Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Hawaii
 [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 07-08-2017, 02:36 PM
 
1,581 posts, read 2,086,013 times
Reputation: 1875

Advertisements

Being a bit of an "environut", my primary reason for going solar was to better our environment. I always thought it was barbaric and uncivilized to burn oil to generate virtually all the electricity consumed in our state.

The benefits to our environment and human health by transitioning to solar from burning oil are clearly plentiful and far-reaching. There are a million unbiased studies out there that prove these benefits. Nothing to discuss there.

But this thread got me curious as to how many barrels of oil I've actually prevented from being purchased from (i.e. Indonesia sucking hard earned dollars away from Hawaii to their country), transported across thousands of miles of ocean, stored, refined, transported again and then burned very inefficiently to generate electricity which is then distributed across an archaic, virtually defunct "un-smart" grid of step up and step down transformers, switchgear, circuit breakers and unsightly power lines.

According to the math (cumulative production of PV systems I've installed)... I've reduced the importation of roughly 600 barrels of oil over the last 11 years. Assuming roughly $75 per barrel as an average cost over the last 11 years + $6 for each barrel for transportation and cost of hedging, I've directly saved the state from force-exporting nearly $50,000 of hard-earned money in the form of energy costs in my HECO bills. This is after-tax money 100% funneled out of our economy and into another country. Poof. Gone. Absolutely zero benefit to any resident in Hawaii (or our country for that matter). Unlike costs tied to state-based oil refining and local distribution, generation, etc which one can argue does have a benefit to our local and national economy (local jobs, mainland firm operations), each barrel of oil paid for is a 100% loss to our economy. There is no recovery for that money, ever. While oil prices are much lower today then they were in the past... even lowest in all history after adjusting for inflation, oil consumption still represents a significant portion of your electric bill.

But the good news is that in 10-15 years the vast majority of electricity consumed here will be produced by solar and stored in batteries for evening and inclement weather use. Inside of 15-20 years, all oil-fired plants will be 100% phased out... well ahead of our 2045 100% renewables state goal. This is exciting times and I'm proud to be part of what got this transition sped up one thousand fold. And most importantly, if it weren't for the state tax credits available over the years, we would not be in this transitory period today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-08-2017, 07:01 PM
 
Location: Puna, Hawaii
4,373 posts, read 4,792,598 times
Reputation: 7895
" Tax credits are meant to change behavior."

Tax credits are meant to appease the lobbyists who paid the politicians for them.

"This is exciting times and I'm proud to be part of what got this transition sped up one thousand fold."

I agree. I think that technology will deliver what the solar industry has been promising for 40 years within my lifetime. The efficiency of solar panels is high enough to make it happen, we just need a cost-effective energy storage solution for everything to fall into place. Our neighbors are 100% off grid. That sounds great on paper but it doesn't sound great when I hear their generator droning on for hours and hours when we've had a few days with no sun. I read that 1 hour running a generator makes as much greenhouse gas as driving a car 20 miles.

"My solar system along with others mean we don't have to keep building more power plants and infrastructure"

Actually, the opposite is true, which is why HELCO changed the solar rates. The existing energy distribution scheme is to transmit high voltage over long distances. There is no cost-effective way to scale up a home's solar system to enter the grid. Any power not shared with immediate neighbors is effectively wasted. I don't know what HELCO uses but traditional overhead lines are over 765,000 volts. The 120 (or whatever) coming from your grid tie can't be transmitted very far before the resistance in the copper eats it up. The cheapest way to avoid building more power plants and infrastructure is conservation. Adding rooftop solar adds infrastructure, and increases prices for all. I'm not saying the end-game isn't worth it (less fossil fuel footprint) but let's not live in a dream world. Solar only exists because of tax subsidies, because it's one of the most expensive sources of energy. The most effective method found to decrease energy prices in Hawaii is mandating solar hot water (which is several times in magnitude more energy efficient than heating water with PV) which is why it was adopted into building code. This is an example of good energy conservation that doesn't add to infrastructure costs and the payback for the homeowner is just a couple of years.

Last edited by terracore; 07-08-2017 at 07:29 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2017, 07:14 PM
 
Location: Kahala
12,120 posts, read 17,749,252 times
Reputation: 6175
Quote:
Originally Posted by terracore View Post

Tax credits are meant to appease the lobbyists who paid the politicians for them.
Hmmm- if you think lobbyists in the solar wield anywhere near the power of electric power companies you'd be highly mistaken.

The tax credits were born out of the energy policy act of 2005 and solar tax credits are only one of many initiatives as part of a broader energy policy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2017, 07:45 PM
 
Location: Puna, Hawaii
4,373 posts, read 4,792,598 times
Reputation: 7895
Quote:
Originally Posted by whtviper1 View Post
Hmmm- if you think lobbyists in the solar wield anywhere near the power of electric power companies you'd be highly mistaken.

The tax credits were born out of the energy policy act of 2005 and solar tax credits are only one of many initiatives as part of a broader energy policy.
Billionaires like George Soros and others are participants in the scheme:

SolarCity raises $305 million in deal advised by Soros' firm | Reuters

George Soros Bails Out Buddy Elon Musk | The Daily Caller

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ounts-the-most

SolarCity raises $403 million in George Soros hedge fund-advised deal | afr.com

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kerryad.../#3ae3866492ad

I'm not mistaken. I'm just following the money. Turn off your TV.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2017, 09:03 PM
 
Location: Kahala
12,120 posts, read 17,749,252 times
Reputation: 6175
That's just chump change. What does that have to do with the energy act of 2005?

I'm actually surprised ANYONE would object to a solar tax credit.

How about mortgage deductions- put those in play also?

Last edited by whtviper1; 07-08-2017 at 09:21 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2017, 04:14 PM
 
Location: Puna, Hawaii
4,373 posts, read 4,792,598 times
Reputation: 7895
"I'm actually surprised ANYONE would object to a solar tax credit."

I don't object to them, in fact I used the credit for my solar hot water system, however I can understand the point of view that some people view them as a sort of corporate welfare for the companies that make and install the panels. Others have argued that it's a tax break for the wealthy because poor people can't afford to install PV systems. I'm sure Elon Musk adores the tax credits.

"How about mortgage deductions-"

Same argument. Benefits owners of McMansions more than the people the credit was designed to assist. Because I purchased a small home and put 20% down, the standard deduction on my taxes is higher than if I itemize, so the mortgage deduction is useless to me, however our wealthier neighbors in their larger more expensive houses are enjoying the credit.

https://www.fool.com/investing/gener...tax-deduc.aspx

"Unless you own a million-dollar home, the mortgage interest tax deduction won't save you much on your taxes."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2017, 04:31 PM
 
Location: Moku Nui, Hawaii
11,048 posts, read 23,877,314 times
Reputation: 10901
There's some programs out there which help folks who can't afford to buy the big systems get them, but I've not looked into the details. Since HECO/HELCO's change in policy about how they deal with electricity from the PV systems, there's been a whole lot less of them installed.

This isn't new, though. Back in the early to mid 80's there was a huge push for solar water systems and some PV then, too, although the inverters were still not the best. Most of the solar systems were for water. All kinds of new solar water installers popped up, folks were crazy busy installing systems everywhere. Then, they pulled the tax credits, things weren't as quick about the ROI and about 90% of those solar installers found other work.

Then they came up with the requirement for alternative energy to heat water on new construction and that increased sales and installations of solar water heating, at least for folks building new houses. Prior to that, when you built a new home, unless you had 100% electric appliances, there'd be a much higher connection charge to bring power to your house. Not sure if this was statewide but if you were rural and several poles away from already installed power, it was a lot less expensive initially to go 100% electric.

Then in the early 2000's the big tax breaks for rooftop PV were back and PV was popping up everywhere. Then, the grid got saturated in some areas, so that then limited the new installations and some of the new PV installers that had popped up went back to doing other things. Now, they've changed how the PV electricity is handled by HECO/HELCO so that's also cut back on new systems. Some of the tax credits are gone, too.

PV and solar water heating lasts a long time, though, so once these systems get installed, they'll be there until the next new wave of solar.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2017, 08:57 PM
 
Location: Kahala
12,120 posts, read 17,749,252 times
Reputation: 6175
Quote:
Originally Posted by terracore View Post

Same argument. Benefits owners of McMansions more than the people the credit was designed to assist. Because I purchased a small home and put 20% down, the standard deduction on my taxes is higher than if I itemize, so the mortgage deduction is useless to me, however our wealthier neighbors in their larger more expensive houses are enjoying the credit.

https://www.fool.com/investing/gener...tax-deduc.aspx

"Unless you own a million-dollar home, the mortgage interest tax deduction won't save you much on your taxes."
That's just plain an awful article. Really awful. A married couple only needs roughly a $1,000/month interest to start taking advantage of itemized deductions - which in Hawaii isn't much of a challenge. It's not just the mortgage interest - then you get to stack all the other deductions- property tax - state income tax - etc
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2017, 10:26 PM
 
Location: Puna, Hawaii
4,373 posts, read 4,792,598 times
Reputation: 7895
"That's just plain an awful article. Really awful. A married couple only needs roughly a $1,000/month interest to start taking advantage of itemized deductions"

Actually that proves the article's point exactly. My entire mortgage payment bundle (principal, interest, insurance, property taxes, fees, etc) is less than $1000. I don't know what $1,000/month on JUST the interest would look like on a property... for us it would mean buying a property outside our means. Why would I want OTHER taxpayers to subsidize that? Or more importantly, why am *I* subsidizing that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2017, 10:38 PM
 
Location: Kahala
12,120 posts, read 17,749,252 times
Reputation: 6175
Quote:
Originally Posted by terracore View Post

I don't know what $1,000/month on JUST the interest would look like on a property...
This is getting silly. A $400,000 traditional mortgage is going to have over $1,000/month in interest per month. I don't even need a calculator for that. A couple with a modest dual income and not anywhere being millionaires can afford that.

Sigh. I looked it up. A dual income $50k (roughly a median income) each earner can get that mortgage....

Last edited by whtviper1; 07-12-2017 at 10:58 PM..
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 > U.S. Forums > Hawaii
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top