Eh I'd revise that to say it's anti-rooftop-without-storage. Basically, the CA grid now has a massive glut of solar generation at midday, and so they changed net metering to not pay anywhere near 1:1 on backfed power (it's a really bad ratio, but I don't remember, maybe like 1:5). On the literature around this change, they noted that it's to encourage people to install storage and do time shifting on the power they generate, to help even things out for the grid.
>Basically, the CA grid now has a massive glut of solar generation at midday, and so they changed net metering to not pay anywhere near 1:1 on backfed power (it's a really bad ratio, but I don't remember, maybe like 1:5)
1:5 isn't "anti-solar" though, it accurately reflects the fact that power is worth significantly less at that point in time.
>it's to encourage people to install storage and do time shifting on the power they generate, to help even things out for the grid.
Yep makes sense. Someone has to bear the cost of providing power when it's expensive to do, and it makes sense to more accurately price the solar energy.
I’d agree with you that it was accurate pricing if they sold power for similarly cheap at that time, such that you could just install storage and profit off of time shifting by backfeeding when there’s not a glut. But I’m pretty sure they still charge their absurd rates at noon on a sunny day.
