U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [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 06-08-2017, 10:02 AM
 
1,543 posts, read 765,088 times
Reputation: 6692

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCresident2014 View Post
I'm surprised at the negative response to this proposal. If you're going to have a freestanding structure in an area full of sunlight, why not add solar panels?

Regarding vandalism by residents of foreign countries, if the US is so poor at protecting itself from violent aggression against government structures, then we have a much bigger issue that only underscores a need for a wall. Is our country so weak that we are afraid to do something that benefits our country (lots and lots of solar panels) simply because they may be destroyed by nationals of another country. Yikes.

Also, I'm surprised that we finally have a government proposal that ISN'T full of financial waste and people act as though it is some evil enterprise to derive a profit. I would LOVE it if more of our government projects had revenue-producing elements to defray the costs.

Is our "us against him" mentality so strong that we are going to treat every single proposal as instantly terrible?
That "freestanding structure" needs to be scrapped. First of all it has a very negative environmental impact, and second, the cost would be $67 Billion to US tax payers. As far as solar panels, less than 2 percent of the U.S. population live within 40 miles of the Mexico border, so how would the electricity be transported to other households? Transmission lines could be built, but those are costly. Solar panels also degrade and need to be replaced and, even under optimal conditions, they operate at approx. 20% efficiency. So let's just say NO to the costly, ridiculous border wall idea. Especially since there has been a 90% drop in illegal entry into the US in the past decade.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-08-2017, 10:57 AM
 
1,516 posts, read 958,843 times
Reputation: 3480
Quote:
Originally Posted by CatTX View Post
That "freestanding structure" needs to be scrapped. First of all it has a very negative environmental impact, and second, the cost would be $67 Billion to US tax payers. As far as solar panels, less than 2 percent of the U.S. population live within 40 miles of the Mexico border, so how would the electricity be transported to other households? Transmission lines could be built, but those are costly. Solar panels also degrade and need to be replaced and, even under optimal conditions, they operate at approx. 20% efficiency. So let's just say NO to the costly, ridiculous border wall idea. Especially since there has been a 90% drop in illegal entry into the US in the past decade.
I find it hard to believe that miles and miles of solar panels would have an overall net negative environmental impact. You say that 2% of the population lives within 40 miles of the border, but where are you coming up with 40 miles as your cutoff for whether a plan should be scrapped? Transmission lines can transmit power hundreds of miles. San Diego, an entire city, is essentially touching the border wall.

Is $67 billion a lot of money for such a great addition to the power generation and security to our nation? We spend billions a year supporting other nations, why can't we spend some to help ourselves?

Solar panels have twenty year warranties, so your comment about degradation are a straw man at best. They produce enough power to pay for themselves (using today's prices per KW) at least three times over during their lifetime, but if (WHEN) inflation sets in, they are an even better investment since they are installed using today dollars but offset power costs in future dollars.

Regarding efficiency- what does that have to do with the price of bananas in Panama? A 200 watt panel produces 200 watts. Efficiency is just an academic figure that companies focus on because increasing panel efficiency will bring production costs down in the future, but I've NEVER heard of someone using panel efficiency as a reason not to buy something.

If you say that the border wall plan is "costly and ridiculous", then please explain to me why solar farms exist anywhere? I'm sure that private companies would jump at the opportunity to install and run the border wall solar farm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2017, 11:26 AM
 
Location: Concord NC
1,727 posts, read 1,023,896 times
Reputation: 4754
The desert itself is sometimes it's own Solar-powered "wall".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2017, 11:35 AM
 
Location: SLC, UT
1,571 posts, read 2,276,273 times
Reputation: 3848
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCresident2014 View Post
I find it hard to believe that miles and miles of solar panels would have an overall net negative environmental impact. You say that 2% of the population lives within 40 miles of the border, but where are you coming up with 40 miles as your cutoff for whether a plan should be scrapped? Transmission lines can transmit power hundreds of miles. San Diego, an entire city, is essentially touching the border wall.

Is $67 billion a lot of money for such a great addition to the power generation and security to our nation? We spend billions a year supporting other nations, why can't we spend some to help ourselves?

Solar panels have twenty year warranties, so your comment about degradation are a straw man at best. They produce enough power to pay for themselves (using today's prices per KW) at least three times over during their lifetime, but if (WHEN) inflation sets in, they are an even better investment since they are installed using today dollars but offset power costs in future dollars.

Regarding efficiency- what does that have to do with the price of bananas in Panama? A 200 watt panel produces 200 watts. Efficiency is just an academic figure that companies focus on because increasing panel efficiency will bring production costs down in the future, but I've NEVER heard of someone using panel efficiency as a reason not to buy something.

If you say that the border wall plan is "costly and ridiculous", then please explain to me why solar farms exist anywhere? I'm sure that private companies would jump at the opportunity to install and run the border wall solar farm.
A wall isn't secure. Building a wall, no matter how big, will not be a "great addition" to security in our nation. Even years ago back when there were no airplanes, the great wall of China couldn't stop the Mongols, and today, with planes, drones, and - you know, shovels - a wall won't stop anyone. It's ridiculous to think it will.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2017, 11:45 AM
 
Location: Gilbert, AZ
3,143 posts, read 1,933,065 times
Reputation: 3266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldjensens View Post
Solar panels are valuable, they will not last a week.
Exactly! PV panels would have to be on south side of the wall, i.e., the Mexico side. Then we'd need a wall to protect the solar wall, haha!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2017, 11:48 AM
 
Location: Shawnee-on-Delaware, PA
3,883 posts, read 3,558,903 times
Reputation: 7160
Quote:
Originally Posted by CatTX View Post
First of all it has a very negative environmental impact, and second, the cost would be $67 Billion to US tax payers.

Where did you get $67 billion from? I've heard $20 billion, and even that was meant to be a scary number. Do they just keep adding a few billion every week to make it even scarier?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2017, 11:52 AM
 
1,516 posts, read 958,843 times
Reputation: 3480
Quote:
Originally Posted by hikernut View Post
Exactly! PV panels would have to be on south side of the wall, i.e., the Mexico side. Then we'd need a wall to protect the solar wall, haha!
So you're saying that the US is incapable of defending itself against foreign attacks on US soil? Sad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtab4994 View Post
Where did you get $67 billion from? I've heard $20 billion, and even that was meant to be a scary number. Do they just keep adding a few billion every week to make it even scarier?
Ha, good point! Honestly, after $1b (or even $1m), I don't think it really matters to anyone. It's all just filed away in everyone's head as "insert generic large number here". Meanwhile, whether it's $20b or $67b, these are immaterial to our annual budget which itself is well into the trillions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2017, 11:53 AM
 
Location: State of Transition
78,030 posts, read 69,950,573 times
Reputation: 75799
Quote:
Originally Posted by tangelag View Post
Sure, that way he can charge for electricity...another way to fill his coffers. This idea clearly appropriated from already in-place cooperatives in Mexico and the US that are sharing solar grids...
Yup. Monetizing the border wall. Brilliant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2017, 12:10 PM
 
Location: Gilbert, AZ
3,143 posts, read 1,933,065 times
Reputation: 3266
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCresident2014 View Post
So you're saying that the US is incapable of defending itself against foreign attacks on US soil? Sad.
Stealing panels would be theft, not an attack.

What's sad is we can't/won't keep people from living and working here illegally. Seeing some solar panels go missing is trivial compared to what we're tolerating as a country today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2017, 03:26 PM
 
9,203 posts, read 11,691,172 times
Reputation: 14424
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCresident2014 View Post
So you're saying that the US is incapable of defending itself against foreign attacks on US soil? Sad.
Unless we deploy the military in strength, our civilian forces are incapable of protecting our borders. This is not a disparaging remark to those agencies, just the task has become such a political sound stage that they spend more on the political aspects than they do on actual border security. As such, solar panels would never survive a week before being stolen or vandalized.
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:

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 > General Forums > Green Living
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:56 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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