Juice: Why Wind and Solar Make Our Power Grid Less Reliable ------ John Stossel ----- 5 minute video

John Stossel ----- Youtube ^ | Mar 5, 2024 | John Stossel

[dennisw]

Juice: Why Wind and Solar Make Our Power Grid Less Reliable

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNS7Qojr1JQ

John Stossel
920K subscribers
18936 views
Mar 5, 2024
Politicians and activists tell how “renewable" energy will save us from the climate “crisis.”

They don’t tell us about the real costs of green power.

[dennisw]

His longer series on the green power scam is at https://juicetheseries.com/ ===== Looks like free viewing

[FreedomPoster]

As I’ve been saying for years here, you cannot power modern civilization on wind and solar. It’s a Green extremist pipe dream.

[Da Coyote]

Heh, Caption Obvious would even quote himself on that one. The grid is becoming as reliable as a Yugo, and it is by design.

[dennisw]

As I’ve been saying for years here, you cannot power modern civilization on wind and solar. It’s a Green extremist pipe dream.

Denmark gets 50% of its electricity from wind and offshore wind. They have no oil, coal or natgas, so it makes sense for them. Here are the electric prices in Denmark>>>>>

"Denmark, June 2023: The price of electricity for households is DKK 1.610 per kWh or USD 0.232 per kWh. The electricity price for businesses is DKK 0.953 kWh or USD 0.137 per kWh."

[FreedomPoster]

That’s about 75% more than I pay. No thanks.

[dennisw]

California rates are 29.11 ¢/kWh -——
So Denmark’s rates are lower at 0.232 per kWh for homes, while business rates are USD 0.137 per kWh.

Here is what all US states are paying
https://www.chooseenergy.com/electricity-rates-by-state/#:~:text=The%20average%20residential%20electricity%20rate%20in%20the%20U.S.,Energy%20Information%20Administration%20%28EIA%29%20in%20all%2050%20states.

[dennisw]

Nebraska is paying 10.58 ¢/kWh -—— With Oklahoma and North Dakota about the same. These are the lowest in the US that I see here>>>>

https://www.chooseenergy.com/electricity-rates-by-state/#:~:text=The%20average%20residential%20electricity%20rate%20in%20the%20U.S.,Energy%20Information%20Administration%20%28EIA%29%20in%20all%2050%20states.

Denmark beats about 6-7 US states —
Rhode Island is worst at 30.88 ¢/kWh
(except for Hawaii at
41.6 ¢/kWh)

With Massachusetts at 28 ¢/kWh

[Tell It Right]

That’s about 75% more than I pay. No thanks.

Exactly. In Alabama it's been 15.6¢ to 16.1¢ per kWh (after adding in fuel rider per kWh and state tax per kWh, but subtracting flat monthly fees for staying connected even if you don't need it).

[Empire_of_Liberty]

Thanks for the links. I didn’t see it making the grid any less reliable than the wind and solar itself, which may be the only point.

I have been thinking, however, that distributed power WILL make a centralized grid less reliable. As houses and businesses begin generating their own power, the grid will fall into disrepair, like America’s roads.

[dennisw]

I have been thinking, however, that distributed power WILL make a centralized grid less reliable. As houses and businesses begin generating their own power, the grid will fall into disrepair, like America’s roads.

Rooftop solar for business and homes is the main distributed power today. My guess is that for a savvy and educated business, it can make economic sense. They know how to avoid the solar frauds. Many homeowners get ripped off. Such as the original installer goes out of business. So no one to service the installation.

A business that gets subsidies and favorable rates for sending power back into the grid, can make out

[Tell It Right]

Many homeowners get ripped off. Such as the original installer goes out of business. So no one to service the installation. A business that gets subsidies and favorable rates for sending power back into the grid, can make out

I agree with some and respectfully disagree. My experience with decentralized solar at a residence (but in Alabama where we get enough sun to think about doing it):

1. You do have to do your homework to make sure it's worth it. And once you decide it's worth it, you have to do your homework to make you're not taken advantage of. Of course you have to wade through all the solar-saves-us-from-warmageddon bull crap. And even then you have to dig further to find real world numbers based on real world results for your area. Last but not least you have to do an analysis on your own power consumption needs to figure out if it's best for your needs. I.e. if both my wife and I still worked at the office and was raising 4 kids, I'd need more battery storage and inverter capacity to make real use of the solar power collected during the day to power the home at night (battery storage) when we consumed power running many appliances at once (inverter capacity). It wouldn't be worth it. You have to do all of that before you start taking bids from solar contractors so you know who's scamming you and who isn't.

2. I suggest doing it in phases like I did. My Phase I was a much smaller system than what I have now. I used it for a year to make sure it'd work like I expected in all seasons before adding onto it in what I call Phase II. That means in Phase I you have to position your solar panels in a way to have room for more later. And your inverters and batteries (if you get batteries) have to be stackable, allowing you to add more later.

3. Selling power to the grid should be treated as icing on the cake, not a necessary component in deciding if getting solar is financially worth it. States change their regulations going from being "net metering" to not doing net metering. Which is fine to me politically. I get that there are fees involved with keeping the grid up and being able to sell your power to others. But it would mess me up if I had depended on the grid sell. Alabama Power has always been not net metering, so from day one of planning for solar I knew not to depend on the grid sell. I had solar for 2 years before I started selling power to the grid (1 year after the upgrade) so I could study the results and make sure taking on the extra fees for selling solar was worth what I get for selling (4 cents per kWh). It's analogous to making sure a Costco membership fee is worth it by making sure the supposed savings is worth it. But that means from day one you have to choose an inverter(s) with the "zero report" or "no output" feature to turn off the grid sell until you're ready to sell power. Then if you do sell power like I've been doing, be ready to turn it off if the regulations change.

[sauropod]

bkmk

[DIRTYSECRET]

The costs for maintaining the grid are the same when solar/wind are undercutting them. Fewer paying customers. Then what?

[sauropod]

Transformers going up in one big ball of flame...

[Empire_of_Liberty]

I figured that you would show up, here. ;-)

Your post is, of course, spot-on. I also figure that less than 1% of solar users are as savvy as you. The vast majority are just easy pickings for the solar con-man.

For people in-the-know, the government-run solar con-game is at least enabling systems to be purchased and somewhat subsidized by the racket.

My solar is really for long-term emergency with only a minor reduction in monthly power cost - at least, for now.

[Tell It Right]

The costs for maintaining the grid are the same when solar/wind are undercutting them. Fewer paying customers. Then what?

True that. IMHO the way to handle that is for your state to not do "net metering" -- which is solar political lingo for paying back the solar resident at the same rate per kWh for power sold to the grid that he pays for power bought from the grid. Also have flat monthly fees everybody pays for grid upkeep before charging a rate per kWh usage.

For example, Alabama doesn't do net metering. After I decided to sell power to the grid half a year ago I started getting back 4.4 cents per kWh, which is over 1/4th how much I pay for power (after fuel rider and tax is added to the standard rate). In the past 12 months, the true per kWh purchase rate we paid (after rate riders and state tax added) ranged between 14.0 cents to 16.7 cents per kWh (with only one month below 15 cents and 5 months above 16 cents). IMHO it'd be unreasonable for me to get the full per kWh amount for selling power to the grid since I wouldn't be able to so without the power company maintaining the lines and such.

Another thing are the flat monthly fees. All residential power consumers here default to a fee rate in which the first $15.60 of each month's statement are the flat monthly fees everyone pays even if no power is pulled from the grid. That's a $14.50 flat fee to stay connected, plus a 50 cent natural disaster fee (which I've seen go up and down between 50 cents and 75 cents, changed infrequently) to help pay for fixing downed lines. Plus a 4% state tax on top to make it $15.60 before pulling power from the grid. Is that $15.60 per residence enough for maintaining the grid? I don't know. Just putting that info out there.

Lastly, those of us who sell power to the grid in Alabama have extra fees added. For example, I pay a demand charge, like businesses do, in my case it's $1.50 X whatever the highest demand I had on the grid that month. In both January and February that was 23kW X $1.50 = $34.50 that non-solar users didn't have to pay. I'm not fussing. IMHO it's fair to expect me to pay for grid upkeep. It's part of my analysis on seeing if it's feasible to sell power to the grid even if it means adding fees.

I agreed to it knowing that usually 4 months out of the year the extra fees would be more than what I get back or the grid sell. The other 8 months out of the year I get back more than the fees (in part because I'll sell more with more sunny weather, and in part because I won't have as many bursty times I need a lot of power making a high demand charge on my bill). I expect the net over the year to lower my power bills about $150 to $200 annually.

Some states had net metering and didn't expect solar residences to pay for upkeep. But even California has done away with net metering (much to the howl of solar users there who expected others to foot the bill for grid upkeep).

[dennisw]

Thanks! You know solar installations so well that you can be a consultant on installations. Home and business.

Just be sure to use the word honest in your business name. Same as Jessica Alba making millions via her “Honest Company”

“The Honest Company, Inc. is an American digital-first consumer goods company, based in Los Angeles and founded by actress Jessica Alba, Christopher Gavigan, and Brian Lee. The company had $319 million…” —— https://www.honest.com/home

[Tell It Right]

Your post is, of course, spot-on. I also figure that less than 1% of solar users are as savvy as you. The vast majority are just easy pickings for the solar con-man.

We might be talking about a somewhat spiritual issue that's beyond solar vs fossil fuels. There's something to be said for an attitude Americans used to have of depending on God, family, close friends, and yourself --- but not government. Now we have too many people getting their "truth" from the political class without question (see tagline).

It may be that we should spend less time getting into the weeds of arguing fossil fuels vs "green" energy, trans vs leave our kids alone, and spend at least part of our time playing the long game and trying to win the larger spiritual battle of Truth coming only from God and the Bible.

[Paal Gulli]

All “renewable” sources require about 80% of their capacity to be mirrored by conventional sources that are capable of operating in “spinning reserve,” else the renewables make the grid unstable. Which drastically increases the operating cost of renewables.

Las I looked, the Germans were more heavily invested in renewables than any other country, and their electric rates were 3x as high as the average for developed nations.