Reply to Thread

"And your spell checker is built in China!!"

Reminds me about the whole USA olympic uniforms being NOT made in the USA. DUHH!!! go into any department store and look for USA made clothing.

Politicians get upset over clothes used once every 4 years when they should be getting upset about the clotes we uuse everry dday.

Reminds me of your commment bbecause you ttarget into some unimportant speeeelling when you should be concerned about the industry and edducating your customer.

Instead you rattle some nonsense about al gore.

Taking a sensible discussion into political stupidness.

Originally Posted by mark beiser

If you believe that, I find it difficult to lend any credibility to anything you say.

Which part of my statement do you not believe?

Ask anyone in Europe if their environment hasn't changed? Very few will deny it.

and yes, cooling is not standard there because NO ONE has forced air.

Originally Posted by newstudent

I agree the government should have a balanced budget, but you just can't cut off the governments roll cold turky without sever consequences. And frankly what is good for the goose it good for the gander.

Any government program that puts an extra $360 a year in hot water energy savings after a few years pay back time adds money to the consumer which is what drives this economy. When we have a good economy we can get a balanced budget.

The HVAC industry must have some pretty crummy lobbyiest because it is obvious to anyone that improving HVAC effciency will be 100 times better than investing in solar. The solar lobbiest can get a 30% tax credit and the HVAC gets 0% tax credit. Does that make sense to anyone? My local utility is offering $200 off new high effciency HVAC install. That's peanuts to what it should be.

HVAC industry should lobby governement for credits for building hvac ducting in conditioined spaces. credits for extra insulation, credits for effcient upgrades, etc. long term savings are what are good for the people, not pet projects with short sighted goals. IMHO.

Evidently your friend Algore isn't invested in the heating industry!!! And your spell checker is built in China!!

Originally Posted by mark beiser

The government shouldn't be spending money they have to borrow against our great grandchildrens future income, period.

I agree the government should have a balanced budget, but you just can't cut off the governments roll cold turky without sever consequences. And frankly what is good for the goose it good for the gander.

Any government program that puts an extra $360 a year in hot water energy savings after a few years pay back time adds money to the consumer which is what drives this economy. When we have a good economy we can get a balanced budget.

The HVAC industry must have some pretty crummy lobbyiest because it is obvious to anyone that improving HVAC effciency will be 100 times better than investing in solar. The solar lobbiest can get a 30% tax credit and the HVAC gets 0% tax credit. Does that make sense to anyone? My local utility is offering $200 off new high effciency HVAC install. That's peanuts to what it should be.

HVAC industry should lobby governement for credits for building hvac ducting in conditioined spaces. credits for extra insulation, credits for effcient upgrades, etc. long term savings are what are good for the people, not pet projects with short sighted goals. IMHO.

Originally Posted by SolarMike

They never used to need AC because it seldom got as hot as as here. That has changed with global warming, look it up. Ductless splits are big business there now.

If you believe that, I find it difficult to lend any credibility to anything you say.

Originally Posted by mark beiser

Well, at least they are probably not junk!
With the global nature of the way electronic parts are sourced, the individual components used to assemble the panels and inverter came from all over the place, but most of the parts and pieces used to build electronics come from the pacific rim. The good ones from Japan, or a Japanese company operating a factory in another Asian country, the cheap ones from China.

We had excellent contractors. The state inspector said it was one of the best installations he had seen. The panels are some of the more efficient for the money ones that were available at the time.

Originally Posted by mark beiser

Well, at least they are probably not junk!
With the global nature of the way electronic parts are sourced, the individual components used to assemble the panels and inverter came from all over the place, but most of the parts and pieces used to build electronics come from the pacific rim. The good ones from Japan, or a Japanese company operating a factory in another Asian country, the cheap ones from China.

That's is why Ontario states a minimum amount of Ontario content if you want a FIT contract. No point in doing it is there is no net benefit to the citizens. Manufacturing here increased.

Originally Posted by sigma

This is how it works. If you are living in Europe you are automatically "green" because everything there is expensive; electrical energy, gasoline, natural gas and heating fuel. So you as an European you drive car with engine little over 1 liter, you will almost kill your family member for leaving light on in an unoccupied room, you will know central air conditioning only from American movies, you will air dry your washed clothes instead using electric dryer.
If you live in the USA you are used to comfortable living and most of you can effort these luxuries and you do not want to hear about this “green” BS. Simple as that.

Not quite right.....everything there is not expensive. I just spent 3 weeks there and I spent less money on fresh fruit and vegs, cheese, and when I eat out I am paying the roughly the same as I do here when you include tax and tip. I am not talking about MeDees or KFC because that is not food.

Fuel is more expensive but I found NO potholes and the roads were perfect. Also, the distances are less there so the net money out of peoples pockets for auto expenses is the the same or less than here. Paris is a special case as everything is more expensive there but if you don't have to drive for a living you really don't need a car as the transit is great.

As for power costs, yes it is more, but not that much and they aren't as addicted to buying as much power consuming c**p as we are. There are some places in the US with higher costs than France or Germany. They never used to need AC because it seldom got as hot as as here. That has changed with global warming, look it up. Ductless splits are big business there now.

Originally Posted by CraziFuzzy

You are looking at this with the assumption that government regulation SHOULD be there. I am talking about if the government regulation wasn't there. If that were the case, electrical prices would follow generation costs, and the power companies would be perfectly happy running the less efficient peaker plant, to produce more peak energy, to sell at a greater profit margin per kWh than the off-peak energy. The government regulation, however, has forced utility companies to be the ONLY industry in history to try to incentivize their customers to buy less of their product, and tries to get them to buy the cheaper off-peak product. They do NOT do this for their own good, but because the government forces them to do so.

I think we'd have a far better energy situation if the government got out of the way, let rates fluctuate as costs do, and allow utility companies to actually make enough income to actually maintain and improve their delivery systems. The grid started it's rampant decline in relative capability not just because the usage started to increase, but because the utility companies are forced at the bare edge of solvency by the utility commissions, and cannot spend what they need to spend keeping them active.

What if the government regulations, instead of regulating the markets away from natural equilibrium, simply penalized power companies for distribution failures. Yes, prices would go up - but that money would go into improving the electrical system's reliability.

Actually, I am looking at what IS, not what I want it to be. To me govt regulation is neither a good thing not a bad thing, in it self. If it works for the general populace than it is a good thing if not, it is a bad thing. No ideology in it.

As for not regulating the power companies, I hope you will remember Enron. 1000s of people ended paying out their life savings to a dis-honest company. I remember those days in the 90s very well because we had a very right wing provincial government that wanted to privatize Ontario Hydro but the Enron debacle taught them that it was not in the publics interest.

So if you really want to know what will happen with de-regulated power all you have to do is look at average power prices around the world, where they are not regulated. I hope you don't mind $.25-.40 /kwh.

Govt does not have to force a utility or anyone to use a cheaper product. Walmart is here because ALL people would rather pay less for their inputs. The govts goal is industry building and cutting down on pollution while not starving low income people.

Originally Posted by vangoghsear

However, my solar panels and inverter were German made (not that that's any different)

Well, at least they are probably not junk!
With the global nature of the way electronic parts are sourced, the individual components used to assemble the panels and inverter came from all over the place, but most of the parts and pieces used to build electronics come from the pacific rim. The good ones from Japan, or a Japanese company operating a factory in another Asian country, the cheap ones from China.

Originally Posted by mark beiser

I just wanted point out that coal plants are only used for baseline generation, as they are not capable of being quickly brought on and off line.
Natural gas and petroleum fuel burning plants are used for peak demand.

I looked that up. You are correct. That is usually the case. I did some work in a coal fired plant that was only used for peak, or at least that is what they told me, but what you said makes more sense.

However, my solar panels and inverter were German made (not that that's any different)

Originally Posted by BParson03

I was just wondering how environmentally conscious each of you are, and what sort of things that you do, or don't do to contribute to that.

This is how it works. If you are living in Europe you are automatically "green" because everything there is expensive; electrical energy, gasoline, natural gas and heating fuel. So you as an European you drive car with engine little over 1 liter, you will almost kill your family member for leaving light on in an unoccupied room, you will know central air conditioning only from American movies, you will air dry your washed clothes instead using electric dryer.
If you live in the USA you are used to comfortable living and most of you can effort these luxuries and you do not want to hear about this “green” BS. Simple as that.

Originally Posted by vangoghsear

No it does not allow the grid to reduce its capacity any because the base is still required, however during the sunniest hottest days when brownouts and supplemental power, usually provided by bringing additional coal plants online

I just wanted point out that coal plants are only used for baseline generation, as they are not capable of being quickly brought on and off line.
Natural gas and petroleum fuel burning plants are used for peak demand.

As for the rest of your post, the entire first paragraph is a logical fallacy based on the incorrect idea that there is a net economic benefit from the government spending money to subsidize your solar purchase.
That 40 cents of every dollar subsidizing your solar purchase has to first be confiscated from the private sector, and the government has to confiscate at least 50 or 60 cents in order to pass the 40 cents on to you.
Most of the parts and pieces of your solar system were also likely manufactured in China. Even if the final assembly was in the USA, many/most of the component pieces came from China.

The net long term economic "benefit" of the government helping pay for your solar PV system is a negative value.

Please understand, I've got nothing against people putting grid tied solar PV systems on their home, I'll be putting one in my house as soon as the cost comes down to the point that the economics of it work, but the government should not be involved with funding it in any way.

Originally Posted by newstudent

sThe half a billion would of been better spent installing solar hot water heaters all across the USA.

The government shouldn't be spending money they have to borrow against our great grandchildrens future income, period.

Originally Posted by newstudent

"I think we'd have a far better energy situation if the government got out of the way, let rates fluctuate as costs do, and allow utility companies to actually make enough income to actually maintain and improve their delivery systems. "

So a company like Duke/Progress Energy, the largest in the nation could raise their rates 15% without government consent? No thanks. My rates just went up 6% with the Governments permission. Without the governement I'm sure they would of gone up 15%. that's what happends when you have a monopoly.

So how much has Duke's costs gone up in that time? Do you think you can have rampant increases in the cost of the SOURCE of electricity, and not have to pay more for it?

And I'd like to point out of all renewables solar PV probably is around 1%.

For some reason it is singled out as a scrape goat. I'm guesssing because HVAC people are pissed the government gives a home owner 30% back for solar but zero for upgrading to a high Eff. HVAC system (I know they had a program a couple of years ago, but not now).

The fact of the matter is that Heating and Cooling/ HVAC is the biggest residential energy use by far and you can either be in this industry and support energy effcient homes or give consumers an ineffcient spider web of attic duct work with over a 25% effciency loss like in my home .

Solar PV is not going to make a huge impact, due to it's cost, but what you do every day and how you educate your clients can. I'd focus on that, instead of making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Originally Posted by Pete838

Do you really think that half billion dollars that went to Solyndra had anything to do with a company trying to succeed?

Yes I do, I do not believe in government conspiracy plans. The historical facts about the Bush administrations involvement make it clear that the program's funding was not a payback of any sort.
"Because one of the Solyndra investors, Argonaut Venture Capital, is funded by George Kaiser — a man who donated money to the Obama campaign — the loan guarantee has been attacked as being political in nature. What critics don’t mention is that one of the earliest and largest investors, Madrone Capital Partners, is funded by the family that started Wal-Mart, the Waltons. The Waltons have donated millions of dollars to Republican candidates over the years."

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/201...tee/?mobile=nc

"I think we'd have a far better energy situation if the government got out of the way, let rates fluctuate as costs do, and allow utility companies to actually make enough income to actually maintain and improve their delivery systems. "

So a company like Duke/Progress Energy, the largest in the nation could raise their rates 15% without government consent? No thanks. My rates just went up 6% with the Governments permission. Without the governement I'm sure they would of gone up 15%. that's what happends when you have a monopoly.

interesting

Originally Posted by SolarMike

Actually, load shifting does save the utility a lot of money. Look at the peak power costs to the utility. Back when Enron was in biz, the cost of a peak kwh passed $1.00 and there is still a big discrepancy in off peak market prices and peak market prices.

This is why subsidizing solar thermal for electric water heaters is good. Even if it costs the utility $.25/kwh to subsidize it, it might be saving them $.50/kwh. There is good economics behind it in some cases. I seem to recall that the CEC says the utility cannot charge more than X amount to the customer (after the nuttiness of the Enron scandal).

You are looking at this with the assumption that government regulation SHOULD be there. I am talking about if the government regulation wasn't there. If that were the case, electrical prices would follow generation costs, and the power companies would be perfectly happy running the less efficient peaker plant, to produce more peak energy, to sell at a greater profit margin per kWh than the off-peak energy. The government regulation, however, has forced utility companies to be the ONLY industry in history to try to incentivize their customers to buy less of their product, and tries to get them to buy the cheaper off-peak product. They do NOT do this for their own good, but because the government forces them to do so.

I think we'd have a far better energy situation if the government got out of the way, let rates fluctuate as costs do, and allow utility companies to actually make enough income to actually maintain and improve their delivery systems. The grid started it's rampant decline in relative capability not just because the usage started to increase, but because the utility companies are forced at the bare edge of solvency by the utility commissions, and cannot spend what they need to spend keeping them active.

What if the government regulations, instead of regulating the markets away from natural equilibrium, simply penalized power companies for distribution failures. Yes, prices would go up - but that money would go into improving the electrical system's reliability.