What a cracker of an article … wish I’d written it ; )
This encapsulates so much of my (“Consumers’ Grid”) thinking and presents it in an ordered, compelling, earnest way.
“The importance of being Earnest. Earnestness is Enthusiasm Tempered by Reason!”
Networks are what “connect us” - they “bind” community!
Understanding this, “popularising” this, is what is really important right now as, like it or not, it’s foundational to the future electricity system.
Note, it is still, and will always be, a SYSTEM, to which we are connected to, and part of. The “networks” are a “Community Commons” which give us opportunities, but carry with it responsibilities.
Thanks Tim. Even I am impressed with it. Gradually coming to understanding to what is happening. There's a lot to consider. It's an exciting time with so many possibilities. Following your posts with much interest. Keep up the great work.
2018 and this article in Vox Populi summarising the work of de Martini, Kristof, et al at PNNL has good animated graphics that have been a guiding summary of change for me.
It made the forecast changes coming to the grid accessible to lay persons even as the engineer in me thought it missed some of the more important nuances about the future roles of storage, large central and distributed generation, Transmission and Distribution.
It still frames my thinking, and since I retired I have been thinking a lot about what changes are needed to energy markets, regulation and operating standards. A blank sheet and starting again often pops into my head, revolution instead of evolution of the current state.
This past week in particular, I have been considering what I would change in the Vox Populi animation to highlight the nuances of how energy actually flows from source to sink as this would bring out your points about what consumers actually need from central generation/storage to staying connected to a grid and how important the local grid is and less important the transmission grid is, which is bring completely overlooked by the regulators. The regulators have been captured but not by whom they most feared the DNSPs.
That movement is likely to accelerate as EV battery technology evolves and like HD TV's that cost $10K when launched in late 90's, but now you can buy a 75inch Smart 4k HD TV for less than $1k, I predict EV's will get a lot cheaper. Efficient solar on the roof and Bidirectional charging will mean some current partial grid users could exit altogether.
Some insightful thoughts here by S Eschbach reshared by Tim Ryan on LinkedIn (use the Translate feature for Stefan's post) ..
"We need far greater focus on what the distribution network does, and more importantly, what it can/should do.
“"I hardly get any electricity from the grid anymore – why should I still pay for it?"
A sentence that I hear more and more often. Comprehensible. But also dangerous.
Because if you think this way, you reduce our power grid to a single function: the flow of energy.
But the distribution grid is much more. It is invisible infrastructure that works even when the meter is stationary. And that's exactly what is being forgotten right now.”"
You're right: some households, especially those motivated by cost, principle, or autonomy, may well take the final step and go fully off-grid — particularly if future pricing penalises partial users in a non-parity way. If they have the means, they can make decisions based on their principles.
But I sense this will remain a minority path. The shift I’ve been considering is among the quiet majority who aren’t seeking to disconnect entirely or even achieving 100% self-sufficiency, but are becoming more energy-capable without intending to go it alone. They didn’t set out to leave the grid — they simply made a series of practical, often incremental choices that now give them more control and flexibility.
Going off-grid isn’t just a technical step — it involves cost, planning, and the burden of building in resilience and redundancy. Not everyone will want to go to that expense. Many will likely prefer to remain connected, not just as a fallback, but also for future opportunities to trade their excess energy through local or broader market mechanisms.
That said, for those who do make the leap, we may well see new service models emerge — perhaps insurance-style packages bundled with retailer deals, offering occasional or emergency reconnection rights to cover periods of shortfall or equipment failure. These hybrid models could offer peace of mind without the need for full reliance.
So yes, full disconnection is likely for some — but I suspect most will prefer optionality over separation. The challenge is to evolve grid design and pricing to support flexible participation, rather than force binary choices.
Geoff, you're almost exactly describing us and our motivations and intent.
We retired a few years ago and have decent super, but wanted to future-proof our financial/energy situation - though sustainability was our primary reason.
We put in a 3kW solar system in 2014 (all we could afford at the time) then, when we got a modest inheritance, an additional 5.5kW solar system with a 13.5kWh battery in 2018. We also bought a second hand Nissan Leaf and had a Zappi charger installed.
We export much more electricity than we use - only buying from the grid in the depth of the Canberra winter and the occasional overcast period. Initially, we made a small profit over the year; now, with the FIT being minuscule, we break even.
But we are able to charge the car entirely from solar so have zero "fuel" costs.
Overall, we're happy that we have substantially achieved the goals of being far more sustainable and also largely future-proofing our situation.
But we have absolutely no wish to disconnect from the grid and are comfortable paying the charges to remain connected and to get a miserable FIT. We are financially privileged and don't want to inadvertently disadvantage those less able, for whatever reasons, to do what we have been able to do.
What we most want to see is, as you suggest, a grid system that evolves to deal positively with this messy but vital transition of our energy systems, while not leaving anyone behind.
Not sure of the precise details but, with honesty and goodwill from government and the energy companies (the latter, in particular, might be a tad optimistic) I can't see why this couldn't be done and the transitioned smoothed and lubricated.
My background is a trade in Electrical Fitting with over 27 years in power generation, 12 of that as a Power Plant Operator at Eraring Power Station.
Almost 2 years ago I resigned for various reasons (which I am happy to discuss with you in another message if you desire. Let’s just say I was fed up with Origins shenanigans and I was left with a choice that affected the rest of my life given the closure announcement).
From Eraring I spent twelve months with Essential Energy on a line crew in the southern mountains of NSW.
What I saw and did therein relation to domestic solar feed in illustrated very clearly why the change to rooftop solar is going to be extremely expensive to everyone connected to the grid.
It is a complicated explanation to type.
Feel free to phone me and I can explain.
I believe more people need to know about the inside info on the Electricity Supply industry but I have to be extremely careful how I convey it as I now once again work in generation. Let’s just say that my employer is in the mountains and uses water as the “fuel”.
Send me a personal message and I’ll give you my number.
What a cracker of an article … wish I’d written it ; )
This encapsulates so much of my (“Consumers’ Grid”) thinking and presents it in an ordered, compelling, earnest way.
“The importance of being Earnest. Earnestness is Enthusiasm Tempered by Reason!”
Networks are what “connect us” - they “bind” community!
Understanding this, “popularising” this, is what is really important right now as, like it or not, it’s foundational to the future electricity system.
Note, it is still, and will always be, a SYSTEM, to which we are connected to, and part of. The “networks” are a “Community Commons” which give us opportunities, but carry with it responsibilities.
Thanks Tim. Even I am impressed with it. Gradually coming to understanding to what is happening. There's a lot to consider. It's an exciting time with so many possibilities. Following your posts with much interest. Keep up the great work.
As Tim says a cracker of an article.
2018 and this article in Vox Populi summarising the work of de Martini, Kristof, et al at PNNL has good animated graphics that have been a guiding summary of change for me.
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/11/30/17868620/renewable-energy-power-grid-architecture
It made the forecast changes coming to the grid accessible to lay persons even as the engineer in me thought it missed some of the more important nuances about the future roles of storage, large central and distributed generation, Transmission and Distribution.
It still frames my thinking, and since I retired I have been thinking a lot about what changes are needed to energy markets, regulation and operating standards. A blank sheet and starting again often pops into my head, revolution instead of evolution of the current state.
This past week in particular, I have been considering what I would change in the Vox Populi animation to highlight the nuances of how energy actually flows from source to sink as this would bring out your points about what consumers actually need from central generation/storage to staying connected to a grid and how important the local grid is and less important the transmission grid is, which is bring completely overlooked by the regulators. The regulators have been captured but not by whom they most feared the DNSPs.
That movement is likely to accelerate as EV battery technology evolves and like HD TV's that cost $10K when launched in late 90's, but now you can buy a 75inch Smart 4k HD TV for less than $1k, I predict EV's will get a lot cheaper. Efficient solar on the roof and Bidirectional charging will mean some current partial grid users could exit altogether.
Some insightful thoughts here by S Eschbach reshared by Tim Ryan on LinkedIn (use the Translate feature for Stefan's post) ..
"We need far greater focus on what the distribution network does, and more importantly, what it can/should do.
“"I hardly get any electricity from the grid anymore – why should I still pay for it?"
A sentence that I hear more and more often. Comprehensible. But also dangerous.
Because if you think this way, you reduce our power grid to a single function: the flow of energy.
But the distribution grid is much more. It is invisible infrastructure that works even when the meter is stationary. And that's exactly what is being forgotten right now.”"
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/tim-ryan-212b9_netzentgelte-verteilnetzbetreiber-netzentgelt-activity-7320219827300626433-OSGe
I think you’ve hit the status right on the head but are missing the end game.
What was the motivation of “partial users”? Money.
Whether to get a 60c feed in tariff back some years ago. Or reduce costs.
Now they see they have more control on their own life, which is magnificent.
But where does it end?
These partial users will likely be charged in some manner for being connected but not consuming in a non-parity manner at some stage in the future.
Then they will go off grid, because they have already seen that they can manage their supply.
Then what happens to the grid and those that remain connected?
Thanks Dave for the comment.
You're right: some households, especially those motivated by cost, principle, or autonomy, may well take the final step and go fully off-grid — particularly if future pricing penalises partial users in a non-parity way. If they have the means, they can make decisions based on their principles.
But I sense this will remain a minority path. The shift I’ve been considering is among the quiet majority who aren’t seeking to disconnect entirely or even achieving 100% self-sufficiency, but are becoming more energy-capable without intending to go it alone. They didn’t set out to leave the grid — they simply made a series of practical, often incremental choices that now give them more control and flexibility.
Going off-grid isn’t just a technical step — it involves cost, planning, and the burden of building in resilience and redundancy. Not everyone will want to go to that expense. Many will likely prefer to remain connected, not just as a fallback, but also for future opportunities to trade their excess energy through local or broader market mechanisms.
That said, for those who do make the leap, we may well see new service models emerge — perhaps insurance-style packages bundled with retailer deals, offering occasional or emergency reconnection rights to cover periods of shortfall or equipment failure. These hybrid models could offer peace of mind without the need for full reliance.
So yes, full disconnection is likely for some — but I suspect most will prefer optionality over separation. The challenge is to evolve grid design and pricing to support flexible participation, rather than force binary choices.
Geoff, you're almost exactly describing us and our motivations and intent.
We retired a few years ago and have decent super, but wanted to future-proof our financial/energy situation - though sustainability was our primary reason.
We put in a 3kW solar system in 2014 (all we could afford at the time) then, when we got a modest inheritance, an additional 5.5kW solar system with a 13.5kWh battery in 2018. We also bought a second hand Nissan Leaf and had a Zappi charger installed.
We export much more electricity than we use - only buying from the grid in the depth of the Canberra winter and the occasional overcast period. Initially, we made a small profit over the year; now, with the FIT being minuscule, we break even.
But we are able to charge the car entirely from solar so have zero "fuel" costs.
Overall, we're happy that we have substantially achieved the goals of being far more sustainable and also largely future-proofing our situation.
But we have absolutely no wish to disconnect from the grid and are comfortable paying the charges to remain connected and to get a miserable FIT. We are financially privileged and don't want to inadvertently disadvantage those less able, for whatever reasons, to do what we have been able to do.
What we most want to see is, as you suggest, a grid system that evolves to deal positively with this messy but vital transition of our energy systems, while not leaving anyone behind.
Not sure of the precise details but, with honesty and goodwill from government and the energy companies (the latter, in particular, might be a tad optimistic) I can't see why this couldn't be done and the transitioned smoothed and lubricated.
Geoff,
My background is a trade in Electrical Fitting with over 27 years in power generation, 12 of that as a Power Plant Operator at Eraring Power Station.
Almost 2 years ago I resigned for various reasons (which I am happy to discuss with you in another message if you desire. Let’s just say I was fed up with Origins shenanigans and I was left with a choice that affected the rest of my life given the closure announcement).
From Eraring I spent twelve months with Essential Energy on a line crew in the southern mountains of NSW.
What I saw and did therein relation to domestic solar feed in illustrated very clearly why the change to rooftop solar is going to be extremely expensive to everyone connected to the grid.
It is a complicated explanation to type.
Feel free to phone me and I can explain.
I believe more people need to know about the inside info on the Electricity Supply industry but I have to be extremely careful how I convey it as I now once again work in generation. Let’s just say that my employer is in the mountains and uses water as the “fuel”.
Send me a personal message and I’ll give you my number.
Dave