Slashdot Mirror
Solar Power On the White House
CartaNova writes "The Obama administration has announced plans to install solar panels and a solar hot water heater on the White House. The Carter administration had previously installed a 32-panel solar system at the White House — which was quietly removed during Reagan's tenure in office. Solar hot water and Photovoltaic firms had been campaigning on this issue for some time."
Why did Reagan remove them?
Why do Europeans have problems not generalizing about Americans?
I just signed a contract to get solar power installed, and the sales guy said business was booming. His phone didn't stop buzzing the entire time.
Also, our President is getting solar power, if you hadn't heard.
>>they were removed during the Reagan administration when they were making repairs to the roof since it wasn't considered cost-effective to replace the panels (although the truthfulness of that could of course be doubted since we're talking about the Reagan administration).
I'd trust Reagan more on cost-effectiveness than Obama, whose answer to every question is "YES".
That said, according to a solar website I read today (so take it with a grain of salt) PV panels have come down from $40,000/watt to $5/watt. Though this may be including subsidies that make up half or more of the cost, it's still a good improvement over the '60s. They're also willing to do the installation for free, and sell you power at a 20% discount, so I guess they're putting their money where their mouth is (if it's not a scam).
www.realgoodssolar.com
I am curious, not trying to bust your chops or anything but how can you justify the cost on something that will never pay a return? I cannot see it ever being a good investment at todays prices at least.
Depending on where you live (ie: depends on how much sun you get and the cost of electricity) as well as what government subsidies for solar installations are offered, it is possible to get a loan for solar equipment today and have the savings on your electric bill completely cover the cost of the loan with savings to spare. So you're not actually spending money out of pocket... it pays for itself and then some.
The downside to this approach is that in a few years, solar panels will be even cheaper and more efficient and the resulting loan payment will be even less and you'll be stuck saving less than you could have saved had you waited. In other words, do you want a net savings of $30/month starting today for 20 years, or wait 3 years and have a net savings of $50/month for 20 years?
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
I hope the power companies don't retaliate
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Politics aside, this is a great symbolic gesture by the White House. Hopefully the publicity will make a few people think of installing a solar water heater and be kind to Mother earth. Understand that this technology might not be applicable for all parts of the world, but there is significant portion of the world where the solar water heater makes eminent sense. Currently I live in Bangalore, India. I have a solar water installed in my house with a 300 liters storage volume. It works for 95% of the year flawlessly supplying hot water for the whole family. On the rare days, when the water temp is not hot enough (it is never colder than ambient temperature), we have a valve in the bathrooms which will route the hot water thru a electric heater. According to my calculation we need to spend about 1000 rupees in electricity charges per month for going completely electrical water heating. The unit cost me about 50 K rupees to buy and install. So it makes good economic sense to me and hot water is always available. BTW it is estimated that we really need one hour of good sunshine (post noon, because the solar panels are facing SW direction) to heat up the water. These are really popular in India, wish it was adopted more than the extant situation. The city is planning on making this mandatory for all new houses. I was actually planning to install PV's to generate all the electricity needed for our family (BTW based on the past 15 months consumption data, we consume ~ 250 KWh per month). Spoke to a few poeple, did the math, PV's are still economically not feasible. If anyone has any solid data or leads let me know, I will certainly be interested in knowing more. Additional data: I have a UPS installed in the house (rated at 5 KVA, with four 12V 120AH batteries, which I believe can store approx 8 KWh of energy) which should be enough supply the house in the night times. So ideally with the right PV's (which can generate about 10 KWh per day with a few hours of sunshine) I can completely go off the grid and tap into the grid only on emergencies or when we have unusuall
G W Bush's house in TX is also one of the most environmentally friendly houses on the planet. Al Gore, on the other hand, lives in a mansion here in Nashville that is 3 times the size of my house but with 10 times the energy usage. He also has another mansion in CA that's comparable in size.
Sometimes it's what you *do* rather than what you *say* that tells me everything I need to know about you...
Do you have ESP?
Interesting argument. I especially like the "drying outdoors is forbidden" -- and wonder whether the dryer manufacturers had any hand in the creation of those laws.
Last night I watched an excellent movie that was referenced here a couple weeks ago, which I then ordered from their website: "What If Cannabis Cured Cancer?" I was completely blown away by this (hour-long) movie; it shows how two interlocking substances evolved in different directions, we have one of them in our bodies, and the other is found in cannabis; together, they reduce the size of tumors. Mice given drugs that block these receptors showed signs of depression, and developed tumors. Much more to it, highly recommended.
I mention it because of the duality -- perhaps dryer manufacturers passed laws that then propped up their industry; similarly, William Randolph Hearst helped pass the law making cannabis illegal because the law propped up his textile industry.
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
Speaking as a person who actually has a photovoltaic system of relatively recent vintage on the roof, it certainly does pay for itself.
My yearly $2000 electric bill is now zero.
In New Jersey, the law states that the electric company has to use "net metering", meaning that at the end of each year after installation, the company nets up how much you gave them and how much they gave you. If you used more, you pay retail for that electric power; if you made more, they give you wholesale for the part you made for them. So, I made a hundred or so.
The real kicker is the SRECs. For every megawatt hour one makes, surplus or not, you get a Solar Renewable Energy Credit. I just sold August's for $645 to an aggregator. I get about ten of them a year; so, in a couple of years, the original cost of the panels will be paid off.
The power companies in the state are required to make some 2% of their electricity "green". For anything less than that, they pay a fine per megawatt hour, but they can pay the fine with SRECs. The state sets the fine amount per megatwatt hour; right now that's hovering around $700 per SREC.
The SRECs received by the state go into the bit bucket. Cash received by the state goes into grants funding more solar panels. Ratepayers end up footing the bill. Advantage for the community: With solar power going in like crazy, coal-burning plants don't have to be built to handle the air conditioning load and the NIMBY factor of new plants is vastly reduced.
This is what comes of having a state legislator who's a EE with an economics degree.
NJ has more panels than any other state save California.
With pretty much zero cost out of pocket and a 2nd mortgage for the panels, I've been cash-flow positive on the whole deal since day one.
I live in Nashville and I've seen his house. I can show it to you if you're in town. He bought solar panels *after* his energy usage was made public. While he has an office there, his main office is at Loew's Vanderbilt hotel on West End. I've seen him there in person while I was there on unrelated business. Codes don't allow him to staff an office at his Belle Meade mansion.
Furthermore, he had the money to build an efficient house rather than buy that one. One just a few blocks away sold recently for under $350K, he could have bulldozed it and put up an efficient house if he liked the neighborhood.
I don't want to take his home or anything else that he has.
Do you have ESP?
It has, however, been remarkably stable since our species has existed.
No, actually it hasn't. Those are just off the top of my head and limited to the geologically insignificant amount of time that humans have been around.
like rising sea levels, melting glaciers for instance?
All of which has happened before without any human intervention and which will happen again with or without humans.
or do you want to wait until the tipping point is past before trying to mitigate what we're doing?
What "tipping point"? Do you really believe there is some magical line that we will cross, after which we are doomed?
From your head in the sand ostrich positions, logic and science do certainly look elitist...
Yey, another insult. I guess it's too hard for you to engage in a respectful dialog on this particular issue. Are you normally this offensive or are you just incapable of having your belief system challenged?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.