I will try to reduce the confusion.
The aim of the Act is to promote energy alternatives and not for big energy companies. The goal is that the general public benefits directly.
There is a large potential for alternative energies in the private households or for small farmers. There are already people they have at home Solar energy, farmers who produce biomass energy, small wind turbines on private land or energy from Hydroelectricity. But this can be more like today.
If you get a fair price be guaranteed for the energy you produce and not need for your own, then many more people build a this systems to produce Alternative Energy. In Atlasia there are so many roofs that could be used for solar energy and also a lot of places where you could set up wind turbines.
Of course we could finance such a thing even on taxes, but a direct promotion with public money would have disadvantages as well.
1. If you get the money at once to build such a system, there is no great incentive for a efficient maintenance of the plant. Not so with a guaranteed electricity price, for example, works only when the solar or wind power system can benefit you
2. It is also useful for the environment not to be financed through taxes. Taxes pay all, no matter how much energy they consume. With a guaranteed price of the electricity will they who consume a lot of energy more exposed, because the power companies give the cost to the consumer.
The law is not inventive to me. There are similar laws in some states in Germany and in several countries in Europe.
OK, I
think I'm starting to understand this. So private individuals who use green energy sources on their land, such as solar or wind, who produce more energy than their household requires can sell the excess power to the public utility at 90% of the established utility rate up to a maximum of $150k/year?
IF that's the case, I think I like this.
![Smiley](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)
I still have some questions about the technical and economic logistics of how the excess power made by small producers being transferred into the power grid. If at all possible, Hans, would you be able to find a link to some news/journal article (in English please) about how such systems or laws work in Europe? That may be very helpful.
IF such logistical issues can be addressed, this idea has potential. I like the idea of giving such direct financial incentives to individual households to create green energy above and beyond simply trimming their own utility bills. Such widespread diversification and individual ownership of production means is a really appealing bit of enviro-capitalism. The increased production of energy would benefit consumers as the laws of supply and demand dictate the increased energy supply would reduce utility costs. Assuming the logistical concerns I mentioned aren't prohibitively expensive, utilities would win out too as they would purchase such energy at a 10% discount from their charging rate (note to Yank: Energy utilities are heavily regulated and largely local/regional monopolies, so there isn't a real "free market" price for energy either produced or sold by such utilities).
Encouraging such widespread ownership kinda reminds me of Winston's bill lowering capital gains taxes on most ESOPs; it encourages everyone to be a direct participant in---and beneficiary of---the market economy.
Again, Hans, an article showing how such laws work in RL would be helpful, but I'm tentatively supportive at this point.