New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

5 years? pathetic

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 
These ROIs should be one year - so people can compare them to the APRs on their credit cards, car loans, CDs, stocks, savings accounts, resale, etc.

Rooftop solar should never be pushed so hard as to need to use 5 year ROIs (lord have mercy) that make it look like a "good" investment compared to traditional money storage which only talks in terms of one year ROIs.

People should know and support and demand UTILITY SCALE solar THERMAL FARMS IN THE DESERT the kind that heats up water to make steam to turn electricity generators, not just the kind in the calculator that's sexy and eco trendy on the roof.

Education should be our number one goal because the numbers are on our side.

Rooftop solar is great for stabilizing the grid, adds resale and should absolutely be done, but the focus should be on both technologies, not just one.

The smart grid is coming anyway to prevent blackouts like the one in 2003. It will also send solar electricity (made at thermal farms) from the south and west to the north and east where it's needed. Right now, power lines leak most of their electricity when transmitted beyond 300 miles.

So let's go back to ONE year ROI cycles since they are great for everything else BUT solar. Actually, only in CA and NY are the rooftop (calculator) solar paybacks good even on a one year ROI cycle - as much as 8%, which beats a savings account or stocks, but you can't try to eliminate the whole electiricy bill to get that good payback - scale the system to only offset the highest price tiers on the bill and spend the remaining budget on efficiency and simply turning things OFF and unplugging them.

Economics ARE in OUR favor, so let's re-imagine the conversation we're having about them truthfully and relatably.

Amory Lovins is (gasp) a CONSERVATIVE! Because the right thing environmentally IS the right thing financially. And his research at Rocky Mountain Institute has shown this over and over, without environmental pandering, without preaching to the choir, without fear, with just honest numbers that money shamed, success guilt damaged hippies don't want to talk about.

He even showed us that all this talk about nuclear poison is nonsense - because the ECONOMICS of nuclear now make it more expensive than solar! That's right, solar is now cheaper than nuclear! So why are we still talking about nuclear pollution? Those outside the choir don't care, let's talk to them about money - something they DO care about.

Wind is also as cheap as coal. Why isn't that bragged about?

But more importantly, nuclear's true costs are going up while solar's are dropping. The utility bill might not charge you the true cost of nuclear, but your TAXES do - the GOVERNMENT pays for liability and disaster cleanup insurance, long term waste storage and decommissioning - the taking apart and storing of toxic nuclear facilities when they are too old to keep running safely - every plant will eventually need to be decommissioned - that's more waste than the plants themselves generate!

All those costs borne by the government are now seeing the light thanks to Amory Lovins and others and Wall Street is listening - nobody wants to finance nuclear power anymore - but the politicians know most people don't know that - so they listen to the nuclear industry who's desperately trying to get the gov to finance nuclear one last time before it goes away from a natural economic death.

ARE YOU LISTENING HIPPIES? STOP PANDERING, GET OVER YOUR SHAME, AND START BRAGGING ABOUT YOUR FINANCIAL ADVANTAGES!!!

The REST of the public is waiting!
post #2 of 10
Welcome to the Huddle Heretic!

Now for a few comments on your post:

1)  Rooftop solar is great for stabilizing the grid, adds resale and should absolutely be done, but the focus should be on both technologies, not just one. Distributed generation (roof top PV) may help marginally stabilizing the grid when the percentage of power supplied increases a bit but at present the total generated is marginal. Adds resale? Maybe and maybe not - depends on the buyer. The consensus among people in the business on the solar blogs is 'don't plan on it'. Totally depends on the buyer. İf you have a lease arrangement for a fixed power cost it will require a real jump in kWh costs to help and very well may detract from the potential sale.

2)  
Right now, power lines leak most of their electricity when transmitted beyond 300 miles.  No idea where you came up with this number but it is totally wrong! Easy to check up on if you wish too - just use the search button.

3) Amory Lovins is (gasp) a CONSERVATIVE! Big deal - İ am also a conservative (independent). The guşit damaged garbage you can keep for yourself if it fits.

4) He even showed us that all this talk about nuclear poison is nonsense. You didn't already know that? 

5) Wind is also as cheap as coal. Why isn't that bragged about? Wind is not as cheap as coal! No one in their right mind makes that claim. Wind offers a bright future once storage is available to make it baseline power and it will get cheaper - yes. Right now major modifications to and expansions of the grid are necessary to utilize wind (along with storage).

6) The utility bill might not charge you the true cost of nuclear, but your TAXES do - the GOVERNMENT pays for liability and disaster cleanup insurance, long term waste storage and decommissioning. You might try blogging about something where you have at least a small amount of knowledge. So far on this topic you have proven you have zero! The utilities pay for every kW of generation for the items you mentioned. This is maintained in a fund by the US government. The fact that the government hasn't done anything with good old Harry Reid leading the charge is not the utilities fault.

7) ARE YOU LISTENING HIPPIES? STOP PANDERING, GET OVER YOUR SHAME AND START BRAGGING ABOUT YOUR FINANCIAL ADVANTAGES!!!  İt is never polite to insult a visitor but you don't deserve the respect. The problem with trying to accomplish anything positive are the happily uneducated (university degree or not) public. To many of whom get their single source information from Rush Limbaugh, Joe Romm or their equivalents.

Thanks for stopping by Heretic but we won't miss you in the future.
ps - keep on waiting!
post #3 of 10
 From Heretic's post: These ROIs should be one year - so people can compare them to the APRs on their credit cards, car loans, CDs, stocks, savings accounts, resale, etc.

Rooftop solar should never be pushed so hard as to need to use 5 year ROIs (lord have mercy) that make it look like a "good" investment compared to traditional money storage which only talks in terms of one year ROIs.

There are very few places in the world (Germany - California, now UK & where else) that solar PV will begin to pay for itself in 10 or even 20 years as of today. You need a very high feed in tariff to get a reasonable payback. Forget Spain - they jumped off the bandwagon when they realized the cost.

Panel prices have dropped but that is all - (the remainder of the system plus installation will be in the range of 50% of the cost of a grid ties system).

Adds to resale value of a house? Maybe yes but very possibly no. İnverters are expensive with an expected lifetime of 10 years or less. İf batteries are used in the system they normally have a life of 5 to 10 years if well cared for. Thin film PV technology has significant losses in efficiency over time.  You go to sell after 5 years and what will the customer think? 
post #4 of 10
Wow. I'm speechless which trust me rarely happens.... Let me think.

I'd like to welcome you to the Huddle Heretic, but it's hard to assume you want to be here when you start calling names. Not all folks looking to live green are hippies you know and the financial comment, well, not sure where you're going with that. Russ as usual covered everything he thinks and in this case I think I agree with him 100%.
post #5 of 10
Hey! İ managed to get Jennifer to agree 100%!

Sometimes we just disagree and sometimes we agree with qualifications or agree just a little bit. 

We like to welcome newcomers but the fellow above sounds much like many of the comments on Yahoo News - not much thought given, not much knowledge but lots of blather. 

This kind of like drive by shooting is kind of like drive by shooting - no real purpose but trying to be cool.
post #6 of 10
Thread Starter 
This message is for both of you since you're the only ones responding and are both equally non-plussed by my comments. So you may pick out the responses below if they apply to you.

I don't want to be here if I have to agree with and support common misconceptions or support nuclear for the wrong reasons.

My bad, wind WILL be as cheap (has the potential for now) as coal and as coal goes up due to penalties imposed, it will do the flip that solar and nuclear did. So the idea is still true.

"Hippies", my intentionally insulting catch-all, are the ones in the bay area/socially focused non profit world maiming the movement for the rest of the world's eyes/ears with constant talk of "the environment" and virtually no bragging about the financial benefits. That's fine when all you want to do is pander to the choir who's already been over saturated with such messages, but what about the rest of the public? They don't care about the environment or climate change. They need another motivator. The press keeps reporting that every energy saver is "environmentally friendly" and maybe "reduces bills" but never challenges the public's opinion that there is virtually no payback.

The press never explains the advantages of energy savers/makers compared to money rotting away in savings accounts below the inflation line at 3% interest. The "hippies" never bother to say "it's better than a CD with less risk than a stock" because they don't think they have to - like GM and Toyota who got fat and cut quality, the "hippies" too have taken advantage of it's core group. Well, when all you have to go on is "the environment" and thinking insulation doesn't pay more than a CD, then you're going to lose audience.

Hippies must change. So must the nuclear folks who keep promoting it when solar is cheaper.

By the way, the grid upgrades will help reduce the costs of solar and wind moreso than fossil/nuc because they will affect areas where wind/solar are sourced but currently don't have access while increasing the grid's stability. Hawaii is already dealing with this very publicly and the rest of the country will too.

Wind and solar also have storage options as well - but the cost argument pro-solar with storage really works best with thermal, not even concentrating PV.

If you care to dispute the leaking comment, please show us all the information you were able to find online so it can be picked apart.

Your warm welcomes are appreciated. Pot meet kettle.
post #7 of 10
 This message is for both of you since you're the only ones responding and are both equally non-plussed by my comments. So you may pick out the responses below if they apply to you. Still playing the wise ass İ see.

I don't want to be here if I have to agree with and support common misconceptions or support nuclear for the wrong reasons. You don't have to be anywhere. You can be happily and totally misinformed anywhere you want.

My bad, wind WILL be as cheap (has the potential for now) as coal and as coal goes up due to penalties imposed, it will do the flip that solar and nuclear did. So the idea is still true.What is this 'my bad' stuff? Some goofy teenager saying? İf you think major penalties are going to be imposed on coal you are not looking at the real world. Remember the 100 Dollars per family the CBO came up with for the crap & trade proposal? Not much affect is predicted. As soon as there is a big tax placed on coal it will kill the economy - they are not about to do that.

"Hippies", my intentionally insulting catch-all, are the ones in the bay area/socially focused non profit world maiming the movement for the rest of the world's eyes/ears with constant talk of "the environment" and virtually no bragging about the financial benefits. That's fine when all you want to do is pander to the choir who's already been over saturated with such messages, but what about the rest of the public? They don't care about the environment or climate change. They need another motivator. The press keeps reporting that every energy saver is "environmentally friendly" and maybe "reduces bills" but never challenges the public's opinion that there is virtually no payback.

Oh! So you are the 'enlightened one who knows so much but manages to be 100% wrong with 'facts'.

The press never explains the advantages of energy savers/makers compared to money rotting away in savings accounts below the inflation line at 3% interest. The "hippies" never bother to say "it's better than a CD with less risk than a stock" because they don't think they have to - like GM and Toyota who got fat and cut quality, the "hippies" too have taken advantage of it's core group. Well, when all you have to go on is "the environment" and thinking insulation doesn't pay more than a CD, then you're going to lose audience.              

Still a bit difficult to follow your rant except that you seem to think you are smarter than anyone else. 

Hippies must change. So must the nuclear folks who keep promoting it when solar is cheaper. There you are with your misinformation again - maybe you even believe this garbage.

By the way, the grid upgrades will help reduce the costs of solar and wind moreso than fossil/nuc because they will affect areas where wind/solar are sourced but currently don't have access while increasing the grid's stability. Hawaii is already dealing with this very publicly and the rest of the country will too.
The grid has to have major additions and upgrades to provide solar and wind power to the population centers. This is a different topic and much more costly than simply improving the grids standard though the two can compliment each other.

Wind and solar also have storage options as well - but the cost argument pro-solar with storage really works best with thermal, not even concentrating PV. What storage are you talking about or is this another of your coffee shop (possibly science class) ideas?

If you care to dispute the leaking comment, please show us all the information you were able to find online so it can be picked apart. Post your own information. İ have no intention of doing a fools work for him. The leak turned out to be a tempest in a tea cup with a couple of fool politicians caught up in it looking at election. The NRC controls that plant, not the state legislature in Vermont.

Your warm welcomes are appreciated. Pot meet kettle. Show up with insults and you get what you deserve. You sound very much like a poster Xul---- on another site on the same topic - came after your visit here. He has the same bad habit of being insulting as you, also the same BS facts and opinions. 

You should consider getting a bit wider perspective. Your information seems to have a very small base which İ find often with 'anti whatever' groups. Maybe a new girl friend would help? 
post #8 of 10
Mr. heretic's comments step outside the boundaries of respectful & rational discussion.

One should never argue with an irrational person... as it can become indistinguishable whom is whom.
post #9 of 10
Thread Starter 
So perhaps what is rational is to continue headstrong down the path of berkeley bubble intellectualism which dictates that all environmental marketing and media keep quoting "the environment" and not the financial savings?

Is it rational to ignore the masses who don't care about the environment by not addressing the money advantages that climate solutions like smart energy use offer?
post #10 of 10
Thread Starter 
So far you offer nothing but attacks. Something you can't seem to handle when delivered right back to you. You offer no answers, no proof, no numbers.

And why so defensive about the hippie thing? You couldn't possibly be one promoting the nuclear fallacy.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Environmental News and Politics