Florida lawmakers do not care about solar energy, cleaner environment? (Orlando: sales, insurance)
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.
Slashdot
Article is called "
Floridian (and Southern) Governmental Regulations Are Unfriendly To Solar Power
Laws in Florida protect greedy polluting toxic electric corporate production over small businesses and entrepreneurs using solar energy to save that planet and save cost??? And no they want the profiteering polluting electric power instead?
When solar panels can save the air of Florida from pollution and there's so much solar potential since it is the "sunshine state ",
Why are people letting big corporate polluting power companies make money over the state being cleaner and better?
Are any Floridians going to fight the good fight for solar energy?
Slashdot
Article is called "
Floridian (and Southern) Governmental Regulations Are Unfriendly To Solar Power
Laws in Florida protect greedy polluting toxic electric corporate production over small businesses and entrepreneurs using solar energy to save that planet and save cost??? And no they want the profiteering polluting electric power instead?
When solar panels can save the air of Florida from pollution and there's so much solar potential since it is the "sunshine state ",
Why are people letting big corporate polluting power companies make money over the state being cleaner and better?
Are any Floridians going to fight the good fight for solar energy?
This has been discussed before. Essentially, it is the same as for every environmental concern in FL, and really every concern in general about quality of life in the state: residents are by and large apathetic. People move here in droves to forget about their problems and unplug from the world - they are not as involved in volunteering their time, or in being active in local legislature, as people in many other states. It's hard to get people to care, too - there are so many retirees and snowbirds who are only here half the year or just don't want to be bothered, and younger families are often struggling to survive financially and are too busy working to want to get involved. People only seem to get involved here when they are really angry with something - and that is only something that costs them money. So if the state were to decide to impose state income tax, or hurricane insurance rates skyrocket and residents think they can do something about it, then you'll hear from them. If it's a practical thing that improves quality of life and the future of the state (keep in mind a large section of the state's residents don't even plan to be around for the state's future and don't have children here), and involves inertia to change the status quo, people just don't want to put the work in.
That said, I agree with you, and if you want to get involved in the politics of it, I would be a voter to support it. But also, corporations are given more power in FL than people, so it will take a lot to overcome all that to get legislation passed. They run rampant, because they know they can and that residents are extremely apathetic - as long as they don't mention tax dollars, they can do whatever they want. It never seems to occur to residents how much all this costs us in the long term - or they realize it but don't care because they won't be here by then.
I'll add another one to your list, while you're at it. I have learned that FL, whose entire tourist economy depends on healthy beaches, has a very high threshold for allowable enterococcus levels - meaning fecal bacteria. They do not close beaches until the number of colonies reaches 105, which is extremely high. Many other states post a warning or close when the number is above 35! I recently got sick I think from going to a beach that I AFTER THE FACT found out had a colony number of 84! That was considered "moderate risk," but it was not posted anywhere and the beach was open. I think we as residents should push for our state to join the others in requiring levels less than 35, for the safety of all our swimmers and our economy - including the many immune compromised people who visit our beaches every year. Clearly, this is also a serious concern for our local environment flora and fauna also, who are harmed or destroyed by high levels of human fecal matter. We need to do better with how sewage is handled, where it is pumped, and what we will allow people to swim into. The future of our environment - and yes, thus our money - is at stake. But people don't want you to even talk about that - it's work, it will take money, it affects corporations ("job creators" - even though they are destroying the environment that creates the jobs in this state), and in the meantime it scares off tourists to admit we might have issues with beaches here.
I am considering getting involved with these issues myself. But, you know as well as I do politics in this state is a nasty game, that is threatening, cruel, and can even get violent. Only the egomaniacs tend to get into it - because the attention is worth all the suffering to them. I just want the state to be clean and run efficiently - I don't want to actually use up my entire life and my current happiness to do so. I will consider it more as I live here longer, and perhaps have children here and thus more at stake. In the meantime though, I would vote for any measures that can help with some of the issues that hold us back from efficiency, and caring properly for our environment.
We are the "Sunshine State" after all - of anyone's going to have solar, you would think it would be us!
We also have an issue with having enough fresh water for all the people in the state, and gratuitous use for non-essentials added to that problem - I don't know of a great solution yet, but if anyone thinks of one that is financially doable, sustainable long-term, and environmentally responsible, please consider adding that idea to the list of things we should include in our local legislation! At the very least, I think high usage exponential increases in water charges would be a good idea - past a certain typical amount per household, you pay much higher rates, and past a really high number, you pay a ton. But that won't fix it all, we still don't have enough for everybody as the state population increases...
It has nothing to do with the politicians...it has everything to do with the people who elected the politicians. Educate those in your Sphere of influence, power is in numbers!
Check out other forums regarding solar power (sustainability, cost to produce, viability without subsidies, cost to install, electric companies and the states adding surcharges because they lose tax money when people don't buy electricity, etc).
A simple 'we need solar power' and ' people who don't accept solar are stupid' is extremely shallow and does not advance the argument.
As long as building more traditional power plants and fueling them is cheaper than solar energy, the majority of Florida residents won't care and will be happy. Most people care more about the bottom line on their electric bill than the environment, even though they might not want to admit it.
As long as building more traditional power plants and fueling them is cheaper than solar energy, the majority of Florida residents won't care and will be happy. Most people care more about the bottom line on their electric bill than the environment, even though they might not want to admit it.
I don't disagree, but it belies the greater problem that most people are foolish enough to expect a 'quick fix' to anything and everything.
There isn't one alternative power source that could replace the ones in practice currently, but gradual and varied investments add up in the long-term and people forget that. In a crude sense, such a gradual buildup would be better served if thought of as an environmental (as well as supplemental) 401k on energy. This way, over time not only is extra capacity added, but investments in innovation (due to a more reliably growing market) would be made. Arguing that since we don't presently have a cure-all we should maintain the status quo is asinine from the standpoint of logic, and that's being polite...
It's not that simple. You realize that solar power is subsidized by our federal tax dollars, right?
Are you familiar with FMPA FLorida Municipal Power Agency?
It's a statewide wholesale power agency that provides economies of scale to 20 individual community owned electric utilities. Like a car pool.
Each municipality has signed a LONG TERM contract and they are subsidizing each other, sharing operating expenses and more efficiencies.
It has NOTHING to do with "the state". These communities like MINE, in Vero Beach and also in the Keys and Orlando, have invested in their OWN power plants by projecting out 30 years. Some plants are new some are old like ours. We make economic and TAXING decisions based on projections of the future, the population, the efficiencies available. We can't "hope" that a certain percent will love solar. Are we going to government MANDATE that now?
And anyway plenty of our new houses have panels. (irony the guy who invented the solar cell at Bell Labs was from here)
Anybody can install solar panels RIGHT NOW.
But to suggest a big shift in PUBLIC power....from the entire state infrastructure you're talking massive economic changes. AND expenses. Running parallel "utility" companies?
When FL was in the BOOM electric was cheaper than in the BUST this decade and cities like mine are now complaining and recently wanted to get OUT of the contract and "stiff" their fellow members of FMPA. The talks have been going on for a long time and very controversial. One of our CDPs is actually suing to get OUT of the contract because they're upset their rates are higher based on lower usage.
Yes it may be lovely to just promise "clean energy" but it's not as simple as the LA TIMES makes it sound.
And of course, you have the problem of retrofitting all these houses that can actually get solar panels now if they wanted to.
Why aren't they?
It costs about $20,000 - $40,000 to INSTALL in a single house.
It's also pretty funny that NONE of those states with the solar panel energy sources have hurricanes except one. Louisiana. Because of Katrina.
And they have a class action law suit pending for deceptive practices, over promising the savings and under delivering, and not following state law about solar.
As an appraiser, we have had to analyze the costs and returns of "energy efficient" homes. Insulated Concrete Forms (ICF) construction cost 20-30% more, Zero market return when they go up on the market (paired sales) compared to similar aged conventional construction. Windmill generation, about a 50% return. Solar cells, maybe a 20% return -if lucky. Reason is that not only do you have such a high purchase and installation cost, you have damage from storms, possible roof deterioration, and a loss due to changes in technology.
Right now, solar is just not economical for 90+% of us without a LOT of government subsidies (direct subsidies, tax write-off, etc). Also consider that electric companies are starting to charge a surcharge for connections to homes with solar to make up for lost revenue.
You can reduce electric costs by better windows, radiant barrier, increased insulation a whole lot cheaper and efficiently than solar. Solar is the most inefficient method.
Essentially, it is the same as for every environmental concern in FL, and really every concern in general about quality of life in the state: residents are by and large apathetic. People move here in droves to forget about their problems and unplug from the world - they are not as involved in volunteering their time, or in being active in local legislature, as people in many other states. It's hard to get people to care, too - there are so many retirees and snowbirds who are only here half the year or just don't want to be bothered, and younger families are often struggling to survive financially and are too busy working to want to get involved. People only seem to get involved here when they are really angry with something - and that is only something that costs them money.
This....and as a result state government fueled by special interests generally runs amok and only when it comes to obvious loose change from state residents pockets does it become an issue people get their backs up about (i.e. toll road construction or sales tax increases), and they could largely care less about anything "environmental".
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.
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.
