Re: 'OT] Are you ready for rain tax?

In article <jugn0j5urnlllccvpomu7sgmf2505uo5s1@4ax.com>,
 shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 23:48:13 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
wrote:
 

On Sun, 31 Mar 2024 00:46:40 -0400, shawn
<nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>

Yeah, that's an issue any time we build anything if there is anything
harmful inside and we let it rot or get damaged and don't repair it.
So why wouldn't you just tax the owners of the solar farms to cover
any costs associated with the broken solar panels?
>

>
Our community association had a guest speaker from a solar panel
company (who had a great slide show) giving his pitch and he said
their monthly maintenance fee covered that as part of your maintenance
contract. (Which you were free to drop out of any time but if you did
that specific charge was on you)
>
(I'm interested but realistically the breakeven on such a project
would be after I expect to be six feet under so it would benefit my
kids not me)

 
Yes, we are still at a point where I don't see a solar system being
useful from a cost savings.

And the big selling point-- that not only will you eliminate your own
electric bill, but you can make money by selling the extra electricity
back to the power company-- is going away.

Here in CA, the assembly passed a bill which Newsom signed, which cuts
the amount of power the utility has to buy back from you in half and
they're expected to eliminate the requirement altogether in coming years.

Strange move for a state government that is constantly preaching the
Climate Cult catechism. One would think they'd strengthen incentives to
go solar, not eliminate them. Kinda shows where their interests really
lie-- in money and perks and whores provided to them by lobbysists for
electric utility industry.

Where it does shine is being able to keep your home power going if you
are in an area with unreliable power subject to hours long black outs
or even brown outs.

Here in CA, we have a law that requires your home solar system to shut
down if the power grid goes down. So you have to suffer through a
blackout with everyone else even if you have solar power.

I always thought that would be one of the great benefits of a solar
system in your home-- that if the power went out, you'd still be up and
running. But the state requires that such systems must be configured so
that if the grid loses power, the homes with solar panels have to go
dark, too.

It supposedly has something to do with the problems that homes that are
still powered will cause to the grid and dangers to work crews trying to
make repairs.

I really hope the reasoning is something like that-- that powered homes
electrify the lines or something-- and that it's not some 'social
justice' bullshit where it's not 'fair' if some people have electricity
when everyone else doesn't. We already have the usual suspects bitching
about how solar power is racist because the majority of homes with
panels are in white/rich neighborhoods.