Global Warming News

[eepete]

Ken, I agree with what you say and numbers don't lie. If I put that money in North Carolina municipal bonds and if I could get 5% that would then be tax free state and federal, it doesn't make sense economically and at best might break even over the life of the equipment. If I can only get a few percent and it's taxed, it can still makes sense. If electric cost go up, it makes more sense.

There is, as with any decision to spend money instead of save it, a subjective portion. It's a fun project, various people are doing it and the like. Some projects I'm working on tie into this, and knowledge gained might lead to some income some day. Much like many tractor owners might be better off to contract out any work they have than to buy the tractors, implements, sheds, and do maintenance, they elect to buy the tractors. If it's close they are happy. Early adopters of home computers certainly didn't get their money's worth. My geothermal heat pumps are way over priced, giving me a 8 to 10 year payback. Same on insulation. My economic choices with the PV array are no more silly than any of the above. Given my options for investing and my costs, and given what I expect electric rates to do in the south in the next decade, I still expect a break even point of about a decade on this.

I don't want to take my situation and extrapolate it out and say that solar is economically feasible today. Like so many discussions on tractor stuff, this is what works for me. I very much agree with your last sentence. But if as an early adopter I can be part of the trend to make the cost go down, and then these PV arrays (grid tie systems) can fill their little niche in the energy picture, and in the process create jobs in the USA, then my payback is far more than just money. If man made global warming is not an issue, I had fun and it wasn't a pile of money. If there is something to it, I'm part of the solution. These sorts of scenarios are the ones I'd like to see people focus on.

I know the government programs manipulate the results. But there are so many programs in so many areas that I don't know how to deal with it all. Remove all crop subsides, energy subsidies (oil, gas, solar, wind), R&D subsidies for companies and who knows what the world would look like. If I had my druthers, I'd phase them all out since I think a free economy works better. I always vote, and follow the various climate change data as it unfolds. Sometimes you take more of a beating by being in the undecided category than by taking a stand.

Anyway, let me close by referencing my earlier post. I'd rather do something than spend too much time on what's the real answer. I'm more concerned with the long term for all than a little more money for my estate.

Hope this makes sense...

Pete

 

[dave1949]

Keegs, For goodness sake, seal up that attic door!

Tax incentives and markets are incredibly complex entities that are woven throughout our economy.

Take roads and highways for example. Roads are paid for and maintained with fuel taxes, some pay annual auto excise taxes, city/township/county, state and federal funds, tolls, etc.

I like a California or Florida orange in winter here in Maine as well as the next person, but strictly speaking, the road and highway network we have isn't a necessity. We collectively decided we would rather have our roads and grudgingly pay for them.

The existance of roadways distorts markets. Certainly their existance distorts rail travel and shipping markets. Same for barges and cargo ships. Housing and commercial real estate markets. How much is a gas station worth without roads to drive on? What is an orange grove worth, or how much would a fresh orange in Maine cost without publically funded roadways?

Many of the same types of distinctions can be made for the air travel/cargo industry.

I think it is an oversimplification to say tax incentives and the corresponding manipulation of markets should be done away with. If you start looking at the less obvious cases there would be a growing list of exceptions people would be/are willing to make.

When looking at energy subsidies, the debate is really about how much the public values the results of manipulating the market. It's also about being forced by circumstances to adopt new paradigms. Whole books can and have been written just to address 'circumstances'. Good points have been made here for and against subsidies.

My personal opinion is we are making a slow but certain exit from the age of fossil fuel energy. The debate is going to continue for some years. Fossil fuels will continue to be used, but will become a specialty fuel. Disclaimer: It's possible my crystal ball is smudged, your mileage may vary.

Here is a factoid from blurtit.com :
In one day enough sun energy shines upon Lake Erie alone to meet the needs (if it could be fully utilized) of the entire American populace for a whole year.

I believe I have heard it stated also as: the sun provides enough energy on the surface of the earth each hour to power all human needs for one week.

The solar energy is there if we are smart enough to utilize it.
Dave.

 

[EddieWalker]

Who was it Dave....Churchhill I think that said, you can alway rely on the Americans to do the right thing after they've tried everything else.

I guess we're in the "try everything else" phase...

This is just too close to the truth of how our government works.

Eddie

 

[Loren49]

Or maybe heading in a good direction. Remember the meaning of non-renewable - there is a finite amount of fossil fuels and as the demand goes up and they become more difficult to extract the price will go up. Its even possible that wars could be fought over this and that the burning is doing serious harm to our environment. (many people agree on the possibility) Someday fossil fuels will be gone.

Loren

 

[keegs]

Keegs, For goodness sake, seal up that attic door!

Tax incentives and markets are incredibly complex entities that are woven throughout our economy.

Take roads and highways for example. Roads are paid for and maintained with fuel taxes, some pay annual auto excise taxes, city/township/county, state and federal funds, tolls, etc.

I like a California or Florida orange in winter here in Maine as well as the next person, but strictly speaking, the road and highway network we have isn't a necessity. We collectively decided we would rather have our roads and grudgingly pay for them.

The existance of roadways distorts markets. Certainly their existance distorts rail travel and shipping markets. Same for barges and cargo ships. Housing and commercial real estate markets. How much is a gas station worth without roads to drive on? What is an orange grove worth, or how much would a fresh orange in Maine cost without publically funded roadways?

Many of the same types of distinctions can be made for the air travel/cargo industry.

I think it is an oversimplification to say tax incentives and the corresponding manipulation of markets should be done away with. If you start looking at the less obvious cases there would be a growing list of exceptions people would be/are willing to make.

When looking at energy subsidies, the debate is really about how much the public values the results of manipulating the market. It's also about being forced by circumstances to adopt new paradigms. Whole books can and have been written just to address 'circumstances'. Good points have been made here for and against subsidies.

My personal opinion is we are making a slow but certain exit from the age of fossil fuel energy. The debate is going to continue for some years. Fossil fuels will continue to be used, but will become a specialty fuel. Disclaimer: It's possible my crystal ball is smudged, your mileage may vary.

Here is a factoid from blurtit.com :
In one day enough sun energy shines upon Lake Erie alone to meet the needs (if it could be fully utilized) of the entire American populace for a whole year.

I believe I have heard it stated also as: the sun provides enough energy on the surface of the earth each hour to power all human needs for one week.

The solar energy is there if we are smart enough to utilize it.
Dave.

Great post Dave....

 

[20 20]

Address your concerns at the ballot box. For those that don't know this November 435 seats in the house and 1/3 of congress are up for election. Choose wisely regardless of their party. You have time to study the candidates, their positions and talk to those you know in hopes that they register and vote.
I hope this is generic enough to not get removed.

The only problem with our "fair" voting procedure is we are still voting on garbage. Even if we could vote fairly the ones allready in office have influance, and can change minds. Corruption is the simplest way I can explain the ones we have in charge, and without a complete overhaul nothing will change . Reminds me of owning a tractor with a bad engine and changing the wheel to make it run right????

 

[20 20]

I took a class in solar in the low 80's taught by a published instructor and came away with the fact that it is expensive. The only solar application that is cost effective is for heating water either for home use or a heating system.
And just one hail storm will cost you many thousands of dollars. Since there are tax benefits it will cost other people for you to be green.
.

I have to agree with the expensive point. I researched this when we were building our home, love to get off the grid. I believe in my area it would take any where from 60-80 yrs to have a solar powered home pay for itself. Now that would be if the solar panels batteries etc... would last that long. If you live somewhere that solar is a good idea I still believe it would take 10yrs. Once again that would be without any repairs or replacement. Maybe solar will become more affordable but it is anybody's quess?

 

[EddieWalker]

If I remember correctly, Rob said that his solar system was in the $100,000 range. He's totally off the grid and has two massive solar panels that follow the sun, plus a generator and a room full of batteries. Once a month, they check the batteries and make sure everything is working properly. I forget how long the batteries last, but a big drawback to solar for just one house is that those batteries only last so long and then you have to replace them. Not figuring the damage that they do to a landfill, they are a big expense that has to be figured into the break even formula of going solar.

If you think that you'll break even in ten years, but then have to buy new batteries every ten years, when do you break even?

If you can get a small home solar system that generates a small amount of electricty, but you still have power coming in and you are not dependent on it, there might be some savings in not buying as much power because the solar is supplying part of your demand. That would be really tough to figure out, but possible with the right monitoring equipment. I just wonder how much you'll actually be saving, the cost of that electricty, and if there really is a payback for the life of the solar equipment that you paid for. I highly doubt it. When you factor in your time, it gets even harder to see where it's worthwhile.

The obvious solution is nuclear. Natural gas makes allot of sense too with the announcements of how much there is available. Wasting money on windmills is just part of that cycle of pretending to do something while others are actualy doing what has to be done. As long as we keep the power plants going, windmills can pretend to be doing something, but I sure hope nobody is expecting windmills to actually replace power plants.

Eddie

 

[psj12]

Windmills on a commercial scale are not feasable because where the wind is there is no electrical infrastructure to transmit the power. Also there is no viable large scale way to store that much electrical power. Ask T. Boone Pickens, i'm pretty sure he has given up.

 

[Ken45101]

Here is a factoid from blurtit.com :
In one day enough sun energy shines upon Lake Erie alone to meet the needs (if it could be fully utilized) of the entire American populace for a whole year.

I believe I have heard it stated also as: the sun provides enough energy on the surface of the earth each hour to power all human needs for one week.

The solar energy is there if we are smart enough to utilize it.

It's not just a question of "smarts". We are no where near the technology to utilize solar energy at anywhere near 25%, much less 100%. Besides, do you realize that if you utilized all the sun energy that shines on Lake Erie, it would freeze!

Yes, hopefully some day we will have high efficiency solar energy. But today the efficiency is quite low and it is not a widespread solution. I'm not saying that we shouldn't work on improving it, but it just isn't a broad solution. Besides, the manufacturing process is environmentally unfriendly if it were currently implemented in massive fashion.

Ken