Green Jobs = Lost Jobs

[jreeves]

Well, there are usually 2 sides to every story. And I've been given one side...the conservative side, again. Professor Gabriel Calzada of course is a global climate change skeptic. It's exactly what I expected to find, when I clicked on the link given to me.

Again, I prefer to look at a subject or story from more than one angle. And yes, there have been criticisms of Calzada's research. And just because Bill Clinton makes a statement, that does not mean that every liberal is going to bow down and take it as gospel. He isn't our Rush Limbaugh, or Sean Hannity.

This liberal has to go to bed, as I have to be up at 400 AM. Yes, liberals work too.

It's not a matter of who said it, its a matter that its true. The Spaniards have shed countless jobs due to their green awakening.

 

[jreeves]

Completely wrong.

February 24, 2009, 4:30 pm
First Solar Claims $1-a-Watt ‘Industry Milestone’
By James Kanter


The maker of photovoltaic cells, based in Tempe, Ariz., said government subsidies of the sort provided in Germany are helping make the solar industry competitive. The solar photovoltaic industry has plenty of supporters, but wider uptake of the technology has long been hampered by cost.

High costs have not just prevented consumers and companies plastering more homes and offices with solar cells. They also have bolstered the claim that large quantities of fossil fuels and nuclear power will be necessary in the future in part because solar panels do not provide value for money.

On Tuesday, First Solar, a global photovoltaic panel maker based in Tempe, Ariz., said it had reached an “industry milestone” by reducing its production costs to less than $1 a watt.

In a statement — seen by Green Inc. on Tuesday — First Solar, which has produced modules for solar installations in several countries in Europe, said it had brought costs down to $1 from $3 over the past four years through economies of scale by increasing its production capacity by 50 times, and by passing on those savings to consumers.


First Solar’s chief executive, Mike Ahearn, tipped his hat to countries like Germany that have offered generous tariffs to producers of solar electricity.

“Without forward-looking government programs supporting solar electricity, we would not have been able to invest in the capacity expansion which gives us the scale to bring costs down,” Mr. Ahearn said in the statement.First Solar Claims $1-a-Watt ‘Industry Milestone’ - Green Inc. Blog - NYTimes.com

Hmm...
How much does electricity cost? What is a kilowatt-hour? (kWh)
The average cost of residential electricity was 11¢/kWh (DOE) in the U.S. in December 2008. The average household used 936 kWh/mo. in 2007 (DOE) and would pay about $100 for it based on the March 2009 average rate. DOE also has historical rates.

God, you are either a silly ass, or totally ignorant. The referance to dollar a watt is to the installation cost of the generator. A coal plant costs over $2 a watt to build. And then you have to buy the coal. And they never factor in the cost of the people that develop asthma from the smokestack emmissions.

At a dollar a watt, a 5 kw roof generating facility would cost $5000 for the solar panels, about $2000 for the grid parrallel invertor, and, if you are not a handyman, another $3000 for installation. 10 grand is a lot, but that would more than power the average household, and if one had an electric vehicle, you would be powering your home and vehicle, and that would mean a payback period of under five years, with a minimum lifespan of 20 years on the system.

The gospel according to off your 'old rocker'....

 

[jreeves]

Hmm...
How much does electricity cost? What is a kilowatt-hour? (kWh)
The average cost of residential electricity was 11¢/kWh (DOE) in the U.S. in December 2008. The average household used 936 kWh/mo. in 2007 (DOE) and would pay about $100 for it based on the March 2009 average rate. DOE also has historical rates.

God, you are either a silly ass, or totally ignorant. The referance to dollar a watt is to the installation cost of the generator. A coal plant costs over $2 a watt to build. And then you have to buy the coal. And they never factor in the cost of the people that develop asthma from the smokestack emmissions.

At a dollar a watt, a 5 kw roof generating facility would cost $5000 for the solar panels, about $2000 for the grid parrallel invertor, and, if you are not a handyman, another $3000 for installation. 10 grand is a lot, but that would more than power the average household, and if one had an electric vehicle, you would be powering your home and vehicle, and that would mean a payback period of under five years, with a minimum lifespan of 20 years on the system.

The gospel according to off your 'old rocker'....

Don't tell me this is another $42,000 RAV4 that will save me so much money, I only have to wait 30 years to recoup the cost.....your unbelievable

 

[jreeves]

Completely wrong.

February 24, 2009, 4:30 pm
First Solar Claims $1-a-Watt ‘Industry Milestone’
By James Kanter


The maker of photovoltaic cells, based in Tempe, Ariz., said government subsidies of the sort provided in Germany are helping make the solar industry competitive. The solar photovoltaic industry has plenty of supporters, but wider uptake of the technology has long been hampered by cost.

High costs have not just prevented consumers and companies plastering more homes and offices with solar cells. They also have bolstered the claim that large quantities of fossil fuels and nuclear power will be necessary in the future in part because solar panels do not provide value for money.

On Tuesday, First Solar, a global photovoltaic panel maker based in Tempe, Ariz., said it had reached an “industry milestone” by reducing its production costs to less than $1 a watt.

In a statement — seen by Green Inc. on Tuesday — First Solar, which has produced modules for solar installations in several countries in Europe, said it had brought costs down to $1 from $3 over the past four years through economies of scale by increasing its production capacity by 50 times, and by passing on those savings to consumers.


First Solar’s chief executive, Mike Ahearn, tipped his hat to countries like Germany that have offered generous tariffs to producers of solar electricity.

“Without forward-looking government programs supporting solar electricity, we would not have been able to invest in the capacity expansion which gives us the scale to bring costs down,” Mr. Ahearn said in the statement.First Solar Claims $1-a-Watt ‘Industry Milestone’ - Green Inc. Blog - NYTimes.com

Hmm...
How much does electricity cost? What is a kilowatt-hour? (kWh)
The average cost of residential electricity was 11¢/kWh (DOE) in the U.S. in December 2008. The average household used 936 kWh/mo. in 2007 (DOE) and would pay about $100 for it based on the March 2009 average rate. DOE also has historical rates.

God, you are either a silly ass, or totally ignorant. The referance to dollar a watt is to the installation cost of the generator. A coal plant costs over $2 a watt to build. And then you have to buy the coal. And they never factor in the cost of the people that develop asthma from the smokestack emmissions.

At a dollar a watt, a 5 kw roof generating facility would cost $5000 for the solar panels, about $2000 for the grid parrallel invertor, and, if you are not a handyman, another $3000 for installation. 10 grand is a lot, but that would more than power the average household, and if one had an electric vehicle, you would be powering your home and vehicle, and that would mean a payback period of under five years, with a minimum lifespan of 20 years on the system.

Ok, so what do we have to pay for the installation of current coal plants already operating?

 

[Sinatra]

Well, there are usually 2 sides to every story. And I've been given one side...the conservative side, again. Professor Gabriel Calzada of course is a global climate change skeptic. It's exactly what I expected to find, when I clicked on the link given to me.

Again, I prefer to look at a subject or story from more than one angle. And yes, there have been criticisms of Calzada's research. And just because Bill Clinton makes a statement, that does not mean that every liberal is going to bow down and take it as gospel. He isn't our Rush Limbaugh, or Sean Hannity.

This liberal has to go to bed, as I have to be up at 400 AM. Yes, liberals work too.

It's not a matter of who said it, its a matter that its true. The Spaniards have shed countless jobs due to their green awakening.

You got that right.

The Go-Green Industry profits a select few at the expense of the many.

 

[editec]

How many jobs do you suppose it costs America when we have to import most of our oil?

 

[code1211]

We could have created millions of green jobs if we spent $700 billion dollars on energy research instead of wasting it in Iraq.

If we perfect carbon nanotubes we could produce solar cells with 80% efficiency. That would solve the energy crisis.

Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda. By using one bonehead move, the War in Iraq, to justify any other move, Obama's whole agenda, you do nothing but demonstrate the stupidity of all.

The highlighted words above are the lynch pins of any dream world solution. In the real world, we have an infrastructure that runs on fossil fuel. When Captain Kirk shows up with his anti matter reactor, we will have something to talk about.

"Scotty, I need more power."

"Kept'n, E dinuh thenk E kin duuue 't".

 

[code1211]

How many jobs do you suppose it costs America when we have to import most of our oil?

That's what we've been doing since about 1970, isn't it?

 

[jillian]

Well duh ... and look where the money from "green" jobs goes, it's all to the corporations that fund enviro-scientists.

and of course, if tony blankley says it...must be true.

i'd prefer to see the actual study than his take on it. i've rarely seen honest assessments about that sort of thing from the pro-corporatists.

it's not so much that he's wrong... it's more that he's rarely correct.

 

[jillian]

How many jobs do you suppose it costs America when we have to import most of our oil?

not as many as companies offshoring tech and manufacturing jobs.

 

[MaggieMae]

Well duh ... and look where the money from "green" jobs goes, it's all to the corporations that fund enviro-scientists.

It doesn't matter where funding goes. It still takes PEOPLE (jobs) to do the groundwork and maintenance to keep green cities and projects going. I just wish people would stop expecting everything, including this, to come together immediately.

Partners & Sponsors | Green Cities Media

These are also areas where investors are turning.

 

[jreeves]

How many jobs do you suppose it costs America when we have to import most of our oil?

We wouldn't have to import nearly as much if environuts didn't prevent American Oil companies from drilling right here in the USA. If Sec. Salazar hadn't blocked the development of oil shale in Colorado would have an oil supply larger than Saudi Arabia.

 

[MaggieMae]

We could have created millions of green jobs if we spent $700 billion dollars on energy research instead of wasting it in Iraq.

If we perfect carbon nanotubes we could produce solar cells with 80% efficiency. That would solve the energy crisis.

I don't know why you people are so skeptical. The technology already exists. Somebody a long time ago had to also figure out how to get that oil from the ground and into your gas tank. Duh...

 

[jreeves]

We could have created millions of green jobs if we spent $700 billion dollars on energy research instead of wasting it in Iraq.

If we perfect carbon nanotubes we could produce solar cells with 80% efficiency. That would solve the energy crisis.

I don't know why you people are so skeptical. The technology already exists. Somebody a long time ago had to also figure out how to get that oil from the ground and into your gas tank. Duh...

How many years and billions of dollars has been spent on Solar technology? Are you even aware?

 

[MaggieMae]

If we perfect carbon nanotubes we could produce solar cells with 80% efficiency. That would solve the energy crisis.

And if worms had machine guns, birds wouldn't **** with them.

Solar technology has had several decades and zillions of dollars worth of R&D, and we're no closer to your solar powered Utopia today than any other time along the way.

So we should continue to sit on these ideas and technology for a few more decades? Why? A different category, but a good analogy is the complaint I see all the time that "If we had done something about Social Security 30 years ago, we wouldn't be having this problem today."

Well Crap, THINK!!! If people remained stuck in old technology and old ways of doing things just because, you wouldn't be reading this right now.

 

[MaggieMae]

Here's a catch-all website for current worldwide information on "green" initiatives. I wish people would stay educated when there's no reason not to.

peopleandplanet.net > renewable energy > newsfile > green economy could generate millions of jobs

 

[Oddball]

So we should continue to sit on these ideas and technology for a few more decades? Why? A different category, but a good analogy is the complaint I see all the time that "If we had done something about Social Security 30 years ago, we wouldn't be having this problem today."

Well Crap, THINK!!! If people remained stuck in old technology and old ways of doing things just because, you wouldn't be reading this right now.

All the R&D and practical applications -no matter how inefficient- that they've currently been put into is "sitting on them"???

Mmmmmmm'kay.

 

[MaggieMae]

We could have created millions of green jobs if we spent $700 billion dollars on energy research instead of wasting it in Iraq.

If we perfect carbon nanotubes we could produce solar cells with 80% efficiency. That would solve the energy crisis.

Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda. By using one bonehead move, the War in Iraq, to justify any other move, Obama's whole agenda, you do nothing but demonstrate the stupidity of all.

The highlighted words above are the lynch pins of any dream world solution. In the real world, we have an infrastructure that runs on fossil fuel. When Captain Kirk shows up with his anti matter reactor, we will have something to talk about.

"Scotty, I need more power."

"Kept'n, E dinuh thenk E kin duuue 't".

That kind of attitude puts the meaning of HEAD IN THE SAND in true perspective. I wish people would download the documentary "We Were Warned" which is based on a not-so-unbelievable hypothetical situation where the world has two simultaneous crises at once: Oil fields in Saudi Arabia being sabbotaged, and another Cat5 hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico which knocks out not only our own rigs, but the flow of oil through all the pipelines from Mexico and Venezuela. Then see how much of a "fantasy" such a scenario is.

Alternative energy IS the future, people. Wake up.

 

[MaggieMae]

How many jobs do you suppose it costs America when we have to import most of our oil?

We wouldn't have to import nearly as much if environuts didn't prevent American Oil companies from drilling right here in the USA. If Sec. Salazar hadn't blocked the development of oil shale in Colorado would have an oil supply larger than Saudi Arabia.

Extracting oil from shale is more expensive than building wind towers and hooking them into the grids. Do some homework.

 

[MaggieMae]

I don't know why you people are so skeptical. The technology already exists. Somebody a long time ago had to also figure out how to get that oil from the ground and into your gas tank. Duh...

How many years and billions of dollars has been spent on Solar technology? Are you even aware?

Who cares? People earn wages trying to figure it out.