There’s a discussion way off at Energy Institute at Haas about how unfair solar owners are, under current government policies, to electrical customers who do not have PV accessible.
It’s irrelevant.
Fossil fuels are done, stranded, the walking dead. Boss Trump or no Trump. Clinton or no Clinton.
This is an irreversible, nonlinear phenomenon, an observable of a coupled set of differential equations. It’s inexorable.
And it’s about time.
And it makes sense. Technological innovations at this scale are part of Nature.
Update, 2018-03-30
From Bloomberg New Energy Finance, “Fossil Fuels Squeezed by Plunge in Cost of Renewables, BNEF Says”.
Update, 2018-04-01: `Solar Surprise: Small-Scale Solar a Better Deal than Big’
The relevant findings are published by ILSR in an article from 29th March 2018.
ecoquant
667 per centimeter : climate science, quantitative biology, statistics, and energy policy 
This is a link to a proof that rooftop solar produces Retail Energy: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1s0uLXdQLjhN7ICmjJfYLC8l8mQ6W8lz6AeodmxgQ67E/edit?usp=drivesdk
As a force vector, the “irrelevant” claim is well considered. But systemically, it’s this single vector is facing very strong economic headwinds regarding the fundamental threat vector regarding the main spring of CapitalismFail: peak credit. The credit bubble created by the incurred debt that is systemically vetted by increased economic productivity arising from fossil carbon and technology’s energy-equivalent slaves ran out of its primary steam source with peak conventional oil. With the technology of computers and financial interactions synchronized multiple (6?) times per day to the millionth of a second enabling futures trading, and hedge funds, great efficiency is being effected in recycling the remaining heat and the bubble continues to inflate. The global debt Kalaydjian writes about is only the tip of the peak credit threat’s iceberg.
Isn’t it motivated reasoning that plays a major part in this dismissing of Hass’ generalized point? CapitalismFail’s fundamental need, and cance-liker, is ever expanding vetted credit. The credit that fossil carbon energy-equivalent slaves rationalize will not be replaced one to one by PV and wind. For something other than hopium to be state as fact in a globalized economic meme that too-big-to-fail banks rule via usurped national sovereignty due to their nationalized currencies, which are denominated in debt, different thinking and feeling has to come into play. Or I see a blindspot feeding this assertion. And grid electricity is ~1/3 of CapitalismFail’s zero fossil carbon challenge.
Anecdotally concerning constraints and what this post dismisses as irrelevant, here in NY, utilities front load a significant proportion of their infrastructure costs to the first metered 25 Kw. This is on a bi-monthly cycle. This means there is the option, with the recent replacement of meters with remote reading technology, to go to a monthly billing cycle to address aspects of the revenue loss net metering apparently constitutes in California. Other states have allowed utilities to adopted a dual metering approach, and distribute grid infrastructure costs accordingly. Here in NY the state grants subsidizing non-residential solar are limited and effected in annual classes over a five year timeframe. The solar contractor I know only does residential because it is the only type that is currently economically viable. I can confirm this. That $.04/Kw wholesale price sets up economic realities that preclude, at this point, lots of good ideas. I had to walk away from a plan that would have allowed my community to have collaboratively invested and zeroed the carbon emissions of our sewer processing plant with PV. There wasn’t sufficient cash flow to service the capital investment of the PV array, maintain it, pay for the raw land, and cover the property taxes.
sNAILmALEnotHAIL …but pace’n myself
https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCeDkezgoyyZAlN7nW1tlfeA
life is for learning so all my failures must mean that I’m wicked smart
>