Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I meant in your opinion. Sounded like that's what you were arguing. Regardless,They are generally for-profit enterprises, although highly regulated.
how do you figure harnessing the Sun's free energy inexpensively rules out its profitability? How could making it more expensive make it more profitable?The sheer amount of solar energy available is enormous and can be harnessed widely by rather inexpensive means. However, these means rule out the profitability needed for anyone to invest in them.
how do you figure harnessing the Sun's free energy inexpensively rules out its profitability?
America had such a president, but they replaced him with Sleepy JoeThere is NO SUCH THING as "clean energy".
The USA used to be a self-sustaining entity................we CAN go back to that, BUT Americans will need to understand that there will be a "down period" while companies are put back in action, and new production facilities built, etc.....
I means TONS of American jobs, and TONS of American income.
BUT..............
We need a President that has the balls and stamina to DO this. Otherwise, the annihilation of this country that the DemonicRats have instilled since Chinese trade began, will continue to destroy whats left of this country.
Highly technical systems require well paid people to build and install them. Therefore, they must be priced to cover these costs, plus the needed profit margins to attract investors. Everyone except the final buyer gets a nice payday. There's little profit to be had in simple systems.I meant in your opinion. Sounded like that's what you were arguing. Regardless,
how do you figure harnessing the Sun's free energy inexpensively rules out its profitability? How could making it more expensive make it more profitable?
You're clearly just forwarding nonsense to match your political agenda. Both wind and direct solar are child's play and getting cheaper every year. The only thing that might produce heat more simply than a solar heat exchanger is a campfire or wood stove, except no fuel is ever required. For technical and expensive, try looking at nukes honestly for a change. They're a horrible waste of money and always have been.Highly technical systems require well paid people to build and install them. Therefore, they must be priced to cover these costs, plus the needed profit margins to attract investors. Everyone except the final buyer gets a nice payday. There's little profit to be had in simple systems.
My utility charges a premium for their solar-produced electricity. No savings there. Some utilities argue for restrictions on rooftop solar as it cuts into their profits.
They face high operating costs and competition from cheaper gas and renewable energy sources, making the business of running many of the nation’s nearly 100 nuclear plants unprofitable.
The conventional model for operating the power grid revolved around “baseload” capacity — supplying the grid’s minimum power requirements from plants that need to run continuously because they cannot easily start and stop. There were mostly coal and nuclear power plants. But that model is becoming obsolete as renewables and natural gas supply more and more power to the grid. These technologies can ramp up and down quickly, which is another reason baseload power is becoming obsolete.
This is a fine example of a statement of fact that's begging for backup. If you think people should just take your word for it regarding such things you really are "nutz."My utility charges a premium for their solar-produced electricity. No savings there.
This is a fine example of a statement of fact that's begging for backup. If you think people should just take your word for it regarding such things you really are "nutz."
Getting cheaper doesn't mean the power is cheap.You're clearly just forwarding nonsense to match your political agenda. Both wind and direct solar are child's play and getting cheaper every year. The only thing that might produce heat more simply than a solar heat exchanger is a campfire or wood stove, except no fuel is ever required. For technical and expensive, try looking at nukes honestly for a change. They're a horrible waste of money and always have been.
Your link makes plain that the municipality borrowed money to build a solar panel farm at the airport. They floated a bond that needs to be paid back. So if you want to pay "a minimal upfront fee" to support that effort you may do so. It's not a requirement. Your saying "My utility charges a premium for their solar-produced electricity" is misleading at best. It only pertains to that single solar electric source, not every solar source available to them such as the rooftop solar your neighbor produces. Blowing smoke at yourself is still blowing smoke. Showing your work tends to save one embarrassment.I know these forums are filled with smoke, but I never blow it.
"Joining Shared Solar involves paying a minimal upfront participation fee and a little more for the solar energy per kWh."
Start up costs and maintenance apply to every technology implementation. That aside, where it properly belongs, the Sun supplies us with free energy. Free power. Free heat. You can't get any cheaper than free. Admit it.Getting cheaper doesn't mean the power is cheap.
"especially"? How about fracking? Are you aware that we still haven't successfully disposed of a single pound of radioactive nuclear waste? That it takes a million years for enriched uranium to decay back down to its natural radioactivity? That burning fossil fuels is killing us already? As opposed to doing what exactly? Is wind energy (also solar), simpler or more complex than whatever alternative you're failing to enumerate?Sure, heat 'exchange' is pretty simple. It's the whole technology that's a bit more complex, and expensive, and not without environmental consequences, especially solar electric panels.
That it takes a million years for enriched uranium to decay back down to its natural radioactivity?
Your link makes plain that the municipality borrowed money to build a solar panel farm at the airport. They floated a bond that needs to be paid back. So if you want to pay "a minimal upfront fee" to support that effort you may do so. It's not a requirement. Your saying "My utility charges a premium for their solar-produced electricity" is misleading at best. It only pertains to that single solar electric source, not every solar source available to them such as the rooftop solar your neighbor produces. Blowing smoke at yourself is still blowing smoke. Showing your work tends to save one embarrassment.
"My utility charges a premium for their solar-produced electricity" is a simple statement of fact. If you buy it you pay a premium.Your link makes plain that the municipality borrowed money to build a solar panel farm at the airport. They floated a bond that needs to be paid back. So if you want to pay "a minimal upfront fee" to support that effort you may do so. It's not a requirement. Your saying "My utility charges a premium for their solar-produced electricity" is misleading at best. It only pertains to that single solar electric source, not every solar source available to them such as the rooftop solar your neighbor produces. Blowing smoke at yourself is still blowing smoke. Showing your work tends to save one embarrassment.
Fossil fuels are also free, but it costs money to develop them as energy sources. You have rightly suggested that burning biomass is the cheapest way to access solar energy. We should do more of that. Lots of dead trees out there.Start up costs and maintenance apply to every technology implementation. That aside, where it properly belongs, the Sun supplies us with free energy. Free power. Free heat. You can't get any cheaper than free. Admit it.
I can enumerate many ways to address the energy issue. My starting point is,"especially"? How about fracking? Are you aware that we still haven't successfully disposed of a single pound of radioactive nuclear waste? That it takes a million years for enriched uranium to decay back down to its natural radioactivity? That burning fossil fuels is killing us already? As opposed to doing what exactly? Is wind energy (also solar), simpler or more complex than whatever alternative you're failing to enumerate?
Your own source says otherwise and it depends on the utility, State regulations, and the contract they agree to with each energy supplier. You evidently have no idea what you're talking about. I suggest you quit acting like you do."My utility charges a premium for their solar-produced electricity" is a simple statement of fact. If you buy it you pay a premium.
The dirty little secret about rooftop solar is that the utility buys the excess at their general cost of production.
Would you have some relevant point to make if I did? Didn't think so.You think, when we enrich uranium, we're increasing the amount of radioactivity in the world?
That's fine. However innovation is predictably messy.I can enumerate many ways to address the energy issue. My starting point is,
Conservation
Insulation
Innovation
Would you have some relevant point to make if I did? Didn't think so.
