# Nobodys growin' the solar thing like we do....



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

*No-no, no, no-no, no-no-no-no
No, no-no, no, no, no-no, no-no, no-no
No-no-no-no, no-no, no, no-no, no*








*Nobody can do the solar thing Like we do
Nobody can do the grid tie Like we do
Nobody can do photovolt Like we do
Nobody can do battery Like we do*









*Well, don't you know I go net zero , I do
Ain't nobody doin' it but me (Nobody but me)
When I go to invert, I do
Ain't nobody doin' it but me, babe (Nobody but me)
Well, let me tell you nobody
But nobody but me*








* nobody (nobody), nobody (nobody)
Nobody (nobody), nobody (nobody)
Nobody (nobody), nobody (nobody)
Nobody (nobody), nobody (nobody)*








*No-no, no, no-no, no-no-no-no
No, no-no, no, no, no-no, no-no, no-no
No-no-no-no, no-no, no, no-no, no*








* nobody (nobody), nobody (nobody)
Nobody (nobody), nobody (nobody)
Nobody (nobody), nobody (nobody)
Nobody (nobody), nobody (nobody)*
:thumbup::laughing:
~C(w/apologies to the Human BeinzS~:laughing:


----------



## wendon (Sep 27, 2010)

chicken steve said:


> *No-no, no, no-no, no-no-no-no
> No, no-no, no, no, no-no, no-no, no-no
> No-no-no-no, no-no, no, no-no, no*
> 
> ...


Where's the pie chart showing how much of it was subsidized by the rest of us???


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

If you're going to tell a lie, make it a big one.


----------



## Safari (Jul 9, 2013)

CS, is the statistics real?


----------



## Bootss (Dec 30, 2011)

I'm looking for a roof crew to sub out to,to help me out with solar installations.


----------



## FrunkSlammer (Aug 31, 2013)

wendon said:


> Where's the pie chart showing how much of it was subsidized by the rest of us???


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies

A 2011 study by the consulting firm Management Information Services, Inc. (MISI) estimated the total historical federal subsidies for various energy sources over the years 1950–2010. *The study found that oil, natural gas, and coal received $369 billion, $121 billion, and $104 billion (2010 dollars), respectively, or 70% of total energy subsidies over that period*. 

*Oil, natural gas, and coal benefited most from percentage depletion allowances and other tax-based subsidies*, but oil also benefited heavily from regulatory subsidies such as exemptions from price controls and higher-than-average rates of return allowed on oil pipelines. *The MISI report found that non-hydro renewable energy (primarily wind and solar) benefited from $74 billion in federal subsidies, or 9% of the total*, largely in the form of tax policy and direct federal expenditures on research and development (R&D). *Nuclear power benefited from $73 billion in federal subsidies, 9% of the total*, largely in the form of R&D, while *hydro power received $90 billion in federal subsidies, 12% of the total*.


----------



## FrunkSlammer (Aug 31, 2013)

Point being, don't make it seem like solar is the only industry to receive tax payer subsidies When you crunch the numbers you're likely to find that solar actually receives considerable less subsidies than the old rich white guy sport of fossil fuel extraction.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ing-for-federal-grant-to-pay-off-its-federal/


World's largest solar plant applying for federal grant to pay off federal loan


----------



## FrunkSlammer (Aug 31, 2013)

They wont get that money even though it's a tiny drop in the gas tank of government subsidies.



> *http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/*
> 
> *How much money does the U.S. government provide to support the oil, gas and coal industries?*
> 
> ...


Also doesn't include the figures associated with waging wars and conflicts across the world to secure or maintain big corporate energy investment.


----------



## wendon (Sep 27, 2010)

FrunkSlammer said:


> Point being, don't make it seem like solar is the only industry to receive tax payer subsidies When you crunch the numbers you're likely to find that solar actually receives considerable less subsidies than the old rich white guy sport of fossil fuel extraction.


That's like saying Bill Gates makes more money than I do. The oil industries also bring in far more tax dollars than the solar ones do. Even just the 30% tax rebate is nothing to sneeze at. To say nothing about all the government grants available. Until you can affordably install solar without any subsidies and have it pay for itself, it will never be viable. Someone is still paying for it.


----------



## wendon (Sep 27, 2010)

FrunkSlammer said:


> Point being, don't make it seem like solar is the only industry to receive tax payer subsidies When you crunch the numbers you're likely to find that solar actually receives considerable less subsidies than the old rich white guy sport of fossil fuel extraction.


Maybe you could come up with a chart showing subsidy dollars per KW output?


----------



## FrunkSlammer (Aug 31, 2013)

Maybe I could come up with a chart that shows subsidy dollars per total dollars per MW generated per MW wasted per industry per carbon emitted per job created per incident of cancer!!!


----------



## wendon (Sep 27, 2010)

FrunkSlammer said:


> Maybe I could come up with a chart that shows subsidy dollars per total dollars per MW generated per MW wasted per industry per carbon emitted per job created per incident of cancer!!!


Much easier to bypass all of that and blame it on George Bush!:thumbup:


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Now now fellas , who cares who's zoomin' who?:whistling2:

Why be such a bunch of bloody _overstuffed boy scouts_ all the time :no::laughing:

Be a _pirate_ says I, we're all sailin' the heavy swells of capitalism , don't you fancy some _booty_? :whistling2:









:laughing:
~C_(arrrggghhh)_S~


----------



## FrunkSlammer (Aug 31, 2013)

wendon said:


> Much easier to bypass all of that and blame it on George Bush!:thumbup:


Hold on, which George Bush? 

Ah nevermind.. blame the the whole family, they're all evil.


----------



## RFguy (Sep 11, 2013)

I extrapolated this chart and have determined that solar will be free in about 6-years. I'm going to wait!


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

FrunkSlammer said:


> Point being, don't make it seem like solar is the only industry to receive tax payer subsidies When you crunch the numbers you're likely to find that solar actually receives considerable less subsidies than the old rich white guy sport of fossil fuel extraction.


 I am pretty certain that in dollars-per-kW of generation, there are significantly higher subsidies to the green generation markets.

That said, it's a nascent industry competing against a fantastically well established fossil-fuel industry, so I think that's to be expected; it's just an attempt to level the playing field.

I think it's silly when people point at an industry that's only really developed in the last decade and say "Why isn't it the same as the century-old coal-fired generation system?"


----------



## McClary’s Electrical (Feb 21, 2009)

This is going to cause global cooling.


----------



## McClary’s Electrical (Feb 21, 2009)

Toys is going to cause global cooling


----------



## wendon (Sep 27, 2010)

Big John said:


> I am pretty certain that in dollars-per-kW of generation, there are significantly higher subsidies to the green generation markets.
> 
> That said, it's a nascent industry competing against a fantastically well established fossil-fuel industry, so I think that's to be expected; it's just an attempt to level the playing field.
> 
> I think it's silly when people point at an industry that's only really developed in the last decade and say "Why isn't it the same as the century-old coal-fired generation system?"


Probably the key with solar is the improved output and better storage batteries. I would imagine that after enough time, the industry will sort itself out as to who has the best equipment. The others will go bankrupt or be bailed out by the government. Another thing that will increase the incentive is when our electric rates double because of penalties paid by power companies due to EPA regulations. Rather than spend the money to try to keep up with the EPA nonsense, they'll just pay the fine and pass it on to the consumer. Reminds me of the EPA woman that was arguing with a truck mechanic. The mechanic tried to explain to her how it was impossible for a company to manufacture a truck engine to comply with their upcoming regulations. Her answer? "That's not our problem." Brilliant. :thumbsup:


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

wendon said:


> Probably the key with solar is the improved output and better storage batteries...


 I think that's a huge part of it. The key to renewables is the ability to store power. Currently pumped-hydroelectric facilities work great, but that's obviously limited by geology.

I know they're trying stuff like molten salt and compressed gas in caverns. I don't know what the potential there is. I keep hearing about super capacitors and next generation batteries, but I don't know that those are actually in use?

It would be interesting to see a serious study of what kind of grid model would actually be necessary for most of our power generation to come from renewables.

It's probably a big combination: Lots of micro-generaton. Drastically improved long-distance transmission. Lots of local storage capacity.


----------



## Wirenuting (Sep 12, 2010)

According the the chart, the average cost of an install is about $30,000. That means it would have to work flawlessly for 18 years before it pays for itself on my roof. 
I don't think it's worth it yet for me.


----------



## FrunkSlammer (Aug 31, 2013)

670,000 People Died in China During 2012 Because of Pollution Caused by Coal Burning

I'd like to see a graph of how many people died in 2012 from too many PV cells absorbing too much sun light.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Big John said:


> I think that's a huge part of it. The key to renewables is the ability to store power. .


I'm _unsure _John....

My take is one of the biggest components in a PV system are the batteries

They're expensive deep cycle deals , and they have a certain life span

When the _true sine wave _inverter debuted , the possibility of grid tie w/o storage was on the table

From what i've been told (_my sources are local solar gurus)_, it was a big fight getting this pushed through the NRTL's , because big power KNEW the #'s would crunch _economically correct _ for Joe Bagodonuts

~CS~


----------



## Pharon (Jan 20, 2014)

I don't think we need to focus so much on storage of solar energy right now. Let's get to the point where every house has them and we can handle just the delta between daytime and nighttime power consumption strictly from solar. Low hanging fruit. And we're nowhere near that point yet.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

Pharon said:


> I don't think we need to focus so much on storage of solar energy right now. Let's get to the point where every house has them and we can handle just the delta between daytime and nighttime power consumption strictly from solar. Low hanging fruit. And we're nowhere near that point yet.


 I don't disagree, personally I think that's the wave of the future for power generation. 

But it's going to cost people, and that's what folks have to be willing to accept. Either power companies are going to absorb the up-front capital cost of leasing roof and property space on which to put easements for a lot of micro-generation, in which case we all keep paying them for generation on our buildings. Or else we install them all on our own and while we save on POCO demand, the rates for maintaining the infrastructure and hot-standby plants necessarily have to go up to fill the gaps.

It's a two-part problem: 
1) Utilities aren't interested in accepting anything that might reduce profits.
2) Consumers aren't interested in doing anything that might raise rates.


----------



## wendon (Sep 27, 2010)

Pharon said:


> I don't think we need to focus so much on storage of solar energy right now. Let's get to the point where every house has them and we can handle just the delta between daytime and nighttime power consumption strictly from solar. Low hanging fruit. And we're nowhere near that point yet.


One small thing that you've forgotten. The average consumer cannot afford it. A chicken for every pot but they can't afford the chicken. If you've got money to burn, it's probably a good place to blow it but, has been mentioned, your payback, if it's even possible, will take years. Not something the average consumer will be able to afford. By the time you get your money back, will the equipment still be functioning? 
Another interesting thing is wind generation. It'll only work as long as the power companies are forced to invest in it and the government subsidizes it. Already, there's wind turbines sitting idle because they've erected newer, more efficient ones nearby and need the grid that's available. And, to top it off, either source still needs a backup. Are the poco's willing to build new power generation plants (powered by what?) to only serve as backup? Not hardly. Would you hire an additional 10 men to sit around your shop just in case you might need the help a few days a month? Not hardly.


----------



## Pharon (Jan 20, 2014)

True, but it's a double-edged sword. To make solar affordable, the cost to manufacture a unit needs to be low. And for that to happen, you need greater demand. Without subsidies, solar has gone nowhere in the past 30 years, because the cost was too high. Arguably, it's still too high for some, but it's hitting a sweet spot where the economies of scale are now working. Solar panel cost is dropping, which will increase demand.

Am I a big fan of government subsidies, in general? Hell no. But as long as we're subsidizing farmers and big oil, I have no problem shelling out a fraction of that to promote renewables.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

Exactly. We have seen an order-of-magnitude reduction in costs in the past 20 years and the only reason for that is because of advancement spurred by subsidy. Ultimately any technology needs to be profitable on its merits. But getting to that point may require help, and it doesn't invalidate the usefulness or potential that the technology has to offer.


----------



## backstay (Feb 3, 2011)

Big John said:


> Exactly. We have seen an order-of-magnitude reduction in costs in the past 20 years and the only reason for that is because of advancement spurred by subsidy. Ultimately any technology needs to be profitable on its merits. But getting to that point may require help, and it doesn't invalidate the usefulness or potential that the technology has to offer.


20 years ago, I spent $5,500 on a 1000 watts of solar panels. Today I buy that 1000 watts for just under $1,000.


----------



## FrunkSlammer (Aug 31, 2013)

Backstay is it also true that individual loads today consume less power than they did 20 years? So that 1000watts could stretch alot further? 

And worrying about people not being able to afford it.. don't worry, the market will figure that out. They already are with the leasing programs for solar.


----------



## bull mike (Nov 4, 2014)

Alternatives are only beginning. The thing for most solar installations is that they're utility buybacks . So most people are not storing it. Because the batteries are too expensive


----------



## backstay (Feb 3, 2011)

bull mike said:


> Alternatives are only beginning. The thing for most solar installations is that they're utility buybacks . So most people are not storing it. Because the batteries are too expensive


Rebates drive almost all (99%) of all installs as grid tie. This does nothing to run the grid during non sun times. Some other type of generation has to happen.


----------



## bull mike (Nov 4, 2014)

I agree the electricity that the residential panels produce is not used by anyone. The net meter just calculates the poco rebate.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

I get that fellas.....

so why is this a _bad_ thing, in light of most electrical infrastructure being obsolete....?



~CS~


----------



## bull mike (Nov 4, 2014)

I don't think it is bad. I do think this is the beginning & improvements are to come for sure


----------



## McClary’s Electrical (Feb 21, 2009)

bull mike said:


> I agree the electricity that the residential panels produce is not used by anyone. The net meter just calculates the poco rebate.


I don't know what you mean by calculate? We did two solar systems last year and both would make the meter on the house spin backwards. The homeowner could possibly get a check instead of a bill, depending on their usage. Also, if the system is large enough, they simply add a meter in line, in between the inverter and the tie in point.


----------



## bull mike (Nov 4, 2014)

There is a NET meter supplied by the local utility that reads both forward & backwards for PV system. Without the net meter more than likely the customer is being charged for using electric instead of making electric


----------



## McClary’s Electrical (Feb 21, 2009)

bull mike said:


> There is a NET meter supplied by the local utility that reads both forward & backwards for PV system. Without the net meter more than likely the customer is being charged for using electric instead of making electric


We've done around 6-8 in the pay few years and the meters don't get changed. The rotor, and the dials on the front, will count backwards. Not sure about meters in your area.


----------

