[pfdietz]

If a residential install pays for itself, it's because it's gaming the details of the rate structure. That is, it lets the consumer avoid paying for much of their electricity at the full retail price, while still deriving benefit from the distribution infrastructure those retail prices are supposed to pay for. This is neither honest nor sustainable.

[glenstein]

> That is, it lets the consumer avoid paying for much of their electricity at the full retail price

Much like growing my own vegetables is "gaming" the marking by letting me "avoid paying the full retail price."

This presumes that grid operators are preemptively entitled to dollars out of the pockets of anyone within range of the grid regardless of whether they need it, which is utility propaganda that they use to fight the development of residential power in state legislatures across the country.

[pfdietz]

Physical objects like vegetables have much more inherent storage (especially when canned or frozen). Also, the consumer is typically responsible for the last mile. This is unlike a grid connection, where you have a wire running to your home sized for the maximum you might consume at any moment, not the average. Because solar is correlated among consumers, the distribution network still has to be sized for what they might occasionally consume, not their average consumption. Also, the power sources on the grid have to be there for these occasional peaks. If vegetables aren't available? You eat something else.

If enough people get solar, rate structures will change to be less based on kWh consumed and more based on what you have the right to call on, even if you don't consume it. This is similar to large industrial rates.

[taylodl]

What you are doing by opting out of the grid is raising the price of electricity for poor people. That's an aspect of electrical energy that's rarely talked about. The current model of the grid providing power to everyone only works because everyone is buying power from the grid.

[titzer]

> for poor people

Well, I don't get how only poor people would be targeted, but to inject data into the picture:

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/plugged-in/the-u-s-elec...

That suggests that all of the distribution, maintenance, and administrative costs are on the order of 2-3 centers per kWh, which is about 1/8th of the cost of a kWh. So I'm going to soft disagree on that point. Besides, we could further decentralize with small modular nuclear reactors (think neighborhood to small town to even small city scale) and cut out a ton of grid cost.

[taylodl]

> Besides, we could further decentralize with small modular nuclear reactors (think neighborhood to small town to even small city scale) and cut out a ton of grid cost.

Yes, we could. But you know and I know we're not so let's stop kidding ourselves. Nuclear is off the table in the US for the foreseeable future.