"[lead acid batteries] are normally used in standalone systems."
I was just about to post that. Batteries of some sort will be needed to store the electricity. Will the people who take up the offer from the state get reimbursed somewhat for the batteries? Or will it be for the solar panels alone? Batteries are not cheap, just think of the layout the home owner or small business owner would make at the start ... thousands if you needed a couple of dozen batteries.
A good idea since I have heard that more energy in the form of sunlight hits the earth each day than all the power ever produced by man.
But ... I have to think ... if it is such a good idea, whay have people not gone ahead and done this by now without waiting for some state reimbursment or tax write off?
I'm still waiting for the nuculer fussion power plants ... a gallon of sea water will power NYC for a month.
Well, maybe the state of CA would undertake to build, maintain and operate large battery banks? IMHO, it would serve these greenpissers right.
You only need batteries if you're not tied to the main grid - say in a remote cabin. Residential systems are typically tied to the grid via an inverter. Power generated by the system during the day when you're at work is put on the grid (spinning your meter backwards), then you draw off the grid when you get home and the sun is down.
Some folks on the grid want a battery back up in case the grid goes down, but that's a very small part of the market.