More than 15K posts served!
- Dec 20, 1997
- Reaction score
- Yacolt, WA
Except that you are advocating that the company should lose money dealing with people who use solar. In effect, you don't want them to pay for electricity at all since you want the power company to "store" their surplus for free
So that means everyone else gets to subsidize the cost of labor and materials in getting power to that residence since that residence won't be paying anything towards upkeep of the grid. Do you think it's cheap to get a bucket truck and a crew out to fix a blown transformer or downed lines? What about all the other employees?
You are advocating a business model that has an end result of putting the company out of business and destroying the grid.
And you still haven't answered why the company should be forced to pay 3.3x more for power from one source when it can get it far cheaper elsewhere. Electricity is a commodity just like any other product.
Now I could see something more than 3 cents, but anybody who has ever managed or owned a business can see that forcing a business to pay exactly what they charge for a product is a quick way to go out of business
Yes, destroy the company if they're unable to provide a public good. Make it a public utility. Why on Earth would you let something as inherently non-competitive as electricity supply be governed by retail supply-and-demand?