Tag Archives: nonsense

Zombie Lie Returns; Time To Kill It Again

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

What Happened: This fella right here – Lucas Davis,an Associate Professor of Economic Analysis and Policy at the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley – trotted out the zombie lie about the solar-customer cost shift again on something called “The Energy Institute at Haas” blog.

  • If he would have picked up the phone and called down to the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, they could have cautioned him against spreading this garbage.
  • How many times to we have to debunk this before reputable people stop trafficking in this idiocy?
  • I haven’t been able to figure out yet who funds the Haas School, but whoever it is needs to get a better handle on what its people are putting out (unless the goal is to misinform the public on a host of public policy issues – more on that in a second).

zombie

SolarWakeup’s View:  (Me, to Yann): “Didn’t I just write this story?”

[Yann to me]: “No.”

[Me to Yann]: “Are you sure? This feels so familiar.”

[Yann to me]: “Look, it’s a zombie lie story, so yeah, you’ve written it before. But this is a different person telling the zombie lie – and it’s not even a utility? He’s an associate professor and everything.”

[Me to Yann]: (Look of quiet desperation) OK. I’ll write it. This is going to be what’s engraved on my tombstone, isn’t it? ‘Frank Andorka, Killed By The Zombie Lie’

[Yann to me]: (Grin)

[wds id=”3″]

Sadly, this is an article I could probably write in my sleep. Another pinhead – this time Lucas Davis, an associate professor of economic analysis and policy at the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley – took to The Energy Blog At Hass to peddle the notion that when solar customers join the electricity-production mix, they shift costs to non-solar users. In his example, California non-solar ratepayers are paying $65 more per year to “subsidize” solar rate payers, who are compensated for their extra electricity by the utilities.

It’s the zombie lie concerning “cost-shifting” again, which, as I have shouted into the abyss so many times I can’t even count them all, is complete nonsense. I should have this explanation as a macro so I don’t have to type it every time. As it is, I’m just going to cut and paste it from my story on Kentucky 12 days ago. If you’re bored reading it, maybe tell Davis and his ilk to stop arguing lies. Let’s review:

The argument goes like this: Retail-rate net metering, a program under which solar customers are reimbursed for the excess electricity they produce, pushes extra costs on to non-solar customers because solar customers aren’t paying for grid upkeep.

What the utilities don’t want you to notice, of course, is that solar customers also relieve congestion on the grid during peak production times, which saves strain on the transmission and distribution lines. So while they may not be paying for upkeep directly, solar production saves wear and tear, which ultimately saves the utility money in the form of repair costs.

You’re welcome.

I should note here that while there is a minor cost-shift, a study by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory indicates the shift only happens when a state passes the 10% mark for solar-electricity generation. And I should also note that even at more than 10%, the shift is so small you’d need the Berkeley Lab’s $27 million electron microscope to see it.

I can’t tell for sure, but from this post and the rest of the posts on Haas School’s blog on energy, it seems like they have an agenda, namely to turn back the clock to the 19th century when all electricity was produced from fossil fuels.

I’m getting so tired of fighting this zombie lie – does anyone have a suggestion about how I can kill it for good? I thank you, and my dog thanks you.

More:

Why Am I Paying $65/year for Your Solar Panels? (The Energy Institute Blog at Haas) [Me, at my computer screen while I’m typing this]: FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, YOU’RE NOT, YOU LYING LIAR! (breathes deeply)

Zombie Lie Informs Kentucky’s Attempt To Kill Its Solar Industry

South Carolina Solar Soul Under Attack [Me]: I’m beginning to feel like MY soul is under attack.

Bonus:

Feast your eyes on this electron microscope. It’s amazing what $27 million will buy.

Will Natural Gas Lose Its Place As A Transition Energy?

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

What Happened:Our friends at the Environmental Defense Fund penned a fascinating blog post on the future of energy production in the Northeast, with particular focus on:

  • whether the lack of natural gas pipelines in the area will harm fuel stability in the region, and
  • outlines the challenges for regulators in the region as they look to keep their energy supplies stable.

SolarWakeup’s View:  The central question facing the Northeast, at least according to N. Jonathan Peress of the Environmental Defense Fund is how the Northeast will continue to keep its fuel supplies secure if it uses natural gas as its transition energy from fossil fuels to renewables.

[wds id=”3″]

Peress does an admirable job of laying out some of the myths surrounding the building of natural gas pipelines in the Northeast and then goes on to explain how these challenges might be overcome with the right regulatory framework.

Here’s the thing, though: As recent examples in Arizona and California indicate, renewables may have already lapped natural gas as a transition energy. Let’s review:

In California, the Public Utilities Commission has become far more unwilling to allow its utilities to build or fix natural gas plants and is insisting far more often that they produce grid support through the use of solar + storage instead. And in Arizona, the Corporation Commission (its public utilities commission – if I were king for a day, I would insist these bodies be called by a consistent name) told Arizona Public Service (the state’s largest utility) to throttle back its plans to build 5.3 GW of natural gas plants in its latest integrated resource plan and instead resubmit it with more renewables (read: solar) in it.

Energy storage is the key. As the technology gets better and the prices come down, the need for a transition energy like natural gas becomes increasingly less important. So while N. Jonathan Peress’ analysis may well be spot on, it may also become increasingly irrelevant as renewables + storage become more prevalent in the generation mix.

More:

New England’s energy future lies in the balance

Natural Gas Plans Hit Snag For Arizona Utility