My situation here is unusual compared to the typical Gringo scenario, because my actual consumption is so low. (I used 160 kWh last month, with two powerful computers, a 22 cubic foot refrigerator/freezer, and air conditioning. Anybody [except for John Bjorgen! ] wanna compare?) My usage is more like that of a typical Mexican family than it is like a typical Gringo household here that will use three, five times (or more) than what I use, going well into the DAC rate. And believe me, that DAC rate will "...encourage people to be eco-friendly..."

There are lots of homes here with solar panels on the roof, not because the owners are trying to benefit the ecology, but because they are trying to benefit their own economies. Taking a hypothetical example, someone with a swimming pool, a large house and extensive use of A/C, a big set of 24 solar panels would drop their annual electric bill from $3261 down to $157 dollars. That would pay for the solar installation in seven years. A no brainer, right? Everyone should do it.

Well, yes and no. It would benefit that hypothetical rich Gringo, but he is using more electricity every month than his Mexican neighbor two streets down the hill uses in nearly a year. That Mexican is already getting his electricity for $157 a year. Even a much more modest solar installation that would cut his electric bill down to $75 a year (the minimum fee to stay connected) would cost him nearly a year's gross salary.

So, yes, the Government does encourage eco-friendliness, disguised as fiscal advantage. If you don't conserve, you pay for it. And FWIW, while it is the Government that "encourages" the eco-friendliness, it is not the Government that pays for it. It is the people on the DAC rate who pay a cost per kWh that is considerably higher than the cost of production who subsidize the low-income, low-usage clients.

Ironically, if every DAC client went solar, there would be less electricity consumed nationwide--a Good Thing. But... due to economy of scale that would likely increase the unit cost of production and without the DAC money to subsidize the low-usage clients, their cost for electricity would rise substantially (more than double). This, I think, would be a Bad Thing.

Go figure.

tanstaafl.