Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by SpodGaju 1547 days ago
And regarding excuses. Maybe we should be able to bring up the road blocks and not call them excuses?

Like this in regards to solar that just popped up on my radar today?

https://www.wral.com/rooftop-solar-rate-changes-could-cast-l...

" NC Capitol NC Capitol Rooftop solar rate changes could cast long shadow over industry, climate change Tags: solar, NC Utilities Commission, utility bills, NCCapitol, Duke Energy, house & home Posted March 25, 2022 6:22 p.m. EDT Updated March 26, 2022 8:41 a.m. EDT

By Laura Leslie, WRAL Capitol Bureau Chief

Raleigh homeowners Gary and Jane Smith are very concerned about climate change. They added a solar array in 2019 to help reduce their carbon footprint.

"There was a tax credit and a rebate from Duke, and it began to make financial sense to put the solar panels on," Gary Smith said.

The panels frequently make more energy than the Smiths need. Duke buys it back at full retail price. It’s called net metering.

But state law says that has to change by 2027.

"The worst case scenario that we could potentially walk into is a complete erosion of this concept called net metering," said Matt Abele with the NC Sustainable Energy Association (NCSEA). "Obviously, we would love to continue down the path of net metering as it currently exists here in North Carolina. But unfortunately, that's just not the reality of how it's playing out."

NCSEA is one of the groups that negotiated the deal with Duke Energy late last year. It will reduce what the utility pays for rooftop solar power during most daylight hours. And it will add a minimum bill for homeowners with solar panels."

So while we try to change individually, the corporations will see a chance to profit. Duke Energy had a 12% net profit margin with a gross profit of $4.4 Billion in December 2021.

I would say voicing your opinion that these utility companies should publicly owned would be a good start.

3 comments

Full net metering is asking folks without solar to subsidize your "batteries", namely the power-grid.

Your power bill is more than just generation costs. It's also distribution AND providing power 24/7, which household solar (without storage) does NOT do.

Suppose that your power company charges $0.50/KwH at peak time. They pay less than $0.50/KwH to other power generators, so why should they pay that to someone with rooftop solar?

Note that solar actually doesn't line up with demand all that well. (Most panels are oriented for maximum power production, which peaks too early in the day.)

I am sorry if I do not shed tears for companies that make billions in profit(!) while ice shelves are cleaving off the Antarctic.

https://twitter.com/StefLhermitte/status/1507397236849876992

These companies are concerned about losing profit, because shareholders. And they actively fight against solar whenever they can because one solar uses is a loss to them. And they use the propaganda you reiterate to believe their sad story.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/13/solar-power-...

https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2021/12/20/fl...

It's not the power companies, it's the other customers of those power companies.

Why should they pay to time-shift your energy production?

If net metering is available to me, I’d orient them for maximum energy (what you called power) production as well.
> Duke Energy had a 12% net profit margin with a gross profit of $4.4 Billion in December 2021.

Having previously invested in Duke Energy (but not currently directly invested in them), that gross profit figure seemed dramatically wrong. Because it is.

For the quarter ending (not the month of) Dec 2021, Duke Energy had a gross revenue of $6.2B, with a cost of revenue of $3.6B, for a gross profit (for the quarter) of $2.7B (figures are correct but seem incorrect due to rounding).

https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/DUK/financials/

Gross profit isn't even a useful metric here. SpodGaju is just cherry picking a number that's high to make it sound outrageous. SpodGaju is ignoring all the infratructure (and related costs) needed for reliable electricity.
Gross profit is gross profit. It is not a number I am making up. They made 5% more profit then they did last year. Their gross profit, meaning money they have left after accounting for all expenses, was $18 billion for 2021.

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/DUK/duke-energy/gr...

Duke Energy annual gross profit for 2021 was $18.137B, a 4.49% increase from 2020.

https://wraltechwire.com/2022/02/10/duke-energy-ceo-q4-cappe...

"For the year, the company reported profit of $3.91 billion, or $4.94 per share. Revenue was reported as $25.1 billion."

Profit, that is money left over. Can you explain how stating a companies profit is cherry picking?

> Their gross profit, meaning money they have left after accounting for all expenses, was $18 billion for 2021.

That’s not at all what gross profit is, nor is their GP for 2021 that high.

In rough terms: Gross profit is revenue minus cost of revenue. Operating income is gross profit minus operating expenses. Pretax profit is OI minus financing and other costs and is much closer to “after all expenses (except taxes)”.

Further, their financial statements show their gross profit for 2021 to be $12.1B with a taxable income of $3.8B. (Both the yahoo link above and WSJ agree: https://www.wsj.com/market-data/quotes/DUK/financials/annual... (For WSJ, take gross revenue and subtract COGS ex-D&A to get to GP))

In California, we have the NEM 3.0 fight https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2022/02/04/california-nem-3-0-de...

In other states (look up what happened in Nevada), rules have been changed that massively rebalance the economy in favor of not getting rooftop solar.

I agree with some of the other comments here about renewables sometimes causing harm through their production / lifecycle. Our best bet is the first “R”: Reduce.