• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

Wind & Solar energy mandates will raise (double) your electric bill

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
WTF is wrong with congress and some of the states (particularly California) with regards to energy?

Seriously have they forgotten simple math? Did their solar calculator die?

PROJECTED COST per KW of electricity from COAL in 2016 is $78.
PROJECTED COST per KW of electricity from ONSHORE WIND in 2016 is $149.
PROJECTED COST per KW of electricity from OFFSHORE WIND in 2016 is $191.
PROJECTED COST per KW of electricity from THERMAL SOLAR in 2016 is $256.
PROJECTED COST per KW of electricity from PHOTO-VOLTAIC SOLAR in 2016 is $396.

States are now considering mandates to push (read that as force) utilities into various "green" energies. California just increased its mandate from 20% to 33%. Heaven help them because their economy will falter if their energy prices clime as expected.

Heaven help the rest of us if our states follow suit.

Government subsidies for solar power are nearly 100 times greater than subsidies for natural gas and petroleum. Subsidies and support per unit of production, according to the Energy Information Administration, were 25 cents for natural gas compared to $24.34 for solar in 2008. How about wind, you say? That's $23.37 per unit. Without massive subsidies from your taxes, wind and solar power generation simply wouldn't happen.

. . . Great Britain has gone down this renewable road already. How did that work out? For every green job "created in the renewable-energy sector (mainly solar and wind), another 3.7 jobs are being lost in the real economy, says the independent study by Verso Economics," James Delingpole wrote in the UK Telegraph.

In my state we have some of the largest wind farms in the country but our governor is not mandating it. Apparently the wind farm operators plan to sell a bunch of our wind generated electricity to Illinois. So they will be screwed. But what is the point of harvesting the wind and the sun if it destroys the economy, eliminates jobs and lowers our standard of living?
 

JEV

Mr. Congeniality
GOLD Site Supporter
Hey, Kalifornians deserve whatever they get. Let their prices rise to where the whole state becomes bankrupt, and we can sell it back to the Mexicans who dominate it now, and who suck the lifeblood from its treasury with their anchor babies and non-English speaking kids who fill the schools and run the gangs. They vote in the same thieves every time, and expect that something will change for the better, when all it does is stay the same. It's a state filled with ignorance. They are like druggies who slowly kill themself because of their stupidity. Good riddance.
 

loboloco

Well-known member
Mel, where did that cost analysis come from? Not knowing where it originated, I can't look at the criteria for their cost analysis. Seems a little high unless they are basing it solely on start up cost and not factoring in lifetime use and labor reductions because of 'free' generation. Not saying they are wrong, just would like to look deeper.
this is an example of what I mean:
If you buy a 10 kw solar generator the cost is between 39,000 and 50,000. On the the first hour of generation, taking the higher figure, cost per kw hour would be 5,000.
If you anticipate a lifetime of thirty years and a generation of 80%, this falls drastically in the first year. Like I said, need to look at the criteria they used for their cost analysis.
 

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
There is a link in my first post to the Orange County Register newspaper, they did the analysis and included all the TAX SUBSIDIES that it takes to support 'green energy.' The article also lists several sources.
 

grizzer

New member
MN greening laws push % of KWH generation from green. Windmills tend to spin at night Spring/Fall when the Co-op cannot use the power, BUT IS REQUIRED TO PAY A PREMIUM for the KWH generation.

The wasted generation premium payments now reached $200K, total shareholder capital payments are $2M.

Insane waste of cash.
 

loboloco

Well-known member
There is a link in my first post to the Orange County Register newspaper, they did the analysis and included all the TAX SUBSIDIES that it takes to support 'green energy.' The article also lists several sources.
Sorry, I found it. I see where the figure is coming from now. biggest mistake is that the government is providing subsidies. Government involvement very nearly quadruples the cost of anything.
 

lowell

New member
Your state does not have to sell wend generated electric to Illinois you could give it to us free and we would still be screwed:yum::yum::yum::yum:
 

BigAl

Gone But Not Forgotten
SUPER Site Supporter
WTF is wrong with congress and some of the states (particularly California) with regards to energy?

Seriously have they forgotten simple math? Did their solar calculator die?

PROJECTED COST per KW of electricity from COAL in 2016 is $78.
PROJECTED COST per KW of electricity from ONSHORE WIND in 2016 is $149.
PROJECTED COST per KW of electricity from OFFSHORE WIND in 2016 is $191.
PROJECTED COST per KW of electricity from THERMAL SOLAR in 2016 is $256.
PROJECTED COST per KW of electricity from PHOTO-VOLTAIC SOLAR in 2016 is $396.

States are now considering mandates to push (read that as force) utilities into various "green" energies. California just increased its mandate from 20% to 33%. Heaven help them because their economy will falter if their energy prices clime as expected.

Heaven help the rest of us if our states follow suit.



In my state we have some of the largest wind farms in the country but our governor is not mandating it. Apparently the wind farm operators plan to sell a bunch of our wind generated electricity to Illinois. So they will be screwed. But what is the point of harvesting the wind and the sun if it destroys the economy, eliminates jobs and lowers our standard of living?


OK !!!! You got my dander up :doh::biggrin: Just what do you think makes the cost so friggin high for solar/green power per KW in the first place ?

Its what ain't in your little article . "The OIL company's controll or own most of the patents/solar companys that work on green energy ".
BP is the biggest solar panel maker in the world . It will not change until we run out of oil .
This is just like when Standard oil and Firestone tire bought the LA transit system after WII . They immediately dismantled it .

FYI !!!!!If you ride rapid transit you do not buy tires and gas .
 

OhioTC18

Gone But Not Forgotten
GOLD Site Supporter
BP is the biggest solar panel maker in the world .

Wonder why all of the BP locations here had solar panels installed on their canopies and then 3-4 years later disconnected all of them? I don't know of a single one that is still operating.
 

BigAl

Gone But Not Forgotten
SUPER Site Supporter
Wonder why all of the BP locations here had solar panels installed on their canopies and then 3-4 years later disconnected all of them? I don't know of a single one that is still operating.
They could not afford to buy their own products !:yum:
 

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
Just what do you think makes the cost so friggin high for solar/green power per KW in the first place ?

Its what ain't in your little article . "The OIL company's controll or own most of the patents/solar companys that work on green energy ". . .
NOPE, sorry Al, that does make for a good conspiracy theory but the fact is the technology to produce the electricity is simple NOT EFFICIENT compared to the cost of burning coal. Coal is cheap and efficient. Wind turbines are outrageously expensive and very inefficient. I have been trying to put solar and wind turbines on my property but I can't find any that actually work or are efficient. Simply put the technology is not good enough yet.
 

waybomb

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
And for all the wind and solar sources, you'll need at least equivalent coal or nukes for base load.

When does electricity usage peak? On those hot high pressure days, WHEN THERE IS N O WIND! Phawk!
 

waybomb

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
If you anticipate a lifetime of thirty years and a generation of 80%, this falls drastically in the first year. Like I said, need to look at the criteria they used for their cost analysis.

'splain the underlined part please? It would seem average capacity would be more like 50%. I do not know what the underlined part implies.

And explain how a solar panel works 30 years at rated output. That seems to be a large assumption.
 

BigAl

Gone But Not Forgotten
SUPER Site Supporter
NOPE, sorry Al, that does make for a good conspiracy theory but the fact is the technology to produce the electricity is simple NOT EFFICIENT compared to the cost of burning coal. Coal is cheap and efficient. Wind turbines are outrageously expensive and very inefficient. I have been trying to put solar and wind turbines on my property but I can't find any that actually work or are efficient. Simply put the technology is not good enough yet.


Oh the technology is there , It is just locked up for now .

Weather its solar companies owned by oil gaints or Green Peaces and earth Lovers stopping new dams on rivers to protect some species of algae . Nothing will change until we are forced too .


Oh and Good Morning . That bad storm in the east do you all any damage???
 

BigAl

Gone But Not Forgotten
SUPER Site Supporter
Hey, Kalifornians deserve whatever they get. Let their prices rise to where the whole state becomes bankrupt, and we can sell it back to the Mexicans who dominate it now, and who suck the lifeblood from its treasury with their anchor babies and non-English speaking kids who fill the schools and run the gangs. They vote in the same thieves every time, and expect that something will change for the better, when all it does is stay the same. It's a state filled with ignorance. They are like druggies who slowly kill themself because of their stupidity. Good riddance.

Ah crap ...... Jev, did you burn the rolls again this morning ????? Your on a roll !:smile:

Don't clump all Californians into the same group . It shows a sign of limited foresight . :biggrin:
 

loboloco

Well-known member
'splain the underlined part please? It would seem average capacity would be more like 50%. I do not know what the underlined part implies.

And explain how a solar panel works 30 years at rated output. That seems to be a large assumption.
Capable of producing at its rated capacity. Basic assumption on any system. Count on only 80% of its capacity. As for the 30 years, most systems sold now have at least 20 yr warranties. Meaing it should last around thirty years, or possibly more.
This doesn't mean some of the components will last that long. Batteries, inverters, connectors, etc will probably have a design life of 3-5 yrs.
Please note, I am discussing only solar systems, not wind, geo, or hybrid systems.
 

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
Capable of producing at its rated capacity. Basic assumption on any system. Count on only 80% of its capacity. . .
Please note, I am discussing only solar systems, not wind, geo, or hybrid systems.

When I talked with people who know wind power they said 50% is the best you can hope for and that would be higher than average!

The costs of photovoltaic is simply beyond reach when I look at the fact that my state (intelligently) does not give tax incentives for houses to hook up photovoltaic solar electric systems, and when I look at the fact that I have reasonably cheap electricity, and when I consider the fact that my region is not a great area for sun generating systems.

I have also looked at (and posted a thread about) solar water heating systems. Again, without a subsidy from the state, the payback for the system is sometime long after the end of my life expectancy on this planet.

Realize that I really WANT this technology to work. It just is not cost effective. I believe honestly that President Obama wants OIL prices to raise to levels that make some alternatives more attractive, but since very little of our heat or electricity in this nation comes from OIL it appears that his strategy is nothing short of stupid and misguided. Natural Gas and Coal are heating most homes in the US, are generating most of the electricity in the US (with the aid of hydroelectric and nuclear). OIL is what we need to have trucks deliver our food, to make plastics and other goods, and those prices are clearly going to go up with the Obama strategy, but it won't affect much of the electrical production in this nation. JMO
 

loboloco

Well-known member
And yet, Mel, solar generators are used throughout the world and in the southern US with good results. When it costs many thousands of dollars to bring electricity into a location, the cost of an independent solar system doesn't look that bad. Neither wind, solar, geo, nuke, or coal is an ideal solution. A commonsense blending would work, but given the current divides on this, I really don;t see it happening.
 

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
And yet, Mel, solar generators are used throughout the world and in the southern US with good results. When it costs many thousands of dollars to bring electricity into a location, the cost of an independent solar system doesn't look that bad...

EXACTLY it is all based on LOCATION LOCATION LOCATION.

My utility company will bring natural gas and electric the first 150 feet for 'free' but after that you begin to pay a whole lot of money. Knowing that I am a cheapskate, can you guess how far back my new carriage house sits from the road :whistling:

I agree that solar systems are great WHEN THEY MAKE SENSE but in MOST AREAS they simply do not make sense!
 

loboloco

Well-known member
EXACTLY it is all based on LOCATION LOCATION LOCATION.

My utility company will bring natural gas and electric the first 150 feet for 'free' but after that you begin to pay a whole lot of money. Knowing that I am a cheapskate, can you guess how far back my new carriage house sits from the road :whistling:

I agree that solar systems are great WHEN THEY MAKE SENSE but in MOST AREAS they simply do not make sense!
I agree, Mel. this is part of the problem with the government's energy program. Why try to build or use solar generators in Alaska? Or tidal generators in Nevada? Plus, I have always been skeptical of the modern wind turbines since the old ones worked pretty good and seemed to have a much smaller failure rate.
 
Top