've now graduated to making threats against the
president. Together with all you other violent suggestions, maybe
it's time for a visit by the Secret Service.

They would also laugh at you and your inane, pathetic horseshit.

Again, child... little, immature bitch type boy... I have never
made any threats against anyone in my life.

Nice try though, punk.

Here:

<https://www.secretservice.gov/contact/>

When you make your false claim, I will then have the means to sue
you for your stupid behavior. That suit... your balls... in a
vise.

Also, they will not be happy about your utter stupidity either.

I would suggest a reading comprehension course. Except you
comprehending anything is a bad bet.

Your call, but you will be placing your balls in a vise at that
point, and it will be me turning the handle tighter. In case your IQ
is even more seriously deficient than I thought, that is a metaphor,
dipshit. You are so fucking fat, your real nuts can't be found among
the folds. In case you were thinking it was a threat. Damn, you are
stupid, boy!

You, motherfucker, had better learn to read *very carefully*.
Because thus far, you have been about as far off the mark as it gets.
There has never been any threat made to you or anyone else.

HOAD, fucktard!
 
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:86de1321-a74c-4418-9581-ebd08d27c64d@googlegroups.com:

Going in reverse is obviously still using the distribution system,
stupid.

No, it is not. It is pumping it.

Used up by nearby others before it even makes it past the local pole
pig primary.

You lose... again.
 
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:69f7bf52-e951-4e4a-
8413-4e8e6dbb77e9@googlegroups.com:

I did know that you're full of BS though.

Too much of a pussy to elucidate your thoughts like a real man?
It shows quite often.

You are a pussified lard ass, and you couldn't even run from a
fucking mouse or even a spider.
 
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:98b217b3-8859-4f5b-8297-27856115a4f6@googlegroups.com:

On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 4:12:53 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 1:32:00 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie
wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 10:50:01 AM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@
decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:1c7c66e4-961d-48b7- 8133-f0104fde3211@googlegroups.com:

In your example, even if A and B traded energy back and
forth
between themselves, they wind up with near zero bills, yet
they are using the distribution network that others are
paying for.


You can't do math either apparently.

"trading energy"?

Distribution charges are from the gen to the load.

No shit Sherlock.

You are both wrong here. Distribution is the local network owned
by the
local utility, transmission is for the long distance network
potentially owned by another company although often utilities have
both, but transmission charges are often billed separately.

Now you want to pick nits. Typical.

You're a goddamned idiot. He knows what he is talking about.

You are devoid of knowledge of ANY of the nits et al, much less the
ones he is picking.

That is for what one uses. If your meter metered it, you
used it

from the gen, over the distribution, into the load.

No shit Sherlock.

You are correct for the small number of people who have zero net
bills, t
hey pay nothing or little for distribution. They pay nothing for
transmission or generation because they are net using nothing.

They pay nothing for transmission or generation because the guy
buying th
eir electricity which only goes through distribution, not
transmission or generation, is billed at the full rate to the
user.

Someone with solar has a net bill of ZERO or close to it.

NO! Only against what they generate. Once that match is even up,
they PAY for what they USE. REAL SIMPLE. WAKE UP.

So,
they are not paying for the DISTRIBUTION system, that they depend
on when the sun goes down or it's cloudy.

They do if the number of their usage is greater than what they put
on.

If they used 400 and they generated 400, they PAY for night use.

If they used more than they generated, THEY PAY for any additional
use beyond the match point.

IF they generated MORE than they consumed, which is unlikely, they
attain a CREDIT against what they use at night. It STILL GETS
METERED.




IT's really very
simple. They are being subsidized, enjoying the use of the
DISTRIBUTION system, without which they would have no electric at
night.

You are truly stupid. If simple home solar was producing some huge
amount beyond their demand, they would pump the grid with it, and a
local battery. That is almost NEVER the case as they are only
supplemental and add up to a portion of the household's daily use.
Especially during the day!

IF they made more, their would be huge DC battery packs installed
in EVERY home solar location, and they would pump themselves at night
and solar draw during the day while also charging the battery pack
back up. BUT THAT IS NOT HOW IT IS, BOY.

Their neighbors, including the poor family with an
electric bill of $150 are SUBSIDIZING them because about half that
$150 bill is to cover the distribution system costs.

You are full of shit. The infrastructure is already in place and
went in before privatization in many cases. Most cost is now in
maintenance, and new builds.


Electric
towers, poles, transformers, wire, cutting trees, crews, etc don't
come for free.
You are obviously far far too stupid to understand how they are
amortized out, however.


If they are going to bill the user on net metering for the
generation and
transmission he is actually using, the other users of the energy
he generates should NOT be billed for the energy he creates.
Rather he should be able to bill the users of his energy.

You soap box is pretty fuckin' rickety, little boy. Maybe go back
to maturity school and come back in about ten years when your mental
age has caught up A BIT to your senile physical age.

They are being paid, it's called net metering, the electric
company typically pays them, but you claimed it's somehow banned.

As much as you mouth and google and yet you have no grasp of
governemtnal controls.

I guess libs just like to ban all kinds of things, whether they
make any sense or not? I mean, what possible purpose would there
be for govt, regulators, to ban an electric company paying for
solar electric you supply to the grid?

One does get paid, just not in the fashion an idiot like you
imagines.
Otherwise all the leaches get a free ride from his expensive
solar installation.

GTFUCYMMWTUC (you'll have to google again, punk)
Net billing is a way to uncomplicate this.

It does nothing to address the costs of the distribution system

You are even more stupid than Donald J. Trump going on about
windmills. Dog shit hell!!! You're dumber than Don's shit, boy.

Bwuahahahahaha!

and that the poor schmucks that don't have solar are paying an
ever increasing share,

You are 100% full of shit.

> while the solar guy gets a free ride.

Nope.

We
call that a "subsidy", a real one.

You represent exactly ZERO "we".

Putting one's solar onto the grid and getting a credit for it is
NOT a subsidy, you STUPID, ILLITERATE FUCKTARD!

Putting it back onto the same grid is not "using the
distribution

network", it is PUMPING INTO it. The fucking inverse,
idiot.f

Going in reverse is obviously still using the distribution
system, stup
id.
And let's just ignore that part. What happens with a solar
home at night or when it's cloudy? They use the GRID, the
DISTRIBUTION system, but they aren't paying for it or paying
very little, an insufficient am
ount.
Their neighbors, including the poor, with at typical $150 bill
are paying about half that to cover DISTRIBUTION, to cover the
system that the solar home still needs. Capiche? That dummy
Rick, he thinks his $15 meter charge is covering the cost of
the whole big distribution system. If that's what every
residence paid, the system would soon go down, first big storm,
the utility would be broke.

Yes, pumping electricity into distribution is "using" the
distribution ne
twork, but not by the supplier, by the user of the electricity.
Should the power company bill twice for the same electricity?

What happens at night? A cloudy day?




Some are wrong about some things, others are wrong about other
things.

And then there is you who's wrong about many things. Claiming that
power companies can't and don't pay for electric that a home solar
system puts into the grid. Thinking that your $15 meter fee
covers the cost of distribution.
What was JL's favorite term? WORD SALAD. Except with you, it is
'retard mumbling'.

> It's not like you are right about everything.

It IS like you never are.

You just adamantly
refuse to acknowledge when you are wrong in spite of the facts.

Funny then that several posters in this group have made that same
observation about you.

> You refuse or are unable to "see" what is put in front of you.

You snip yours away as if the person never enlightened you.

How quaint.. not!
I was right about what I posted here, but you drone on.

Your continual posts are pretty goddamned dronish, little boy.
 
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:86de1321-a74c-4418-9581-ebd08d27c64d@googlegroups.com:

Wrong, always wrong. (And note that isn't a label as you falsely
claim. It's an observation and fact, based on what you just
posted)

It is an incomplete sentence, and a retarded one at that. It is
also very poorly and improperly punctuated.

But now you will come back with the standard reply you stupid
bastards spew when cornered with your utterly inane stupidity, which
is you, jacking off at the mouth about my grammar error observation.
The fact that it is not even a sentence to begin with, kinda makes
seeing it as a moniker belched by a nit-wit a valid observation.
Especially since you do it incessantly. Ooops.

That was a nice try, though, nit-wit boy.
 
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:86de1321-a74c-4418-9581-ebd08d27c64d@googlegroups.com:

What happens with a solar home at
night or when it's cloudy?

Same as any other home. Standard meter gets put onto the line and
begins feeding the home. Wake up, idiot.

They use the GRID, the DISTRIBUTION
system,

They were always using the grid. Everyone does. And WHEN *they*
do, their usage goes through the same fucking meter a retard like
yours does, dipshit.

> but they aren't paying for it or paying very little,

If their alternate is offline, their metered 'grid use' as you seem
to want to call it, is pushing the same meter at the same rate as
yours.

an
insufficient amount.

You're a goddamned idiot, and since when do you decide benefit
points? Power companies are private and their charge structures and
their payback decisions are theirs, regardless of how fair you think
it is.

You are like the stupid fucks that think cyclists should not be
allowed to use the roads.

You are like the gun law dipshits that think their finger pointing
laws will work. What dumbfuck gets to compile the list and point the
fingers? Some retarded bastard like you? No thanks.
 
On Sunday, September 22, 2019 at 11:42:59 AM UTC+10, whit3rd wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 5:19:00 AM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 9:51:09 PM UTC+10, whit3rd wrote:

The power utility is trying to double-bill.

The 'distribution' cost is billed thus by the utility to the users: home A delivers solar power into the network, home A meter goes in reverse. That power then goes to his neighbor in home B, whose meter reports
the usage. B pays for electricity and distribution. Billing both A and B for the distribution is... excess, overbilling.

That depends on your point of view.

The utility company had to invest capital to construct the wiring that connects users A and B to each other, as well as the rest of the system, and spends more on maintaining that connection.

But the utility company can buy power at a rate that matches its marginal generating cost, and is already charging users for the distribution overhead. The OTHER sources of power that supply the utility , do THEY pay a fee for the wires they don't own (don't control how it is used/structured/maintained)? I think not.

How would you know? The "other sources" of power seem to be people with big centralised generating plant, and that would be on the transmission network - the big, high voltage distribution system, rather than the local low-voltage stuff that you seem to be complaining about.

The negotiations that set prices and charges on that are going to be "commercial in confidence" and you won't have a look in.

It makes sense for them to recover that cost from the people who are exploiting that connection, whichever way the current flows.

Extortion often makes sense. It isn't cost recovery if they already bill another way to cover that same cost.

What makes you think that?

The distribution network cost money to build and money to maintain.

Getting the customers to pay for it isn't any kind of extortion.

Loading the charge directly onto the electricity bill as an extra charge per kilowatt hour used to be a tolerably equitable way of getting that money back - heavy users of electric power subsidised more frugal consumers, who paid out less for exploiting a one-size fits all local distribution system but roof-top solar makes it a whole lot less equitable.

Whichever way the current flows, it goes through a meter to a paying customer
who gets the bill. Utilities (regulated monopolies) typically operate on a cost-plus rate schedule, and costs are NEVER neglected or forgotten, so they aren't now un-billed.

There is, therefore, likely no 'problem'.

There is, however, a complicated bit of verbiage that might support an artificial lowering of the as-booked price for buying solar power, and THIS IS A MONOPOLY so the solar-producing customers haven't got a competitive bargaining position, nor a lawyer nor lobbyists.

In Australia, we can choose who we buy our retail power from, and presumably who we sell it to if we've got roof-top solar, or a solar farm in the home paddock.

I live in a flat, so I've got no experience of how that works.

Presumably the various retailers can compete by offering different rates for power used and power sold back, and different levels of fixed connection charge.

If your current regulatory structure is rubbish - and the US power privatisation set up Enron, with al it's criminal frauds - you should be able to agitate for something better.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On Sunday, September 22, 2019 at 11:36:25 AM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 8:59:53 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, September 22, 2019 at 6:28:33 AM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 4:12:53 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 1:32:00 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 10:50:01 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:1c7c66e4-961d-48b7-
8133-f0104fde3211@googlegroups.com:

snip

It's not like you are right about everything. You just adamantly refuse to acknowledge when you are wrong in spite of the facts. You refuse or are unable to "see" what is put in front of you.

I was right about what I posted here, but you drone on.

Trader4 is always convinced that what he has posted is right, no matter how silly the right-wing propaganda he was recycling happened to be, and has no way of learning that he might be wrong (as he often is).


Funny, I never knew the concept of net metering, where solar home installs
get paid for putting electric into the grid was right wing propaganda.

It isn't.

I never knew that the fact that solar homes are not paying much, if anything,
for the distribution grid that they need was right wing propaganda either.

Your take on that is common-or-garden stupidity rather than anything specifally right-wing, though the "global arming isn't anything to worry about" subtext does have right-wing associations.

ROFL

I did know that you're full of BS though.

You do like to think that.

He suffers from the same kind of mental defect as krw - the total incapacity to imagine that he might be wrong.

Except of course, I'm not wrong here, stupid.

Not even wrong - merely irrelevant noise.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 7:25:30 AM UTC-7, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 8:19:00 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 9:51:09 PM UTC+10, whit3rd wrote:
On Friday, September 20, 2019 at 10:48:10 PM UTC-7, Rick C wrote:
On Friday, September 20, 2019 at 2:41:08 PM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:
On Friday, September 20, 2019 at 11:19:25 AM UTC-7, Whoey Louie wrote:

... the fact that solar people aren't paying for distribution is a problem
that some states are starting to address.

Oh, no, there's zero marginal cost to 'distribution'. You have a paying
customer who already pays for distribution, who sometimes runs his 'consumption'
meter backward. The so-called problem is a money grab, pure and simple.

Not at all clear what you are trying to say. Who is making the money grab?

The power utility is trying to double-bill.

The 'distribution' cost is billed thus by the utility to the users: home A delivers solar power into the network, home A meter goes in reverse. That power then goes to his neighbor in home B, whose meter reports
the usage. B pays for electricity and distribution. Billing both A and B for the distribution is... excess, overbilling.

That depends on your point of view.

No it doesn't. It just depends on being able to do basic math
and understand income and expenses into a business.

It depends on more than that; it depends on the billing structure as approved
by the (monopoly utility) oversight agency, which fully covers costs
with a profit margin. Trying to second-guess the billing structure of
an unspecified utility, or perceive a 'problem', is akin to saying that the
local agency has made an error (even though such agencies have access to
the books and a mandate to keep a balance).

Which locale, which agency, is being criticized? Can you support the assertion in court?
Or, is someone just being anti-solar-power because he's invested in (other)?

Oh, BS. I can read an electric bill. Mine, about half is for the cost of
the energy, the other half is for DISTRIBUTION. This isn't anything new,
if you've followed solar at all, it's come up before, it's coming up more
and some states are starting to take steps to address it, ie making solar
homes pay their real cost, instead of being subsidized by putting the cost
of distribution on their neighbors.
 
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 9:42:59 PM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 5:19:00 AM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 9:51:09 PM UTC+10, whit3rd wrote:

The power utility is trying to double-bill.

The 'distribution' cost is billed thus by the utility to the users: home A delivers solar power into the network, home A meter goes in reverse. That power then goes to his neighbor in home B, whose meter reports
the usage. B pays for electricity and distribution. Billing both A and B for the distribution is... excess, overbilling.


That depends on your point of view.

The utility company had to invest capital to construct the wiring that connects users A and B to each other, as well as the rest of the system, and spends more on maintaining that connection.

But the utility company can buy power at a rate that matches its marginal generating cost,
and is already charging users for the distribution overhead. The OTHER sources of
power that supply the utility , do THEY pay a fee for the wires they
don't own (don't control how it is used/structured/maintained)? I think not.

Do the other sources of grid power need to take power from the grid to power
their generation plants? Home solar users need and use the grid for
that when the sun isn't there, yet their electric bills are zero or
near zero and they aren't paying for the grid. Their neighbors who don't
have solar, including the poor, are paying an increasing share of the
cost of the distribution grid. If half of homes have solar, the distribution
charges on the remaining half will have to about double to cover the cost.
Geez.
 
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:ac62de5a-7e22-4288-9e15-cf54a62cdbb1@googlegroups.com:

Sure, except that at the end of the month, they have an electric
bill of ZERO or close to it, so they are not paying the cost of
the distribution system that they desperately need. Without it,
they would have no power at night, no way to put electric into the
grid either.

They most certainly DO pay. They get CASH credit against their
usage for their solar. THAT is why the bill APPEARS to be little or
none. WAKE THE FUCK UP!

I find it very amusing that you are unable to do this *VERY SIMPLE*
math. Of course, I am adult enough that I am not "rolling on the
filthy floor laughing" like you do so often. Maybe you been
breathin' floor dust all these years. I am going with the decidedly
obvious fact that you dumbed yourself down. Self retarded. Self
impotentized.

Go find a tall building to jump from, DipTard4.
 
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:312e60fb-b48f-4a95-8e07-8e5e98f36489@googlegroups.com:

On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 11:44:57 PM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:86de1321-a74c-4418-9581-ebd08d27c64d@googlegroups.com:

Going in reverse is obviously still using the distribution
system, stupid.

No, it is not. It is pumping it.


Wrong, always wrong. And what happens with those solar homes that
are paying little or zero electric bills when the sun goes down,
stupid? They need the grid just like their neighbors, except they
aren't paying for it.

Yes, they are you fucking retarded twit!

WHEN their meter moves because they are using the grid instead of
their solar, they pay! IF their solar provided them additional
credit against that, they STILL payed for it with their solar.

You are just pissed because you have to pay for it with cash. They
pay with cash too. It just happens to be the 'cash' credit they got
for their generation that was over and above their usage, if any.

I have a friend who pays about $100 a year, and that because he
uses more than he generates.

Hey, jailhouse boy... Use matchsticks if it helps you.

Real simple, you jailhouse mentality zero business acumen dumbfuck!
 
On Sunday, September 22, 2019 at 12:28:27 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:98b217b3-8859-4f5b-8297-27856115a4f6@googlegroups.com:

On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 4:12:53 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 1:32:00 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie
wrote:
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 10:50:01 AM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@
decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:1c7c66e4-961d-48b7- 8133-f0104fde3211@googlegroups.com:

In your example, even if A and B traded energy back and
forth
between themselves, they wind up with near zero bills, yet
they are using the distribution network that others are
paying for.


You can't do math either apparently.

"trading energy"?

Distribution charges are from the gen to the load.

No shit Sherlock.

You are both wrong here. Distribution is the local network owned
by the
local utility, transmission is for the long distance network
potentially owned by another company although often utilities have
both, but transmission charges are often billed separately.

Now you want to pick nits. Typical.

You're a goddamned idiot. He knows what he is talking about.

No, Rick thinks his $15 meter monthly meter charge is what it takes
to pay for the grid. Actually it's about half of a non-solar homes
bill each month. I know how to read a utility bill.



You are devoid of knowledge of ANY of the nits et al, much less the
ones he is picking.

That is for what one uses. If your meter metered it, you
used it

from the gen, over the distribution, into the load.

No shit Sherlock.

You are correct for the small number of people who have zero net
bills, t
hey pay nothing or little for distribution. They pay nothing for
transmission or generation because they are net using nothing.

They pay nothing for transmission or generation because the guy
buying th
eir electricity which only goes through distribution, not
transmission or generation, is billed at the full rate to the
user.

Someone with solar has a net bill of ZERO or close to it.

NO! Only against what they generate. Once that match is even up,
they PAY for what they USE. REAL SIMPLE. WAKE UP.

Which is what I said, zero or near zero, stupid.





So,
they are not paying for the DISTRIBUTION system, that they depend
on when the sun goes down or it's cloudy.

They do if the number of their usage is greater than what they put
on.

But then they are only paying a small amount, not the true cost of the
grid. Again, here the electric cost per Kwh is about half for the energy,
half for DISTRIBUTION. A non-solar home has a bill of $150, they are
paying $75 for the grid. A solar home has a bill of ZERO, they are paying
ZERO for the grid. Yet they need the grid at night, without it they would
have no power. Follow it to it's logical conclusion. If everyone was
a solar customer with a zero bill, then the utility would be taking in
no money to pay for the distribution system, the grid. Capiche?
Right now, their neighbors are subsidizing them, they are paying for the
grid and they will pay an increasing burden.






If they used 400 and they generated 400, they PAY for night use.

Wrong, always wrong. If they have a net usage of zero, they pay zero,
or close to it. There may be a small monthly meter charge, but it's
not paying for the grid.



If they used more than they generated, THEY PAY for any additional
use beyond the match point.

IF they generated MORE than they consumed, which is unlikely, they
attain a CREDIT against what they use at night. It STILL GETS
METERED.




IT's really very
simple. They are being subsidized, enjoying the use of the
DISTRIBUTION system, without which they would have no electric at
night.

You are truly stupid. If simple home solar was producing some huge
amount beyond their demand, they would pump the grid with it, and a
local battery. That is almost NEVER the case as they are only
supplemental and add up to a portion of the household's daily use.
Especially during the day!

Gee, "especially" during the day? Solar doesn't work at night, stupid.
The house would have no power without the grid, which solar homes aren't
paying for, though the desperately need it and use it.



IF they made more, their would be huge DC battery packs installed
in EVERY home solar location, and they would pump themselves at night
and solar draw during the day while also charging the battery pack
back up. BUT THAT IS NOT HOW IT IS, BOY.

Their neighbors, including the poor family with an
electric bill of $150 are SUBSIDIZING them because about half that
$150 bill is to cover the distribution system costs.

You are full of shit. The infrastructure is already in place and
went in before privatization in many cases. Most cost is now in
maintenance, and new builds.

And their non-solar neighbors are paying for that distribution system,
the solar home with a zero bill is not, stupid.

Wrong, always wrong.
 
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 11:52:46 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:86de1321-a74c-4418-9581-ebd08d27c64d@googlegroups.com:

What happens with a solar home at
night or when it's cloudy?

Same as any other home. Standard meter gets put onto the line and
begins feeding the home. Wake up, idiot.

Sure, except that at the end of the month, they have an electric bill
of ZERO or close to it, so they are not paying the cost of the distribution
system that they desperately need. Without it, they would have no power
at night, no way to put electric into the grid either.




They use the GRID, the DISTRIBUTION
system,

They were always using the grid. Everyone does. And WHEN *they*
do, their usage goes through the same fucking meter a retard like
yours does, dipshit.

Sure, but with a bill of zero, they aren't paying for that distribution
system, stupid.





but they aren't paying for it or paying very little,

If their alternate is offline, their metered 'grid use' as you seem
to want to call it, is pushing the same meter at the same rate as
yours.

an
insufficient amount.

You're a goddamned idiot, and since when do you decide benefit
points? Power companies are private and their charge structures and
their payback decisions are theirs, regardless of how fair you think
it is.

Wrong, always wrong. What they can and can't do, what they can and
can't bill for, is pretty much set by state regulators.




You are like the stupid fucks that think cyclists should not be
allowed to use the roads.

You are like the gun law dipshits that think their finger pointing
laws will work. What dumbfuck gets to compile the list and point the
fingers? Some retarded bastard like you? No thanks.

We already have a "list", the fed instant check database. Maybe they
can answer your hostile questions? BTW, it's not working very well
either, as evidenced by the dramatic rise in mass shootings, at least
some of those where whack jobs that were known to the local police
walked right into gun stores and bought whatever they wanted to,
because there was no permit process and they were not in the database.
 
On Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 11:44:57 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:86de1321-a74c-4418-9581-ebd08d27c64d@googlegroups.com:

Going in reverse is obviously still using the distribution system,
stupid.

No, it is not. It is pumping it.

Wrong, always wrong. And what happens with those solar homes that are
paying little or zero electric bills when the sun goes down, stupid?
They need the grid just like their neighbors, except they aren't paying
for it.
 
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:a8503f1f-a4bf-43f0-8673-b167c8772d6a@googlegroups.com:

Oh, BS. I can read an electric bill. Mine, about half is for the
cost of the energy, the other half is for DISTRIBUTION.

Yes, IDIOT. AND WHEN THE SOLAR USER READS HIS, half of HIS *METERED*
usage is for the distribution thereof.

IOW, if he generates, that meter does not move, because there was NO
USAGE. If he uses it when not generating, it does move.

If it does move, he pays. Same same. Get over it, ya dippy twit.
 
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:87dfe032-4f71-4b16-a23a-3c5ef49e0016@googlegroups.com:

Do the other sources of grid power need to take power from the
grid to power their generation plants? Home solar users need and
use the grid for that when the sun isn't there, yet their electric
bills are zero or near zero and they aren't paying for the grid.

Goddamn you are stupid, boy! They DO PAY! They simply pay with
solar wattage instead of cash. Wake up, you sub-human, math devoid
idiot!

Their neighbors who don't have solar, including the poor, are
paying an increasing share of the cost of the distribution grid.

You are obsessed with this poor middle class asshole who can barely
pay crap. Why? Is that you, fat ass?

You use, you pay. Period. A solar included consumer uses his own
solar. When that is not there, he uses the METERED grid connection.

Wake the fuck up.

If half of homes have solar, the distribution charges on the
remaining half will have to about double to cover the cost. Geez.

You are seriously wrong, child. And not simply on this point.

Remember when I said that the cause was inexperienced pilot error,
and you refuted? Guess what the final determination is.
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top