The California Desert Is Now Home to the World’s Largest Solar-Power Plant

His math still doesn't work.

I'm not buying that his roof mounted PV system, at $20,000 is large enough to offset his entire electric usage. PV just isn't there in efficiency even with 100% clear days for 365 days per year.

I don't doubt he gets some benefit but at $20,000 in depreciating and efficiency losing equipment, the KwH he enjoys come at a great expense to tax payers.

I also pretty much know that PG&E, by statute, is paying near retail rates for power generated through these subsidized systems. That means PG&E is further subsidizing our friend because he isn't paying for grid placement or upkeep. Well let's correct this, it's not PG&E subsidizing, it's ratepayers like you and me.

Yep, screwed coming and going. Thanks dude.

Cheers
Labour

 

1) Not a diversion but rather right on point. The oil companies get loads of tax credits and ridiculously cheap leases of government land both on and off shore. Why aren't you demanding that they pay you back? Typical GOP attitude favoring large corporations over regular citizens at every turn.

2)The average monthly bill for the three years prior to installing the system was around $375. Very high during the summer months when the AC is running a lot and lower during the winter months. Now the average bill is less than zero. At the end of the year, the power company sent me a check for over $600 which was the amount of power I generated less the power I used. I went from paying $4500 a year to paying NOTHING and receiving a check for $600. During the day time when the sun is shining, the meter runs backwards creating credits on the bill, at night the meter draws power from the grid.

3)You and everyone else are paying the billionaire oil companies for any and all of the billions in tax credits they receive from the congress every year and the sweetheart deals on the US Government land that they use and abuse. Try demanding your money back and see how far you get.

4)the system I bought is from Pedersen-Dean here out of Valencia California. They obtain the permits from the local building inspectors in LA County and install the system to code which works through the existing power grid. I have 42 panels on my roof. I was informed that these panels are good for around 20 years. I would assume that by the time they need to be replaced, there will be panels that are even more efficient and probably much cheaper, as there is constant research and development in this area. At that time, I will replace them at a fraction of the cost of the original system due to the fact that much of the cost of the system is already in place and no new permits will be required. They work through the grid so yes, I can and do run 220 through them.

5) Why do you seem so opposed to the one time tax credit given to the consumer for retrofitting his home with such a system? Do you also rail against the billions in tax credits given to the oil companies? It is my understanding that these credits were approved because the net effect on the environment by using clean readily available power would be a big plus regarding air quality and also if widely used here in the great state of California, it would bring us much closer to energy independence. We were recently swindled out of tens of billions by the slimy Texas corporation, ENRON which is one of the main causes of the huge deficits here in the state. Hopefully the wise use of a great natural resource, sunshine will get us back on the right track. It seems to me that those who oppose solar power are either paid whores or dupes of the oil companies.

Cheers

 

Yes at his $375 per month it will take 4 years to recoup the cost of the investment and during their life cycle they will loose between 40-20% efficiency. And that if he gets ALL his electricity through the system. Also have to wonder if the manufacturer is not receiving some sort of subsidy to keep the cost down. Doesn't include any maintenance cost, the electronic components that convert the power to AC and regulate it, he claims "no moving parts" but lots of electronic components and added insurance cost.

Also that $375 per month for conventional electricity seems pretty high be kwh else he uses a LOT of electricity bringing into question is he really generating all the electricity with just solar panels.

 

LOL, you just don't get it champ. I have the bills to prove it, IT WORKS. And yes, we get about 330 days of full sunshine here. Right now it's 8:35 in the morning and my meter is spinning madly backwards while a sit here and type on my battery powered Ipad. Around mid day it will be spinning faster until around 2 pm. In the summer when the days are long and the sun is hottest, even better. Why do you hate these facts so much. Are you a lobbyist for Exxon? The power monopolies are scared (*)(*)(*)(*)less that everyone in California, Arizona, Nevada and Utah will get their heads out of their asses and do what I have done. They have been waging a multimillion dollar Madison Ave. campaign against the solar industry for years and some dupes are still buying it. Pedersen-Dean which was formerly a large roofing contractor is in the final stages of development on roofing material which is made of solar panels so that when you build your house or replace the roof you will be able to have a system that is 2-4 times more powerful than mine. Also, you can install battery storage that will allow you to draw power from it even when the grid is down and the sun isn't shining. Step into the 21st century....

 

Wrong again. NO change in insurance cost champ. All of the components which convert solar into AC and those which act to integrate with the existing grid system are included in the cost of installation and there is no maintinence cost on them.

 

What tax credits?

No they aren't ridiculously cheap and we taxpayers make money off of them, who are you claiming wants to lease those lands at a higher rate?

Well I am not the GOP but a regular citizen who has ownership in LOTS of large corporations, don't you?

What is your cost per kwh? What ulitility?

Again diversion noted and what tax credits are you talking about?

Where the cost of electricity is about double the national average. Take into account the loss of efficiency, 42 panels is HUGE, why so many?

If you want it YOU pay for it, if they are so great why do they need a government subsidy?

What tax credit and be specific.

- - - Updated - - -

Wait a minute the value of your house went up $20,000 and your insurance cost didn't go up?

 

Sour grapes....If you want to research the billions in tax credits given to the oil companies google it. If you are claiming that they don't get any, you are delusional. Still puzzled about why a conservative like you claim to be is against legislation which affords a private citizen some tax relief. I thought you guys were in favor of lower taxes.

 

So you claim oil companies are getting huge tax credits but can't cite any................gotcha.

Yes and a good start would be ending your tax credit and all such credits for home solar installations.

 

I was just reading about a new BMW called the i3. Reportedly, it is made using only windpower and gets 136 mpg using a small on-board gas engine to generate electricity for the motor. Seats 5 and has a price tag of a little more than $40,000. These things ring the death-knell for the NASCAR wannabe set.

There is also a TV ad for the thing.

- - - Updated - - -

That'd be a city of about 400,000. There are NFL franchises in towns smaller than that. AND, there is a helluva lot of desert in California.

 

Not a huge amount of people can afford 40k + for a car.

 

Oh, yeah, there's a huge amount when you consider that a Impala or Malibu will set you back $30g and you still have to foot the Diamond-Shamrock bill. To me, the i3 looks like it might be a tech upgrade over the Prius and there are hundreds of thousands of those on the road. Who knows? - I wouldn't buy one until the 3rd model year anyway.

 

Sounds promising though, they need to find a way to drive the price down.

 

It's a 4 passenger electric that can charge in 3 hours on 220V (that makes about 8 hours 120V). The all electric has a range of about 72 miles. With the small gas extender

"The single significant flaw with the i3’s range extender is that it drinks from a Big Gulp–sized gas tank. At 1.9 gallons small, the gas reservoir contributes another 75 miles or so to the i3’s reach, but the range indicator drops at an alarming rate, no better than when the car is running on battery alone. So it alleviates the anxiety of driving an electric but doesn’t solve the range issue the same way a Volt does. Take the i3 on a 500-mile weekend and you’ll stop to refuel every hour. Wasn’t driving an electric car supposed to be about avoiding gas stations?"
http://www.caranddriver.com/bmw/i3

 

There are no tax credits given to Oil, Gas and Coal companies. A tax credit is a direct payment from the Treasury to the company or individual, it can be used to offset taxes owed but if no taxes are owed then a check is cut. Refundable tax credit. Oil and Gas companies don't get credits they receive legitimate operating expense deductions. Oil and Gas companies pay the highest effective tax rates in the country, the miniscule billion or so they get in deductions is offset in spades by the 100's of billions they pay in income tax.

Jack, you got a tax credit just not a refundable one. Rebates from your state? You can use up to 30% of the cost of the Solar installation against federal tax due. How did you get $10,000 on a $20,000 installation?

As to the KwH rate you are paid. If in California you are getting retail AND for energy produced during peak hours you are getting a 2.5 multiplier or 2.5 times retail. That costs ratepayers, because the utility is paying you more than they pay for energy and further you aren't covering infrastructure costs.

Yep, it's only economical when you use our money. Good for you, sucks for us.

Cheers
Labour

 

I've been running my hot water system through one solar panel for 25 years. It's been paying ME $20/month for the last 15 years, so it isn't pointless.

I'm thinking if solar can be used just to power home air-conditioning systems, our energy problems will be solved. Most people need air-conditioning only when the sun is shining.

 

It's relevant when the sheer amount of land mass it takes up to produce that solar power is taken into account.

Wasn't there some animal rights fruitcake group recently incensed when they found out windmills were slaughtering birds?

 

More passengers, more load capacity, more towing capacity, more range. And with the electric you still have to foot the Con-Ed bill who have to pay the coal mines for the fuel.

 

So then the question is, who (as in from the business perspective) stands to profit handsomely from "efficient" solar power? Why, I bet it's private companies and corporations, right? Let them sink their money into the R&D and hit the market with their viable product once they've figured it out.

Unless, of course you're willing to require these companies to subsidize the end consumer's costs since they are using our tax dollars to develop this stuff.

As an tax payer/investor (in these cases), I/we want a return on our money.

 

My guess is that 136 mpg (for the non-plug-in model) would be within just about everybody's range. But you know the fuel companies; we pay them just as much/gallon for under-utilization as for max output.

 

They are both plug-in models, one is battery only the other is battery with a small gas range extender. So you run on coal and then if you have the gas extender on gas.

 

It is, currently, a pipe dream as a sole source energy solution, but a few panels, an inverter and having it piped into your meter helps save on your monthly bill. (no batteries required).

Same for a smaller windmill.

When I was living down in Texas (not by choice, mind you), I looked seriously into a combo wind/solar solution to get me close to 0 net monthly usage from my commercial provider I looked at the set ups that pump the electricity back into the grid instead of the battery solution which is needed to be totally off grid). As mentioned, the cost was more than it would be just pay the electric bill the rest of my life.

I then looked at costs for smaller set ups to help cut my monthly bill and depending on what your local power company charges and what your usage is it's possible to find such a set up at an acceptable cost/ROI/time solution.

On large scale (like the big desert mirror farm) whole other cost factors arise that home owners don't need to consider. Land mass usage being one. Large windmills need separation, considering they have blade spans in hundreds of feet. Solar just needs lots of mirrors or panels....it takes large land areas to set these things up.

Then...those poor animals...

 

So lefty land is all for replacing "big corporate oil" with "big corporate solar or wind"...got it.

 

I don't understand the need to defend fossil fuels and to put down renewables. If you look at the EROI chart I posted earlier in this thread, you'll see that many renewables already now compare favorably with fossil fuels, except for coal. However, what fossil fuels have going for them is the infrastructure and being the entrenched technology. In order to overcome that with sheer market forces, renewables would need to be significantly cheaper than fossil fuel energy.

If we look at other countries, who don't have the entrenched fossil fuel infrastructure, it makes a lot of sense for them already today to build up new capacity with renewables, which is what some are doing. Thus, the US is risking being left behind: In 50 years, many emerging market countries may run a large percentage of their energy needs on renewables with modern infrastructure, while the US will still be arguing over the same issue based on petty partisan politics, while being stuck in the stone age of fossil fuel infrastructure. Therefore, I would be more than happy to subsidize renewables with my hard-earned tax dollars, if it helps to prevent this fate.

 

I suppose that makes sense if the only way you define profit is through monetary gains.

 

"Despite receiving an estimated $39 billion in annual government subsidies over the past five years, the solar energy industry accounted for just one half of one percent (0.5%) of all the electricity generated in the U.S. during the first 10 months of 2014, "
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...-govt-subsidies-solar-produced-05-electricity

I wish solar was the answer to energy but then I also wish we could have a perpetual motion machine.