Wish we had more sunshine around these parts to make it worth the investment!

It makes Dave feel all warm and fuzzy though.

Ain't going to work around my house, what I need is some minature turbines on my downspouts.

Tell those oils sands and tar sands guys about that "too expensive" to extract it schit...solar is getting cheaper every day, and will continue to do so...your corporate masters who love oil and killing brown people will have to get along with it sooner or later.

Fish on...

Todd

That should be enough energy to charge your cell phone. :>)

Wind will work just fine as a supplement to keep my toaster going.

I'm waiting for this State to declare that they own the sunshine, just like the rain. That will take care of the "profits". I can see the old hag drooling at the possibilities.

I'm not especially against solar power..... but it has to be feasible first. The battery issues alone are not a minor issue.

The grid can be the battery.

When Hankster discovers the solar foil hat it will be repel and absorb...repel and absorb. What a nightmare.

Here we go DV.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/8380...-potential.html

It's not so much a "need sunshine in the PNW" problem, it's a "need efficient transmission to get it from New Mexico" problem. That's the pipeline we should be investing in if you ask me.

I live near Port Townsend......Greenie capitol of the Pacific NW....I've toured houses with solar power. I've asked the cost and the projected break even point.......at this time you have to just have money to throw away for the "looks"......no way is it worth the cost....presently.

Since there's no heating cost in HI, that stretches the payback even farther into the future I'd guess. Takes a couple decades or more around here I've heard. Just hearsay tho.

There are other considerations as well such as appliances....at least for those who wish to be totally off the grid. Water delivery can also be a problem depending on where you are considering converting to solar power. Well pumps don't like to run on less than 220v......so you're stuck with either a public water source or a rain water collection system.....but with La Nina in our immediate future that might work out OK. A lot of considerations and presently with our cheap electricity rates, it's a tough one to beat.

Here's more bad news for the conservative America haters.

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/24/first-solar-claims-1-a-watt-industry-milestone/

Solar will have a tough time competing here where we have some of the world's cheapest electric rates. But in many places with high priced diesel or coal power plants and with much more sun, solar shines. When we were in Alice Springs, Australia we saw that most homes had at least some solar power.


I don't see solar ever becoming our primary source of power but it may save us a lot of dependence on foreign oil and cause much less pollution than coal powered electricity. I see that as a win win.

Don't disagree in the least, Dave. I did a research paper on the feasibility on this side of the mountains (some time ago). Couldn't make it pencil out, but on the East side, different story.....much closer to feasible.

We are a ways out yet, but we may get there. My wife and I are very low impact users, so it may not become a reality in my lifetime, but who knows?

I think that the solar hot water heaters might be the way to go around here, but going beyond that isn't very feasable.

Slab... Germany has a climate very similar to ours here on the "wet" side of the mountains. Solar power is now knocking on the door to take over as the primary source of electrical generation there.

Are you sayin' the Germans are more innovative than we are?

I have heard the same thing. They claim our climate is not a real deterent.

No, what i'm saying is that we have cheap electricity.

edit: In fact, what I stated earlier I believe is an error....I haven't looked at my electric bill in a long time, but the .10/watt I stated earlier, is more likely .10/kilowatthour. Which means you can turn on a 100 watt light bulb and let it run 10 hours for a dime. Compare that to the solar cost.

My brother installed solar atop his place in San Jose and it paid for itself within three years.

And that's AFTER it was done heating his house, pool, and hot tub. Too bad he had to sell it for a fixer-upper in La Jolla, because I was getting spoiled by the good Dim Sum in SFO and Fenton's in OAK.

Food in SD County kinda blows. Too many hillbilly sailors from Bumfuck, Arkansas.

WA is a better bet for wind turbines, because of the low azimuth of the sun 9 months out of the year and just generally crappier weather.

I'm not opposed to the idea of solar power. The issue is that it takes a 75% subsidy to make it feasible on a large scale. This is based on the Chicago Sun Times article.

Why Is the U.S. Losing the Green Race?

Americans pride themselves on being global leaders in innovation. So why is the nation lagging behind China and Germany on renewable energy?

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/201...le-energy-model

The answer is simple, conservatives hate America.

A fellow on a fly fishing BB who lives near Wenatchee reports that he lives off the grid and uses solar power exclusively. It costs him a lot to be "green" since Chelan PUD is one of the four cheapest electric rates in the US. Even there he says he has been unable to break even on cost because the life span of his storage batteries and some other essential parts required replacement before he could break even. Extremely important, he said, is that anyone thinking of going off the grid needs to be committed to reducing their overall electric consumption by about 90%. He heats with wood in the winter, has solar design for as much shade as possible in the hot summer, etc. He didn't define break even, but if it means equal to the costs from his local utility, it's doubly hard for him since Chelan costs about half what most west side utilities charge.

Sg

Funny how those who oppose solar energy on the basis of government subsidies, also favor nuclear, which is by far the most subsidized form of energy on the planet.
PNW rate payers are still paying for the shuttered WPPS and Trojan nuclear power plants.

No just her...hubby is staying behind with the Goats.

No solar. have an old friend (ex- hippy) that has been installing solar panels for over 20 years. almost 100% are used to offset the cost of a swimming pool or hot tub. I guess it saves $ in the long run...

Hank,

All new energy sources are considerably more expensive per MWH than the existing base. The cheapest of those is coal power - provided you do not factor in any environmental or health costs. I take it coal is your preference for incremental energy additions to utility portfolios? It should be good for your X-ray business.

Sg

Well, my monthly numbers are higher than yours.....so there!

But then I'll include everything. Electric furnace here.....well water (artisian, but use pump).....septic......etc. Electric all the way. When the power goes out I can switch the important stuff over to my gas generator (6KW) and run the well pump, lights, microwave, coffee maker, computers, tv....but not the other 220v stuff. If the power is out long enough, I'll plug in a room heater (I think that has happened only twice in 15 or so years). Running the generator costs about $20/day with today's gas prices.

Typical costs about $100/mo in the Summer, about twice that in the Winter. Solar isn't even a thought for me......that's how far away we are right now. I'll leave the look good to those who need it. Reminds me of the addicts who play Bingo at the Casino...."Oh I won $100!".....unsaid is, "It only took me $500 to do it!"

I have an electrical converter in the garage. It works great converting neocons into liberals but my bills are high.

Up here in Sno Co we had some of the cheapest rates in the nation until GW's pal Kenny Lay and Enron gamed everyone.

I wish some of his investors and employees would have gotten to pull the switch on old Kenny, instead of him going out somewhat peacefully.