U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-17-2011, 09:18 AM
 
Location: Loveland Colorado
91 posts, read 145,260 times
Reputation: 79

Advertisements

Food for thought aurora will be home to the largest solar facility in the country.
GE To Build America's Largest Solar Panel Factory In Colorado
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-17-2011, 09:23 AM
 
20,310 posts, read 37,804,669 times
Reputation: 18087
Quote:
Originally Posted by zenkonami View Post
It was suggested...nay, encouraged on another thread. So let's start it here.

Present your thoughts, and more importantly your DATA on energy alternatives to fossil fuels throughout Colorado. DON'T FORGET TO PROVIDE YOUR SOURCES. Fossil fuels are known contributors to pollution as well as potentially damaging to land and local geologies, but are well subsidized and supported by our current infrastructure, making them cheap, fast and accessible in a world of rising energy costs.

Remember...thoughts are welcome, but DATA IS BETTER and PROVIDE SOURCES!

Get ready...get set...and GO!
Thanks for starting an ALTERNATIVE ENERGY (aka wind, solar, nuclear) thread.

I've moved 20 posts from the OIL thread to this one, and since they were posted a few days ago, your posting is no longer #1 in this thread. I'll make a note in the first post to notify readers of the split.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2011, 11:18 AM
 
2,253 posts, read 5,838,130 times
Reputation: 2615
Wink Great in principle

Seems like good news with General Electric intending a major investment in the production of solar panels in Colorado.

No secret my belief in solar energy, despite the young growing pangs of its early technological development. My largest issue with hydrocarbon sources of energy is the seemingly inevitable environmental degradation consequent. Also that for such critical resources as natural gas and oil it makes no sense to waste them on no more than transportation or heating. Even though I continue to use propane in part for exactly that, so I better get with the solar.

But since pointing to myself as part of the problem, I'm also happy to hold GE's feet to the fire. Many with little familiarity with the Silicon Valley of California may assume it is a very clean industry, which is not exactly the case. All the marshaled brain power is, other than the electricity used, fuel in their BMWs, and all other associated costs of humans needing to live. But within Silicon Valley they also do a lot of manufacturing, semi-conductors and other high-tech things, and in processes which use toxic chemicals and with the potential to do a great amount of environmental damage. Fortunately these processes seem well-regulated there, with the result that all the many operations and money made are fairly clean.

To be hoped GE follows the same standards. That the result greater solar energy, jobs, profit for GE, and no environmental regrets for Colorado.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2011, 03:56 PM
 
8,317 posts, read 25,103,855 times
Reputation: 9065
What everyone seems to ignore is that the best source of "alternative energy" is CONSERVATION. There is no part of our energy picture that could not be improved at least 20% or more through efficiency and energy conservation, but we spoiled brat Americans want to hear none of that. That's particularly obnoxious when a lot of those conservation measures would actually save people money, lessen our dependence on foreign oil, slow environmental degradation, and lead to more livable communities. I'm not any raging environmentalist, far from it--but only a moron can not see that our energy-wasting ways in this country have to stop. It's sort of like trying to fill a water bucket with a bunch of holes in the bottom--we concentrate on every way possible to pour more in the top instead of trying to plug some of the holes in the bottom. All the alternative energy in the world will not forestall an energy catastrophe in this country unless we learn how to conserve--simple as that.

Teddy Roosevelt saw it coming a century ago--how can we stay so dumb?

Quote:
"We of an older generation can get along with what we have, though with growing hardship; but in your full manhood and womanhood you will want what nature once so bountifully supplied and man so thoughtlessly destroyed; and because of that want you will reproach us, not for what we have used, but for what we have wasted...So any nation which in its youth lives only for the day, reaps without sowing, and consumes without husbanding, must expect the penalty of the prodigal whose labor could with difficulty find him the bare means of life."

"Arbor Day - A Message to the School-Children of the United States" April 15, 1907
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2011, 04:44 PM
 
2,253 posts, read 5,838,130 times
Reputation: 2615
Wink The Bull Moose Party

Per conservation = exactly right.

In the event no one else has, I nominate Teddy Roosevelt for our next president, and one badly needed. Although, aside from he already having served two terms, it seems something of a long proposition
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2011, 04:56 PM
 
808 posts, read 1,176,209 times
Reputation: 2074
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idunn View Post
In the event no one else has, I nominate Teddy Roosevelt for our next president, and one badly needed. Although, aside from he already having served two terms, it seems something of a long proposition
Ole Teddy wouldn't stand a chance in modern US politics. That trust-bustin' national park creatin' fool would get branded a soft commie tree-huggin' pinko and run outta town before he could get five words out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2011, 11:25 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
1,627 posts, read 3,620,013 times
Reputation: 1777
Quote:
Originally Posted by smdensbcs View Post
Ole Teddy wouldn't stand a chance in modern US politics. That trust-bustin' national park creatin' fool would get branded a soft commie tree-huggin' pinko and run outta town before he could get five words out.
But he'd still be carrying a big stick the whole way!

Frankly I'm a big fan of Teddy Roosevelt. He seemed to have a better understanding of what we COULD be as a country than any of the clowns we currently in or running for office.

I certainly agree with conservation. I think that includes more energy efficient appliances and such, but we often forget that the more important approach is simply USING less energy. We're very hung up on the idea that we HAVE to chew up those kW hours simply because we CAN. Usually at the expense of alternative forms of production or entertainment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2012, 04:17 PM
 
Location: Pueblo - Colorado's Second City
12,102 posts, read 20,355,007 times
Reputation: 4131
Since there are plans for solar fields in Colorado, including one east of Pueblo, I thought I would talk about the future price of solar versus fossil fuels here.

MIT did a study and found that by 2020 solar will cost .06 KHW while fossil fuels will cost .15 KHW

I heard this while watching a video with Dr Peter Diamonds, the CEO of the X Prize.

I found this very interesting and one reason I think that in the next 8 years we will start to see a shift from fossil fuels in Colorado to alternative energy including solar.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2012, 01:04 AM
 
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
20,802 posts, read 37,476,508 times
Reputation: 20864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie View Post
Since there are plans for solar fields in Colorado, including one east of Pueblo, I thought I would talk about the future price of solar versus fossil fuels here.

MIT did a study and found that by 2020 solar will cost .06 KHW while fossil fuels will cost .15 KHW

I heard this while watching a video with Dr Peter Diamonds, the CEO of the X Prize.

I found this very interesting and one reason I think that in the next 8 years we will start to see a shift from fossil fuels in Colorado to alternative energy including solar.
personally, I will predict a new barrage of NG turbines, due to current economics. Solar will ONLY be viable as long as silly gov policies keep meddling to level the playing field. At some point Solar will be very cheap (and 100% of components and technology will be supplied from outside USA) AND the solar farms in USA will be owned by foreign investors (as are much of the wind farms). The only energy money from these farms that stays in USA is minimal taxes and land rents. (+ minimal maint). Profits flow out of USA. Too bad, as these should be COMMUNITY OWNED by REA, Co-ops and such. That way the $$ would fuel and improve the local economy and infrastructure.

I did enjoy dabbling in solar while in CO in the 1970's (and ever since). It has potential, but USA has no energy policy, thus EVERYTHING is driven by CURRENT economics. (Including Renewables when the Gov gets the great idea of subsidizing). THAT KILLS the affordability and commercial cost structures and especially kills economic incentives for companies to drive down production costs and make WW competitive products. Trust me... the USA (pin head politicians) are gonna screw up Alternative Energy and China will trounce us (as they currently are). They have bought up much of ours and Europe's technology and are very happy to copy it for their own benefit. (They have come in to USA and bought Alternative Energy plants and dismantled them and shipped them home, then sold the land (but they usually KEEP the land a rent it to higher $$ revenue stream).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2012, 02:43 PM
 
Location: Pueblo - Colorado's Second City
12,102 posts, read 20,355,007 times
Reputation: 4131
Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthRabbit View Post
personally, I will predict a new barrage of NG turbines, due to current economics. Solar will ONLY be viable as long as silly gov policies keep meddling to level the playing field. At some point Solar will be very cheap
The tipping point will be around 2020 as the study by MIT shows. At that point the cost for solar will be 1/2 of what it is for fossil fuels and you will see a huge investment from the private sector to build solar fields in Colorado. In the next decade the cost of solar will continue to go down and the industry will really boom.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthRabbit View Post
(and 100% of components and technology will be supplied from outside USA) AND the solar farms in USA will be owned by foreign investors (as are much of the wind farms). The only energy money from these farms that stays in USA is minimal taxes and land rents. (+ minimal maint). Profits flow out of USA. Too bad, as these should be COMMUNITY OWNED by REA, Co-ops and such. That way the $$ would fuel and improve the local economy and infrastructure.
That is why I support tax subsidizes on the local and state level to try and get many of the solar production facilities and owners of the solar farms to locate in the state of Colorado and from my biased perspective Pueblo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthRabbit View Post
I did enjoy dabbling in solar while in CO in the 1970's (and ever since). It has potential, but USA has no energy policy, thus EVERYTHING is driven by CURRENT economics. (Including Renewables when the Gov gets the great idea of subsidizing). THAT KILLS the affordability and commercial cost structures and especially kills economic incentives for companies to drive down production costs and make WW competitive products. Trust me... the USA (pin head politicians) are gonna screw up Alternative Energy and China will trounce us (as they currently are). They have bought up much of ours and Europe's technology and are very happy to copy it for their own benefit. (They have come in to USA and bought Alternative Energy plants and dismantled them and shipped them home, then sold the land (but they usually KEEP the land a rent it to higher $$ revenue stream).
The study by MIT takes all that into account as this is a technology issue not a political one. By 2020 the cost for solar will be less and then everyone will be singing a different tune.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top