BUT, it will provide many high paying jobs. The product may leave the US but the high wages will stay here and right now we could really use this.
Energy Independence a Reality?
- Thread starter candrew
- Start date
BUT, it will provide many high paying jobs. The product may leave the US but the high wages will stay here and right now we could really use this.
Beantown
Well-Known Member
I work in the industry, the new way to do solar is called a PPA. Its basically a solar utility setup where the homeowner doesn't pay out of pocket for the system but then pays a solar utility bill based on KWH. That rate is lower than their current setup.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QeMOVpljUY
https://www.epa.gov/greenpower/buygp/solarpower.htm
Those advertisements seem silly when the SSP could build a much more efficient plant in more optimal locations than typical residences. If co-ops could do one good thing then this would be it.
QuinSnydersHair
Well-Known Member
So you guys throw solar panels on my roof for free, and then I pay a monthly utility bill as usual? If my average monthly bill over the course of a year is $300, how much would it be with solar panels?
Beantown
Well-Known Member
But why take up useful land when useless roof space is so readily available?
Beantown
Well-Known Member
I will show you an example. The typical Massachusetts customer pays somewhere between 16-18 cents per KWH with NSTAR. With Solar/Sunrun they can pay anywhere from .03 cents to about 12 cents per KWH. It all depends on how efficient their roof is. But minimally they should see a 20-30% savings their very first month. That solar rate is also locked in so their saving keeps increasing as the local utilities rates will keep rising. Average utilities rise about 3-6% a year
Additionally states don't charge taxes on clean energy so most should see an additional 10 bucks or so each month too.
QuinSnydersHair
Well-Known Member
Yes, $300/month. Why?
QuinSnydersHair
Well-Known Member
Meh. To me, the payoff isn't substantial enough to offset what happens when I try to sell the house (I personally think most people think they're ugly and that it would be tougher to sell for that reason and also because potential buyers wouldn't know the implications of inheriting such) or try to get rid of them after 25 years. To my knowledge, that is a very grey area right now. But I've heard I will be the one responsible for getting rid of them and thus, paying to dump them, wherever that may be.
Beantown
Well-Known Member
Just curious. In states like California since they are on a pricing tiered system customers need to be paying about 200 or more per month for solar to make sense and give them a savings.
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
First of all, define "many."
Secondly, what type of environmental impact will this have? From what I've seen in N. Dakota, the environmental impact has been significant. So even if you get away without paying for their actions, your children and grandchildren might not be as lucky. And isn't that what repubs are uber concerned with, their children and grandchildren?
Thirdly, soooooooooooo you make more money but if the cost of living continues to go up, especially for gas, what exactly are you gaining? I mean, lets not forget, the cost of gas has an effect on nearly ever facet of the economy. So merely shrugging our exportation of fuel as, "Meh" is quite obtuse to me. Then again, I am talking about the loser of the last 2 Presidential elections. According to them, they feel like their message wasn't rejected. In fact, they seem to feel like it's the way the message was presented. LOL. Yep, that's exactly the problem... LOL.
Lastly, I find it hilarious how we keep going back to the "Drill baby drill" mantra. As if alternatives will just sprout out of nowhere once non-renewable sources have been exhausted. Why not invest heavily now in alternatives? Why is China outspending us significantly on this? Then, once we're energy independent on alternatives, we can sell our oil at an even higher price to other countries? I think that sounds like a better plan. Then again, I must keep in mind we are talking about the GOP here. Short term gains over long term stability. The party of, "Drill baby drill, shock and aw, Evolution doesn't exist, no evidence of global warming, everyone is Christian, tax cuts for the wealthy, and GET OFF MY LAWN AND GET BACK TO MEXICO!" mantra. the same idiots who think that 47 percent of our country is worthless. LOL. Keep it up ya hacks!
It's time to stop playing political games and get back to what is best for America. I think many could benefit from seeing our European and South American countries are adjusting to the 21st century. Brazil has several different forms of fuel and Spain invests heavily in solar energy. Once again, America is back in the stone age when it comes to this issue.
Last edited by a moderator:
Beantown
Well-Known Member
-The payoff? You don't invest any money.
-Sunrun takes them off your home after 20 years with no charge to you.
-With the PPA program homes have been selling 3 times as fast with solar and still adding about 17,000 worth of equity to the home.
-Not sure what state you are in but solar is desirable in places with high utility rates, Mass, NY, Hawaii, NJ, Cali, etc.
-Solar gives you the "green home" edge in the market.
QuinSnydersHair
Well-Known Member
I'll wait 'til they develop solar "panels" that are the actual shingles that are on your house and don't **** it up aesthetically. I see that time coming in the next 10-20 or so years.