• Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online  community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.

All Solar, Et Al, In 12 Years?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Solar as a means of saving on your utility bill is a loser unless you get a subsidy or can sell back electricity at the same price you get charged for using the utility supply electricity, regardless of time of day use.

Try this and see if you can go off grid.

Amazing "Solar Generator" Is Like Having A Secret Power Plant Hidden In Your Home!

http://www.mysolarbackup.com/CZ101.html
 
German Wind and Solar Power Overwhelming Neighboring Grids

Germany’s drive to harness wind and solar power is producing so much electricity that it’s spilling over into neighbors’ grids and increasing the threat of blackouts.

Poland and the Czech Republic are spending $180 million on equipment to protect their systems from German power surges, while Austria is curbing some trading to prevent regional networks from collapsing. On a windy day, the overflow east can exceed the output from four atomic reactors.

Germany’s fivefold increase in green energy in the past decade has outpaced investment in power lines to move it across the country. Electricity is looping through Poland and the Czech Republic to reach southern Germany, where supply is constrained as Chancellor Angela Merkel ordered the closure of nuclear plants after the 2011 Fukushima disaster in Japan. The disruptions show the limits to the European Commission’s vision of a single power market.

“A huge accumulation of overflow increases the threat of a blackout,” Zbynek Boldis, the head of trade and international relations at Czech grid CEPS AS, said in an interview in Budapest. “The root of the situation is allowing a huge amount of electricity to be generated regardless of the capacity of the grid.”

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com...er-overwhelming-neighbor-country-s-grids.html

The California problem of too much green energy coming on stream with no load balancing. Solution? Send the power out of state and loop it back. Or sell it cheaper than the cost to generate it to areas that can take the load.
 
I think,
The problem with going off the grid is you can't get a residential mortgage.

I could be wrong, but I believe you have to be connected to the grid to get/and keep a residential mortgage.
 
making the grid smarter and greener will cost a huge amount of money. Chu says that could be well over $100 billion over several decades.

Reid Detchon, director of the Energy Future Coalition advocacy group, says Americans have paid big money for a collective benefit before.

"If you accept that there's a national objective here, just as we did with the national highway system, then you create the national authority to expedite that at the federal level," Detchon says.

Eventually, that national authority will have to decide who's going to pay for the new grid.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103537250

Like lots of other farmers and ranchers in the northern Plains, Joel Keierleber has been flirting with wind power developers for years.

He knows his grassy slopes near Winner, S.D., have world-class wind, but there's always the same hitch: There aren't enough transmission lines to carry the electricity from rural areas like his to the big cities where the electricity is needed.

If the country is going to meet President Obama's ambitious green energy goals, the transmission system has to link up the places that offer the best chance of producing lots of clean energy, such as the sunny Southwest and the windy Plains.
For more than a decade, wind developers have been salivating over windy places like this, but balked at building turbines without transmission lines. And utilities wouldn't string the lines without the wind farms. ITC wants to break that impasse, with a $12 billion transmission project.
ITC's project would carry 12,000 megawatts of electricity from the northern Plains to Chicago and points east. That's enough electricity to power about 4.5 million homes. Dudak says the current grid is not up to the job of bringing green power to millions of homes and businesses — it's a patchwork of transmission lines strung decades ago by utilities — mostly connecting big polluting power plants to local customers.

"There is no superhighway system, and there's not enough room right now. The system is terribly constrained right now," he says.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103575144

.
 
Better crank up the copper mines for all the wire they'll need. :whistle:
 
Excerpts from Jimmy Carter's speech 18 April 1977

I know that some of you may doubt that we face real energy shortages. The 1973 gasoline lines are gone, and our homes are warm again. But our energy problem is worse tonight than it was in 1973 or a few weeks ago in the dead of winter. It is worse because more waste has occurred, and more time has passed by without our planning for the future. And it will get worse every day until we act.

The oil and natural gas we rely on for 75 percent of our energy are running out. In spite of increased effort, domestic production has been dropping steadily at about six percent a year. Imports have doubled in the last five years. Our nation's independence of economic and political action is becoming increasingly constrained. Unless profound changes are made to lower oil consumption, we now believe that early in the 1980s the world will be demanding more oil that it can produce.

The world now uses about 60 million barrels of oil a day and demand increases each year about five percent. This means that just to stay even we need the production of a new Texas every year, an Alaskan North Slope every nine months, or a new Saudi Arabia every three years. Obviously, this cannot continue...

Because we are now running out of gas and oil, we must prepare quickly for a third change, to strict conservation and to the use of coal and permanent renewable energy sources, like solar power.

The world has not prepared for the future. During the 1950s, people used twice as much oil as during the 1940s. During the 1960s, we used twice as much as during the 1950s. And in each of those decades, more oil was consumed than in all of mankind's previous history.

World consumption of oil is still going up. If it were possible to keep it rising during the 1970s and 1980s by 5 percent a year as it has in the past, we could use up all the proven reserves of oil in the entire world by the end of the next decade.

I know that many of you have suspected that some supplies of oil and gas are being withheld. You may be right, but suspicions about oil companies cannot change the fact that we are running out of petroleum...

Each new inventory of world oil reserves has been more disturbing than the last. World oil production can probably keep going up for another six or eight years. But some time in the 1980s it can't go up much more. Demand will overtake production. We have no choice about that...

Now we have a choice. But if we wait, we will live in fear of embargoes. We could endanger our freedom as a sovereign nation to act in foreign affairs. Within ten years we would not be able to import enough oil -- from any country, at any acceptable price...

If we fail to act soon, we will face an economic, social and political crisis that will threaten our free institutions.

But we still have another choice. We can begin to prepare right now. We can decide to act while there is time.

That is the concept of the energy policy we will present on Wednesday. Our national energy plan is based on ten fundamental principles...

The fourth principle is that we must reduce our vulnerability to potentially devastating embargoes. We can protect ourselves from uncertain supplies by reducing our demand for oil, making the most of our abundant resources such as coal, and developing a strategic petroleum reserve.

The sixth principle, and the cornerstone of our policy, is to reduce the demand through conservation. Our emphasis on conservation is a clear difference between this plan and others which merely encouraged crash production efforts. Conservation is the quickest, cheapest, most practical source of energy. Conservation is the only way we can buy a barrel of oil for a few dollars. It costs about $13 to waste it.

The seventh principle is that prices should generally reflect the true replacement costs of energy. We are only cheating ourselves if we make energy artificially cheap and use more than we can really afford.

The eighth principle is that government policies must be predictable and certain. Both consumers and producers need policies they can count on so they can plan ahead. This is one reason I am working with the Congress to create a new Department of Energy, to replace more than 50 different agencies that now have some control over energy.

The ninth principle is that we must conserve the fuels that are scarcest and make the most of those that are more plentiful. We can't continue to use oil and gas for 75 percent of our consumption when they make up seven percent of our domestic reserves. We need to shift to plentiful coal while taking care to protect the environment, and to apply stricter safety standards to nuclear energy.

The tenth principle is that we must start now to develop the new, unconventional sources of energy we will rely on in the next century.

These ten principles have guided the development of the policy I would describe to you and the Congress on Wednesday.

These are the goals we set for 1985:

-Reduce the annual growth rate in our energy demand to less than two percent.

-Reduce gasoline consumption by ten percent below its current level.

-Cut in half the portion of United States oil which is imported, from a potential level of 16 million barrels to six million barrels a day.

-Establish a strategic petroleum reserve of one billion barrels, more than six months' supply.

-Increase our coal production by about two thirds to more than 1 billion tons a year.

-Insulate 90 percent of American homes and all new buildings.

-Use solar energy in more than two and one-half million houses.

We will monitor our progress toward these goals year by year. Our plan will call for stricter conservation measures if we fall behind.

I cant tell you that these measures will be easy, nor will they be popular. But I think most of you realize that a policy which does not ask for changes or sacrifices would not be an effective policy.

This plan is essential to protect our jobs, our environment, our standard of living, and our future...

And we have been proud of our vision of the future. We have always wanted to give our children and grandchildren a world richer in possibilities than we've had. They are the ones we must provide for now. They are the ones who will suffer most if we don't act...

Other generation of Americans have faced and mastered great challenges. I have faith that meeting this challenge will make our own lives even richer. If you will join me so that we can work together with patriotism and courage, we will again prove that our great nation can lead the world into an age of peace, independence and freedom.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/primary-resources/carter-energy/

.
 
Excerpts form the speech: Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama gave in Las Vegas, Nevada on June 24, 2008.

What we are seeing here – from the solar panels that power this facility to the Bombard workers who built it – is that a green, renewable energy economy isn’t some pie-in-the-sky, far-off future, it is now. It is creating jobs, now. It is providing cheap alternatives to $140-a-barrel oil, now. And it can create millions of additional jobs and entire new industries if we act now.

All across the country, local leaders and entrepreneurs and small business owners are providing the innovation and initiative needed to make this transformation possible. In Pennsylvania, an old steel mill has become the home of a new wind turbine factory because of the state’s push for renewable portfolio standards that require the production of more alternative energy. Wisconsin is poised to gain more than 14,000 jobs at existing manufacturing facilities because of its investment in wind power. Where we’re standing in Southern Nevada happens to be one of the best sources for the generation of solar power in the world. Next week, our friend and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will come here to cut the ribbon on a new thermal solar technology plant. And between solar, wind, and geothermal energy, this state could create upwards of 80,000 new jobs by 2025...

We have been talking about energy independence since Americans were waiting in gas lines during the 1970s. We’ve heard promises about it in every State of the Union for the last three decades. But each and every year, we become more, not less, addicted to oil – a 19th century fossil fuel that is dirty, dwindling, and dangerously expensive. Why?

What Washington has done is what Washington always does – it’s peddled false promises, irresponsible policy, and cheap gimmicks that might get politicians through the next election, but won’t lead America toward the next generation of renewable energy. And now we’re paying the price. Now we’ve fallen behind the rest of the world. Now we’re forced to beg Saudi Arabia for more oil. Now we’re facing gas prices over $4 a gallon – gas prices that are decimating the savings of families who are already struggling in this economy. ...

I realize that gimmicks like the gas tax holiday and offshore drilling might poll well these days. But I’m not running for President to do what polls well, I’m running to do what’s right for America. I wish I could wave a magic wand and make gas prices go down, but I can’t. What I can do – and what I will do – is push for a second stimulus package that will send out another round of rebate checks to the American people. What I will do as President is tax the record profits of oil companies and use the money to help struggling families pay their energy bills. I will provide a $1,000 tax cut that will go to 95% of all workers and their families in this country. And I will close the loophole that allows corporations like Enron to engage in unregulated speculation that ends up artificially driving up the price of oil. That’s how we’ll provide real relief to the American people. That’s the change we need.

I have a very different vision of what this country can and should achieve on energy in the next four years – in the next ten years. I have a plan to raise the fuel standards in our cars and trucks with technology we have on the shelf today – technology that will make sure we get more miles to the gallon. And we will provide financial help to our automakers and autoworkers to help them make this transition. I will invest $150 billion over the next ten years in alternative sources of energy like wind power, and solar power, and advanced biofuels – investments that will create up to five million new jobs that pay well and can’t be outsourced; that will create billions of dollars in new business like you’re already doing here in Nevada. And before we hand over more of our land and our coastline to oil companies, I will charge those companies a fee for every acre that they currently lease but don’t drill on. If that compels them to drill, we’ll get more oil. If it doesn’t, the fees will go toward more investment in renewable sources of energy...

And that’s the choice that you face in this election. When you’re facing $4 a gallon gas, do you want a gas tax gimmick that will save you at most thirty cents a day for three months and a drilling proposal that won’t provide a drop of oil for ten years, or a second rebate check and $1,000 tax cut to help your family pay the bills? When you look down the road five years from now or ten years from now, do you want to see an America that’s begging dictators for more oil that we can’t afford? An America that’s fallen further behind the rest of the world when it comes to the jobs and industries of the future? Or do you want to see more places like Springs Preserve and Bombard Electric? More green jobs and green businesses? More innovation and ingenuity that helps this nation lead the way on affordable, renewable energy?...
http://www.cfr.org/elections/obamas-speech-renewable-energy/p16627

Never mind.
 
1977-2015

Ooops, sorry, the grid can't handle all that renewable energy.

All those good jobs saved, created, standard of living maintained? Ooops, sorry.

Reliance on foreign oil we can't afford, from reserves that were supposed to have run out a couple of decades ago, Ooops sorry.

Use coal, Don't use coal. Ooops sorry.

But the public memory is short. Good thing they are always asking for our sacrifices to accomplish this mission they are not going to accomplish.


.
 
High electricity costs from utility can be avoided - don't buy it from utility

Some California communities are turning to Community Choice Aggregations, or CCAs, in hopes of obtaining cheaper and cleaner power. Encinitas may join their ranks.

The Encinitas Environmental Commission voted unanimously Aug. 13 in favor of establishing a work group of city officials to explore whether a CCA makes fiscal and environmental sense. This recommendation will be forwarded to the Encinitas City Council, which will decide whether to set up the group.

A CCA would let Encinitas bypass San Diego Gas & Electric to purchase its energy directly from providers. Proponents of the model say it gives communities the flexibility to boost green energy power, improving upon SDG&E’s model, in which about one-third of electricity comes from renewables.

In 2010, Marin County launched the state’s first CCA, which claims to deliver more than double the renewable energy than the local utility — and at a slightly reduced cost to customers.

How could a city or county buy energy cheaper than a utility company? Bissonette said one reason is that utilities entered into many long-term power contracts before the cost of alternative energy declined.

“Those contracts may not be as competitive as you could get now in the marketplace with renewables,” Bissonette said. Conversely, she later said, local communities that negotiate good alternative energy deals now could face higher expenses down the road if the markets shift.

“The risks are associated with price and contract,” Bissonette said.

Under a CCA, SDG&E would still deliver the energy over the existing grid. However, the city would be responsible for securing the power, not SDG&E.

There are three CCAs in California, and many communities are considering the model. Notably, Solana Beach ordered a feasibility study to see whether a CCA would be less expensive than SDG&E.

The city of San Diego has expressed interest in the approach to help meet its Climate Action Plan target of 100 percent renewable energy by 2035. The idea is that more local choice would significantly increase its renewables portfolio, cutting down on greenhouse gas emissions.

Two attempts to form CCAs in San Francisco and the San Joaquin Valley have stalled, with both facing opposition from the utility Pacific Gas and Electric Company. It has argued that the areas face a large financial liability if CCAs are approved.

http://www.encinitasadvocate.com/news/2015/aug/18/encinitas-community-choice-aggregation-sdge/

As more of the power cost is determined by opportunistic timing of the contract price, the utility is stuck with high price contracts as CCAs form and buy their own cheaper power contracts directly from providers. At zero interest rates, new solar farms are very feasible undercutting existing suppliers that have higher fixed cost. Utilities are their only customers. That forces a general price increase on those customers not in a CCA to cover the difference.

Gee, the same problem that rooftop solar has. The utilities are changing the arrangement for buying and selling power. You can bet rooftop solar is going to blown away as it is the highest cost producer.

The double-whammy comes when the CCAs join the club and shifts more of the high cost of power to the utility customer base.

Peak pricing for SDG&E is 40 cents per kilowatt-hour now. That may have to go higher as more the higher cost contracts (take or pay contracts) can't be spread over the entire base.

And, SDG&E has to maintain and expand the grid to handle more solar along with gas fired power plants to make up the power shortages when the sun don't shine. The carbon generation is subject to the cap and trade tax.
 
California weighs 'off-the-shelf' gas plant in case of reliability issues

  • In case of grid reliability issues in Southern California, the California Energy Commission (CEC) has proposed that California allow once-through cooling units to continue running past their expected retirement dates, or allow at least one "off-the-shelf" natural gas plant to be quickly built in the region, according to Platts.
  • The proposal comes as key stakeholders weigh the state's options for maintaining grid reliability as once-through cooling units are set to retire, and the region still feels the hit of the permanent closure of the controversial San Onofre nuclear plant in 2013.
  • The proposal suggests grid reliability issues could crop up in Southern California if the performance of "preferred" resources (such as renewables and demand response) doesn't meet projections, if proposed power projects are not completed as expected, or if new transmission is put off or doesn't perform.

It takes 7-8 years to build a power plant in California from being proposed to coming online, according to the CEC, but half that time is spent on permitting that occurs sequentially, not simultaneously. A sped-up permitting process could significantly reduce the timeline for power plant construction.

http://www.utilitydive.com/news/cal...s-plant-in-case-of-reliability-issues/404101/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at
AppraiserSites.com
Back
Top