Comments on: Berkeley Lab report finds storage attachment rates jumped under NEM 3.0

By: Kelly Pickerel

Kelly Pickerel — Mon, 20 May 2024 16:14:16 +0000

In reply to Suzanna Sanborn. Unfortunately, math is not our strong suit. We've updated the headline again. Thank you

By: Suzanna Sanborn

Suzanna Sanborn — Mon, 20 May 2024 15:46:51 +0000

Hi – I’m still a little confused by the headline – if ten out of every 100 projects had storage attached and now 60 out of every 100 projects has storage attached, isn’t that a 500% increase? (60-10)/10 = 5 — or 500%. Here’s a calculator link -https://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/algebra/percent-change-calculator.php You can enter 10% for V1 and 60% for V2.

By: Solarman2

Solarman2 — Fri, 17 May 2024 23:52:45 +0000

This NEM to NBT “called” NEM 3.0 is starting to get sketchy in a Star Wars kind of way. When character Princess Leia says: “The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.” In this instance the actual electricity customers are saying to the President of the CPUC, “Alice Reynolds, the more you disturb the NEM, the more consumers will slip through your fingers.”

Personally I’m not seeing a need to “go off grid” as there’s a lot of robust interconnections in place with decades of usefulness left in their original designs in place. I DO like the prospect of a technology stack that allows a larger solar PV panel array on one’s roof a larger in home battery energy storage system with a hybrid inverter that can accommodate such efficacy of “duck curve” daily energy storage at home, then using that stored energy to apply to the TOU rate spiking period of the day usually between 4PM and 9PM each day. Expand the battery storage and allow standby backup resiliency when a PSPS is invoked by the local utility on any given day. In California one might find they need a 65kWh home battery to cover these onerous operations and rate programs foisted on the retail electricity users. Basically grid agnostic is still better than (off grid).

By: Kelly Pickerel

Kelly Pickerel — Thu, 16 May 2024 11:16:03 +0000

In reply to Galen Barbose. Oops! We have updated the headline. Thank you

By: Galen Barbose

Galen Barbose — Thu, 16 May 2024 10:26:54 +0000

Hi there–Just a note from the author pf the Berkeley Lab paper that the headline in this article is incorrect. As indicated in the second bullet, the report finds that storage attachment rates jumped FROM 10% to 60%.