With all the almost daily pleas from ERCOT for us residential customers to conserve electricity, I got to thinking about solar power once again, and how it makes no sense financially to install. A good number of people bought solar when the IRS would give you a sizeable tax break, but still, it would be thousands to install, and it didn't make much sense to me then, and with all these cries to conserve, I guess I'm confused as to why ERCOT and local utilities make it an unwise investment to install solar, from my vantage point.

I used this example. I'm a CSU customer, and I pay roughly $0.14 / kWh. Now, if I spent tens of thousands of dollars, and generated my own power, enough to feed back into the grid, CSU only buys from me at $0.04 / kWh. It costs them nothing to generate this power, so if ERCOT and CSU really wanted a sustainable grid, they'd buy back at what I buy for, or at least a better rate than at a 66% discount.

Curious to see what @Bob Yancy thinks about this.

I believe that CSU installed smart meters a few years ago that would allow them to apply a variable rate structure to consumers.

I would bet that if they lowered the price that they charge for electric during non-peak times, people would find a way to make a change in their electric consumption to shift some usage away from the peak times.

But as Jeff said, that would lead to less revenue.

Next thing you know, the local water districts will ask their customer base to conserve water so they have more water to sell to someplace else.

MeKnowNot said:

---

Next thing you know, the local water districts will ask their customer base to conserve water so they have more water to sell to someplace else.

---

Referring to this? https://www.kbtx.com/2023/08/10/city-bryan-asking-wellborn-sud-customers-conserve-water/

UninformedInternetBlogger said:

---

MyNameIsJeff said:

---

What if I told you the priority wasn't a sustainable grid and was instead making money?

---

This, profits from the utility help pay for buying out department stores and building sports facilities

---

You forgot convention center / concert venue, but I see where you're going with this

UninformedInternetBlogger said:

---

MeKnowNot said:

---

Next thing you know, the local water districts will ask their customer base to conserve water so they have more water to sell to someplace else.

---

Referring to this? https://www.kbtx.com/2023/08/10/city-bryan-asking-wellborn-sud-customers-conserve-water/

---

https://www.kbtx.com/2022/11/01/permit-approved-that-would-remove-large-amounts-water-robertson-county/

Wow, I guess we don't need water in the brazos valley. Let's give it to Houston

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_battery

So for both water and electricity, how are we going to manage the growth locally and in Texas?

Locally, there is a page devoted to all the new housing going up in Northgate and another discussion of a large temperature controlled venue/convention center.

According to the US Census bureau:

"The population of Texas, the largest in land area among the Lower 48 states, increased by 470,708 in 2022, continuing a steady uptick. From 2000 to 2022, the state gained 9,085,073 residents, more than any other state and almost 3 million more than Florida, the next largest-gaining state."

I don't think sweating in the dark and not watering my grass is really going to have an meaningful impact to solve this issue.

Bitcoin

MeKnowNot said:

---

So for both water and electricity, how are we going to manage the growth locally and in Texas?

Locally, there is a page devoted to all the new housing going up in Northgate and another discussion of a large temperature controlled venue/convention center.

According to the US Census bureau:

"The population of Texas, the largest in land area among the Lower 48 states, increased by 470,708 in 2022, continuing a steady uptick. From 2000 to 2022, the state gained 9,085,073 residents, more than any other state and almost 3 million more than Florida, the next largest-gaining state."

I don't think sweating in the dark and not watering my grass is really going to have an meaningful impact to solve this issue.

---

Generation of each in reliable manners is what's needed.

Investment in true infrastructure; increased transmission lines for electric, and redundant pathways where possible. Greater emphasis on reliability for existing generation; retrofit of low-temperature systems for the cold-weather, and investment in greater capacity of nat-gas or nuclear systems. They scale, work well for base, and nat-gas has a low dispatch time, so you can spin them up and down a lot quicker than other types, which can allow for *some* renewables use.

Water is harder honestly, as Texas is at the end of most rivers that flow through it, so we have to deal with any shortfalls from upstream users, and aquifers recharge through rain, which has been less and less. Perhaps we should invest in a few more large groundwater sources, generating a few more lakes, but that just exacerbates the problem downstream. Large scale desalination hasn't been proven enough yet. Water system efficiencies and upgrades to minimize leaks and breaks in the existing distribution systems are a good measure for now.

Both of these utilities require investment though, and that's been the sticking point. Local and state governments are loathe to redirect any money to these projects because, to be perfectly frank, they're not sexy projects often that a politician can have a picture taken in front of. They cost money, and long-term investment has never been more out of style when compared short-term gains as is common now, in all facets of life. The state would rather tout low energy costs and taxes, but do nothing to ensure that the system that provides such is sustainable. Their position is that people and business can move in, have the political win of the gains and infrastructure issues with growth becomes some other administration's problem (hopefully their opponents, so they can say "Look how they can't even manage the base systems; Let us back in and everything will be great")

UninformedInternetBlogger said:

---

Animal Eight 84 said:

---

No other regional grid in the USA has power shortfalls like ERCOT.

---

Incorrect, several ISOs are having issues. It seems the media loves to cover any ERCOT story disproportionately.

https://www.wjtv.com/news/state/mississippians-asked-to-conserve-electricity-amid-high-temperatures/

https://www.rtoinsider.com/30761-california-runs-on-fumes-avoids-blackouts/

https://www.wowt.com/2022/12/23/southwest-power-pool-reports-record-high-energy-use-amid-cold-weather/

---

Scary part is each of those grids are predicting significant future shortfalls due to lack of thermal generation due to shutting down coal plants.

None of those grids are currently at the threadbare level of Generation that ERCOT is. Those articles reference short term Stage 1 alerts.

"Without storage, solar is an offset to a utility bill and nothing more. It does help in Texas, as our typical times of highest load are also when solar is at it's prime output."

While true, large scale solar deployment has shifted the tightest time from peak usage to later in the afternoon when power from wind/solar drops off faster than demand.

Below is an image from ERCOT showing the available power for the grid and the demand for that power from a few days ago. Things got real tight as power from wind and solar start really dropping at around 1900. Demand doesn't fall fast enough to keep up with the loss of wind/solar until after 2100.

We are going to need more storage (batteries) if we are going to rely more heavily on wind/solar.

tvoiles said:

---

Looking at arrays today you can still get 26% tax rebate from Feds.

---

Just a minor correction. It's a 30% tax credit and it'll be available at that rate until 2032 after which it starts shrinking year after year. If you don't have enough tax liability to use all of the tax credit in one year, you can roll it over to future years for as long as the tax credit is in effect.

BiochemAg97 said:

---

"Without storage, solar is an offset to a utility bill and nothing more. It does help in Texas, as our typical times of highest load are also when solar is at it's prime output."

While true, large scale solar deployment has shifted the tightest time from peak usage to later in the afternoon when power from wind/solar drops off faster than demand.

Below is an image from ERCOT showing the available power for the grid and the demand for that power from a few days ago. Things got real tight as power from wind and solar start really dropping at around 1900. Demand doesn't fall fast enough to keep up with the loss of wind/solar until after 2100.

We are going to need more storage (batteries) if we are going to rely more heavily on wind/solar.

---

Completely agreed, storage is paramount to a successful deployment of wind/solar.

The past month has been especially hard though due to the upper-level high sitting basically stationary over Texas, which significantly curtailed wind output. Under normal weather, the crossing point still gets close, but usually never went over as it has been typically. This definitely makes the case for utility scale storage though. We need to ensure there's enough base generation to cover what we need at use solar to shave the heat/daytime related peaks with Wind being bonus power

The biggest concern with the MegaPacks that have been discussed is that their energy storage capacity isn't large enough to make much of a dent. They work well in peak shaving and emergency dispatch to allow nat-gas to spin up for unforeseen outages, minimizing the spike to power prices in the market, but just aren't energy dense or ubiquitous enough to make sense for sustained, multiple-hour load timeshifting. They're more like a large capacitor on the grid rather than a battery.

Slightly off-topic but do we have de-salinization plants along the coast at all? Is that even feasible?

FlyRod said:

---

Slightly off-topic but do we have de-salinization plants along the coast at all? Is that even feasible?

---

Yes it is feasible, lots of other places desalinate seawater.

A lot of desalination of brackish ground water (44 back in 2011).

South Texas voters approved on to desalinate seawater with construction set to start in 2013. As of 2017, they still hadn't figured out where to put it and in 2022, EPA was trying to block it.

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/desalination-a-big-part-of-texas-water-future-2269050.php

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/09/22/texas-desalination-plant-corpus-christi-tceq-epa/

Maybe the real answer is it isn't feasible for political(environmental) reasons.

Though battery storage is still small percentage wise, that is rapidly changing. Between the Megapack concepts (large scale battery storage close to substations) and in-home storage/sell back options, you are going to see that number drastically increase in the next couple of years.

Earlier this week, there was a peak of 1,800MW of battery storage pushing into the grid at the 8:00PM pinch. That number is expected to rise to close to 4,000-5,000MW by next year and over 10,000MW in 5 years. Those kind of numbers start having real impacts during those times when solar is falling off the grid and usage is decreasing with sunset. What happens is that they are charging the battery storage off-peak at night and then selling when the price is $5,000/MWH. The economics of this show that there is clearly money to be made in battery storage being utilized for these peak scenarios.

Tesla Electric (the virtual power plant energy reseller) did a pilot program and it was just approved by ERCOT for individual homes (in deregulated areas...Houston/Dallas) with Powerwalls to sell back stored power into the grid during these peak times. Tesla is acting collectively as a energy broker for all of these Powerwall users and is involved in the buying/selling of power in these peak times. There are multiple articles just from this summer of enrollees in this program making as much as $150-$200/day by Tesla selling their power back into the grid at these $5,000/MWH rates. Though each home individually doesn't amount to much of a difference in the grid, you can see how thousands of homes all of the sudden add up to sizable numbers.

If we continue seeing power rates staying at these drastic levels for extended amounts of time (hours per day), you will start seeing more and more electric providers who are going to move to variable rate plans where they charge the consumer a different rate per hour based on what it's actually costing them to buy it wholesale. I know it's very real conversations with electric co-ops right now. At the same time, there are multiple pilot programs right now where the electric co-op will subsidize either a whole-home generator OR battery storage (Tesla Powerwall) and then they have the ability to switch your home over to the generator or battery storage when wholesale rates become more expensive than it costs to use your own stored energy or generator. It sounds crazy, but when wholesale rates are staying as high as they have been for as long as they are, we start getting to scenarios where it is substantially cheaper to create your own power at-home versus the market rate.

Please share your source for the info in your second paragraph. I would like to read more.

I was actually involved in a co-op presentation about these numbers and pilot programs and it was notes I had from it. I'll dig into where they got the actual numbers from. I do remember seeing this article from earlier this summer and found it. It's a lot of information about large scale battery storage across the US but does have information about ERCOT as well. Some of these numbers they are talking about line up with the numbers/predictions I was shown.

https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/060523-us-battery-storage-capacity-reached-nearly-108-gw-in-q1-317-gw-planned-in-q2

AgProgrammer said:

---

I was actually involved in a co-op presentation about these numbers and pilot programs and it was notes I had from it. I'll dig into where they got the actual numbers from. I do remember seeing this article from earlier this summer and found it. It's a lot of information about large scale battery storage across the US but does have information about ERCOT as well. Some of these numbers they are talking about line up with the numbers/predictions I was shown.

https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/060523-us-battery-storage-capacity-reached-nearly-108-gw-in-q1-317-gw-planned-in-q2

---

Is there some way that EV's could be made to work as batteries? Charging at off-peak times and, if available to do so, sending power back to the grid at peak times.

MeKnowNot said:

---

AgProgrammer said:

---

I was actually involved in a co-op presentation about these numbers and pilot programs and it was notes I had from it. I'll dig into where they got the actual numbers from. I do remember seeing this article from earlier this summer and found it. It's a lot of information about large scale battery storage across the US but does have information about ERCOT as well. Some of these numbers they are talking about line up with the numbers/predictions I was shown.

https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/060523-us-battery-storage-capacity-reached-nearly-108-gw-in-q1-317-gw-planned-in-q2

---

Is there some way that EV's could be made to work as batteries? Charging at off-peak times and, if available to do so, sending power back to the grid at peak times.

---

There has been a lot of talk about it. If a Tesla could be signed up for the Tesla Energy Power Wall deal to sell back to the grid during $$$ times, I could see the consumer buying in.

There might need to be a modification to the vehicle power system to be able to push electricity out the charging port.

Everything else I have seen is really about it being technically feasible, but I've always been left with the question about what is in it for the consumer to run the risk of not having a charged car when they need it. Obviously there are solutions to minimize that risk like only drain car so much, leave time to charge up before morning, etc.

MeKnowNot said:

---

AgProgrammer said:

---

I was actually involved in a co-op presentation about these numbers and pilot programs and it was notes I had from it. I'll dig into where they got the actual numbers from. I do remember seeing this article from earlier this summer and found it. It's a lot of information about large scale battery storage across the US but does have information about ERCOT as well. Some of these numbers they are talking about line up with the numbers/predictions I was shown.

https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/060523-us-battery-storage-capacity-reached-nearly-108-gw-in-q1-317-gw-planned-in-q2

---

Is there some way that EV's could be made to work as batteries? Charging at off-peak times and, if available to do so, sending power back to the grid at peak times.

---

Absolutely. It's called V2G out Vehicle-To-Grid technology

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/09/06/texas-paid-bitcoin-miner-riot-31point7-million-to-shut-down-in-august.html

Bitcoin is the current strategy. But we should invest in one or more gravity batteries to offset the inconsistency of renewables and consumption peaks as well.

Quote:

---

This, profits from the utility help pay for buying out department stores, building sports facilities and conference centers!

---

FIFY

dubi said:

---

Quote:

---

This, profits from the utility help pay for buying out department stores, building sports facilities and conference centers!

---

FIFY

---

I love you