U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 09-11-2019, 05:09 AM
 
31,264 posts, read 15,959,582 times
Reputation: 20677

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
I use 13 watt LED bulbs...They are equivalent to 60 watt incandescent bulbs. I have 22 of them that have been in use for five years, and none have burnt out...

Lets do the math...LEDS 22 x 13 = 286 watts....Incandescent 22 x 60 = 1320 watts...I guess I need a few more bulbs.
You keep 22 lights on full time?

If you have 10 on for 12 houes, it's roughly 6 Kwh in savings a day.

How many miles is 6 Kwh going to get you in an EV? Maybe 20 miles? That would get me to work, but not home or anywhere else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-11-2019, 05:14 AM
 
14,179 posts, read 9,647,376 times
Reputation: 4625
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
Without government subsidies, it's just not worth the cost to the majority of homeowners.
Not worth it for me since my elect bill is only around 100 a month . I get almost 100% sunshine everyday now that we don't have winters anymore in FL, so would get all the sun i need if i went solar. But it would cost 30k to get it up and running.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 05:16 AM
 
31,264 posts, read 15,959,582 times
Reputation: 20677
BTW, I want solar power on my home if there is ever a breakthrough that makes it worth it (or I suppose if grid power were to significantly increase in price). I also want an EV.

I changed to LED bulbs way early on, because in Houston, yyou use the hell out of your AC, and by replacing 120 tiny heaters in my house to "slightly warmers", I could keep my home cooler for less cost while not having to constantly change burned out incandescent bulbs.

Every couple of years, I run the solar numbers, and every couple of years I find it still isn't worth it.

Now, if I make a small fortune on my startup and build my dream house, it will have solar, because I won't have to worry about the extra costs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 06:40 AM
 
Location: Ontario, NY
2,770 posts, read 6,306,675 times
Reputation: 2841
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkcarguy View Post
-Utility company caps. The same family friend says there is a cap on his energy buyback, where if he was to add another panel setup and produce more power the most they would pay him is $300ish a month. I thought this was pretty bogus as the utility will obviously be able to "sell" his excess energy.
Maybe, Maybe not. Electricity can't be stored, at least not cheaply or efficiently. If there is no buyer ?(ie demand) for that KW you produce, it just disappears. Power plants have the same issue, If they produce say 500 Megawatts, but the demand at the time they produce the power is only 450 Megawatts, 50 Megawatts of power go unsold and just disappear fairly quickly. They try to minimize these loses by estimating the demand and produce just enough power to satisfy demand and not waste too much by over producing. Also most power plants can't produce more or less power like a gasoline generator on demand, It takes days to get a Nuclear Power plant up to temperature, the generator spun up and synched to the grid. A natural gas plant takes about 2 hours to get online from a cold start, because the water and lines have to be preheated before running the generator.


In short, if the power company can't "sell" the extra KW's your producing, they are certainly not going to pay you for them.

Last edited by TechGromit; 09-11-2019 at 06:48 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 06:40 AM
 
46,607 posts, read 18,552,787 times
Reputation: 19394
The big and secret scam of solar cells is this. It takes more energy to produce them, than they will ever deliver in productive electricity.



So without massive involvement by the government, they fail as a way to generate energy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 06:51 AM
 
Location: Jewel Lake (Sagle) Idaho
27,978 posts, read 17,946,495 times
Reputation: 15970
Quote:
Originally Posted by cruitr View Post
No I didn't turn down the subsidies. I just didn't apply for them yet. Free money is good. I'll take every free dollar I can get.
You mean welfare extorted from other taxpayers? There is no such thing as "free".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 09:39 AM
 
Location: Ontario, NY
2,770 posts, read 6,306,675 times
Reputation: 2841
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
The big and secret scam of solar cells is this. It takes more energy to produce them, than they will ever deliver in productive electricity.

This is based on an old study when Solar Panels were new technology. A solar panel correctly installed, in an ideal location like Arizona, the energy break even point is 2 to 3 years. A solar panel produces enough energy to equal the energy production cost in this time. In a worst case scenario, where it's point the wrong direction, in an area say Alaska or UK where the sun doesn't shine as long, the payback is 6 to 8 years. Since Solar panels are guaranteed to produce there energy output rating for 20 to 25 years, ideally that gives at least 10 fold payback. It also important to remember a solar panel can last a lot longer, just that the energy output will drop over time as the panel ages.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 09:55 AM
 
Location: Eastern NC
19,883 posts, read 18,019,403 times
Reputation: 17712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Sure does. What are your thoughts on subsidies?
Get rid of them all. No subsidies allowed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 10:15 AM
 
Location: Seattle
1,602 posts, read 339,220 times
Reputation: 1553
I'm not sure renewable energy sources even need subsidies any more. They're about to clobber natural gas.

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-envir...newable-energy

So yeah, I think we should consider phasing out all the energy subsidies by 2035 and use the money for research.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 12:54 PM
 
46,607 posts, read 18,552,787 times
Reputation: 19394
Quote:
Originally Posted by TechGromit View Post
This is based on an old study when Solar Panels were new technology. ...
Nope.


Oh, and when do you think they were invented? No google plz.
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

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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

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