I have a modest set of solar panels on an entirely ordinary house in suburban London. On average they generate about 3,800kWh per year. We also use about 3,800kWh of electricity each year. Obviously, we can't use all the power produced over summer and we need to buy power in winter. So here's my question: How big a battery would we need in order to be completely self-sufficient? Background …
We can’t, but we can do net metering, meaning we can offset costs but not get paid. So the best investment is to pay nothing through Dec. 31 and keep costs manageable at the start of the year (net metering ends with the calendar year).
Only while there’s a surplus. Our net metering arrangement effectively forfeits any surplus at the end of the year. It obviously can vary by region and how much you’d get from surplus vs specifics of the net metering policy, but I think getting paid for surplus is simpler and easier to plan around.
I disagree, but in not in your situation so I can be wrong.
Unless you are producing way, way more electricity than you can use I think net metering is a great arrangement for the customer. (Not so much for the utility company)
The electricity is usually bought by the utility company at a much lower cost than what the customer is paying. Because the generation cost is only a percentage of the cost, there is taxes, maintenance of the grid …
For example in France we pay 0.1952€/kWh, but the utility is buying the solar electricity produced by household at 0.04€/kWh.
Meanwhile with net metering your electricity is virtually bought at the same price as what you are buying your electricity for.
Net metering is potentially better, as you are effectively getting free night usage based ob day generation. My setup pays me, but I get paid 20c per Kw (NZ dollar) and pay about 30c to buy, so there’s a 10c difference. Just as long as whatever you lose on 31st Dec is not too high, you’d be better off than me.
We can’t, but we can do net metering, meaning we can offset costs but not get paid. So the best investment is to pay nothing through Dec. 31 and keep costs manageable at the start of the year (net metering ends with the calendar year).
Net metering is great, much better than being paid for the surplus.
With net metering the grid is basically an free, infinite, 100% effective battery.
Only while there’s a surplus. Our net metering arrangement effectively forfeits any surplus at the end of the year. It obviously can vary by region and how much you’d get from surplus vs specifics of the net metering policy, but I think getting paid for surplus is simpler and easier to plan around.
I disagree, but in not in your situation so I can be wrong.
Unless you are producing way, way more electricity than you can use I think net metering is a great arrangement for the customer. (Not so much for the utility company)
The electricity is usually bought by the utility company at a much lower cost than what the customer is paying. Because the generation cost is only a percentage of the cost, there is taxes, maintenance of the grid …
For example in France we pay 0.1952€/kWh, but the utility is buying the solar electricity produced by household at 0.04€/kWh.
Meanwhile with net metering your electricity is virtually bought at the same price as what you are buying your electricity for.
Ah, I didn’t realize the payout was so low. If it was half the purchase price, it could be better than net metering.
Net metering is potentially better, as you are effectively getting free night usage based ob day generation. My setup pays me, but I get paid 20c per Kw (NZ dollar) and pay about 30c to buy, so there’s a 10c difference. Just as long as whatever you lose on 31st Dec is not too high, you’d be better off than me.