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.
Bringing NEW industry to America will bring NEW jobs. What could possibly be better than Green Economy initiatives to create real job growth (with real living wages), clean energies generated in our own country, and a self-sustaining economy for America?
You and your friend are awesome! btw, what is "PV" "EV"?
And someone else (sorry name eludes me) on this thread suggested placing solar panels on electric cars (or something like that, I'll find thread)
Next best thing, car wash goes green (and gets green tax deductions)
Kingman Car Wash Goes Green to Save Money (http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/business/solar-car-wash-09192010 - broken link) "Kingman Car Wash Goes Green to Save Money
Updated: Sunday, 19 Sep 2010, 11:25 PM MDT
Published : Sunday, 19 Sep 2010, 11:23 PM MDTKINGMAN, Ariz. - Dozens of solar panels were installed on the Wash Me car wash, which generate up to 30 megawatts of power.
The owner says it's cut their monthly power bill by about a third.
Federal tax deductions helped pay for half of the $440,000 installation costs.
The energy savings will help the business pay off the balance over the next decade."
You and your friend are awesome! btw, what is "PV" "EV"?
And someone else (sorry name eludes me) on this thread suggested placing solar panels on electric cars (or something like that, I'll find thread)
newonecoming and newonecoming2 are one and the same just I lost my pass word. PV= pphoto voltayic or how ever you spell it. And EV= electoric Vehicle. Not enough room an the cars for that It really makes economic sence to do it the way i'm talking about but it steps on big oil's tows so it probably wont happen.
Green cars such as the Chevy Volt are bound to be abject failures with their $40,000 price tags, so there's no reason to believe that the push for 'green jobs' in this country will be attainable without trillions of dollars in funny money from Uncle Ben's printing press.
If green jobs were profitable and made business sense, companies such as ADM, Weyerhauser, Caterpillar & tons of others would have jumped in two decades ago.
Green cars such as the Chevy Volt are bound to be abject failures with their $40,000 price tags, so there's no reason to believe that the push for 'green jobs' in this country will be attainable without trillions of dollars in funny money from Uncle Ben's printing press.
If green jobs were profitable and made business sense, companies such as ADM, Weyerhauser, Caterpillar & tons of others would have jumped in two decades ago.
The way that most green jobs are set up don't make that much sense. But the way that I'm talking about doing it does make economic sense. It just pisses off the oil companies. What you do is put a $1 surcharge on fuel for cars. You use this money to make a consumer subsidy for the purchase of photo voltaic and electric cars. This would make enough money available for about 1,000,000 units a year. That is at a subsidy level of about $70k per car and a unit price of about $100k. The subsidy would be a co-pay plus the rest % domestic content. The brake even point when we are taking less out of the economy than we are putting back in, in reduced oil imports is about 8 years. After that we will be money ahead for doing it.
I stated at the beginning of this thread that I am against mercury lightbulbs, of course they are NOT green energy!
...you're putting more mercury into the atmosphere by not using them. Understand? You're focusing on the mercury in the bulb as opposed to the big picture which is also what you're doing through most of your posts.
The way that most green jobs are set up don't make that much sense. But the way that I'm talking about doing it does make economic sense. It just pisses off the oil companies. What you do is put a $1 surcharge on fuel for cars. You use this money to make a consumer subsidy for the purchase of photo voltaic and electric cars. This would make enough money available for about 1,000,000 units a year. That is at a subsidy level of about $70k per car and a unit price of about $100k. The subsidy would be a co-pay plus the rest % domestic content. The brake even point when we are taking less out of the economy than we are putting back in, in reduced oil imports is about 8 years. After that we will be money ahead for doing it.
The first mistake is assuming that a government subsidy will cause significant permanent change. It usually doesn't.
Case in point - post oil embargo "Energy Tax Credits" for all manner of alternative energy.
That was a big bust... for the taxpayers. *(You do not see energy efficient, solar water heater equipped, superinsulated developments sprouting up... after 30 years!)
Second mistake - subsidizing a change to electric cars will NOT solve the intrinsic problem with automobiles. They are far more wasteful of resources than rail based land transport. *(Automobiles have several inherent problems - a huge requirement in surface area - inability to scale up in capacity - and despite their convenience, are far underused and expensive for the task they do.)
There is no magical or legislative way to make it more efficient to wrap 2 tons of steel and motor around a single occupant, and move him from point A to point B. Nor can you make rubber tire on pavement more efficient than steel wheel on steel rail.
If all subsidies and taxes were removed from the decision making process, it would be painfully obvious that the more desirable goal would be to restore rail based transportation, nationwide.
The simple fact that when you have a finite energy budget, you want to move the most people and cargo for that amount. And with a finite amount of land, it is patently absurd to try to resolve traffic congestion by building ever more superhighways - cars require too much clearance space for safety. In contrast, a single track has the carrying capacity equivalent to 9 lanes of superhighway - or more... merely by increasing train length, frequency of service, and speed increases. A four track right of way has the capacity to replace a 36 lane superhighway.
That means only one thing - electric traction steel wheel on steel rail is our best solution at this time.
Instead of wasting (expletive deleted) funds on propping up a dying mode of transportation, America could be laying the tracks for the future.
Of course, our "fearless leaders" are actually frighten followers - the real change has to come from YOU, not the government, nor with tax payer funding.
Same democratic snow jo on passing their bills . Allt aht accomplished was a huge chinese credit card bill with nothing in return for the cost. Enjoy your new economy. No jobs;massive debt of 1.2 trillio in 11 months. What you see is what you get for the Obama revolution on taking control of your future.Wait until the bill comes for the spending now.Rememeber the old massive infrastruture stimulus bill tahtwould provide jobs to keep unemployemnt under 8% ;asure growth.redistribute wealth and secure the future. Well this is it.
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.
btw, what is "PV" "EV"?
Car wash goes green
(and gets green tax deductions)
It really makes economic sence to do it the way i'm talking about but it steps on big oil's tows so it probably wont happen.
