7-year-old Prince Michael Combs rides his bike in the North Lincoln Homes amid all the solar panels. (Cyrus McCrimmon, Denver Post file)
Re: “Battle of solar pits rooftop against utility-scale systems,” July 26 business news story.
The public utilities, as Mark Jaffe writes, are aware that although solar panel costs have plummeted, especially if used en masse (as by the utilities), rapid advances in solar storage technology may provide most of the electrical power for rooftop systems, even during off hours. Of course, the utilities would like to erase that writing on the wall.
Many solar homeowners would like to be able to control their own power in the event of a utility outage, provided the cost differential was not excessive. And on the other hand, if such shortages were to occur, the utilities might benefit from the “net-metering” arrangement that they are now attempting to dissolve.
R. Kiefer, Arvada
This letter was published in the Aug. 2 edition.I read the article on solar vs. solar with interest, as I was one of the first in my neighborhood to go solar.
What the article did not take into account is the cost of the land to put the large utility-scale arrays on. Out West we have a lot of land which is of little use for other things, but it still costs money.
In addition, the article did mention line losses, but most of that “vacant” land is not near where the electricity produced would be used. As the article pointed out, the electricity produced on my roof is used in my house. (So far I have not sold any back to Xcel.)
Larry McLaughlin, Aurora
This letter was published in the Aug. 2 edition.
Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.
