Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

Renewable Energy as a Mainstream Product Choice

By Stephen Lacey, Staff Writer
January 24, 2008   |   48 Comments

Do you like this news?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
That may point to one of the keys for marketing renewable energy to the general public: while efficiency and conservation are very important in the entire energy picture, many consumers care more about what the product can give them, not take away.
48 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 48
January 24, 2008
<p>&nbsp;</p><p>Creating practical energy appliances requires serious financing for product development. Instead of financing cheaper PV generating substances, investment should be going into the packaging of technologies to create user friendly, automated, durable, low maintenance energy appliances. </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Anyone serious about transforming the world with practical uses of solar energy can contact me through: http://lightontheearth.blogspot.com/</p><p>&nbsp;</p>
Comment
2 of 48
January 24, 2008
<p>&nbsp;Nobody has packaged the technologies to create low maintenance cost-effective PV appliances.&nbsp; This is possible with technologies that have already been demonstrated, yet no investment is being made to create modularized, well engineered PV systems with built-in charge controllers, inverters, batteries and grid connected battery chargers. </p><p>&nbsp;Systems like this could reduce the installation costs while setting standards in configuration. Until these investments are made in integrated systems, the PV industry will be stuck in the era of one of-a-kind systems that have to be individually designed and engineered for every installation.&nbsp; </p>Continued in next comment<br /><p>&nbsp;</p>
Comment
3 of 48
January 24, 2008
Besides the early adopters of renewable energy, American consumers really feel no need to produce their own power, they flip on the switch and the energy is unlimited in their minds. As the cost of energy starts to eat away at their yearly budget and governments start to limit energy use per household (California is already giving rebates to consumers who authorize the utility company to control their thermostat remotely), a need will emerge. Consumers are used to buying energy as a service; the mainstream consumer is not comfortable for pre-paying their energy bill. I feel to take solar mainstream the turning point will be a financial innovation versus advancement in technology.

-Deep Patel
www.gogreensolar.com
Comment
4 of 48
January 24, 2008
<p>True Stephen,</p><p>and We need to promote&nbsp;R.E. systems&nbsp;increased property value...We have installed PV systems which have increased the owner's property value by more than cost of the system, in some cases, even twice the value was added!&nbsp;&nbsp;It's not comparible to other building additions, like a Swimming pool, deck, or other additions which depreciate in value, most home R.E. systems have constanly increasing worth since, as energy costs rise, your system gets MORE valuable.</p><p>It has nothing to do with ROI (who calculates the return on investment for a Pool, landscaping, driveway?), that's only for commerical applications.</p><p>What is the TRUE cost of paying&nbsp;INCREASING finite fuel energy costs for 20 years? </p><p>R.E. systems get better with time since there are no &quot;fuel costs&quot;,ever.</p>
Comment
5 of 48
January 24, 2008
<p>Part of the problem is that the true cost of using non-renewable energy is not correctly factored into its price. If that were done, then RE energy investments would look much more attractive.</p><p>&nbsp;Already though in utility scale energy generation, solar thermal has shown itself to be cheaper than a natural gas plant. Solar PV is still expensive, but the price is coming down fast. Give it a few years; the technology is getting exponentially better.</p><p>&nbsp;Stephen_B </p>
Comment
6 of 48
January 24, 2008
<p>Another example is the Tankless Water heaters: On a retro fit to an existing house, it can be $2,000 to $5,000. (my self install was over $1,000 for a cheap model). This is for a product that increases efficiencies from 50% to 80% so if you use $20 per month to heat water, that saves $6 per month, or $72 per year. If the money i borrowed at 5% on $3,000 then the break even point is way out there. People don't live long enough to break even on this one.</p><p>Why would anyone buy any of these renewables? It doesn't make economic sense. So it must be their religous beliefs that make them do it.</p><p>Alot of Greenies are religous zealouts. They're just in denial.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>
Comment
7 of 48
January 24, 2008
<p>The reason people don't buy renewables is that most of them are lemons.</p><p>Take hybird cars in American for an example. The added $4,000 to $6,000 in cost for a hybird equals nealy 50,000 miles of gas in America, but you still get the burden of buy gas/electrical power that is usd at therate of 60 mph (110 kph?). The break even point has to be somewhere around the 100,000 mile point or more if you have to pay interest on that intial $4-6,000. My 8 cylinder Suburban could be more economical than a Hybird if you do the math accurately.&nbsp;</p><p>Take the example of Solar pv: Most consumers will not break even even after 20 years! That is a 4% rate of return. They are better staying on the grid and paying off their mortgages, car loans, and credit cards.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>
Comment
8 of 48
January 25, 2008
I would to encourage everyone here to check out Nanosolar.&nbsp; They have just shipped their first, utility scale, panels.&nbsp; This is breakthrough technology.&nbsp;&nbsp; While it is a little early for concrete results, I have read one claim that they 'might' be able to compete on an even basis with coal on price per KW.&nbsp; Now thats something we can all live with.&nbsp;&nbsp; If we couple this, with the coming technology of the electric car,&nbsp;&nbsp;via lithium ion and supercapacitors, we can all realize a truly effective drop in our carbon footprint, which is good for our whole world.
Comment
9 of 48
January 25, 2008
<p>Let us remove ALL of the subsidies that go to all of people and companies involved in the energy circus so that one can determine the real costs and benefits of all the various types, present and proposed, of energy production.</p><p>I believe that this should also apply to the evaluation of all transportation costs associated with delivering all methods of energy. Some are apparent, and others not quite so easy.</p>
Comment
10 of 48
January 25, 2008
<p>Brett and others, the point of this article is that a majority of people don't want to pay the extra cost for RE.</p><p>As one of those in Texas paying the 20% extra for wind it is my choice.&nbsp; Still I am in the minority, not becuase no one knows about the clean energy option, but because they&nbsp;don't want to pay the extra 20%.&nbsp; </p>
Comment
11 of 48
January 25, 2008
<p><span style="font-size: 8pt; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Electric Car plugging into the Non renewable energy grid? Oxymoron?Let&rsquo;s talk about Fuel Cell cars?Hydrogen from your Home Fuel Cell?Home Fuel Cell Powered by smaller footprint PV.Also Heats/Cools and supplies Powers to your house.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: 8pt; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><a href="http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/owning/home-energy-station" target="_blank">http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/owning/home-energy-station</a>. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: 8pt; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Move forward!</span></p>
Comment
12 of 48
January 25, 2008
New coal has nearly trippled in price due to the need to finally follow clean air laws written back in 2005. And would more than six times the former price if it needed to do carbon sequestration.<br />Nuclear gets more federal loan guaruntees and R&amp;D dollars than the entire rest of the energy industy combined and multiplied. Industry funded studies are finding that nuclear is even more costly than new coal, and maybe even comparable to the cost of coal with sequestration.<br />Perhaps the only snag to Renewables is really all about Reliability. Luckily we have SolarThermal, Geothermal, and Interconnected Wind. Which are both inexpensive and reliable.<br /><a href="http://greyfalcon.net/solarthermal" target="_blank">http://greyfalcon.net/solarthermal</a><br /><a href="http://greyfalcon.net/geothermal" target="_blank">http://greyfalcon.net/geothermal</a><br /><a href="http://greyfalcon.net/wind" target="_blank">http://greyfalcon.net/wind</a>
Comment
13 of 48
January 25, 2008
In my experience the two biggest problems in marketing sustainable energy (conservation, efficiency and renewables) to the public are; 1) The negative knee jerk reaction that many people have to &quot;environmentalists&quot; label.&nbsp; When I first decided to start working with my town on sustainable energy issues in 2005, I purposefully focussed on &quot;energy&quot; and not the environment.&nbsp; A green group in my town had &quot;pissed off&quot; just about every elected official and town department heads with their &quot;bully pulpit&quot; attitudes and finger waggling.&nbsp; 2)&nbsp; We have to make going green as easy as buying an SUV.&nbsp; I've spent the better part of 3 years educating myself about energy efficiency, conservation and renewable energy.&nbsp; If we want the average person to &quot;get on board&quot; we have to make this easier.
Comment
14 of 48
January 25, 2008
<div>&lt;b&gt;==Alot of Greenies are religous zealouts. They're just in denial.==&lt;/b&gt;</div><div>Oh really?<br /><a href="http://greyfalcon.net/yellowcake" target="_blank">http://greyfalcon.net/yellowcake</a><br /><a href="http://greyfalcon.net/iraqvsenergy.png" target="_blank">http://greyfalcon.net/iraqvsenergy.png</a></div><div><div><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2u4zNGtnY8" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2u4zNGtnY8</a></div></div>
Comment
15 of 48
January 25, 2008
<p>&quot;Until the industry better addresses concerns about cost, reliability and ease of use, it will simply be easier for Americans not to buy clean energy.&quot;<br /><br />The prominent problem is misinformation among consumers rather than simply not having renewable options. More and more energy companies are offering renewable energy rate plans that are more affordable than most realize. </p><p>For example, check average starting rates for Texas energy providers at both the <a href="http://www.powertochoose.org/_content/_compare/compare.asp" target="_blank">PUC</a> and <a href="http://www.electricitytexas.com/" target="_blank">ElectricityTexas</a>. Then hop over to <a href="http://www.greenenergychoice.com/" target="_blank">GreenEnergyChoice</a> and check prices for companies available in your service area. Keep in mind prices fluctuate constantly, as is the nature of the energy industry, but all in all, the cost of renewable energy plans are comparable to non-renewable. </p>
Comment
16 of 48
January 25, 2008
Howard Fuller - my apologies. You&rsquo;re correct &ndash; I shouldn&rsquo;t have lumped all political conservatives into a stereotype of non-conservationists. That&rsquo;s just been my personal observation, but I shouldn&rsquo;t make that leap &ndash; just as Mr. Berry shouldn&rsquo;t have assumed all greenies are religious zealots. We are all in this together, and we need to work together to find a solution. As you said, enlightened is exactly what we all need to become by working together with open minds. <br /><br />I really like the bumper sticker &quot;Support Al-Qaeda! Drive a Hummer.&quot; Gotta get one of those. 100,000 miles on your 2001 Prius is very encouraging. I have a 2005 and want to get at least 200,000, and either upgrade it to a plug-in when the costs come down or trade it in for the new plug-in Prius hopefully when they come out in 2010.
Comment
17 of 48
January 25, 2008
<p>By the way, Mr. Klinken, I am coming up on 100,000 miles on my second Prius. My mother inherited my first one, a 2001 model. She's a conservative, too. Her bumper sticker reads,&quot;Support Al-Qaeda! Drive a Hummer.&quot; We're all in this energy boat together and should find common, enlightened ground, rather than parrot political slogans. That is our best hope of getting a federal government that will actually consider the best interests of its citizenry over those of their campaign donors.</p><p>Mr. Keane, my hybrid Prii didn't cost a penny more than the standard versions, by the way. </p>
Comment
18 of 48
January 25, 2008
What about a reality tv show which has renewable as its core and show what is and is not&nbsp; needed?
Comment
19 of 48
January 25, 2008
Jerry Klinken-Some of us political conservatives are indeed conservationists. It doesn't help the cause by stereotyping any of us, except for reactionaries like Mr. Keane, that is. His 8-cylinder SUV says it all.
Comment
20 of 48
January 25, 2008
<p><span style="font-size: 7.5pt; font-family: Verdana">Furthermore Mr. Keane,&nbsp;</span></p><span style="font-size: 7.5pt; font-family: Verdana">Our best bet, and one that SmartPower should be endorsing&nbsp;requires a paradigm shift from our life of convenience, which is becoming increasingly costly.&nbsp; We should invest in renewables&nbsp;at the local levels without discrimination for folks with fancy electric or natural gas appliances.&nbsp; For that, I would write a big fat check becasue my town taxes would not get out of control trying to keep the school lights and heat on.&nbsp; Get down to you're town meetings and make a real difference!</span> <p>Jesse Hayes</p>
Comment
21 of 48
January 25, 2008
<p>I plan on installing solar PV and hope that Congress and the next President create significant renewable energy incentives over the next couple of years. I&rsquo;ll do it as an investment in my home and for the environment. It may not make more than a 4% return, as you speculate, but that&rsquo;s not why I&rsquo;m doing it. But I suspect the way energy cost are soaring, it will actually be a wise long-term investment.<br /><br />I want to do my part to solve the climate crisis, the energy crisis, and the rampant environmental destruction. I&rsquo;m not doing it for me, but for the earth and all the creatures (including humans) that are threatened with their very existence.</p><p>Jim, don&rsquo;t be so quick to criticize the intentions and motivation of others, especially when we&rsquo;re just trying to help the situation. By the way, I hope you enjoy driving your 15mpg Suburban as much as I enjoy driving my 50mpg Prius, especially when you fill up.<br /></p>
Comment
22 of 48
January 25, 2008
<p>Brian Keane,</p><p>You're not being lied to.&nbsp; You just don't understand the actual value Americans place on the issue.&nbsp; I am second to none in support of sustainable energy but cannot endorse paying an extra cent on my utility bill if the utilities aren't going to take the bait&nbsp;while continuing to buy energy on the open market (volatile)&nbsp;instead of adding new renewable capacity.&nbsp; They are&nbsp;concerned with minimizing operating costs, managing supply and demand, and maintaining reliability of the electrical network.&nbsp; With renewables, the first item decreases but the other two become more difficult (that's where the &quot;20%&nbsp;by&quot;&nbsp;phrase comes from).&nbsp; </p><p>Jesse Hayes</p><p>Signed, some young&nbsp;troublemaker who doesn't know much.</p>
Comment
23 of 48
January 25, 2008
In response to Jim Berry... I really don't understand the connection you're trying to make between an environmentalist and a religious zealot. Typically, right-wing conservatives are the religious zealots and are the biggest deniers of global warming. For some reason they make every attempt to fight change and maintain the status quo. It always puzzled me why conservatives don&rsquo;t care about conserving the earth and making it a better place. That&rsquo;s all &ldquo;greenies&rdquo; are trying to do.<br /><br />You ask why would anyone buy any of these renewables? It&rsquo;s not always about money. I drive a Prius and I spent more for hybrid technology to get 50mpg, but I paid about what I would a paid for a &ldquo;normal&rdquo; car anyway. In 1985, I installed a geo-thermal water-source heat pump. Yes, it cost more up front, but it paid for itself and has used a lot less electricity over the years, saving money, pollution and CO2 emissions. Continued
Comment
24 of 48
January 25, 2008
<p>Mr. Berry,</p><p>Please&nbsp;refrain&nbsp;from name calling. It does nothing but show your biases.</p>
Comment
25 of 48
January 25, 2008
The idea that broad samples of consumers think RE has to be 100% off-grid or that reliability is a central issue doesn't apply to the middle adopters, that is, people who have made a move to attend a green-energy conference or who have solicited RE pricing quotes. These are the people we need to focus on. In their case, the price tag, installation costs and residential site problems are the deal killers. My conclusion is the residential market, especially for over-promised value in PV, is fundamentally flawed. Instead, we need ito focus on commercial building applications where vast amounts of exposed roof space and corporate green mandates are in place.

Joel Fairstein
www.solar-labs.com
Comment
26 of 48
January 25, 2008
<p>Jim Berry - before attacking people as zealots maybe you should consider that perhaps they are just less self interested than you. Economic sense, at this stage, is not the only argument and the marketplace is changing all the time. Come and live with the energy prices in the UK for a while and I bet you'll be singing a different tune. </p><p>The US public, is still sheltering behind the administration's fear of, and collusion with, the petro chemical industries. The renewable technologies contain many non-lemon technologies. Hybrid cars are a motor industry compromise to appease theoil companies. The purely electric car, which could be on the streets tomorrow, and may be if Toyota goes further as planned, is a threat to the link between automobiles and oil, as well as the vast spares and servicing business, and that is why it is not prevalent - not because of anything inherently wrong with the technology.&nbsp; </p>
Comment
27 of 48
January 26, 2008
<p>Renewabe energy could be made vastly more feasable if the governments of the world would just take the plunge and make it so.&nbsp; Most of the measures they could take, with a &quot;stroke of the pen&quot;, wouldn't even cost them anything in taxes and the benefits of producing most of their energy within their borders would be huge.&nbsp; see Solar Electric, The government role.&nbsp; The article is about solar electric but applies to all forms of renewable energy.</p><p>http://mtkass.blogspot.com/2007/07/solar-electric-government-role.html </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p>
Comment
28 of 48
January 26, 2008
<p>Mr. Lacey begins his piece with three bogus claims, &quot; consumption of dirty fossil energies is impacting the environment, threatening national security and hindering long-term economic growth.&quot; which constitute the propaganda&nbsp; of the hard core environmentalists. As many recent peer reviewed&nbsp; scientific reports show none of these claims have a factual scientific or economic basis. Perhaps the American people are beginning to realize that they are being subjected to a campaign that intends to control their lives by controlling their energy usage. California is already considering a proposal that would control a person's energy consumption by the State controlling the home's thermostat. Is the novel &quot;1984's&quot; predictions far behind? &nbsp; <br /> </p><p>&nbsp;</p>
Comment
29 of 48
January 27, 2008
<p>Mosman,</p><p>1984??? </p><p>&nbsp;Ignorance is truth?</p><p>War on...(Terror)???</p><p>&nbsp;</p>
Comment
30 of 48
January 27, 2008
<p>Jim Berry is way out in left field. Surely he should know that renewable energies are not being created and promoted for terrific pay-back!</p><p>The purpose is two-fold: reduce carbon emissions and provide lower expenses in the future.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>
Comment
31 of 48
January 28, 2008
<p>Mr. Hughes,</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I too am waiting for a plug-in hybrid, but I currently own a traditional hybrid Prius.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I think the traditional hybrid comes out of a reaction to the terrible history with all electric vehicles (EV).&nbsp; A number of companies tried to bring EVs to market in the 90's, but the EVs were very limited by the battery technology available at the time.&nbsp; Range was short and they only worked well in warm climates.&nbsp; (I know someone is going to disagree with this, but the broad strokes of my description are more true than not).&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp; With the addition of NiMH batteries, plug-in hybrids (and perhaps EVs as well) have started to become possible.&nbsp; However, it does seem that plug-in hybrids will need to wait for Li-ion batteries for a practical car to emerge.</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I hope the Chevy Volt is real and works well.</p><p>Thanks</p><p>John C. Briggs&nbsp;</p>
Comment
32 of 48
January 28, 2008
<p>I wonder of the car of the future might not be an electric with a range of at least 250km and with a small petrol or diesel generator for emergencies; the reverse of the present hybrids.&nbsp; The key will be the expansion of plug in facilities at parking meters, super markets, places of work etc where you punch in the amount you want and swipe your card.&nbsp; </p><p>http://mtkass.blogspot.com/2007/10/excess-energy-what-to-do.html</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p>
Comment
33 of 48
January 28, 2008
<p>I find the hybrids that don't have a plug in facility rather strange beasts.&nbsp; Of course there are plug in hybrids on the market.&nbsp; To qualify as a hybrid plug in,&nbsp; they have to have&nbsp; a 10km range on battery&nbsp; and many of them have&nbsp; a 40km range.&nbsp; The per km cost of &quot;fuel&quot; for a plug charged from the gird is&nbsp; a third of&nbsp; petro driving.&nbsp;&nbsp; 20% of my driving falls within the 40km range so a plug in facility would result sinificant savings.&nbsp; If plug in facilities expand at &quot;parking meters,&nbsp; businesses, super markets etc,</p><br /><p>&nbsp; </p>
Comment
34 of 48
January 28, 2008
<p>Mr. Mosman,</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp; If there is no human-caused global warming, does that mean that there is no benefit to renewable energy?&nbsp; Or do wind and solar power offer other benefits than the environmental ones?</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I think that is the point that is trying to be emphasised by Mr Lacey.&nbsp; Renewable energy systems need to have other benefits to sell beyond the (possible?) environmental benefits.&nbsp; If those other benefits exist, thoses are the benefits that will sell the systems.</p><p>&nbsp; &nbsp; I wonder if the flip-side is true.&nbsp; If the only benefit of renewable energy is environmental, then perhaps the systems are doomed.</p><p>Thanks</p><p>John C. Briggs&nbsp;</p>
Comment
35 of 48
January 28, 2008
<p>Mr Murt,</p><p>'Ignorance is Truth' is a given when the first Two Laws of Thermodynamics are ignored leading to misleading and often outrageous claims for alternate sources of energy. <br /> 'Ignorance is Truth' is a given when the Big Lie serves as a Truth as in &quot;The Inconvenient Truth&quot;. When global warming Guru Al Gore refused to support and failed to defend his movie in a British court case, the court found that the film was misleading and inaccurate in 11 respects and if shown in the school these eleven inaccuracies had to be specifically drawn to the attention of the students. Unfortunately Americans are still being subjected to Mr. Gore's propaganda film without any reservations. As Adolph Hitler said &quot; If you tell a lie long enough and loud enough it becomes the truth&quot; <br /> </p>
Comment
36 of 48
January 28, 2008
&nbsp; I think most people drive SUV's for reasons on image (at least here in Boston where no one has to move farm supplies).&nbsp; So for many of them, the Prius is actually cheaper than the SUV they last purchased.&nbsp; But in this case, this is not an economic argument. It is a matter of &quot;image&quot;.
Comment
37 of 48
January 28, 2008
<p>&nbsp; I also have sympathy for Jim Berry's comment about the added cost hybrid systems.&nbsp; Personally I own a Toyota Corolla ($13,000) and a Toyota Prius ($24,000).&nbsp; There is no way that added cost of the Prius will ever pay for itself.&nbsp; I knew that going into the purchase.</p><p>&nbsp; However, I could not convince my wife to replace her Toyota Sienna with a Corolla.&nbsp; This was a matter of pride and self-image.&nbsp; My wife was not willing to drive something as &quot;down-scale&quot; as a Corolla.&nbsp; So a $13,000 car was not an option because people would know it was a cheap car and this would reflect badly on my wife.</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; So in the end, I replaced a $24,000 (18 mpg) Mini-van with a $24,000 (48 mpg) Prius.&nbsp; In this sense, I am saving significantly on gasoline.&nbsp; The cost of the vehicles, to me, was the same.&nbsp; By the way, the Prius is a really nice car and the hybrid thing is really just a bonus.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>
Comment
38 of 48
January 28, 2008
<p>Personally I appreciate Jim Berry's push-back on the price of these systems, even though I am a Prius driving, solar panel installing person.&nbsp; </p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; When economics are good, conservation and renewable energy do succeed.&nbsp; I think that LED based traffic lights are one example where the economics are right, so adoption has become very mainstream.&nbsp; CFL light bulbs are another such example.&nbsp; Solar PV has wide spread adoption for remote areas and changable traffic signs due to the economics working well there. &nbsp; These are not cases were being &quot;green&quot; was the deciding factor.&nbsp; One other interesting case is the &quot;wind-up&quot; flash light.&nbsp; These seem to be very popular.&nbsp; I think the key reason is not being green, and it may not even be economics.&nbsp; I think the key value here is reliability.&nbsp; You don't have to worry about running out of batteries.&nbsp; You can always turn the crank. </p>
Comment
39 of 48
January 29, 2008
I think a more appropriate response to ask&nbsp;is &quot;who is lying to who?&quot;&nbsp; Consumers will buy into it when it is&nbsp;guaranteed, approved and easy to accomodate.&nbsp;The current inconsistant&nbsp;grid-tie in and net metering regulations&nbsp;across the contintent&nbsp;points to&nbsp;part of the problem.&nbsp; The other half has more to do with&nbsp; public education and demonstrations of working systems.&nbsp;&nbsp; Toyota solved all of these issues then began to sell their cars.
Comment
40 of 48
January 29, 2008
<p>Mr. Fairstein (post #9) is spot on.&nbsp; Using ratepayer subsidies to underwrite retail-size (and priced)&nbsp;PV installations for individual homeowners is wasteful.&nbsp; </p><p>Instead, those precious dollars should go to municipal buildings, like schools, where&nbsp;the project scale invites&nbsp;wholesale costs, along with&nbsp;benefits to a much broader segment of the community.&nbsp; Too, public buildings afford greater opportunity for access, and education.&nbsp; </p><p>On the broader front, customers will purchase efficient and/or RE products when their pocketbooks dictate.&nbsp; If they're stuck with a gas-hog and an upside-down payment/resale value, they'll stick it out, and put off realizing the loss.&nbsp; They have no illusions: those gas-hogs will be driven by someone else, here or abroad.&nbsp; (You DO know we're shipping the excess overseas, right?)</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>
Comment
41 of 48
January 30, 2008
<p>&nbsp;Its all kind of happening to much to soon.&nbsp;Kids dont like to be pressured into buying something practical, espeacialy when it has a lot of attention surrounding it. Back off a little.&nbsp;They know its out there. Quit being a bunch of Greedy Gus's. Lower your prices and be patient.</p><p>I can tell you the worst thing about PV is the simple fact that&nbsp;most folks do not want to spend&nbsp;$500 to offset the cost of their electric bill by&nbsp;one 100 watt light bulb for a few hours a ngiht.&nbsp;When the difference is $14 a year. It would only take 35 years for the PV module to pay for its self at that rate. Get the picture?</p>
Comment
42 of 48
January 30, 2008
<p>In a since we are all kids right? Some are big some are little but we are all kids at heart or at least we want to be. I mean, lets face facts here, kids typically have more fun and kids love candy, anything sweet, anything with sugar.</p><p>Well, I tend to look at RE as a sort of sugar substitute metaphorically speaking. It looks like sugar, it tastes like sugar, I am&nbsp;not sure about the cavity thing,&nbsp;but somehow knowing that its not sugar it just doesnt really take the place of sugar. You just dont get that sugar high off of the substitute either.</p><p>To my mind the phrase &quot;Energy Independence&quot; doesnt conjour up images of being free from the cost&nbsp;natural resources of another nation or the resulting pollution there of,&nbsp;it conjours up images of being free from the cravings for energy.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>
Comment
43 of 48
January 30, 2008
Mr. Briggs, <br /> With regard to your further question on renewable energy if by 'renewable' you are referring to growing our way to energy independence by converting grain, cane, beets, grass or other crops to usable energy, it did not work in Brazil and is not working here without massive government subsidies. If you are referring to solar, wind, or wave generation there is probably a niche market. In any case all so-called renewable or sustainable sources are dependent on two things ;&quot;mother nature' to act responsibly, providing the right amount of sun, rain, wind, etc., when and where needed and to act benignly, i.e.,no hurricanes, tornados, floods, fires, ice storms or other bad weather which disrupts both growing seasons and electrical transmission for hours or days.&nbsp;&nbsp;
Comment
44 of 48
January 30, 2008
<p>Mr.Briggs,</p><p>Since every living thing on earth is carbon based the continued effort to demonize CO2, which constitutes approximately 0.035 to 0.04 percent of the earth's atmosphere and is needed to maintain our atmospheric oxygen levels is truly unscientific. The simple fact is that the earth's climate has cycled between Ice Ages and extreme warm periods for tens of or hundreds of millions of years without any help from humans.&nbsp; Saul Bellow said: &quot;A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep.&quot; and this true for the idea that human activity causes global warming.&nbsp;</p><p>Thanks again </p><p>E.Patrick Mosman&nbsp; &nbsp;</p>
Comment
45 of 48
January 30, 2008
Mr. Briggs,<br /> Thank you for an interesting question. Human caused global warming&nbsp; is based on assumptions triggered primarily by Professor Mann's 'Hockey stick' curve of global warming. The sharp increase in temperature in this curve was immediately attributed by the writers of the first IPCC report, not the scientific findings which were ignored and even changed, as due to human greenhouse gas emissions. Since then Professor Mann's curve has been discredited by two vigerous studies but only after the US Congress forced Mr. Mann to provide a Congressional established scientific study group and other scientists with his data and methodology. However, the Mann curve is still being touted by some as proof that human activity causes global warming.
Comment
46 of 48
February 9, 2008
<p>Again,...as stated before,....wait until fuel is $5.00 a gallon in North America.&nbsp; Then see how many electricians, builders come to play.</p><p>Contractors will be all over our TV's, radio, newspapers heralding the beautiful benefits of PV, concentrated, Geo, etc.&nbsp; Installers will grow exponentially, but prices will be kept relatively high due to demand.&nbsp; So,...why wait for installations in the future.&nbsp; Get it done now while competition is low, and you can &quot;whiddle&quot; down the price for installs with good negotiation skills.&nbsp; Ohh yaah, that's something else we don't learn in our schools.&nbsp; I guess we should just keep studying the &quot;Nina/Pinta/Santa Maria&quot; for all time.</p><p>All the Best,</p>
Comment
47 of 48
May 25, 2009
I work in Texas and have started getting Green Mountain Energy mailings asking me to switch to a renewabl electric service rate with them. I checked into how a renewable electricity rate could be cheaper than a rate produced using coal and found out it may have something to do with large heaps of rotting wood. The wood piles are not in Texas but they represent renewable energy credits that Texas electric providers can purchase. These wood piles represent a lot of potential energy and it is very cheap. There may not be a lot of demand for it right now which is why Texas energy suppliers are able to buy these REC's and than turn around and sell it as an electric rate below a TXU Energy coal produced electric rate. This site had a list of all the green electric providers in Texas. http://www.texas-electric-companies.com/Retail-Electric-Providers/green-electric-providers/ You can check prices with these companies and those electric companies that offer a dirtier form of electricity.
Comment
48 of 48
March 21, 2011
I've been comparing electricity rates in Texas and I am utterly confused. So many companies offer one time deals, gimmicks, and specials, it's hard to compare but this site helped me a lot.
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Advertise With Us

Comment:Visions groSolar FRONIUS USA LLC  Solar Electronics Division Solar Energy International (SEI) Stoel Rives LLP Sharp Solar Energy Solutions Group Rotork plc
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine North America Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Photovoltaics World Magazine Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters