Global Economy Bursting?

[nm505]

Me thinks you protest too much. I LOVE my solar. Not only that but 10-15 of my neighbors have installed solar in the last 2 years. Ah oh! A revolution is happening. Although these neighbors are doctors, lawyers, candlestick makers...they see the wisdom and economics of doing so.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

Payback From Federal Center Solar Project To Take Decades

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/02/20/payback-from-federal-center-solar-project-to-take-decades/

DENVER (CBS4) – A 4 On Your Side investigation found it will take decades for taxpayers to get their investment back on a $40 million solar project at the Denver Federal Center.

The project created jobs and will be good for environment, but experts are shaking their heads over the projected payback period. The government’s own estimate is 48 years. Experts say that is an unbelievably long time for taxpayers to recover their costs on the large project.

The panels are mounted on the rooftops of several buildings and more than a dozen carports.

The recently finished solar energy project will provide 15 percent of electricity for the Denver Federal Center, but is it worth it?

The government spent $40 million on the project. While Uncle Sam is content to wait nearly half a century, the business world won’t go solar without a much quicker return on investment, according to Harrington.

“We typically see paybacks, especially for commercial projects that are up to 10 years,” Harrington said. “The average is 5 to 7 (years). So a 48-year payback on a project, I said to myself, ‘What’s wrong with this picture?’ “

The government project doesn’t take advantage of generous subsidies, tax credits, solar incentives, nor utility rebates. But commercial projects can use all of those to look better than they are.

“If you take those incentives away from the private sector, their payback period is going to be 48 years as well,” Scott Conner with the General Services Administration said.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

Wind energy subsidies die in Congress

http://www.beaufortobserver.net/Art...12-Wind-energy-subsidies-die-in-Congress.html

In a move that, unless changed, may doom the Invenergy Pantego Wind Farm in Beaufort County, the Chicago Tribune is reporting that the infamous wind tax credits failed to achieve renewal last week in Congress. Without the government subsidies it is very rare that a wind project to generate electricity can sustain itself with the revenue it generates by selling electricity in the current market.

The electricity markets have also recently seen a significant reduction in their generating cost coming from natural gas. The bottom has fallen out of the natural gas market since new technology has led to an increase in supplies. That makes it even more difficult for wind and solar generation to compete. Attempts to contact Invenergy were not successful over the weekend but several knowledgeable sources has told us that it is unlikely any new wind project will be started unless and until the tax subsidies are reinstated.

As the Tribune reports, it is not likely the issue will come up again in Congress before the November elections and wind generators say that will be too late for them to avoid scrapping currently planned projects that cannot be online before the existing credits expire.

 

[nm505]

Yes, it is too bad about the wind subsidies (tea party website?). We have always subsidized new technologies. We heavily subsidize nuclear and even oil. We MUST keep the straits of Hormuz open so lets send in the military. That doesn't cost much. From the secretary of Navy....
The naysayers
“In the 1850s, we went from sail to coal. In the early part of the 20th century, we went from coal to oil. In the 50s, we pioneered nuclear. We were the first service, first people to ever use nuclear power for transportation. And now, we’re changing it again. And every single time, from the 1850s to today, you’ve got nay sayers, they say you’re trading one form of energy that you know about, that’s predictable, that’s affordable for another that’s not and you just shouldn’t do it. And every single time, they’ve been wrong and I’m absolutely confident they’re going to be wrong again."

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

My sources on the "right" was CNN. Story about how Merkel was saying they cannot afford the 5 billion euro price tag of solar which is producing a whopping 3% of the energy...it was supposed to be more but last year was cloudier than average...and winter...oh my, what a dandy they've had across Europe.. even S. Italy is freezing cold. And just when you need it the worst the sun goes down. Go figure.

The cost of energy reflects the peak usage. That "baseline" energy level which has to maintain the maximum electrical usage day or night. Solar is not storable and the batteries to do so if such technology was available would require mining all of Mongolia for lithium, and other rare earths to create these batteries...

So when will wind and solar pay their own way? And the hoax of 20/2020...20% renewables by 2020. Minnesota will meet this by building windmills in IOWA....and "export" that energy to MN...say what? MN then will "export" its conventional generation somewhere else... never mind that the electricity in W. Iowa will never reach MN, it will on paper and that is all that counts right? It's the principle of the thing... We can feel good about our little "green" selves.

I have a friend who invested in a wind company and they've had fits. Wind currents on top of tall buildings are a real problem and they've had to redesign this vertical shaft wind gen to cope with the unstable wind currents...and in doing so they lost some efficiency.

They were showing 3 windmills next to a church in a local town tonight to demonstrate how high the wind is blowing....too bad these cost the church thousands of dollars and have never successfully generated a dime for the church. They say they don't even work and they gave up trying to fix them...but they turn!

Without subsidies, wind nor solar is economic. Never has been and likely to not be until energy costs are much higher. And what technology teaches you is that short a break thru when oil prices rise, the alternatives become more expensive to build thus constantly stay just out of reach of the break even point of being competitive with coal, nuclear, hydropower, oil and gas.

 

[nm505]

No, no. The source on the right was Randolph's and was from a website called "On the Right". I just have trouble with all the "naysayers" when my own experience has been so different. Storing solar energy in batteries...crude as they are...is being done all over the country in rural areas. These off grid locations (we have a bunch in Taos) are doing just fine. I hear there are a few in Texas as well. Maybe not in Arkansas? I am on the grid and sell back my excess energy.

It is true the southwest has an advantage when it comes to solar energy. We will lose our water, however, if climate changes continue in the direction we have seen of late. I attended a water conference five years ago where a climate scientist nearly cried as he talked about the likely changes we would see during his kid's lifetime. He was from Arizona. I will confess that, besides solar and all the energy efficiency I could possibly do (caulked every square inch of my house), I have rain barrels and an urban garden. Randolf will really laugh at that.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

Don't get upset nm505 for the choices you have made and then feel compelled to defend.

We all have choices. You missed the one truism: If you take those incentives away from the private sector, their payback period is going to be 48 years as well. see post #2632 http://appraisersforum.com/showpost.php?p=2224512&postcount=2632

My brother (lives in Tempe, AZ) outfitted his whole rooftop with solar panels. It was not the payback period (10+ years after subsidies, rebates and tax credits) or ROI that was his reason to go solar. It was the snob factor. He spent $15,000 out of his pocket (net after rebates and credits). Of course, at zero interest rates, he had a very low threshold to hurdle to justify prepaying his electricity usage for the next 10 years. And if he dies or moves, he will have lost money on this investment. BTW, my brother is in his 60s. Chances are he will die or be moved into an assisted care facility in the next 10 years.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

Gas prices soaring at Northern California pumps

http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/traffic/gas-prices-soaring-northern-california-pumps/nJQQQ/

“I’m actually shocked,” Walnut Creek resident Don Sherwood told KTVU. “The last time (I filled up) it was $3.80. Now it’s $4.40. That was a week ago. It’s incredible.”


Surging gas prices threaten to derail economic recovery

http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-gas-prices-20120221,0,2040833.story

The average cost for regular gasoline in California has climbed past $4 a gallon, with prospects for even higher prices ahead.

Newport Beach resident Daniel Heaton said he "did a double take" over the price at a Shell station in downtown Los Angeles: $4.599 a gallon for self-serve regular.

 

[EDWARD BERRY]

Nm505,

What % Of Rainfall On Your Site Do The Rain Barrels Catch?

I Was Just In A Class That Touted About 10%.

Which Makes Wonder About The Other 90%.

 

[nm505]

In NM, it is technically possible to catch close to 80% losing some to evaporation if it is hot. I have a friend who does it and reports his gallons on a monthly basis.

We are in the high desert and our average rainfall per year is only 8-9 inches. In 2011, we were below normal for the state and way below normal in ABQ with less than 5 inches and they mostly came all at one time. We joke about a 5 inch rain..meaning the drops were 5 inches apart.

We have a flat roof (tar and gravel) on an adobe home with 3000SF total roof area and canales. The canales (basically wooden spouts with metal liners) are used in this area to drain the roof.

We put 55 gallon plastic barrels retrofitted with a spigot and mesh top under each canale (5). We could have had more barrels and hooked them up in a series so one overflowed into another but have not done that yet.

So, when a hard rain comes, we go out and open the spigot with a hose attached (so the barrels don't overflow) which goes to our fruit trees as they need deeper watering. If it is a lighter rain that does not overflow the barrels, we have more latitude to use when we need to.

Ideally, I would love to have an in-ground cistern with a purification system. With our water crisis, the city is a little more lenient about allowing such systems (even grey and black water catchment) if protocols are followed. Many of the newer high end "green" homes have such systems included for landscape watering.

As mentioned, in Taos there are homes near the gorge where water is over 800' down IF you can find it. My daughter got an estimate on a property there and the well could have been $80-100K. I discouraged her from buying the property but she was very comfortable collecting water with a cistern as so many do in that area. They get bottled water for drinking and as a backup. Taos has a unique culture and these homes have marketability. Dennis Weaver's old home. http://www.premiersystems.com/earthship/

An off the grid home in ABQ but with a well. http://www.greenhomesforsale.com/listing.php?id=19285