rehmwa 2 #26 July 10, 2007 Quote I only wish the government(s) would make it even more palatable by offering larger rebates and tax breaks. Who's this "government" you talk about? So, let's take tax money from individuals, siphon some off for administration, then give less back as a tax break to buy solar panels. In essence, everyone supplements everyone else's purchases... Give me $100, and I'll give you $90 back as a tax break/rebate. Nice How about if the 'government' helps, instead of wasting the money in a changing hands scenario that helps only a few, they instead support manufacturers in finding a way to make the things a lot cheaper so it actually makes sense to buy them. Or, have our taxes stay out of it completely and the manufacturers can figure it out on their own without interference. First to figure it out gets rich, the 2nd has a decent business, the rest, well, better luck with the next thing. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
trigger 0 #27 July 10, 2007 ugh, this is terrible accounting. Argh the buzz phase we're getting in the UK is to reduce our carbon footprint. It's not about cost/savings over here,its just about being trendy..CHOP WOOD COLLECT WATER. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #28 July 10, 2007 Quote Quote I only wish the government(s) would make it even more palatable by offering larger rebates and tax breaks. Who's this "government" you talk about? So, let's take tax money from individuals, siphon some off for administration, then give less back as a tax break to buy solar panels. In essence, everyone supplements everyone else's purchases... Give me $100, and I'll give you $90 back as a tax break/rebate. Nice Well, if the government body (state of California, for example) is going to spend the money anyhow on power infrastructure, then it's fair to want to see it spent on next generation power sources rather than the status quo. Even though the power shortage of 2001 was mostly mythical, usage will continue to grow with the population. And most of the population is in a good position to use solar due to the number of sunny days. Paying above market rates as cited for the Canadians would be an interesting incentive. Rather than discount on the purchase, you'd be encouraging people to oversize on the panels so they could be small day time producers when the load demand is highest. Unlike Enron types, they wouldn't flip the switch to game the price. Last question though - while solar panels don't generate pollution after construction, the process of making them is like any other silicon product. How bad is it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
trigger 0 #29 July 10, 2007 Not sure what the situation is in the US,but i've heard you need a license here in the UK if you start suppling the grid with electricity even on a very small scale say with excess solar/w.turbine power..CHOP WOOD COLLECT WATER. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #30 July 10, 2007 QuoteWell, if the government body (state of California, for example) is going to spend the money anyhow on power infrastructure, then it's fair to want to see it spent on next generation power sources rather than the status quo. I agree with that for the 'development' of the technology compared to just redistribution of money from one person to the other just to purchase a technology which isn't cost effective for the average joe. I'd still rather see the private sector own the development and the gov stay out of it. But if they 'have' to spend on it, let's have it done in a productive way, not just propogate purchase of something that should be more affordable otherwise. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skinnyflyer 0 #31 July 10, 2007 QuoteIf you are ONLY going to consider the economic benefits then I doubt any of us will ever buy a fuel efficient car, we will never buy a solar water heater and we will never consider any form of energy usage other than traditional, fossil-fueled systems that we use today. I strongly disagree. fuel efficient cars are already more economic and will be more so in the future. i posted the example of solar power already being on par with grid electricity in italy. trend; 1barrel of oil in 1999=$10 1barrel of oil in 2007=$70+ 1barrel of oil in 2015=??"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
