11192Re: [hreg] SRECs in Texas
- Mar 12, 2012Interesting thread.Big factor missed on the Texas Model was Time of Use and Time of Production. Wind tends to produce best at night, and Spring and Fall. All the most worthless times for Electricity. Just not how we tend to use Electricity.Heaviest Times of Use are Mid-Summer afternoons (Air Conditioning) which would have favored Solar Thermal Production. Second Heaviest Time of Use is Winter Days -- which would have favored Solar PV Production.Wind is a Swing-and-a-Miss on both. At some times the West Texas Wind has become so worthless (worth less than Zero) the Wind Operators have had to PAY the Grid Operators to take the power -- it is worth less than Zero. Only keeps functioning due to the Production Credit (Federal Money).But it was cheapest to slap the Wind Turbines up without regard to Transmission, or Time of Use, just to chase the Tax Credits and Grants. So Texas is way out of balance towards Wind. A legit market has NOTHING to do with this.Back towards where this started. Solar RECs. They trade (if they have any value) in Blocks of Megawatt-hours and up. Makes it hard for small players in the game. But if you look at the (not so fine) Fine Print with Oncor -- if there are rebates involved on the install --Oncor owns the RECs.
--- On Mon, 3/12/12, Andrea Wisner <amwisner@...> wrote:
From: Andrea Wisner <amwisner@...>
Subject: Re: [hreg] SRECs in Texas
To: "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>
Date: Monday, March 12, 2012, 10:07 AMThere are factors other than money ("the market") that determine the value of a resource.Andrea
From: Robert Johnston <junk1@...>
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 9:28 AM
Subject: RE: [hreg] SRECs in Texas
I must have missed something. What’s the downside of letting the market choose the winners? If wind is cheaper than solar, why not go with that? Don’t you want the cheapest RE source to compete with fossil fuels?
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>