Professional Member
He just couldn't find his pipe stretcher or metric adjustable to fix it. Mike Holmes made his millions by ragging on other contractors. Most deserve it, don't get me wrong, but in some cases he has to find faults where there aren't any, just to have material for the show. Let's see how he's gonna spin this into "you and your family could have died a horrific death because of the pump/flow meter".Originally Posted by drife678
Professional Member*
I would be a little upset too if one of my jobs that i put heart and soul into got ripped out and thrown on he lawn without me first being given a chance to remedy any problems. It doesn't really matter the reason or explanation, once it gets to national TV all the viewing public sees is your equipment being removed. I wouldn't be happy about it either
AOP Committee/Professional Member*
The trick is to craft rules that do not result in tyranny.
[Avatar photo from a Florida training accident. Everyone walked away.]
2 Tim 3:16-17
RSES CMS, HVAC Electrical Specialist
Member, IAEI
AOP Forum Rules:
Professional Member*
Ooo, that's a good one!
Professional Member
Teach me that trick and I'll let you be my right-hand man as I rule the worldActually, they didn't do such a bad job, once the affluent state of Michigan decided that they didn't want Canadian garbage or Canadian dollars as they were overflowing with cash. The way they set up the system right now, you can generate as much trash as you want as long as you pay for it, but you have every opportunity to get rid of your recyclables/compostables for free. Since garbage can get pretty raunchy over 2 weeks if it contains compostables, you have an extra incentive to get in with the program.
Professional Member*
Seems they understand thoughtful design is incentive driven rather then penalty driven.
Professional Member*
On the OP: Mike Holmes is subsidized by the Province and the shows sponsors. He does do good work but is not at all concerned about sledge hammering perfectly good building materials that could be "Re-Used". They go to the land fill. I have learned all kinds of stuff watching his programs. I got hooked on it from a post on H-Talk (thank you very much, sort of). He has taken a softer stand on his "Tear It Out" position recently due to pressure from some body regarding the land fill issue. I can only hope he (Mike Holmes) uses SolarMikes system to make a point on using alternative energy sources and how wise the HO was to have a "Solar System". If not I may have to besmirsch his reputation on this very forum.
On CFL's: I started buying them years ago keeping in mind the "Last 20 times longer than Incandescents" claims. After the first few burned out in a matter of months I started putting a date on them when I installed new ones. "20 times longer" my a$$ ! I must have gotten the seconds. Most only lasted 18 months, 1/2 what the old incandescents lasted. The ones available now are "Subsidized" by the Utility with instant rebates (so the sign says) and cost me about $1.35 each, dimables are twice that. I am waiting to see what the service life ends up being.
On PV solar: The "Technical Anaylist" (salesman) gave me his calcs and said we can do your system (6.4Kw) for $14K after the utility rebates. I did my own anaylsis and it will take me 19.8 years to break even with the rebate, 31.6 years without. In my area PV is running $4.00 a watt. At that price only big business and municipalities can afford a 20 year payback, not me !
On E85: It takes 1.8 energy units to produce 1.0 energy unit of Ethanol/Gasoline mix. Only government can afford to do that. D'oh !
On Recycling: Considering our (USA) massive consumerisim we should be compelled to sort and recycle everything we put into the trash and recycle bin, period !
If sense were so common everyone would have it !You cannot protect the Stupid from themselves !"Experience is the ability to recognize a mistake Before you make it again!" (Stolen Quote)
Professional Member*
Might be time to look at leasing. Basically shift the electric bill from the electric company to the solar panel company. Only difference is the rate is fixed and guaranteed for 20 years, then they abandon the system in place.
Many panels installed 40 years ago are still producing 80-90% of the output they made when installed.
Professional Member*
I read the fine print. They still "Own" the system at the end of the lease and I still get to pay them as long as it is functional and attached to the grid (very fine Lawyering went it to that part). That is why I still don't have a PV system at this point.
Last edited by Cagey57; 10-09-2012 at 12:16 AM. Reason: typogarphical airor
If sense were so common everyone would have it !You cannot protect the Stupid from themselves !"Experience is the ability to recognize a mistake Before you make it again!" (Stolen Quote)
Professional Member*
One of the big issues with solar, or any technology that needs some market incentive to get people to choose it, is that it is an upfront cost. If you don't have the disposable money to spend on it, you are left out of the market. I hate monopolies so I would rather have a large number of people each owing a small bit of something than one big company. It is democracy in action. In our case, and Germanys, and many other countries, the way to get more solar on the roof is to make it so that those without the upfront money can afford it. Until there is a better mechanism, the FIT process is it. without those payments, it will be slow process and the continued cost reductions would not happen.On the OP: Mike Holmes is subsidized by the Province and the shows sponsors. He does do good work but is not at all concerned about sledge hammering perfectly good building materials that could be "Re-Used". They go to the land fill. I have learned all kinds of stuff watching his programs. I got hooked on it from a post on H-Talk (thank you very much, sort of). He has taken a softer stand on his "Tear It Out" position recently due to pressure from some body regarding the land fill issue. I can only hope he (Mike Holmes) uses SolarMikes system to make a point on using alternative energy sources and how wise the HO was to have a "Solar System". If not I may have to besmirsch his reputation on this very forum.
On PV solar: The "Technical Anaylist" (salesman) gave me his calcs and said we can do your system (6.4Kw) for $14K after the utility rebates. I did my own anaylsis and it will take me 19.8 years to break even with the rebate, 31.6 years without. In my area PV is running $4.00 a watt. At that price only big business and municipalities can afford a 20 year payback, not me!
Mike Holmes has put an eye on "better quality" renovations but I think some people tune in just to hear him rant and get out the crow bar. I'll see what the story is soon with this solar system.
Professional Member*
Not all solar lease programs are the same. Some truly ARE rent to own type systems... some are 'financed' systems, and yes, some are perpetual leases. Heck, my work is currently 'lease to owning' a 1MW solar array - 10 year program where we pay the solar installer a fixed rate per kWh produced (which is actually a little above the current utility price), then at 10 years, the system is ours outright.
Global Moderator
Get an answer on why the unit was out?
Professional Member
My guess is because it collected carcinogenic UV-rays
Professional Member*
So after 10 years the energy produced thereafter is effectively FREE.
How does THAT suck?
Professional Member*
I didn't say it sucks... hell, i don't care if it every produces a single watt - all I care is that the new panels are above my parking space, so I get shade now... The only part that sucks about the project is that the company HAS the capitol to build the array themselves, but chose to do this 'deal', I'm guessing because someone knew someone.
Professional Member*
Nothing is free. Everythign still requires maintenance and at some point it will wear out and fail. I don;t know what hte service life of all hte components are, but I doubt it's much beyond 20 years. After that, you'll be upgrading because it's it's compeltely obsolete.
Regular Guest
The annual energy output is so low that the money wasted on solar panels could be better spent on efficiency upgrades.
Getting rid of a natural draft furnace and air sealing/insulating could save more energy in 2 years than a 1kw solar system in the northeast could produce in it's lifetime, at a fraction of the capital cost. Spending money on solar diverts funds which are badly needed for efficiency upgrades.
Professional Member*
That's a lot of generalization. Not everywhere even uses a significant amount of energy for heating, and not everywhere is the northeast. I have no doubts that over the expected life, the 1MW array we have installed is going to pay for itself.
Professional Member*
Yeah, and...?
Panels are warrantied for 25 years. In 25 years there probably WILL be technology that completely justifies replacement. In the meantime you paid 10 years plus maybe a little maintenance for 25 years worth of energy, and helped shed/distribute load on the grid.
I agree, taking a comprehensive look rather than one product look is the wiser and more financially astute way to assess opportunity. But on the other hand I look at this from the average investor's perspective as say "prove it". I'm not writing a check based upon COULD or MAYBE, ARE YOU? (If you are, I'll send you my address. Please send me $10,000. I promise you could see 10% roi.)
When it comes to living up to comprehensive approach savings, you have any proof those 2 years savings ever show up? Solar panels have dedicated meters. Tracking realization is not only simple, it's actually being DONE.
Furthermore, in true socialist state air sealing John Doe's house and replacing his crappy furnace would take precedence over installing Fuzzy's solar because it has greatest benefit. But since Fuzzy is worried about Fuzzy's situation, maybe he already took care of his highest opportunity, he's on to solar. Or maybe he'd prefer a lower return with higher confidence than one with a lot of maybe's and little proof.
Regular Guest
Excuse my use of metric units - I have no idea how much energy a cubic foot of gas has.
In ontario, canada has a newer (late 90s, early 90s) relatively well build 2000 sq house with a natural draft furnace (spark ignition @ 68% afue) may use 2000 m3 of gas per year excluding water heating.
Upgrading to a 95% afue unit should save around 29% or 580 m3 per year.
1 m3 of gas has 36000 BTUs in it; one kwh has around 3400 btu/hr...
Furnace upgrade savings: 6141 kwh per year.
Energy produced by 1kw of pv per year: 1100 kwh (http://pv.nrcan.gc.ca/pvmapper.php?L...llement&lang=e)
So in one year a high eff furnace can save as much energy as a 1kw pv system can produce in 5.6 years. (I exaggerated in my previous post)
Now, late 80s/early 90s homes aren't energy pigs. In old homes energy efficiency upgrades can cut consumption by 50%+ as you know (getting rid of ancient < 60% afue oversized furnace, air sealing, blowing insulation into framed walls/attic), at a similar cost to a 1.5-2kw pv system.
----------------------------
As for determining the roi of efficiency upgrades, it's as simple as analyzing utility bills.
Software which can simulate the impact of efficiency upgrades is also available - for example, hot 2000.
Posting Permissions
Reply