EPA declares Greenhouse gasses a Heath Hazard under the Clean Air act.

[WB9YZU]

This in response to a Supreme Court ruling that Greenhouse gas emissions need to be regulated under the Clean Air Act if found to be a Health Hazard.

The Democratic Congress is all over this one. After all, why have a regulation when you can have legislation instead?

As a side bar, Bush wasn't buying this argument and resisted the Court's decission.

Story here >> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090417/ap_on_go_ot/epa_climate

[Jester99]

Is this seriously what we are paying and electing people for? THEY ARE JUST NOW FIGURING THIS OUT?!?!?!?!?:doh: idiots....ALL OF THEM.

[JNickel101]

Thats right ladies and germs, two gasses your body naturally produces are harmful to your health. GTFO....

They forgot the #1 "greenhouse gas" though - Dihydrogen Monoxide....

[5-90]

So, does that mean they're finally going to do something about the overpopulation of the globe? After all, that will have the most significant effect on production of CO2 and CH4...

[WB9YZU]

5-90> In the US, we assume that we are the sole cause of all polution in the world and take unilateral action to prevent same.

Some amusing responses considering how this could be regulated or legislated.

Consider this idea:

All vehicles that are older than say, 10 years old, would be scrapped because they no longer comply with EPA standards.

[5-90]

Some amusing responses considering how this could be regulated or legislated.

5-90> In the US, we assume that we are the sole cause of all polution in the world and take unilateral action to prevent same.

Consider this idea:

All vehicles that are older than say, 10 years old, would be scrapped because they no longer comply with EPA standards.

Believe me, I thought of that as well. That's what California keeps trying to do.

Still - it's a half-assed measure to solve the problem. We need to address it at the source!

And the funny bit is that we didn't even consider environmental factors when we did that project in HS - and determined that the maximum truly sustainable population figure for the planet (considering psychology, logistics, available space, ...) was something like four to four and a half billion.

We're somewhere fairly well north of seven billion now, aren't we?

[WB9YZU]

The political mine field you are stepping in is called "Human Rights".

The point of the EPA ruling is not this whole human drama thing, but that your Jeep is truely and endangered species, especially your beloved Renix equipped Jeeps.

[5-90]

The political mine field you are stepping in is called "Human Rights".

The point of the EPA ruling is not this whole human drama thing, but that your Jeep is truely and endangered species, especially your beloved Renix equipped Jeeps.

Yeah, I know.

Simply goes to show the cognitive handicaps caused by long-term hypoxia, no?

[Rod Knee]

I think technology will enable us to keep our jeeps and our general lifestyles. For example:

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39546/113/

[Rod Knee]

Plenty of jobs and investment opportunities are likely anytime new tech is implemented.

[iBarsky]

Unfortunately, a portion of the population won't be happy until we're all driving solar powered smart cars. Your choice of white or white.
Can't 'wheel it or tow your atv's/boat with it? That's no problem, you don't need to be spending all of that extra money anyway. We'll just give it to the local lazy ass methheads, the soon to be "legal" aliens, and anyone who doesn't want to work for anything. The hybrid will get you to work everyday of the week, which is what you will be working because more lazy ass people are born or swim north every day.

My SOAPBOX has a 4.0 and '31s

[muddyrocks]

Is anyone else aware of the fact that, as we type, smoke is being blown up your boxers? Anyone remember the trillions printed to cause the as of yet unborn to owe the gov?

The dance involves 2 so bite if you will. However, please be aware that the unpopular but correct solution , as posted previously, is population control. JMSO.

[8Mud]

The marketplace has a way of deciding what gets built, no matter who is trying to set the agenda.
Seemed for awhile people were fed up with cars self destructing at 7 years and bought those that lasted. In a way, not a bad environmental scenario, fewer cars got junked.
I have the feeling the environmentalists and the auto manufacturers use the same lobbyists. One wants the cars off the road, the other wants to replace them with something else as soon as possible. Just about as soon as they get built, the regulations (rules) change and they become obsolete.
The sad thing is, it's likely both scenarios have unforeseen consequences that will show up eventually.

[Rod Knee]

Hey, solar/"green" tech as it reduces dependence on oil from the middle east will be a *good* thing.

[8Mud]

Is anyone else aware of the fact that, as we type, smoke is being blown up your boxers? Anyone remember the trillions printed to cause the as of yet unborn to owe the gov?

The dance involves 2 so bite if you will. However, please be aware that the unpopular but correct solution , as posted previously, is population control. JMSO.

Laying the debt off on your kids is nothing new. My father and those before him that retired, did OK with Social Security. Then it started to go down hill.
I periodically polled my projected SS benefits, have for many years before I started drawing SS. Right now they are around half of the projection for twenty years ago, while the cost of living has likely doubled. My dad and his generation. along with the politicians spending my retirement, have all but killed SS.
Politicians are alway going to find a way to rape the system.

[hubs97xj]

The only thing I heard in relation to this was that they were trying to get some official control over industry, and what's belching out of the smokestacks. So it's actually about taking my car away?

[muddyrocks]

I don't believe that taking our cars is the immediate intention. The end result my look similar though, in that, as another poster implied, the choices may be gone as the 'perfect' auto is designed. Personally, I am pissed that the network broke the story with, of all things, a file photo of an XJ (ABC). It wasn't the only vehicle in the shot but was certainly the center of the shot and the shot tightened to the XJ too. I'm certain it's coincidence, but there you go, make up your own mind.

Greenhouse man killer (my words). Oh great, I think, just what my chosen recreation needs; more bad publicity.

[garr]

When You elect Clowns

party1:You Get a Circusparty1:

Get ready, It is only going to get worse!

[hubs97xj]

Has the government ever sought to make itself smaller, more efficient, or less intrusive? Everyone's intent on telling me we're screwed now- we were screwed the first time we submitted to rule by another- it's not like this is anything new or different.

[5-90]

Has the government ever sought to make itself smaller, more efficient, or less intrusive? Everyone's intent on telling me we're screwed now- we were screwed the first time we submitted to rule by another- it's not like this is anything new or different.

No. No. No.

In its pure form, "anarchy" is not the 'absence of order,' it is the 'absence of externally-imposed order'. (Emphasis mine.)

Problem is, there is no society on Earth, at this point, that is grown-up enough to allow itself to be ruled by little more than Social Contract and self-interest (which, in its most essential form, tells you to treat other people well so they will treat you well. We're too short-sighted for that to be true.)

[fscrig75]

Problem is, there is no society on Earth, at this point, that is grown-up enough to allow itself to be ruled by little more than Social Contract and self-interest (which, in its most essential form, tells you to treat other people well so they will treat you well. We're too short-sighted for that to be true.)

Those fine Amish people do a pretty good job of it. Though I could never live like that.

[5-90]

Those fine Amish people do a pretty good job of it. Though I could never live like that.

Close - but don't they still require protection from external elements? If so, that effectively invalidates your argument. That, and they're still subject to Federal law, as I recall (as are the various Indian reservations.)

Motivated self-interest, properly applied, would make for an excellent system of rule. But, how many of us on this mudball are smart enough to realise you actually come out ahead if you don't try to screw your neighbour over than if you do?

The Amish are probably the closest example we have, at least here in the States. I can't think of anyone else offhand (save maybe the various Bedouin tribes in Araby...)

[fscrig75]

Yea I get what your saying, I was just throwing them out there.

I have no idea what the crime rate is towards the Amish, probably pretty low since they don't have anything that most criminals want.

[Rod Knee]

The hybrid will get you to work everyday of the week, which is what you will be working because more lazy ass people are born or swim north every day.



One thing that needs saying before this thread dissappears...just about all Mexicans I've ever known (from living in an agricultural part of the country) have been very hard workers and most of them good people to boot.

[hubs97xj]

And obviously, unless you're a full-blooded Native American, or the descendant of slaves, you really can't complain about immigrants in America to begin with...

[fscrig75]

One thing that needs saying before this thread dissappears...just about all Mexicans I've ever known (from living in an agricultural part of the country) have been very hard workers and most of them good people to boot.

Very true, its usually the 2nd or 3rd generation that becomes lazy.

[fscrig75]

And obviously, unless you're a full-blooded Native American, or the descendant of slaves, you really can't complain about immigrants in America to begin with...


But I was born here, doesn't that make me full blooded native born American?

[RichP]

But I was born here, doesn't that make me full blooded native born American?
As far as I'm concerned, I'm 5th or 6th generation depending on how generations are counted. As far as I'm concerned if you are born here you are American, had a kid in HS that was born in Germany, German mother, American miltary father, at 18 he had to decide, he picked German, no surprise, he was not exactly the sharpest axe in the shed. Got him out of the draft though and out of the country. I always wonder how he fared, he did not speak a word of German.

[fscrig75]

As far as I'm concerned, I'm 5th or 6th generation depending on how generations are counted. As far as I'm concerned if you are born here you are American, had a kid in HS that was born in Germany, German mother, American miltary father, at 18 he had to decide, he picked German, no surprise, he was not exactly the sharpest axe in the shed. Got him out of the draft though and out of the country. I always wonder how he fared, he did not speak a word of German.

Thank you, thats exactly how I see it. Personally I'm sick of all this Italian/African/Mexican/Irish/pick a country/Americans. Your either American or your not.

My wife is German, resident alien, and our child is about to be a dual-citizen when it, I don't know yet, is born. And at 18 it will pick, just like the kid from your HS.

Personally I like the way the German's do it. You move to the country you become a citizen and that is that. You are no longer, what ever country you came from you are German.

[Ecomike]

First, GHG reduction is in the cards, whether you like it not, the world is moving quickly in that direction, and the US is too. It needs to move in that direction quickly, but I don't want to get into that debate here.

I am a practicing Environmental consultant for industry ( and Chemical Engineer). I have dug under the hood so to speak on this topic for years now. The largest and fastest growing sources of GHG (Green House Gases) is from burning coal. And China and India have added massive amounts in the last 15 years to the worlds foot print, which will soon rival our own Coal carbon foot print. I forget the exact ratio but 100 MW of electricity from coal produces about 100 (or maybe 1000) times as much carbon dioxide as 100 MW of electricity from natural gas. The 4 hydrogen atoms per Carbon atom in the natural gas molecule is what makes the difference.

I suspect what they will finally do is two things. One is to add a carbon tax on CO and CO2 emissions which will re-price the ratio between the cost of coal, oil, natural gas, and alternative energy sources, in that order. The tax will help reduce the deficit, and help nudge the market towards the use of less GHG polluting alternatives. It will not outlaw Jeeps or gasoline. The second item they will pass will be a GHG market based system like they used 20 years ago to reduce acid rain emissions from NOx and SOx emissions. It will be a trade - bank system, where real large emissions like power plants (coal) will require either the purchase on the open market of GHG emissions previously banked by the reductions of others, or by the addition of GHG pollution reduction technologies, and or capture and sequestration of CO2 byproducts. They will also include tax credit incentives to make low GHG emission technologies more competitive with high GHG emitting technologies.

The trade - bank system is one where those who reduce there GHG emissions deposit there reductions in a trade system (Like a bank deposit), and they can either sell or reuse those credits later for expansion. Each time credits are created and sold, about 5% of the emissions are permanently retired, thus causing a net reduction. New sources must either have very low emissions (thus being exempt), or they must buy from the trade bank. This creates a market solution, which promotes the use of the most cost effective GHG reduction technologies, and yet does not strangle or require an end of pipe best available control technology with permits, which is the worst way to go. The trade - bank system also allows one to reduce GHGs on a voluntary basis, and then sell those emissions into the market to help pay for the GHG reduction technolgy. Some GHG reductions will actually result in a profit for those who implement them and then sell the reductions. We used the "Cap and Trade" system here in the USA with great success for the last 20 years to reduce acid rain, and it can work for GHGs too.

I would suggest that if you wish to keep your jeeps and gasoline, that you read up on cap and trade issues, and support the two options above, lest we end up with a permit only system edict from the EPA, caused by a court edict. In other words we need to give Congress the political will to pass a Cap and Trade system that makes sense for everyone and the economy, instead of sitting on their asses and letting EPA do it with a costly permit system, while EPA takes the heat due to congressional stalemates. A national law addressing GHG regulation would also preclude a hodge podge of conflicting local city, county, regional and state regulations like the ones that are going into effect now. You can be sure automakers will be supporting a national solution from Congress now (due to the GHG, CAA court case) over a local set of variable rules like California, et. al., is after.

Such a cap trade system might eventually need to be world wide, or at least coupled somehow as China and India, and Brazil (Amazon forest) for instance are major players in any GHG solution. Europe already has a Cap and Trade banking system for GHGs that is working, and they still have gasoline jeeps.

[srimes]

Europe already has a Cap and Trade banking system for GHGs that is working, and they still have gasoline jeeps.

Would you care to define "working" in relation to this claim?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/08/AR2007040800758_pf.html

I'm sure it'll work very well at enriching "carbon banks." It's also a nice way to increase taxes on everyone in order to grow government.

But hopefully it'll inspire good ways to address it. Algenol looks like they have a very promising process: http://www.algenolbiofuels.com/.

I'm just not convinced that CO2 is the huge problem many say it is. I agree on controlling things that clearly are a polutant, but co2? Really?

[Ecomike]

Would you care to define "working" in relation to this claim?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/08/AR2007040800758_pf.html

I'm sure it'll work very well at enriching "carbon banks." It's also a nice way to increase taxes on everyone in order to grow government.

But hopefully it'll inspire good ways to address it. Algenol looks like they have a very promising process: http://www.algenolbiofuels.com/.

I'm just not convinced that CO2 is the huge problem many say it is. I agree on controlling things that clearly are a pollutant, but co2? Really?

The trade bank is not a big profit center as such, simply a trading platform. It can be profitable if the credits price is high enough (high demand), for those who voluntarily install cost effect technology that reduces GHG emissions at a cost that is less than the market value of the credits they sell to others through the bank.

Algenol is just one of hundreds of GHG reduction solutions that are already available. The simplest is to replace low energy efficient systems that use and waste electricity or heat, with higher efficiency systems, which by the way would help stimulate the world economy at the same time! LED lights come to mind.

One of the first things you realize as you study ecology is that an excess of anything (concentration) can be a pollutant, if only because it is concentrated beyond a norm that shifts the original ecosystem out of balance in a real bad way. We have doubled the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere in about 100 years. That is a significant change, and the rate is rapidly accelerating. I have followed the GHG topic for about 25 years now. Everything I have seen has indicated an increasing consensus that the problem is real, serious, and that it may already be too late to avoid many catastrophic consequences. CO2 is not the only GHG problem. CH4, NOx and some of the new fluorocarbons are also a GHG problem.

Many of the projections I am seeing are showing that global warming may starve half the world population in our kids lifetime. You can't starve 3 billion people with out causing WW III.

DiHydrogen Monoxide is a deadly poison if you breath too much of it.

[RichP]

First, GHG reduction is in the cards, whether you like it not, the world is moving quickly in that direction, and the US is too. It needs to move in that direction quickly, but I don't want to get into that debate here.

I am a practicing Environmental consultant for industry ( and Chemical Engineer). I have dug under the hood so to speak on this topic for years now. The largest and fastest growing sources of GHG (Green House Gases) is from burning coal. And China and India have added massive amounts in the last 15 years to the worlds foot print, which will soon rival our own Coal carbon foot print. I forget the exact ratio but 100 MW of electricity from coal produces about 100 (or maybe 1000) times as much carbon dioxide as 100 MW of electricity from natural gas. The 4 hydrogen atoms per Carbon atom in the natural gas molecule is what makes the difference.

I suspect what they will finally do is two things. One is to add a carbon tax on CO and CO2 emissions which will re-price the ratio between the cost of coal, oil, natural gas, and alternative energy sources, in that order. The tax will help reduce the deficit, and help nudge the market towards the use of less GHG polluting alternatives. It will not outlaw Jeeps or gasoline. The second item they will pass will be a GHG market based system like they used 20 years ago to reduce acid rain emissions from NOx and SOx emissions. It will be a trade - bank system, where real large emissions like power plants (coal) will require either the purchase on the open market of GHG emissions previously banked by the reductions of others, or by the addition of GHG pollution reduction technologies, and or capture and sequestration of CO2 byproducts. They will also include tax credit incentives to make low GHG emission technologies more competitive with high GHG emitting technologies.

The trade - bank system is one where those who reduce there GHG emissions deposit there reductions in a trade system (Like a bank deposit), and they can either sell or reuse those credits later for expansion. Each time credits are created and sold, about 5% of the emissions are permanently retired, thus causing a net reduction. New sources must either have very low emissions (thus being exempt), or they must buy from the trade bank. This creates a market solution, which promotes the use of the most cost effective GHG reduction technologies, and yet does not strangle or require an end of pipe best available control technology with permits, which is the worst way to go. The trade - bank system also allows one to reduce GHGs on a voluntary basis, and then sell those emissions into the market to help pay for the GHG reduction technolgy. Some GHG reductions will actually result in a profit for those who implement them and then sell the reductions. We used the "Cap and Trade" system here in the USA with great success for the last 20 years to reduce acid rain, and it can work for GHGs too.

I would suggest that if you wish to keep your jeeps and gasoline, that you read up on cap and trade issues, and support the two options above, lest we end up with a permit only system edict from the EPA, caused by a court edict. In other words we need to give Congress the political will to pass a Cap and Trade system that makes sense for everyone and the economy, instead of sitting on their asses and letting EPA do it with a costly permit system, while EPA takes the heat due to congressional stalemates. A national law addressing GHG regulation would also preclude a hodge podge of conflicting local city, county, regional and state regulations like the ones that are going into effect now. You can be sure automakers will be supporting a national solution from Congress now (due to the GHG, CAA court case) over a local set of variable rules like California, et. al., is after.

Such a cap trade system might eventually need to be world wide, or at least coupled somehow as China and India, and Brazil (Amazon forest) for instance are major players in any GHG solution. Europe already has a Cap and Trade banking system for GHGs that is working, and they still have gasoline jeeps.

All well and good but does anyone else find it interesting that Al Gore is still involved in this
"Generation Investment Management, the private equity fund chaired by former U.S. vice president Al Gore, has acquired a 9.5 percent stake in Camco International Ltd, a carbon asset developer."

Wonder how many other government officials have a piece of this pie.
The carbon company is Camco.

[5-90]

All well and good but does anyone else find it interesting that Al Gore is still involved in this
"Generation Investment Management, the private equity fund chaired by former U.S. vice president Al Gore, has acquired a 9.5 percent stake in Camco International Ltd, a carbon asset developer."

Wonder how many other government officials have a piece of this pie.
The carbon company is Camco.

Interesting? Sure. Surprising? No.

Gore is, after all, a statist democrat. The primary personality trait they all have in common is avarice - and if he can't control with political power, he'll do it with money. If he can do it in a manner that makes himself rich as well, bonus!

[JNickel101]

When You elect Clowns

party1:You Get a Circusparty1:

Get ready, It is only going to get worse!

Speaking of that...look at the retard who is now our Energy Secretary...

Where the hell did B.O. find this douchebag....

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/19/energy-secretary-offers-dire-global-warming-prediction/

[JNickel101]

All well and good but does anyone else find it interesting that Al Gore is still involved in this
"Generation Investment Management, the private equity fund chaired by former U.S. vice president Al Gore, has acquired a 9.5 percent stake in Camco International Ltd, a carbon asset developer."

Wonder how many other government officials have a piece of this pie.
The carbon company is Camco.

x2, biggest scam since Catholicism :D

[RichP]

x2, biggest scam since Catholicism :D

Well, I know a funeral home in NJ that got a govt grant to cover 50% of his solar setup, it's a big one and runs the entire funeral home, he gets carbon credits that he turns around and sells on the market, $3-4000 bucks, 4 times a year. They get sold on some kind of auction and the carbon credit company gets a piece of it. To me it's just another artificial market, the new ponzi scheme maybe :D

[SBrad001]

The trade bank is not a big profit center as such, simply a trading platform. It can be profitable if the credits price is high enough (high demand), for those who voluntarily install cost effect technology that reduces GHG emissions at a cost that is less than the market value of the credits they sell to others through the bank.

Algenol is just one of hundreds of GHG reduction solutions that are already available. The simplest is to replace low energy efficient systems that use and waste electricity or heat, with higher efficiency systems, which by the way would help stimulate the world economy at the same time! LED lights come to mind.

One of the first things you realize as you study ecology is that an excess of anything (concentration) can be a pollutant, if only because it is concentrated beyond a norm that shifts the original ecosystem out of balance in a real bad way. We have doubled the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere in about 100 years. That is a significant change, and the rate is rapidly accelerating. I have followed the GHG topic for about 25 years now. Everything I have seen has indicated an increasing consensus that the problem is real, serious, and that it may already be too late to avoid many catastrophic consequences. CO2 is not the only GHG problem. CH4, NOx and some of the new fluorocarbons are also a GHG problem.

Many of the projections I am seeing are showing that global warming may starve half the world population in our kids lifetime. You can't starve 3 billion people with out causing WW III.

DiHydrogen Monoxide is a deadly poison if you breath too much of it.

I'd like to know what modeling you speak of when you refer to 'catastrophic consequences'.

Now allow me to throw my two-bits in. I am a civil/environmental engineer, I work in industry, and I specialize in cleaning up messes. And I don't buy the entire basket when it comes to global warming. There are just too many variables to come to a clear and distinct conclusion. There are too many models that provide widely varying predictions as to the outcome of global warming.

The one truly valid reason to switch to alternative fuels in my book, is energy independence from the rest of the world. Fossil fuels will run out eventually and I want to know that we won't have an economic collapse.

[RichP]

The one truly valid reason to switch to alternative fuels in my book, is energy independence from the rest of the world. Fossil fuels will run out eventually and I want to know that we won't have an economic collapse.

My feelings exactly, I feel that this stimulus money should be used to retrofit EVERY HOUSE in the COUNTRY with solar shingles, yea, everybody says they are not efficient, but you put 1 or 2 kw shingles on 20 MILLION homes and I don't care how 'inefficient' they are you will decrease power plant requirements by better than 50%.

[fscrig75]

My feelings exactly, I feel that this stimulus money should be used to retrofit EVERY HOUSE in the COUNTRY with solar shingles, yea, everybody says they are not efficient, but you put 1 or 2 kw shingles on 20 MILLION homes and I don't care how 'inefficient' they are you will decrease power plant requirements by better than 50%.

I was looking into a solar system for my house, its El Paso the sun shines like 300+ days a year. But the more I looked into the less I liked it. I get a tax rebate from the Gov't, but nothing from state. Sure the energy I produce spins my meter backwards, which lowers my bill. The big question is say my bill gets to zero one month what happens to the excess electricity I produce? Well the local electric company, does not have to pay me for the electricity I produce. WTF? Why do I have to pay for their electric but they don't have to pay for mine? Something to do with a county run power company do not have to pay.

I think there are only 2 states that actually have to pay people for the electric they produce, Colorado and New Jersey. Ok in some areas CO gets a lot of sun, but Jersey? Seriously? Think how much electric could be produced from homes in NM, AZ, CA, UT and West Texas, if the Gov't would just make it worth our time to have that stuff installed on our homes.

[RichP]

I was looking into a solar system for my house, its El Paso the sun shines like 300+ days a year. But the more I looked into the less I liked it. I get a tax rebate from the Gov't, but nothing from state. Sure the energy I produce spins my meter backwards, which lowers my bill. The big question is say my bill gets to zero one month what happens to the excess electricity I produce? Well the local electric company, does not have to pay me for the electricity I produce. WTF? Why do I have to pay for their electric but they don't have to pay for mine? Something to do with a county run power company do not have to pay.

I think there are only 2 states that actually have to pay people for the electric they produce, Colorado and New Jersey. Ok in some areas CO gets a lot of sun, but Jersey? Seriously? Think how much electric could be produced from homes in NM, AZ, CA, UT and West Texas, if the Gov't would just make it worth our time to have that stuff installed on our homes.

I don't have them handy but the feds have a solar map of the US, until you get pretty far up in NY state the solar is pretty good and comes close to what the southwest gets, there was only like a 10% diff from my area to the southwest states. You also get one other thing, carbon credits which you can resell for some pretty big bucks. As far as the meter running backwards, yea, but then you use power at nite and the meter runs forward, the goal is to get it as close to -0- as possible, or preferably below, to cover those dark days everyone gets.
If I had not had a really nice new roof, with architectural shingles put on ~5 years ago I'd be doing solar shingles this summer and thats what we will be putting on the new house in 5 years when we build it not to mention siting on the property to take the most advantage of the sun and solar.

[Tom R.]

I was looking into a solar system for my house, its El Paso the sun shines like 300+ days a year. But the more I looked into the less I liked it. I get a tax rebate from the Gov't, but nothing from state. Sure the energy I produce spins my meter backwards, which lowers my bill. The big question is say my bill gets to zero one month what happens to the excess electricity I produce? Well the local electric company, does not have to pay me for the electricity I produce. WTF? Why do I have to pay for their electric but they don't have to pay for mine? Something to do with a county run power company do not have to pay.

I think there are only 2 states that actually have to pay people for the electric they produce, Colorado and New Jersey. Ok in some areas CO gets a lot of sun, but Jersey? Seriously? Think how much electric could be produced from homes in NM, AZ, CA, UT and West Texas, if the Gov't would just make it worth our time to have that stuff installed on our homes.
Someone here in Utah recently told me of a friend who periodically got paid a small amount of money by the electric company for producing more energy than consumed. He used a windmill and not solar panels, but I presume it shouldn't make a difference. I got to find out who that was and get the details.

What's the upstart cost involved for a home solar panel system?

If there's no real incentive for common folk to do this, then what does that say about politicians and vocal environmentalists who are leading the charge on promoting alternate energy sources?

[RichP]

What's the upstart cost involved for a home solar panel system?

If there's no real incentive for common folk to do this, then what does that say about politicians and vocal environmentalists who are leading the charge on promoting alternate energy sources?

Startup costs vary, you can buy solar cells on ebay in a pac that is stuck together with wax to keep them from breaking then build you own panels. The ebay cells are good just may have some chips in them. The controller is the expensive item that isolates and feeds back the power to the grid.
The incentive is to corporations and income streams at the corporate level not for individual citizens. It's another case of 'follow the money', you can bet your bottom dollar that the power companies don't want individual home owners to generate their own power and become stand alone, cuts into revenue and those big salaries that their power company execs get. Personally I think it's just like bio diesel, the oil companies don't want people to become fuel independent. Are the car companies involved, I have no doubt they are along with all the other investors that have a stake in being the only suppliers to supply fuel. I often wonder how big bio diesel is in Europe considering they have all those diesel engines over there.
There was an interesting article on CNN tech today about a motor scooter company in Vietnam that will be producing electric scooters with a 45 mile range, cost under a grand for the unit http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/04/20/eco.electricscooter/index.html
A strap on battery pack should be no problem on them, heck you could probably wear the thing in a backpack and recharge it at work.

[Tom R.]

Yeah, Rich, it was a rhetorical question. It was already reported that Obama will reap $$$ with this cap & trade BS he's pushing. Yep, follow the money trail.

[SBrad001]

Yeah, Rich, it was a rhetorical question. It was already reported that Obama will reap $$$ with this cap & trade BS he's pushing. Yep, follow the money trail.

Come on man. Are you that short site that you can't 'see' past the partisan BS? Obama, Gore, the rest of the democrats, it's not just them. There are plenty of republicans that will score HUGE amounts of money.

And really, it doesn't bother me all that much. Cheney scored huge by having shares in Halliburton and being the former CEO. So what. Who cares. It's a free market and if someone can generate more wealth because they 'see' the writing on the wall, well all the more power to them.

Business = wealth generation/creation. And that will always be a good thing.

[SBrad001]

My feelings exactly, I feel that this stimulus money should be used to retrofit EVERY HOUSE in the COUNTRY with solar shingles, yea, everybody says they are not efficient, but you put 1 or 2 kw shingles on 20 MILLION homes and I don't care how 'inefficient' they are you will decrease power plant requirements by better than 50%.

See, that's what I'm talking about! That would be fricking awesome. Sun farms and wind power and we could knock out atleast 30% or 40% of our dependency on natural gas and coal.

You could then use that natural gas and coal as the basis of multiple alternative fuels. Hell, use the natural gas for 'enhanced' diesel engines and get even better fuel mileage and decreased emissions.

[Ecomike]

All well and good but does anyone else find it interesting that Al Gore is still involved in this
"Generation Investment Management, the private equity fund chaired by former U.S. vice president Al Gore, has acquired a 9.5 percent stake in Camco International Ltd, a carbon asset developer."

Wonder how many other government officials have a piece of this pie.
The carbon company is Camco.

Al Gore is no longer a government official. He is a private citizen, so no I am not surprised, in fact I would be surprised he did not capitalize on those opportunities since he wrote the book so to speak. In fact his participation probably helps validate Camco to help attract private capital.

Not familiar with Camco, but I probably should be as I have patent in the area (GHG reduction) they might be interested in funding.

[Ecomike]

x2, biggest scam since Catholicism :D
:roflmao:

[Tom R.]

Come on man. Are you that short site that you can't 'see' past the partisan BS? Obama, Gore, the rest of the democrats, it's not just them. There are plenty of republicans that will score HUGE amounts of money.

"Short site?" Do you mean short sighted? Nope, I'm equal op. This isn't a partisan issue; it's an issue with most politicians.

Cheney scored huge by having shares in Halliburton and being the former CEO. So what. Who cares. It's a free market and if someone can generate more wealth because they 'see' the writing on the wall, well all the more power to them.

Business = wealth generation/creation. And that will always be a good thing.
Nice red herring argument. Permit me to explain it to you: Obama, like those in congress, is a public servant, not a CEO. His duty is to serve the American people and have their best interests in mind, not his own. If he or any politician manipulates the system to benefit himself at the expense of the constituents, then it's a problem. If this cap & trade goes through, it will mean the higher costs are passed down to the end users: us. We effectively line his pockets with $$$. At minimum, it's an ethical issue, but often it's a legal issue. For this reason I care. Come back to play after you get more informed.

[SBrad001]

"Short site?" Do you mean short sighted? Nope, I'm equal op. This isn't a partisan issue; it's an issue with most politicians.

Oops! :jester:

Thanks grammar/spelling NAZI . . . and cool. Thank you for acknowledging the other side.


Nice red herring argument. Permit me to explain it to you: Obama, like those in congress, is a public servant, not a CEO. His duty is to serve the American people and have their best interests in mind, not his own. If he or any politician manipulates the system to benefit himself at the expense of the constituents, then it's a problem. If this cap & trade goes through, it will mean the higher costs are passed down to the end users: us. We effectively line his pockets with $$$. At minimum, it's an ethical issue, but often it's a legal issue. For this reason I care. Come back to play after you get more informed.

And as for the red herring argument . . . Halliburton had its hands in SO many public servants' pockets that it's actually kind of scary. But I don't think it really matters all that much, it's just the status quo. We (tax payers/consumers) pay for everything, but it's not like there's a finite amount of wealth out there. Wealth can be created if a demand exists for whatever is being sold.

I don't really want to argue about the whole 'carbon credit' economy that's coming (because I know it's BS because my research in college was heavily based on carbon credit trading). It's coming whether we want it to arrive or not, so why don't we go ahead and capitalize on that stupidity? It's kind of like back in the '50s when there was a HUGE boom in Uranium mines and very few of them panned out. But plenty of people capitalized on the stupidity of others. And frankly, if some idiot wants to give me his money because he 'feels' guilty about his carbon footprint, then LET him.

[RichP]

Oops! :jester:

Thanks grammar/spelling NAZI . . . and cool. Thank you for acknowledging the other side.



And as for the red herring argument . . . Halliburton had its hands in SO many public servants' pockets that it's actually kind of scary. But I don't think it really matters all that much, it's just the status quo. We (tax payers/consumers) pay for everything, but it's not like there's a finite amount of wealth out there. Wealth can be created if a demand exists for whatever is being sold.

I don't really want to argue about the whole 'carbon credit' economy that's coming (because I know it's BS because my research in college was heavily based on carbon credit trading). It's coming whether we want it to arrive or not, so why don't we go ahead and capitalize on that stupidity? It's kind of like back in the '50s when there was a HUGE boom in Uranium mines and very few of them panned out. But plenty of people capitalized on the stupidity of others. And frankly, if some idiot wants to give me his money because he 'feels' guilty about his carbon footprint, then LET him.

This goes along with another thing I have been slowly becoming aware of, Al Gore just happened to be the one that was obvious to me. Prior elected official have always made money after office by writing book, peddling [lobbying] their influence and speaking engagements, Gore was the first one who I think actually setup a scheme that he could use once he was out of office, it's a good idea really, lay the ground work while in office so you can reap the benefits once you get out. Get the corporation lined up, get the legislation seed planted, water it, nurture it and then harvest it once you are out of office.
Sure beats getting caught with your hand in the cookie jar like Cheney seems to have with Haliburton and all his defense industry 'investments'...

[fscrig75]

Oh and don't forget that pretty Nobel Peace Prize he won.

"for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change"

Must be nice to win that thing by spreading someone else's work around for people to see/read and watch.

[bigalpha]

Speaking of that...look at the retard who is now our Energy Secretary...

Where the hell did B.O. find this douchebag....

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/19/energy-secretary-offers-dire-global-warming-prediction/

I don't understand why he's a douchebag.

[JNickel101]

I wouldn't expect you to. Read the whole article. Spreading false "facts" in order to elicit fear in a problem that doesn't exist. Using his post to influence those who he knows won't go back and do any fact-checking on their own. Using OLD data. Come on....he's a douchebag.

[bigalpha]

I wouldn't expect you to. Read the whole article. Spreading false "facts" in order to elicit fear in a problem that doesn't exist. Using his post to influence those who he knows won't go back and do any fact-checking on their own. Using OLD data. Come on....he's a douchebag.

See, that's not very nice. What happened to civility?

In regards to the article ... it's conservatives blasting a liberal. I'd be a lot more happy with some unbiased facts; which the article doesn't provide.

[JNickel101]

Well...you can be a real jerk when it comes to these arguements. You've jumped in and attempted to flame me on many debates I was having with Rod Knee about this topic - so I wouldn't expect you to read the whole article and see what a tool our Energy Secretary is. He made a complete ass out of himself....too bad more people don't realize that.

[bigalpha]

Well...you can be a real jerk when it comes to these arguements. You've jumped in and attempted to flame me on many debates I was having with Rod Knee about this topic - so I wouldn't expect you to read the whole article and see what a tool our Energy Secretary is. He made a complete ass out of himself....too bad more people don't realize that.

Haha. Is that so? If by 'flaming', you mean asking you for facts and sources to back up the biased opinion of the FOX NEWS articles you quote, then I suppose I'm guilty. Actually, I challenge you to provide some examples of my numerous flaming. Otherwise, try not to be rude.

What part of that article makes him a douchebag? That he quoted the IPCC or that he said some events "may" happen? He's correct, though. If sea levels rise, it will inundate many places on the planet. There's something like 70% of the world's population lives on the coast.

[RichP]

Well...you can be a real jerk when it comes to these arguements. You've jumped in and attempted to flame me on many debates I was having with Rod Knee about this topic - so I wouldn't expect you to read the whole article and see what a tool our Energy Secretary is. He made a complete ass out of himself....too bad more people don't realize that.

Everything that the democrats have done so far is straight out of Saul Alinski.

[Ecomike]

If I read this right the Chinese have signed a deal and funded the shutdown of five coal fired plants to be replaced by biomass to natural gas producing, natural gas fed generator, generation plants. Point being even the Chinese are getting on board with this as evidenced by this kind of news. Also we should be leading the pack in developing and deploying these newer technologies (to create US jobs and growth) instead of fighting it, lest we end up looking overseas to China, Europe and Japan for the answers instead of selling the answers overseas ourselves.

[JNickel101]

Haha. Is that so? If by 'flaming', you mean asking you for facts and sources to back up the biased opinion of the FOX NEWS articles you quote, then I suppose I'm guilty. Actually, I challenge you to provide some examples of my numerous flaming. Otherwise, try not to be rude.

What part of that article makes him a douchebag? That he quoted the IPCC or that he said some events "may" happen? He's correct, though. If sea levels rise, it will inundate many places on the planet. There's something like 70% of the world's population lives on the coast.

I'm sorry. In reality, I have nothing but respect and love for you. :worship:

























:rolleyes:

[bjoehandley]

I was looking into a solar system for my house, its El Paso the sun shines like 300+ days a year. But the more I looked into the less I liked it. I get a tax rebate from the Gov't, but nothing from state. Sure the energy I produce spins my meter backwards, which lowers my bill. The big question is say my bill gets to zero one month what happens to the excess electricity I produce? Well the local electric company, does not have to pay me for the electricity I produce. WTF? Why do I have to pay for their electric but they don't have to pay for mine? Something to do with a county run power company do not have to pay.

I think there are only 2 states that actually have to pay people for the electric they produce, Colorado and New Jersey. Ok in some areas CO gets a lot of sun, but Jersey? Seriously? Think how much electric could be produced from homes in NM, AZ, CA, UT and West Texas, if the Gov't would just make it worth our time to have that stuff installed on our homes.

Wouldn't it be possible to use some form of battery (like a bank of Gell Cell Optima's ) to store the excess energy produced during the day so you have some during evening hours and more or less reduce your electric company provided power usage to nill unless you're running some form of electric car or plug in hybrid that could possibly require more juice to charge?

[RichP]

Wouldn't it be possible to use some form of battery (like a bank of Gell Cell Optima's ) to store the excess energy produced during the day so you have some during evening hours and more or less reduce your electric company provided power usage to nill unless you're running some form of electric car or plug in hybrid that could possibly require more juice to charge?

Yup, just start adding batteries, I'd start with probably 40 if you have a well and electric appliances. Though I have seen 26 used successfully, you just have to figure out your draw during night time hours and then size your battery bank accordingly.
There is a guy down the road a ways that has an electric car, he uses two 2ft by 4ft solar panels on his roof to charge it, I guess it works, I've seen it down at the post office 4 miles away and at the local grocery store about 8 miles away.

[bigalpha]

I'm sorry. In reality, I have nothing but respect and love for you. :worship:

Of course, don't worry about providing supporting evidence for your side (of anything).

Yup, just start adding batteries, I'd start with probably 40 if you have a well and electric appliances. Though I have seen 26 used successfully, you just have to figure out your draw during night time hours and then size your battery bank accordingly.
There is a guy down the road a ways that has an electric car, he uses two 2ft by 4ft solar panels on his roof to charge it, I guess it works, I've seen it down at the post office 4 miles away and at the local grocery store about 8 miles away.

Electrical substations use banks of batteries to kick the breaker back ON in case the breaker gets kicked OFF.

Make sure your voltage regulator works. You don't want to fuse 40 batteries together instantly. I've seen it. It's crazy.

[Ecomike]

http://www.brightautomotive.com/vehicles

Just ran across this today.

Found it here:

Original article (http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/envision-solar-joins-bright-automotive/story.aspx?guid=%7B18EB1764%2D9F43%2D4EEC%2DB127%2 DFEC2A6B614FE%7D&dist=pfbeta)

Talks about 4 related companies, one is Axion which has the new lead carbon battery breakthrough I posted about here recently in the off topic area. Axion signed a deal with Exide last week that sent the Axion company stock straight up.

You all can beat the !!!1 all you want, I am too busy trying to figure out how to invest in the future with the future winners in the new GHG regulatory age so I can still afford to buy $10 gas in a few years for my Jeep! Or afford to convert it to electric someday.

[JNickel101]

....I'm still waiting for Mr. Fusion to become reality. That will power my XJ.

[fscrig75]

You all can beat the !!!1 all you want, I am too busy trying to figure out how to invest in the future with the future winners in the new GHG regulatory age so I can still afford to buy $10 gas in a few years for my Jeep! Or afford to convert it to electric someday.

The companies that are out are pretty low in price right now, so yea getting in on the ground floor is nice. The BIG problem is that the tech for this stuff is changing so fast, like computers a few years ago.
If you find something good through it up here. For now I'll stick with cheap Ford and GE stock.

[Ecomike]

The companies that are out are pretty low in price right now, so yea getting in on the ground floor is nice. The BIG problem is that the tech for this stuff is changing so fast, like computers a few years ago.
If you find something good through it up here. For now I'll stick with cheap Ford and GE stock.

If you bought Ford at $1, or Citi (C) at about $1 around March 6-9, you would have made about 400% return on investment in about 5 weeks already, Warren Buffet style investing!

[fscrig75]

I got a boat load of Ford @ 1.50, but the profit wasn't as much as I would like, its offset what I lost when it slammed down. Same with GE.

[Ecomike]

These guys have a real interesting idea, technology. May pay off if CO2 gets regulated. They are capturing CO2 and converting concentrated CO2 (from say a coal fired plant exhaust) into hydrocarbons using a bioprocess of some kind IIRC (Mimicing plant life).

LINK (http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/newsweek-online-features-exclusive-interview/story.aspx?guid=%7B3CEC3905%2D05BF%2D4D5F%2DBAA8%2 DCC899FC95DD1%7D&dist=pfbeta)

[fscrig75]

I'm not sure about that. How much CO2 is needed to start the process. The way the Gov't is moving now, is to drastically reduce the CO2 emmisions, so wouldn't that cut down on what they need?

This seems like a stop-gap to me, like that corn-fuel crap.

[fscrig75]

Personally I think solar is place to be.

The problem with solar companies is that it is taking so long to built the panels. The companies get huge orders but they can't build them fast enough, so they lose orders, loose money. They take loans from banks to try and build new production systems but they can't catch back up. They are owing more money then they can make.

[RichP]

Personally I think solar is place to be.

The problem with solar companies is that it is taking so long to built the panels. The companies get huge orders but they can't build them fast enough, so they lose orders, loose money. They take loans from banks to try and build new production systems but they can't catch back up. They are owing more money then they can make.

Use the bailout money to start up 50 new companies, one per state or more.

[bigalpha]

Use the bailout money to start up 50 new companies, one per state or more.

I like your enthusiasm about solar. I fully believe it's the best solution for our energy problems.

[RichP]

I like your enthusiasm about solar. I fully believe it's the best solution for our energy problems.

Figure there are on the low end 100 MILLION homes in america, if each one generated 2-3KW thru solar power do the math. Most of those home are empty all day and would not be using much so it would all be pumped back out into the grid to be used by business's. It's probably closer to 200 Million counting vacation homes and rental homes, not counting apartment buildings and such. Yup, I am a big fan of solar, it's probably the most innocuous setup you can have, other than being shiny solar roof shingles look well, just like shingles.

[bigalpha]

Figure there are on the low end 100 MILLION homes in america, if each one generated 2-3KW thru solar power do the math. Most of those home are empty all day and would not be using much so it would all be pumped back out into the grid to be used by business's. It's probably closer to 200 Million counting vacation homes and rental homes, not counting apartment buildings and such. Yup, I am a big fan of solar, it's probably the most innocuous setup you can have, other than being shiny solar roof shingles look well, just like shingles.

Exactly. Everyone talks about how costly they are. Well, once you start manufacturing them more and more, price goes down and down. Make carports out of them, put them in interstate medians, on top of light poles. So easy.

[JNickel101]

I like your enthusiasm about solar. I fully believe it's the best solution for our energy problems.

That or wind - I'm trying to figure out why there aren't more windmills around, especially out here. I know east of El Paso, there is a decent sized wind farm....

Also promising are the guys up in New England who are experimenting with tidal power. Seriously, that is one natural power source that NEVER fluctuates. Don't have to worry about a cloudy or non-windy day....it is a constant power source...thoughts?

[Ecomike]

I like your enthusiasm about solar. I fully believe it's the best solution for our energy problems.

The current state of the art solar units are still not cost effective on their own, they are great for remote areas that have no gird! The new solar thin film that was co-developed by the Google founders is in production now, at a production cost of 1% of silicon solar panels, but they only have one, the first production plant up and running.And it has only been online for about 6-9 months.

The new mirror based thermal energy concentrators that reflect and concentrate sun light onto a thin long pipe with heat exchange fluid flowing through the pipe are being built in the deserts now to heat water for steam turbines. They are much more competitive that silicon solar, but don't scale down. They are very Green, with no GHG emissions, and are very competative with coal. The 800 F thermal fluid is also easy to store in bulk for overnight use!!!!

[fscrig75]

The other problem with solar is the stigma it still has from the late 70s early 80s panels. Kinda like the old diesels.
I'm sure everyone remembers those old huge panels that people had on thier houses. Then when you asked the home owner about them, they didn't have a clue about them at all.

[RichP]

The other problem with solar is the stigma it still has from the late 70s early 80s panels. Kinda like the old diesels.
I'm sure everyone remembers those old huge panels that people had on thier houses. Then when you asked the home owner about them, they didn't have a clue about them at all.

Not any more
http://www.thisoldhouse.com/toh/article/0,,1205726,00.html

http://hubpages.com/hub/SolarPowerShingles

[fscrig75]

Those are nice, wish I could afford them. You get a small write off from the Fed but nothing from the state, and I can't sell excess electric back.

If the Fed, State each gave some type of tax rebate and then electric companies had to pay for the electricity they got from home owners, I think people would be lining up around the block to have this installed on their homes. I know I would've had it done years ago.

[RichP]

Those are nice, wish I could afford them. You get a small write off from the Fed but nothing from the state, and I can't sell excess electric back.

If the Fed, State each gave some type of tax rebate and then electric companies had to pay for the electricity they got from home owners, I think people would be lining up around the block to have this installed on their homes. I know I would've had it done years ago.

Here is something you might want to read. Cannot get much simpler than this.
http://www.mdpub.com/SolarPanel/index.html

[muddyrocks]

Here is something you might want to read. Cannot get much simpler than this.
http://www.mdpub.com/SolarPanel/index.html

Did ya notice 'Mike built a homemade jet engine'?

All in all, very cool stuff.

[fscrig75]

Here is something you might want to read. Cannot get much simpler than this.
http://www.mdpub.com/SolarPanel/index.html

Pretty interesting. Does he just plug it into a wall outlet then?

[tbburg]

Does he just plug it into a wall outlet then?According to his site, he uses a low voltage system in a camping trailer, with small inverters to run low draw appliances. He doesn't have a 120/240 household system.

[RichP]

Pretty interesting. Does he just plug it into a wall outlet then?

For putting that kind of setup in a house you need a converter, that gadget can get a mite pricey but it does a lot, converts DC to AC, matches the phase, it also isolates power when power goes away from the outside like say a down power line so you don't electrocute any line workers. Almost the same setup as an emergency generator. His needs were site specific and down to the most basic of needs for his camp site place.
It does show though that there is no mystery or difficulty to building the thing from parts. I'm pretty sure that others on here with some metal working skills could come up with a much better mounting system other than wood that would withstand years out in the elements.

I liked the jet engine though, question is, what do you do with it other than the cool factor :D :D :D though it might make one heck of a garage heater or be good for defrosting your snow and ice covered car... or a convection oven...

[kujito]

How hard would it be to do a hybrid system using both solar and wind? That would be awesome around here. We get around 300 days of sunshine a year and there is quite a bit of wind too. I just got done replacing a cedar fence panel that the wind broke. It was nailed to the posts from the leeward side (that day). It pulled the nails through the 2x4s on one end, and snapped the 4x4 post at the base on the other end (end of fence).
The solar could be the primary with the wind as an aux./on availability secondary. I'm sure it could get complicated trying to tie the two together, especially when one only operates when the wind blows. Maybe even tie the wind generators to some of those turbine style attic/garage roof vents. They'd turn on hot windless days.

[bjoehandley]

Shouldn't be all that tough to do, they'd have to be wired into the system anyway.

I mentioned this thread to my father and he was telling me that when he was growing up they had a wind generator for the farm prior to it being electrified in the mid-50's. It was something along the lines of a wind mill with a generator and a bank of batteries that were used to power things, when needed. He also told me of a building C&NW build in Bill, Wyoming in the 80's that didn't really have a stationary power source (no power lines were running near the build site prior to construction) and they used a mixture of solar and wind for electrical and sun supplied heat for heating the structure and providing heated water. While neither one was perfect, keep in mind that were talking as recent as 25 years ago and as far as 60+ years ago! Imagine what could be done with newer technology in the same circumstances as what Dad has already delt with in just his lifetime.

[tbburg]

How hard would it be to do a hybrid system using both solar and wind?
http://www.mdpub.com/SolarPanel/index.html
If you read through the guy's site, his system is hybrid solar/wind. One of his other projects was a windmill generator, and a charge controller that had inputs for both the generator and his solar panels

[RichP]

If you read through the guy's site, his system is hybrid solar/wind. One of his other projects was a windmill generator, and a charge controller that had inputs for both the generator and his solar panels

Yea, but you still need the 'box' that controls what goes back out and comes in from the grid. Crispy linemen are not cool.
Feds fund 100 solar manufacturers in 50 states, outlaw asphalt shingles for more than 50% of the entire roof, forces solar shingle use, puts a bunch of new manufacturers to work, sales people, installers, spawns a whole new industry that has the potential to rival auto manufacturing. It would easily take 10+ years or more as the older roofs failed, incentives to do it sooner would speed up the process.
We are already starting to plan our new house in 6 years, it will be solar roofed.

[tbburg]

Yea, but you still need the 'box' that controls what goes back out and comes in from the grid. Crispy linemen are not cool.A reliable phase matching system/grid feed system will probably be the biggest obstacle to widespread use. Another would be the re-alignment of the elec. grid to multi-point power generation. The way we're set up now, single point generation, if there's a grid failure, they can shut it off at one point and work back to the damaged area. With multi-point generation,.... man I'd hate to be one of the guys working on that,...
It would easily take 10+ years or more as the older roofs failed, incentives to do it sooner would speed up the process.
We are already starting to plan our new house in 6 years, it will be solar roofed.more like 30 years unless you forced people to change. Last time I checked, the cheapest fiber/asphalt shingle on the market had a 25 year warranty. Some commercial products are "lifetime". It's a good idea though. I'd like to see a program like that here(but to be honest, the whole "govt. mandate" kind of leaves a bad taste). If they covered all the roofs in Phoenix with solar, we could probably shut down the Palo Verde nuke plant(or sell the electricity to LA and subsidize the solar with it ;) ).
What I'm really surprised at is the lack of solar water heaters around here. It turns out some HOAs have actually outlawed them.:doh:

[RichP]

A reliable phase matching system/grid feed system will probably be the biggest obstacle to widespread use. Another would be the re-alignment of the elec. grid to multi-point power generation. The way we're set up now, single point generation, if there's a grid failure, they can shut it off at one point and work back to the damaged area. With multi-point generation,.... man I'd hate to be one of the guys working on that,...
more like 30 years unless you forced people to change. Last time I checked, the cheapest fiber/asphalt shingle on the market had a 25 year warranty. Some commercial products are "lifetime". It's a good idea though. I'd like to see a program like that here(but to be honest, the whole "govt. mandate" kind of leaves a bad taste). If they covered all the roofs in Phoenix with solar, we could probably shut down the Palo Verde nuke plant(or sell the electricity to LA and subsidize the solar with it ;) ).
What I'm really surprised at is the lack of solar water heaters around here. It turns out some HOAs have actually outlawed them.:doh:

The 'box' usually runs about $1500-$3000 but you only need that one, the more expensive ones also handle the inputs from the solar or wind DC inputs. I know of one wind generator that was put up as a 'decorative' windmill, HOA restrictions, like you see on farms, unless you look close you may not notice the drive rod going down to the base, he stuck the generator in there which turns out to be a good thing, makes it easier to maintain, you just need to get creative and hide the dam thing, make it look like something else.
My cynical side wonders how many of those HOA executives derive their income from ownership in power stocks. We had one resident who successfully managed to get enough signatures to prevent any future Verizon underground fiber installation in the development [FIOS], a few of us were gabbing one morning, one of the backers was bragging how they finally had enough names to override the HOA and keep that evil phone company from trenching road footage and lawns to the house, that was the first time I heard about it, when I mentioned he worked for the local cable company you could have heard a pin drop. I'm not worried about it, we'll be moving in a few years and not to any HOA controlled development either, we only moved here because of the indoor heated electric pool and 5 acre rec area, once the HOA took over from the builder it all went downhill, I'll let whoever buys this place live with it.

[tbburg]

The "hidden in plain site" thing is a good idea, even without restrictions. One thing I've never liked was ugly installations of anything. Good engineering can look good too! Anyway, it's not my problem here(I rent, and if I buy, there won't be a HOA) I just get a chuckle reading about some of the problems that crop up, so I manage to stay inadvertently informed :D
The real problem with the HOAs around here is they're all written to protect the original developer, and not the eventual property owners, so they tend to restrict everything. It can be changed, but usually nobody tries, or even notices until some HOA-Nazi gets in and starts making trouble.

[RichP]

Actually our HOA is not bad, they do keep the 56 chevy and F150 lawn ornaments out as well as quite a bit of other trash. Luckily the original builder built the roads to govt standards so the handover to the town was easy, now they take care of them.
The downside is once the builder handed the club over to the HOA we found out it cost about $35,000 a year to heat the pool in the winter, at least we had the pool for the first 12 years which was good for the kids. It's why we moved here in the first place.

[tbburg]

Seems to go with the topic:

http://newmexicoindependent.com/26011/epa-pulls-the-plug-on-desert-rock-coal-fired-plant

We don't really need another carbon spewing coal plant out here.

[RichP]

Seems to go with the topic:

http://newmexicoindependent.com/26011/epa-pulls-the-plug-on-desert-rock-coal-fired-plant

We don't really need another carbon spewing coal plant out here.

"Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley said in a statement the decision was further proof that the U.S. government isn’t “honest and truthful in its dealings with Native America.” Shirley said that the EPA withdrawal of the permit will harm the Navajo people."

WhereTF has this guy been, the USG isn't honest and truthful when dealing with ANYONE let alone it's citizens and it's becoming less honest every day.

[XJEEPER]

Democratic Reps Henry Waxman of California and Ed Markey of Massachusetts have introduced The American Clean Energy and Security Act. Also known as "the cap-and-trade bill," these 648-pages of legislative swamp gas would stifle the already moribund economy with brand-new costs and regulations designed to defeat so-called "global warming."

Michigan Democrat John Dingell dared to utter the truth on April 24. "Nobody in this country realizes that cap-and-trade is a tax, and a great big one." How big? $646 billion between 2012-2019, states President Obama's budget.

Even worse, this bill aims roughly to halve CO2 levels from about 900 parts-per-million, where they could rise by 2100. Page 336 declares that analysis the bill mandates "shall address...whether United States actions, in concert, with international action are sufficient to avoid...atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations above 450 parts per million carbon dioxide equivalent."
http://www.standard.net/adserver/www/delivery/lg.php?bannerid=1770&campaignid=498&zoneid=83&channel_ids=,&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.standard.net%2Flive%2Feditori al%2Fnationalcommentary%2F171439%2F&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.standard.net%2Flive%2Fedi torial%2Fnationalcommentary&cb=5ce71ecc41

As Iain Murray explains, achieving this goal involves numbers almost too huge to count and projects nearly too large to contemplate. During a seminar last week at the Heritage Foundation's Resource Bank here, Murray -- a senior fellow with the Competitive Enterprise Institute -- detailed what it takes to cut Earth's CO2 by about 50 percent by 2099.

A staggering 3.7 trillion tons (or 3,700 gigatons) of CO2 must be squelched worldwide until century's end to hit this benchmark. This equals 41.1 gigatons (or 41.1 billion tons) of CO2 for each of the 90 years between 2010 and 2100.

How can mankind make this happen? Select any one of the following choices from this menu of dizzying options.

* Increase current wind-turbine capacity 575-fold.
* Construct 5,589 1-gigawatt atomic-power plants, 15 times today's output.
* Build 11,220 "zero emission" 500-megawatt coal-burning electrical plants.
* Install 41,100 facilities to sequester CO2, similar to Norway's Sleipner project. Only three comparable sites now exist.

* Plant trees on now-barren land covering 14.2 million square miles, roughly four times the size of the USA

[Ecomike]

Democratic Reps Henry Waxman of California and Ed Markey of Massachusetts have introduced The American Clean Energy and Security Act. Also known as "the cap-and-trade bill," these 648-pages of legislative swamp gas would stifle the already moribund economy with brand-new costs and regulations designed to defeat so-called "global warming."

Michigan Democrat John Dingell dared to utter the truth on April 24. "Nobody in this country realizes that cap-and-trade is a tax, and a great big one." How big? $646 billion between 2012-2019, states President Obama's budget.

Even worse, this bill aims roughly to halve CO2 levels from about 900 parts-per-million, where they could rise by 2100. Page 336 declares that analysis the bill mandates "shall address...whether United States actions, in concert, with international action are sufficient to avoid...atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations above 450 parts per million carbon dioxide equivalent."
http://www.standard.net/adserver/www/delivery/lg.php?bannerid=1770&campaignid=498&zoneid=83&channel_ids=,&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.standard.net%2Flive%2Feditori al%2Fnationalcommentary%2F171439%2F&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.standard.net%2Flive%2Fedi torial%2Fnationalcommentary&cb=5ce71ecc41

As Iain Murray explains, achieving this goal involves numbers almost too huge to count and projects nearly too large to contemplate. During a seminar last week at the Heritage Foundation's Resource Bank here, Murray -- a senior fellow with the Competitive Enterprise Institute -- detailed what it takes to cut Earth's CO2 by about 50 percent by 2099.

A staggering 3.7 trillion tons (or 3,700 gigatons) of CO2 must be squelched worldwide until century's end to hit this benchmark. This equals 41.1 gigatons (or 41.1 billion tons) of CO2 for each of the 90 years between 2010 and 2100.

How can mankind make this happen? Select any one of the following choices from this menu of dizzying options.

* Increase current wind-turbine capacity 575-fold.
* Construct 5,589 1-gigawatt atomic-power plants, 15 times today's output.
* Build 11,220 "zero emission" 500-megawatt coal-burning electrical plants.
* Install 41,100 facilities to sequester CO2, similar to Norway's Sleipner project. Only three comparable sites now exist.

* Plant trees on now-barren land covering 14.2 million square miles, roughly four times the size of the USA

I take it you have a problem with it all. (Insert Nickel :wave:)

" Even worse, this bill aims roughly to halve CO2 levels",

I am wondering why you consider this worse? From what I have read if we reach 450 ppm of CO2, it may be all over anyway, so some would argue it is too little too late.

[JNickel101]

I have no problem with wind, atomic or clean coal....problem is, the same liberal hippies who suggest it, find fault with it (the whole "not in my backyard" arguement). They have lots talk, but no real solutions, they poke holes in their own ideas. If they spent as much time DOING as they did protesting or stopping shit in the courts, they'd accomplish something.

Must be nice to not have to work, and just protest all day....spending someone else's money....

But my idea would just take a few B-2 sorties flying over China and a few other choice countries....CO2 "problem" solved for at least 50 years....and it would be the quickest solution. Overnight cut of CO2 production.

:D

[tbburg]

....problem is, the same liberal hippies who suggest it, find fault with it (the whole "not in my backyard" arguement). They have lots talk,,.. ...' If they spent as much time DOING as they did protesting or stopping shit in the courts, they'd accomplish something.

Must be nice to not have to work, and just protest all day....spending someone else's money....Oh, they "accomplish" a lot,...

Look up the history of the Moscow, OH, COAL burning(conventional) elec. station.

Then look up the Moscow, OH, Nuclear generating station.


The punch line is, "They're the same plant." :confused1