Jon's Comments

Yeah, the payback struck me as well, but what we aren't told, is how much of the money is actually going for replacing the roof structure itself, not merely solar installation. I would imagine some of these places have been in place for a while, and might need sections replaced. The solar is probably icing on the cake.

Electric38...speaking from Utah...not much. Remote sites use solar, as well as some large warehouses, but its mostly a Public Relations item for box stores. As for wind, the county I live in, Tooele, has 1 tower, that I've been able to find. Granted, its a large one..but it is, after all..one tower. Utah has abundant coal reserves and powerful industrial lobbies that will prevent more than lip service, for many years to come. They'll 'study' it, to seem like they're doing something, but until someone lights a fire under them, they will do nothing. If anyone cares to disagree, I'd be happy to change my mind, but other than a handful of wind turbines at the mouth of a canyon, you won't find much here. Hydro depends on snowfall here, so that's a chancy thing, but we do have several producing resevoirs. Could more be done? Of course, with a little vision and fewer political action commitees. We're the 2nd driest state after Nevada, but there's a river of cash keeping the status quo in place.

I find it ironic, but not surprising that it takes Californian energy needs to get Utah to produce clean energy.

The article is rather vague regarding location, but huge tracts of land in Utah are Federally owned, and quite a bit is owned by the State. State land resources, timber, mining, whatever, if sold/leased are put toward education funding for Utah schools. The article mentions only geothermal rights, as well as 'surface' rights which probably cover the building of roads, buildings and transmission (power) lines.
If the land is federal, various agencies govern the enviromental impact of the proposed land's use, the rate the gov'ment is paid and whatnot. As well, the contract covers what is expected to be done to restore any damage that occurs in exploiting the resource. Usually the rates are low, under the theory that its an incentive to bring businesses forward to tap into the resource. Its a common, but pretty involved, process. No one wants to see the land ruined, but we also want to see that energy tapped, so compromises are worked out. I hope it goes forward. Most of Utah's power plants are coal fired, with oil, natural gas and hydroelectric filling in the rest.

"Projects like the Hu Honua Bioenergy Facility play an important role in shifting Hawaii's energy mix away from imported petroleum toward renewable sources."

-- Dan KenKnight, Director, Hu Honua BioEnergy LLC

Which is nice and all...but the article refers to a converted coal fired plant. Last time I checked, coal ain't petroleum.

I agree with Muir Matteson. The buildings ARE going to be cooled, so they might as well use a local resource, rather than tankers bringing oil across that same ocean.

I believe the figures included cover only the cost of the CABLE contract. Thus, 3 cables (one of which is a spare) and the fiber optics one.

I think some are willfully ignoring the premis of the article. IF, with branding, you can sway people to pony up some cash for solar, this in turn, would bring the needed cash flow to the industry as a whole. In turn, this funds R & D, as well as drawing in more venture capitalism to a proven service provider. The very fact we are all reading this, means we've purchased computers, and likely consider them not luxuries, but 'necessities'. $90.00 a month for cell phones seemed insane even a short time ago. Today, try taking one from a teen without a lawsuit for cruel and unusual punishment :P
Where we CHOOSE to put our money says a lot about ourselves. So, I find the concept of carping about a sustainable resource being 'less affordable' than any that do not help us survive, laughable. If you have the ability to choose renewables, and realize it's the right thing to do, I applaud you. As for asking others to pay for it... no one asked downwinders at all, when they threw up coal-fired power plants and told them, literally, to suck it up.
Jon Reese
Local 1859
1978-1983
United Mine Workers of America
How's this for branding?
"Coal, It's America's Ace in the Hole"
Yeah, buncha aceholes came up with that one, but it worked.

Dear Dr. Christensen,

As you can tell by the comments about your recent article about 'branding' (g'lord, how'd you get away with using beef, and branding, in the same paragraph?), the renewable community is deeply divided. I'm afraid you tapped into a lot of resentment that solar is still so costly. Unfortunately, our society isn't so great at figuring out the invisible costs of quality of life issues.
They did, rightly, point out that your California cost model, doesn't approach the 'average' most would expect to compare their own experiences with. Regardless, when greenhouse gas penalties are accessed, and I believe they will have to be, then we'll all be forced to realize a truer cost of 'retail'
mainstream electricity production.

Mr. Weingarten,

Funny

Mr. Weingarten,

Funny you should mention 'off grid' and Habitat For Humanity.

http://www.sustainablehomemag.com/CDA/Archives/BNP_GUID_9-5-2006_A_10000000000000097390

Granted, it's not totally off the grid, but it's moving toward the edge!

There's been other efforts by HFH, but the main idea was to keep utility costs down for the homeowners. Such efforts are worth our support.

Years ago, my folks put an insert in their fireplace, with fans to distribute the waste heat that normally went up the flue, and it made a huge difference.

"Greater energy output and increased efficiency are among the key features of the new 2.5xl wind turbine. The new machine's rotor diameter of 100 meters is an increase of 12 meters over the current 2.5-megawatt wind turbine, and is the largest GE wind turbine available for onshore applications"

Quote is from GE's website, so yes, rotor diameter of 100m is correct. I suppose each blade is just under 50m with the hub counting for a little, but perhaps they just rounded it off. They'll be made in Germany and Spain, so Turkey's not that far away. Here's hoping the Gov'ment of Turkey sees the success of this and supports it more, in the future, so they actually HAVE a future.

Jim, 'those people' do, in fact pay for their homes. Habitat For Humanity provides no interest loans in exchange for aproximately 300 hours of 'sweat equity' invested in their own homes. Further, many go on to donate hours of work, gaining skills both technical and social, on the homes of others. Therefore, I'd put 'those people' way ahead of anyone sneering from behind the comfort of his or her computer screen. Tell ya what, when you pick up an actual hammer and swing it at a worthy target, I'll donate another $300.00 to HFH, just like I did last week when they needed some help. And before you pick up a brush and try and paint me as a flaming liberal, I'm in Law Enforcement, Dept. of Defense. You know...'those people'.

Agreed, Ken. Here's a link to a recent NPR interview about it. Its not specific, doesn't break down gas vs oil or anything, but does have what Congress is going after.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6854127
Hit the 'listen' tab to operate.