Jump to content
REGISTERING FOR MEMBERSHIP ON UPLAND JOURNAL Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
Thack

Climate Change

Climate Change  

  1. 1. Climate Change

    • Is human caused.
      Is human caused.
    • Is not human caused; part of the earth's normal climate cycles.
      Is human caused.
    • Is not occurring.
      Is human caused.
    • The Jury is still out (your undecided?)
      Is human caused.
    • Is a left wing conspiracy?
      Is human caused.
    • All science is a left wing conspiracy?
      Is human caused.


Recommended Posts

Country Nate
Man made climate change is a hoax made up in order to control capitalism, especially in America.  It has nothing to do with the climate, weather, or the environment.  Its political.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ben Hong
Man made climate change is a hoax made up in order to control capitalism, especially in America.  It has nothing to do with the climate, weather, or the environment.  Its political.

If you think that politicians can control weather/climate, I will have whatever you're drinking... even though I am a teetotaler. ???  :O  :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Country Nate

Man made climate change is a hoax made up in order to control capitalism, especially in America.  It has nothing to do with the climate, weather, or the environment.  Its political.

If you think that politicians can control weather/climate, I will have whatever you're drinking... even though I am a teetotaler. ???  :O  :laugh:

No politicans cannot control the climate.  The earths temp has constantly changed from the beginning, and there is nothing you me or anybody else can do about it.

People can and do control other people though.  That's what the fairy tale of man made "global warming" or  "climate change" or whatever they dub it this year is really all about.

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rprovines
Well, it's settled then. By 1.36% global warming is not caused by man. Good, hook up the old boat and go kill some gills then and rest easy about the drive there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigHink66
Could it work today without the tax credits? Not in very many places. Are you getting something in return for the tax credits? You bet. A bunch of stuff.

I think the real issue is what does your neighbor get for subsidizing your solar panels?  You know the guy who can't affor to spend 50K to get off the grid.

If the answer is to look at your ugly panels, I would buy a sling shot.

A couple of questions here. Can you tell me exactly how you subsidize your neighbors solar panels in PA? Do you know how that might be different from other states?

And for the general discussion; How exactly are you personally subsidizing solar in your state? Do you know?

Why might the electric utilities support solar installations in some areas, but not in others?

How might you benefit if you are living in a state where there are additional solar incentives beyond the federal tax credit?

Why would the federal government want to provide a tax credit to help people afford to go solar?

Added one more question: Have state incentive programs been increasing or decreasing the amount of benefits available to those wanting to add solar to their homes or businesses?

1.  http://solarpowerrocks.com/pennsylvania/

PA subsidizes in order to meet mandates:

A Renewable Portfolio Standard (“RPS”) is a law or other piece of regulation that mandates that a certain percentage of at state’s energy production comes from renewable resources by specified target dates.

This requires the utility to buy electricity from other sources.  Tier 1 is renewables like solar.  Its cheaper for them to buy it then build solar or wind facilities.  But the added cost gets past on to other customers.  So your neighbor does directly subsidize your solar panels both from the the federal rebates and incentives that raise taxes and the buy up of excess electricity.

PA's 100 million dollar rebate program has expired.  Under the current governor it has not been renewed.

The federal government most likely would like to incentify solar to help their political friends and lobbyists of these new and trendy energies.

The money spent would have been better invested in their efficiency programs in providing insulation and window upgrades.  Simply because that reached the most of the population and had more potential for impact on energy usage.

I don't personally know anyone that can currently afford the amount of panels required to leave the grid.  And with the shelf life of 40 years or less it doesn't seem like a good investment.  Would you want to buy  a new house with 30 year old panels that you would have to buy new in 10 years?  If the cost of panels was $30 - 60K, would you rather just have an electric bill of $80 a month or a second mortgage payment??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
valuman

I'm glad to see someone taking some time to start educating themselves on this topic. While I'm not clear on whether these are quotes that you wrote, or c/p from some internet source, I've added a couple of notes below for consideration, BigHink.

A Renewable Portfolio Standard (“RPS”) is a law or other piece of regulation that mandates that a certain percentage of at state’s energy production comes from renewable resources by specified target dates.

Correct. Please understand that the utilities themselves are a part of this process and bring a lot of leverage to the discussion.

This requires the utility to buy electricity from other sources.  Tier 1 is renewables like solar.  Its cheaper for them to buy it then build solar or wind facilities.  But the added cost gets past on to other customers.  So your neighbor does directly subsidize your solar panels both from the the federal rebates and incentives that raise taxes and the buy up of excess electricity.

Not necessarily, although that is one option most utilities do not take this route. They also have the option of showing an interconnected, net metered capacity within their service area as compliance with the state's RPS. This is a far more common approach since it saves them money.

PA's 100 million dollar rebate program has expired.  Under the current governor it has not been renewed.

While I have no insight to this situation, I would suppose that the electric utilities have lobbied to not renew, because they are generally not in need of the distributed generation at this time.

The federal government most likely would like to incentify solar to help their political friends and lobbyists of these new and trendy energies.

Politics being what they are, I'm sure there are some favors being traded in multiple arenas. That said, were you aware that is was the Bush administration who extended the 30% Federal tax credit through 2016? With a bit of insight to this one, I can safely say the decision was primarily driven by job creation and grid/demand issues.

The money spent would have been better invested in their efficiency programs in providing insulation and window upgrades.  Simply because that reached the most of the population and had more potential for impact on energy usage.

Hooray for this! The cheapest kilowatt hour or thermal unit is the one you don't use. As far as I know EVERY utility has an energy efficiency program that includes some kind of a subsidy. I have seen targeted localized programs where energy efficiency (EE) and solar electric systems were heavily marketed by the utility, so as to reduce peak demand in a specific area. It worked!

I don't personally know anyone that can currently afford the amount of panels required to leave the grid.

That is no longer an issue. You can "go solar" for as little as zero $ up front and reduce the cost for your electricity beginning the day the system is activated. Also, we do not advocate taking people completely off the grid. A net metered system  is connected to the grid so that there are no issues to the homeowner with regard to running out of available electricity. And because there's no offset of grid loads or benefit to ratepayers, incentives are not available for off grid solar installations.

And with the shelf life of 40 years or less it doesn't seem like a good investment. Would you want to buy  a new house with 30 year old panels that you would have to buy new in 10 years?  If the cost of panels was $30 - 60K, would you rather just have an electric bill of $80 a month or a second mortgage payment??

Three issues here. First, costs are not anywhere near those numbers if you lease or go with a solar power purchase agreement (ppa) and can literally be zero up front, depending on where you live, pay for your electricity, etc.

Second, I would not want to own a house off the grid as a primary residence and the vast majority of solar installations are not off the grid, so an old system doesn't affect availability of electricity. You can simply pay the utility for their electricity and get it the old fashioned way.

Third, With a good a lease or PPA, at the end of the term the homeowner has the option of renewing at a negotiated rate, or having the system removed at no cost to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigHink66

And with the shelf life of 40 years or less it doesn't seem like a good investment. Would you want to buy  a new house with 30 year old panels that you would have to buy new in 10 years?  If the cost of panels was $30 - 60K, would you rather just have an electric bill of $80 a month or a second mortgage payment??

Three issues here. First, costs are not anywhere near those numbers if you lease or go with a solar power purchase agreement (ppa) and can literally be zero up front, depending on where you live, pay for your electricity, etc.

Second, I would not want to own a house off the grid as a primary residence and the vast majority of solar installations are not off the grid, so an old system doesn't affect availability of electricity. You can simply pay the utility for their electricity and get it the old fashioned way.

Third, With a good a lease or PPA, at the end of the term the homeowner has the option of renewing at a negotiated rate, or having the system removed at no cost to them.

Well, tell me what you do know.  You seem to be probably the most educated on this topic.

If there are no "upfront" costs, what are the costs behind the scenes.

I mean, if it is so affordable, why isn't everyone doing it?  My house is all electric and if there were no cost, you can bet that I'd be willing to sign up for some panels and reduce or eliminate my electric bill.

Like I sort of said before.... My electric bill is 80-100 dollars and if I can reduce it to 20 or 40 dollars a month, but have to pay a rental fee of $XXX.  What is the cost?

If it comes out to be the same it might be worth considering, but if my bill is $40 for electricity and $125 to rent the equipment.  Well then, I just am not interested in increasing my bills.

This isn't going to be attractive to the entire population until its the " or equal" of what they currently see on their bill.

Just so you know where I stand...

I don't believe the climate is influenced by mans activities.  But I do believe we need to live as clean as we can afford to.

I also don't believe the governments role should be in subsidizing anything. Or insert nearly endless list here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bobman

unintended consequences...

Georgia governor latest to call for ethanol mandate waiver

Request comes on heels of Federal Register notice of public comment period

Release Date: Tuesday, August 21, 2012

Georgia Governor Nathan Deal has become the latest to petition the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency requesting that the Renewable Fuel Standard be waived in light of the current drought plaguing the Midwest.

The University of Georgia has reported that the state’s poultry producers are spending $1.4 million extra per day on corn due to the drought and the upward pressure on corn prices caused by the demand created by the Renewable Fuel Standard for ethanol. This translates to over $516 million per year if these market conditions continue, said Deal. “It is abundantly clear that substantial evidence exists now within the existing reports of the [u.S. Department of Agriculture] regarding expected crop yields and within private sector forecasts of crop yields that current and futures pricing of corn will result in severe economic harm in the poultry and livestock sectors,” he said. “It can also be reasonably projected that this harm will continue well into 2013, if not beyond 2013, and that the decreasing availability of stocks of grains will only be eased when a new crop season provides an abundance of supply.”

Deal is the fifth governor to request that the agency waive the Renewable Fuel Standard, joining the governors of Maryland, Delaware, North Carolina and Arkansas. His petition comes just a day after the Environmental Protection Agency said it is issuing a Federal Register notice opening a 30-day public comment period on waiving the Renewable Fuel Standard requirements. This statute provides the agency with 90 days in which to make a decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ANF grousin

unintended consequences...

Georgia governor latest to call for ethanol mandate waiver

The University of Georgia has reported that the state’s poultry producers are spending $1.4 million extra per day on corn due to the drought and the upward pressure on corn prices caused by the demand created by the Renewable Fuel Standard for ethanol. This translates to over $516 million per year if these market conditions continue, said Deal.

Question???

If the ethanol mandate is ended, what kind of pressure will that put on gas refining and prices?  With gas prices pushing up, an end to the mandates could quickly push the price up over $4/gallon.  Did the university study take into affect what the rising gas prices would do to the poultry industry?

I'm not an ethanol fan, and certainly not a fan of forced government mandates; right now it seems we are damed if we do, and damed if we dont.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bobman

:D I dont know I'm in the poultry industry as a supplier and so I get these things sent to me with industry news. UGA is the big school about poultry.

But I have a question back at you... what makes you believe gas prices would climb? From what I've read ethanol drives the price of gas up not down.

and we can buy all of the ethanol we want from South America ( sugar cane) for way less than it costs to produce

and (2) :)  food prices are going thru the roof because of corn prices ethanol production here drives a lot of that upward price

pressure on corn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
valuman
I am not a fan of the ethanol for fuel program. Big problems there IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ANF grousin

bobman, are you drinking or token with all those smiley faces? :cool:

But I have a question back at you... what makes you believe gas prices would climb? From what I've read ethanol drives the price of gas up not down

We'd have to make up 10% volume and the price of crude is going up, and that will make it go higher.

and we can buy all of the ethanol we want from South America ( sugar cane) for way less than it costs to produce

Like that will happen, it makes to much sense.  There is to much politics involved and to many votes to buy to let that happen.  Its what should have been done a long time ago instead subsidising corn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bobman

I quit toking 40 years ago when I got out of the army :p

I dont think we have a shortage of crude just a shortage of refining capability combined with too many regulations demanding different blends for different regions.

I agree nothing logical will happen , well maybe after the one who must not be mentioned  :) gets sent back home.

If that doesn't happen I think I may take toking back up....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
valuman

Well, tell me what you do know.  You seem to be probably the most educated on this topic.

If there are no "upfront" costs, what are the costs behind the scenes.

I mean, if it is so affordable, why isn't everyone doing it?  My house is all electric and if there were no cost, you can bet that I'd be willing to sign up for some panels and reduce or eliminate my electric bill.

Like I sort of said before.... My electric bill is 80-100 dollars and if I can reduce it to 20 or 40 dollars a month, but have to pay a rental fee of $XXX.  What is the cost?

If it comes out to be the same it might be worth considering, but if my bill is $40 for electricity and $125 to rent the equipment.  Well then, I just am not interested in increasing my bills.

This isn't going to be attractive to the entire population until its the " or equal" of what they currently see on their bill.

Just so you know where I stand...

I don't believe the climate is influenced by mans activities.  But I do believe we need to live as clean as we can afford to.

I also don't believe the governments role should be in subsidizing anything. Or insert nearly endless list here.

Re: Upfront and Ongoing Costs

Different companies have different ways of doing this and because each site has to be considered individually, it's actually a tough question to answer. The essence is that, we know what the cost to install, finance and maintain the system is for a particular location and are able to accurately predict the production from each system. Production is dependent upon the azimuth and angle of the panels as well as the specific weather and shade patterns for each site. All of those things go together to determine a monthly price (lease), or price per kilowatt hour of electricity (ppa). Since incentives and cost of electricity from the grid vary pretty widely, this model isn't viable everywhere and our company is not currently doing business in PA because ours doesn;t pencil out there.

Obviously a zero up front model is the toughest to make work since the installer, or financier have to carry all of the financial burden and wait a number years to realize a return. All of that said, when the numbers do pencil, the electricity from the solar electric system costs the home owner less per kwh, or per month than they are paying their utility for the same amount of electricity.

A lot of people are doing this in places where the numbers work. I really can't disclose exact numbers for the company I work for, but they're pretty big and getting bigger all the time.

Where electricity is cheap, it doesn't work. Where the utilities aren't benefited by the peak load reductions, there are no programs. It is all about economics.

We also offer other options to our customers where they can put some amount of money in up front to reduce the monthly amount they will pay us and lock in their costs for the term of the agreement. There's also a fully pre-paid lease or PPA option that generally costs about 1/3 the cost of a purchase. Folks with a little more budget see this as a good use of their money and a safe investment.

One other point. Personally, I am not a supporter of building large solar "farms" out in the desert. While I suppose they have their place, the economics for such installations are very different, they don't solve the demand issues, require construction of new power transmission lines and in my mind are a detriment to the desert habitat. ymmv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigHink66

I've contacted 2 companies, both didn't service my area.

I found a third and am in the process of contacting them.  At least for consultation.  But they don't offer the lease program and I really am not interested in purchasing something for 35k that I have to replace in 25 years.  According to their calculator the cost to me will be around 24k, and the estimated savings will be $40 per month on a yearly average.

Doesn't seem like its a worthwhile alternative to meet my needs.  At least not presently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×