[conradpdx]

I'm not even going to get into some of this somewhat hijacked thread.

As I see it, much of this debate is based solely on working within the current energy business structures. However, with a few simple legal changes we could easily increase our use of solar/wind power.

As is stands now; as an individual, if I were to go "alternative" the best I could ever hope for would be that I wouldn't have to pay a power bill. The "system" is set up so that as a property owner I cannot sell power to the power company for a profit (rephrased purposely). Hence the term "Net Zero. And for those with a net metering billing system in place the money they receive for excess power is given to them as credits at a rate well below market value for that power. Those credits are then applied to those times that the house uses more power than it creates. It is part of the contract that they won't pay you for power generation over and above what you use (at least here in Oregon it is, this may vary power company to power company...but I doubt it).

Now an easy way to get more solar/wind power into the grid would be to outlaw this procedure and make it possible for an array/turbine owner get an unlimited fair market value for the power they produce in excess of their needs. This one act alone would dramatically increase the amount of "alternative" energy in the grid, as well as start a domino effect into other great things (here's 10 just off the top of my head).

1) it would speed up the pay back time on alternative power investments a person makes.

2) It would help decentralize the grid.

3) It would increase the amount of power conservation at the investors residence (who wouldn't be more apt to watch their consumption if it meant more cash).

4) It would lower the power loss from transportation. Since the excessive power that house creates would then be sold to commercial properties and properties that can not meet their own power needs near the point of generation.

5) It be revenue for consumers.

6) And it would cost the government nothing more than passing some legislation.

7) It would reduce the amount of political power that the power companies currently have.

8) It would make recovery from natural disasters faster, and those area's hit safer.

9) Solar panels would become sexy instead of an eye sore. Is anything really more sexy than money?

10) Use mass amounts of already developed land instead of building new structures on undeveloped land.

Such incentives would even encourage people with less than ideal locations to go solar, because even if they couldn't get a check at the end of a billing cycle, they'd at least get a better rate of return on the investment rather than the small credit they'd get now.

Now I'm not by any means implying that this measure would be a cure all. There would still be a need for other power generation to supply power during the night, or through extended down periods of the home owners power generation, but these larger systems could be much smaller in scope (or perhaps much bigger and covering a much larger region than they could under the current system). Though the really smart property owners would store some at home to keep from losing money to the grid in such times. But I don't really see any down sides to allowing the general public to be an active part of the solution other than asking us to buy better light bulbs and turn off the lights.