The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>

[Elfie]

That's why I say we should be doing a national campaign to get solar on new houses being built and convert existing if possible.

That would take decades to convert existing homes. The costs would be enormous. Who is going to pay for that?

[RedTop]

Why wont our Congress do something, anything to help?

Because doing the right thing for the american people isn't what congress and washington are all about.

[moot]

Well current solar panels still waste about 80% of the Sun's energy but they are getting better with time. If we actually invested in the technology like we do oil, we would make much more efficient and cheaper cells. Even though they still only use @ 20% it's still much cheaper energy to produce vs using oil or natural gas and it's renewable unlike oil and gas.

I think the problem with transfer of energy is the line leakage problem. It's nothing really do do with the solar cells, we pretty much couldn't put a bunch of nuclear reactors in one or two states and power the whole country either. No matter if the energy is produced by solar,wind,coal oil or what ever it's still energy the only difference is how it's produced.

That's why I say we should be doing a national campaign to get solar on new houses being built and convert existing if possible. If you had entire neighborhoods producing their own electric you wouldn't need such large solar farms to replace the actual same kilowatts from say a normal power plant.

That's what I'm saying.  The ultimate efficiency of solar is quite a bit below that of a few other alternatives.  I can't freakin recall the numbers, but it was pretty big.  Now, solar might get ahead of everything else in the mean time (before all alternatives reach max efficiency), but eventualy it won't be competitive anymore... The exact numbers are required to really say to what degree, but I just can't find em..  And I think it either included resistance losses, or showed solar being uncompetitive right off the bat solely on an energy production basis.
The campaign thing wouldn't be optimal way to go about it..  You can't just tell people to put up relatively huge bits of unaesthetic equipment on their property, which would have to be replaced over and over as the tech evolves.  It wouldn't sell.

[Shamus]

Will changes happen now? Change is not likely for several reasons. First, change is not something most people are comfortable with. Second, changes will be expensive. When the changes become less expensive than the status quo, then and only then will changes be made. I am also of the belief that neither current parties have the intestinal fortitude to make the necessary changes.

I think we are going to have an opportunity to institute changes again.

At the current rate of oil its not going to be expensive, we have not seen any of the costs yet.

A year from now if gas is still at 4.20 a gallon we are going to be saying..holy toejam inflation during tho 70's wasn't all that bad.

Anyone who thinks that alternatives to oil are a waste of time are fools.

Yeager you're on 

shamus

[REP0MAN]

Because doing the right thing for the american people isn't what congress and washington are all about.

Why? Why has it gotten to the point where politicians campaign one thing, then do nothing. Why do we keep nominating the lazy idiots. I say cap the salary of Congressmen at 30k per year and anyone caught taking kickbacks gets an M-16 and a ticket to Islamistan. It's ludicrous. The way we get congressmen and other lawmakers needs to change. We need honest people who WANT to work for Americans. The system is flawed.

 

[RedTop]

Why? Why has it gotten to the point where politicians campaign one thing, then do nothing. Why do we keep nominating the lazy idiots. I say cap the salary of Congressmen at 30k per year and anyone caught taking kickbacks gets an M-16 and a ticket to Islamistan. It's ludicrous. The way we get congressmen and other lawmakers needs to change. We need honest people who WANT to work for Americans. The system is flawed.

 

I agree...no argument here Bud

Since the last voting cycle I have changed the way I vote. I am a registered Republican. But , I vote for those that I have either heard from and agree with dem or repub....or vote out the incumbant. If the incumbant has a Repub. running against him...then more than likley I'll give them a shot. '

My days of the same people in office for MY vote are over. I vote em out after every election....UNLESS.....I KNOW FOR SURE...they worked hard on my interest and behalf. Sadly.....thats not been the case yet.

[Elfie]

Because doing the right thing for the american people isn't what congress and washington are all about.

So sad....and yet so true..... 


Yet, the same can be said for all branches of our government. 

[Holden McGroin]

Since the last voting cycle I have changed the way I vote. I am a registered Republican. But , I vote for those that I have either heard from and agree with dem or repub....or vote out the incumbant. If the incumbant has a Repub. running against him...then more than likley I'll give them a shot. '

Voting against the incumbant is a good idea regardless of party.  If we make it so that the average term of office for a rep is maybe 6 years max, we might have a congress which answers to the only special intrest group they should worry about, the American People.

As far as solar goes, on my new shop I have the south facing slope roof area to install about 10kw of solar.  I was seriously considering it and had a inslatter come out and look.

$8 per watt installed cost. 

I need 1500 or 2k to become a net zero electricity user, so $16,000 is the cost of my system. 

Our state government (along with the feds) has rebate programs that cut the installed cost to $6 per watt.

Subsidize green power... good little Oregon liberal.

In Germany, they have a program that if I were to overproduce, the extra is purcahsed by the grid at a 50% markup to my cost per kwhr if I were to buy.  They are paying like 40c /kwhr, but if they send some back to the grid, the homeowner gets 60c/kwhr check from the utility.

Germany is buying like 75% of PV's made in the world.

In Oregon, the program is if I make more than I need during the summer, the utility banks it and I can withdraw from the bank during the winter.  Along comes March 31, and we zero my account.  If I made less than I needed, I send a check to the power company.  OK, that's fair.  If I made more than I needed, by state law I have just contributed the extra power to the low income assistance program.

Take away and incentive for me to make more power than I use.... idiotic little Oregon liberal.

[crockett]

That's what I'm saying.  The ultimate efficiency of solar is quite a bit below that of a few other alternatives.  I can't freakin recall the numbers, but it was pretty big.  Now, solar might get ahead of everything else in the mean time (before all alternatives reach max efficiency), but eventualy it won't be competitive anymore... The exact numbers are required to really say to what degree, but I just can't find em..  And I think it either included resistance losses, or showed solar being uncompetitive right off the bat solely on an energy production basis.
The campaign thing wouldn't be optimal way to go about it..  You can't just tell people to put up relatively huge bits of unaesthetic equipment on their property, which would have to be replaced over and over as the tech evolves.  It wouldn't sell.

Yea but even though they aren't as efficient they still work pretty damn good and can be a cheap long term solution. Take for example that house from the web page I posted. It produces @ 4,500 kWhr year in electricity. The national average usage is 6,000 kWh per household per year for 3 residents. So by setting up the average household with the same type of system it would only require a extra 2,000 kWh + or - per year.

That means the power grid doesn't have to produce as much power because each house would be producing most of it's own electricity. So even at only 80% efficiency it's clearly a good choice assuming we could make it more affordable by mass production. To make things more interesting Cali is trying to get the average 1500 sq ft home down to 4140 kWh per year by giving people incentives to switch over to various power saving utilities and so on.

At that point the solar system would produce excess power and in reality if someone was investing in solar it's very likely they would also be making the rest of the house as energy efficient as possible. Then further down the road as better more efficient panels are produced the generated kWh per year would surely go up. The deal is even at the current efficiency they come pretty damn close to producing enough power for the average home.

Jay Leno's garage is run on a solar power/wind turbine system and his garage is the size of a large business (17,000 sqft). Granted it doesn't make all the electric he needs but it makes a real big chunk of it. His system was pretty expensive but as I say the prices will come down and the efficiency will likely go up if we started putting more investment into it.

This is a pretty good article on his shop.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/jay_leno_garage/4228638.html

In the end if we had a system like this on a national level, we would be reducing consumpion with out having to cut back on actual usage or make major changes to lifstyle.

[Shamus]

Voting against the incumbant is a good idea regardless of party.  If we make it so that the average term of office for a rep is maybe 6 years max, we might have a congress which answers to the only special intrest group they should worry about, the American People.

As far as solar goes, on my new shop I have the south facing slope roof area to install about 10kw of solar.  I was seriously considering it and had a inslatter come out and look.

$8 per watt installed cost. 

I need 1500 or 2k to become a net zero electricity user, so $16,000 is the cost of my system. 

Our state government (along with the feds) has rebate programs that cut the installed cost to $6 per watt.

Subsidize green power... good little Oregon liberal.

In Germany, they have a program that if I were to overproduce, the extra is purcahsed by the grid at a 50% markup to my cost per kwhr if I were to buy.  They are paying like 40c /kwhr, but if they send some back to the grid, the homeowner gets 60c/kwhr check from the utility.

Germany is buying like 75% of PV's made in the world.

In Oregon, the program is if I make more than I need during the summer, the utility banks it and I can withdraw from the bank during the winter.  Along comes March 31, and we zero my account.  If I made less than I needed, I send a check to the power company.  OK, that's fair.  If I made more than I needed, by state law I have just contributed the extra power to the low income assistance program.

Take away and incentive for me to make more power than I use.... idiotic little Oregon liberal.

Do you get a 1 for 1 credit?, if you do its a good deal. In most states you get something under 100% of what the power companies charge, some companies pay less than 50%.

shamus

[crockett]

As far as solar goes, on my new shop I have the south facing slope roof area to install about 10kw of solar.  I was seriously considering it and had a inslatter come out and look.

$8 per watt installed cost. 

I need 1500 or 2k to become a net zero electricity user, so $16,000 is the cost of my system. 

Our state government (along with the feds) has rebate programs that cut the installed cost to $6 per watt.

Subsidize green power... good little Oregon liberal.

In Germany, they have a program that if I were to overproduce, the extra is purcahsed by the grid at a 50% markup to my cost per kwhr if I were to buy.  They are paying like 40c /kwhr, but if they send some back to the grid, the homeowner gets 60c/kwhr check from the utility.

Germany is buying like 75% of PV's made in the world.

In Oregon, the program is if I make more than I need during the summer, the utility banks it and I can withdraw from the bank during the winter.  Along comes March 31, and we zero my account.  If I made less than I needed, I send a check to the power company.  OK, that's fair.  If I made more than I needed, by state law I have just contributed the extra power to the low income assistance program.

Take away and incentive for me to make more power than I use.... idiotic little Oregon liberal.

hehe yea that's typical.. They almost get it right, but then totally screw it up at the end. Here in Florida it's even worse on the buy back, it's  $0.05/kWh for PV and $0.03/kWh for solar water heating.

The systems are tax exempt and they have set prices for the rebates which are pretty good IMHO.

Solar Photovoltaic System $20,000.00 for residential and $100,000.00 for commercial but I dunno if the 20k would cover a garage as in your case. in all honestly I'm really surprised there are more people taking up the offer.

edit...

I guess the 20k/100k was the max they will pay. They do base it on the wattage after all and it's only $4 per watt. 


The rebate amount shall be set at $4 per watt based on the total wattage rating of the system. The maximum allowable rebate per solar photovoltaic system installation shall be as follows:

Twenty thousand dollars for a residence.
One hundred thousand dollars for a place of business, a publicly owned or operated facility, or a facility owned or operated by a private, not-for-profit organization, including condominiums or apartment buildings.

[Holden McGroin]

Do you get a 1 for 1 credit?, if you do its a good deal. In most states you get something under 100% of what the power companies charge, some companies pay less than 50%.

shamus

You get 1 for 1 until you make as much as you use.  If you make more than you use, it's a 0 for 1.

There is no incentive but a warm feeling to make more than you use.

[Holden McGroin]

I dunno if the 20k would cover a garage as in your case. in all honestly I'm really surprised there are more people taking up the offer.

20 k after subsidies would get me about 2500 watts, which would be more than I need, and about 1/4 what I have roof room for.  But my electricity bill is maybe $80 / mo, (no heating or cooling w/ electricity)

20 k in a 5% interest bearing acct would yeild 1000 / yr, or about $80 / mo. simple interest. 

The way the law is I should size for maybe 80% of my needs.  No incentive whatsoever to be a net producer.

[crockett]

20 k after subsidies would get me about 2500 watts, which would be more than I need, and about 1/4 what I have roof room for.  But my electricity bill is maybe $80 / mo, (no heating or cooling w/ electricity)

20 k in a 5% interest bearing acct would yeild 1000 / yr, or about $80 / mo. simple interest. 

The way the law is I should size for maybe 80% of my needs.  No incentive whatsoever to be a net producer.

Yea I think at this point solar is just too expensive for somthing like yours. It's likely more benifical for people with larger electric bills.

[Holden McGroin]

the cost of install rises with larger electric bills.

Somebody that has a 200 / mo ebill will need 3 times the initial install cost, and the payback is still prohibitive.

Right now solar is a luxury that people pay for just cause they wanna.  Like getting a Mercedes Benz instead of that Chevy.  Both will get you to work in relative comfort, and one costs twice as much.