Are you using solar to power your home?

[ChrisL]

I hear a lot of liberals praising solar power, saying it is reliable and affordable and they are wondering why EVERYONE isn't flocking to use it. I am just wondering how many of them are actually using it?

Do you use solar power to power your home? Yes or no.

 

[ChrisL]

Yeah, I get the feeling that very FEW liberals will answer this poll or even acknowledge it's existence. That is okay though because I will direct them here when I get an opportunity to do so.

 

[martybegan]

I hear a lot of liberals praising solar power, saying it is reliable and affordable and they are wondering why EVERYONE isn't flocking to use it. I am just wondering how many of them are actually using it?

Do you use solar power to power your home? Yes or no.

I live in NYC, where solar power is difficult. By me its a combination of the weather/climate limiting available sunlight and other buildings and trees limiting the locations that it would work.

However if I lived in a place like Arizona or Nevada I'd have my roof covered with the damn things, and I'm no progressive.

 

[ChrisL]

I hear a lot of liberals praising solar power, saying it is reliable and affordable and they are wondering why EVERYONE isn't flocking to use it. I am just wondering how many of them are actually using it?

Do you use solar power to power your home? Yes or no.

I live in NYC, where solar power is difficult. By me its a combination of the weather/climate limiting available sunlight and other buildings and trees limiting the locations that it would work.

However if I lived in a place like Arizona or Nevada I'd have my roof covered with the damn things, and I'm no progressive.

I hear it is quite expensive though, and I was arguing with liberals in a thread where I was saying the reason why it is not popular is because it is just not affordable. If they want people (most people) to use it, it has to be reliable and cheap. If not, then it will never replace what we have now.

 

[ChrisL]

What is hampering solar power has everything to do with cost. It is five to eleven times more expensive to produce electricity from the sun than it is from coal, hydro or nuclear sources. The first problem is with the cost of the technology:

• Solar panels use expensive semiconductor material to generate electricity directly from sunlight. Semiconductor factories need 'clean' manufacturing environments and are expensive to build & maintain.
  
  
  
• The efficiency of solar cells currently ranges from around 20% up to a top range of around 40%, although this continues to improve. The rest of the sunlight that strikes the panel is wasted as heat. More efficient photovoltaic cells have been discovered (up to 43% efficient - see How efficient is solar energy? - but these are still in relatively new and are expensive to manufacture).

Problems With Solar Energy

 

[Moonglow]

It has it's application like when living off the grid...

 

[martybegan]

I hear a lot of liberals praising solar power, saying it is reliable and affordable and they are wondering why EVERYONE isn't flocking to use it. I am just wondering how many of them are actually using it?

Do you use solar power to power your home? Yes or no.

I live in NYC, where solar power is difficult. By me its a combination of the weather/climate limiting available sunlight and other buildings and trees limiting the locations that it would work.

However if I lived in a place like Arizona or Nevada I'd have my roof covered with the damn things, and I'm no progressive.

I hear it is quite expensive though, and I was arguing with liberals in a thread where I was saying the reason why it is not popular is because it is just not affordable. If they want people (most people) to use it, it has to be reliable and cheap. If not, then it will never replace what we have now.

I think in places that get a ton of "shine" like desert or plains areas the up front cost is made up by the "up time". Couple it with a decent battery farm and in some places you could probably go off grid most of the time.

The biggest concern is that ironically the best places for shine time also have PV cells worst enemy; sand.

 

[martybegan]

What is hampering solar power has everything to do with cost. It is five to eleven times more expensive to produce electricity from the sun than it is from coal, hydro or nuclear sources. The first problem is with the cost of the technology:

• Solar panels use expensive semiconductor material to generate electricity directly from sunlight. Semiconductor factories need 'clean' manufacturing environments and are expensive to build & maintain.
  
  
  
• The efficiency of solar cells currently ranges from around 20% up to a top range of around 40%, although this continues to improve. The rest of the sunlight that strikes the panel is wasted as heat. More efficient photovoltaic cells have been discovered (up to 43% efficient - see How efficient is solar energy? - but these are still in relatively new and are expensive to manufacture).

Problems With Solar Energy

Here i think government subsidies are actually hampering development, because if they had to rely more on the market they would have more impetus to find cheaper materials and quicker and cheaper manufacturing processes. I'm sure that is happening, but when Uncle Sam is funding the R&D or even production there is less need for innovation.

 

[ChrisL]

I hear a lot of liberals praising solar power, saying it is reliable and affordable and they are wondering why EVERYONE isn't flocking to use it. I am just wondering how many of them are actually using it?

Do you use solar power to power your home? Yes or no.

I live in NYC, where solar power is difficult. By me its a combination of the weather/climate limiting available sunlight and other buildings and trees limiting the locations that it would work.

However if I lived in a place like Arizona or Nevada I'd have my roof covered with the damn things, and I'm no progressive.

I hear it is quite expensive though, and I was arguing with liberals in a thread where I was saying the reason why it is not popular is because it is just not affordable. If they want people (most people) to use it, it has to be reliable and cheap. If not, then it will never replace what we have now.

I think in places that get a ton of "shine" like desert or plains areas the up front cost is made up by the "up time". Couple it with a decent battery farm and in some places you could probably go off grid most of the time.

The biggest concern is that ironically the best places for shine time also have PV cells worst enemy; sand.

Most people don't have the money to put up is the bottom line. If they did, it would be taking off. It is not, and it is pretty simple to conclude that most people just find this unaffordable. There is also maintenance to think of. I don't know what that consists of.

 

[martybegan]

I hear a lot of liberals praising solar power, saying it is reliable and affordable and they are wondering why EVERYONE isn't flocking to use it. I am just wondering how many of them are actually using it?

Do you use solar power to power your home? Yes or no.

I live in NYC, where solar power is difficult. By me its a combination of the weather/climate limiting available sunlight and other buildings and trees limiting the locations that it would work.

However if I lived in a place like Arizona or Nevada I'd have my roof covered with the damn things, and I'm no progressive.

I hear it is quite expensive though, and I was arguing with liberals in a thread where I was saying the reason why it is not popular is because it is just not affordable. If they want people (most people) to use it, it has to be reliable and cheap. If not, then it will never replace what we have now.

I think in places that get a ton of "shine" like desert or plains areas the up front cost is made up by the "up time". Couple it with a decent battery farm and in some places you could probably go off grid most of the time.

The biggest concern is that ironically the best places for shine time also have PV cells worst enemy; sand.

Most people don't have the money to put up is the bottom line. If they did, it would be taking off. It is not, and it is pretty simple to conclude that most people just find this unaffordable. There is also maintenance to think of. I don't know what that consists of.

The type of person that can afford a nice spread of property and a ranch house somewhere in the desert can probably afford the cost of the panels.

The issue is always when activists propose a one size fits all solution to a problem.

And also in those areas the biggest power provider is a combo of hydro and nuclear, so they aren't even competing against coal and oil.

 

[ChrisL]

I hear a lot of liberals praising solar power, saying it is reliable and affordable and they are wondering why EVERYONE isn't flocking to use it. I am just wondering how many of them are actually using it?

Do you use solar power to power your home? Yes or no.

I live in NYC, where solar power is difficult. By me its a combination of the weather/climate limiting available sunlight and other buildings and trees limiting the locations that it would work.

However if I lived in a place like Arizona or Nevada I'd have my roof covered with the damn things, and I'm no progressive.

I hear it is quite expensive though, and I was arguing with liberals in a thread where I was saying the reason why it is not popular is because it is just not affordable. If they want people (most people) to use it, it has to be reliable and cheap. If not, then it will never replace what we have now.

I think in places that get a ton of "shine" like desert or plains areas the up front cost is made up by the "up time". Couple it with a decent battery farm and in some places you could probably go off grid most of the time.

The biggest concern is that ironically the best places for shine time also have PV cells worst enemy; sand.

Most people don't have the money to put up is the bottom line. If they did, it would be taking off. It is not, and it is pretty simple to conclude that most people just find this unaffordable. There is also maintenance to think of. I don't know what that consists of.

The type of person that can afford a nice spread of property and a ranch house somewhere in the desert can probably afford the cost of the panels.

The issue is always when activists propose a one size fits all solution to a problem.

And also in those areas the biggest power provider is a combo of hydro and nuclear, so they aren't even competing against coal and oil.

That's the point. Solar power isn't a viable option for MOST people. There are a lot more poor people and lower middle class people than wealthy people.

 

[martybegan]

I live in NYC, where solar power is difficult. By me its a combination of the weather/climate limiting available sunlight and other buildings and trees limiting the locations that it would work.

However if I lived in a place like Arizona or Nevada I'd have my roof covered with the damn things, and I'm no progressive.

I hear it is quite expensive though, and I was arguing with liberals in a thread where I was saying the reason why it is not popular is because it is just not affordable. If they want people (most people) to use it, it has to be reliable and cheap. If not, then it will never replace what we have now.

I think in places that get a ton of "shine" like desert or plains areas the up front cost is made up by the "up time". Couple it with a decent battery farm and in some places you could probably go off grid most of the time.

The biggest concern is that ironically the best places for shine time also have PV cells worst enemy; sand.

Most people don't have the money to put up is the bottom line. If they did, it would be taking off. It is not, and it is pretty simple to conclude that most people just find this unaffordable. There is also maintenance to think of. I don't know what that consists of.

The type of person that can afford a nice spread of property and a ranch house somewhere in the desert can probably afford the cost of the panels.

The issue is always when activists propose a one size fits all solution to a problem.

And also in those areas the biggest power provider is a combo of hydro and nuclear, so they aren't even competing against coal and oil.

That's the point. Solar power isn't a viable option for MOST people. There are a lot more poor people and lower middle class people than wealthy people.

You can use large footprint solar, but then you run into taking some of the most pristine land in the west and covering it with either PV cell fields or mirrors and a heat tower.

They need to find a way to make the production cheaper.

 

[ChrisL]

I hear it is quite expensive though, and I was arguing with liberals in a thread where I was saying the reason why it is not popular is because it is just not affordable. If they want people (most people) to use it, it has to be reliable and cheap. If not, then it will never replace what we have now.

I think in places that get a ton of "shine" like desert or plains areas the up front cost is made up by the "up time". Couple it with a decent battery farm and in some places you could probably go off grid most of the time.

The biggest concern is that ironically the best places for shine time also have PV cells worst enemy; sand.

Most people don't have the money to put up is the bottom line. If they did, it would be taking off. It is not, and it is pretty simple to conclude that most people just find this unaffordable. There is also maintenance to think of. I don't know what that consists of.

The type of person that can afford a nice spread of property and a ranch house somewhere in the desert can probably afford the cost of the panels.

The issue is always when activists propose a one size fits all solution to a problem.

And also in those areas the biggest power provider is a combo of hydro and nuclear, so they aren't even competing against coal and oil.

That's the point. Solar power isn't a viable option for MOST people. There are a lot more poor people and lower middle class people than wealthy people.

You can use large footprint solar, but then you run into taking some of the most pristine land in the west and covering it with either PV cell fields or mirrors and a heat tower.

They need to find a way to make the production cheaper.

Yup, we have a big "solar field" around here. It is ugly.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Why not use solar power? It's free energy.

​

One thing's certain: jurisdictions aren't forever going to offer subsidies of one sort or another to individuals who install solar power.


Note:

• For any of you inclined to raise exceptions and objections, utilize the resource we both know you have -- the Internet -- to obtain information about the operation, maintenance, efficacy, limitations, etc. of solar systems. I'm not at all entreating or offering to be your news and information source re: solar energy, not an industrial scale and not on a personal/household scale.

 

[martybegan]

I think in places that get a ton of "shine" like desert or plains areas the up front cost is made up by the "up time". Couple it with a decent battery farm and in some places you could probably go off grid most of the time.

The biggest concern is that ironically the best places for shine time also have PV cells worst enemy; sand.

Most people don't have the money to put up is the bottom line. If they did, it would be taking off. It is not, and it is pretty simple to conclude that most people just find this unaffordable. There is also maintenance to think of. I don't know what that consists of.

The type of person that can afford a nice spread of property and a ranch house somewhere in the desert can probably afford the cost of the panels.

The issue is always when activists propose a one size fits all solution to a problem.

And also in those areas the biggest power provider is a combo of hydro and nuclear, so they aren't even competing against coal and oil.

That's the point. Solar power isn't a viable option for MOST people. There are a lot more poor people and lower middle class people than wealthy people.

You can use large footprint solar, but then you run into taking some of the most pristine land in the west and covering it with either PV cell fields or mirrors and a heat tower.

They need to find a way to make the production cheaper.

Yup, we have a big "solar field" around here. It is ugly.

To some people so is a power plant in general.

The only pretty ones to me are dams, and a lot of people find those ugly as well.

 

[ChrisL]

Why not use solar power? It's free energy.

​

One thing's certain: jurisdictions aren't forever going to offer subsidies of one sort or another to individuals who install solar power.


Note:

• For any of you inclined to raise exceptions and objections, utilize the resource we both know you have -- the Internet -- to obtain information about the operation, maintenance, efficacy, limitations, etc. of solar systems. I'm not at all entreating or offering to be your news and information source re: solar energy, not an industrial scale and not on a personal/household scale.

It is not "free." That is a lie.

 

[usmbguest5318]

It has it's application like when living off the grid...

As far as I'm concerned, it's application is that it's free energy. That's good enough for me.

 

[martybegan]

Why not use solar power? It's free energy.

​

One thing's certain: jurisdictions aren't forever going to offer subsidies of one sort or another to individuals who install solar power.


Note:

• For any of you inclined to raise exceptions and objections, utilize the resource we both know you have -- the Internet -- to obtain information about the operation, maintenance, efficacy, limitations, etc. of solar systems. I'm not at all entreating or offering to be your news and information source re: solar energy, not an industrial scale and not on a personal/household scale.

There is no such thing as "free" energy, there is always capital costs, and maintenance costs. They only thing you don't pay for is the fuel, and in the case of solar one doesn't control the amount of fuel available, nor it's "up" time.

And those numbers given often are found to be grossly optimistic, based on the above issue of "fuel" availability.

 

[martybegan]

It has it's application like when living off the grid...

As far as I'm concerned, it's application is that it's free energy. That's good enough for me.

It's not "free". The only thing you don't pay for is the "fuel", and again, the problem is you don't control the fuel supply either.

 

[Toro]

We’re building a house. We looked at it, but the trade off was about the same as the utility. So we didn’t.

But it is becoming cost competitive.