Pil: I agree completely that we can solve our present problems with technology; I do wonder why you think that subsidizing solar panels is either necessary or desirable, though. The example of our synthetic rubber technology didn’t require any subsidies, did it?
The truth is that solar technology will not be competitive with fossil fuel technology in the foreseeable future, even with $200/barrel oil(if that ever happens). The predictions of $4/gal gas was made in 2005, and isn’t here yet. I don’t think it’s ever wise to take action on the basis of predictions, especially economic predictions.
robert108 - 11:05am on 05/06/2008
r108,
The solar panels could and would take a lot of strain off of our aging power grids as well. I don’t think it would be a replacement for fossil fuel energy, but a supplement.
Pilgrim - 11:05am on 05/06/2008
The solar panels could and would take a lot of strain off of our aging power grids as well. I don’t think it would be a replacement for fossil
fuel energy, but a supplement.
I think your requirement for a subsidy tells the real story. If and when solar panels are competitive on a level playing field, they will make it in the market.
I hope the ethanol example will be a lesson to everyone that the market knows best.
robert108 - 11:05am on 05/06/2008
The solar panels could and would take a lot of strain off of our aging power grids as well.
Hmmm, have you forgotten about cloudy conditions and short winter days when the highest energy consumption is when there is no sunlight? Solar energy will always have to be suplemented by other energy sources.
docdave - 11:05am on 05/06/2008
I think oine good way to gemore energy isto build Nuclear Power Plants. That would help with powering homesand businesses. If you live in the desert, solar power iffine,but wahtif you live in the Midwest where stormswill block the solar panels. Or if youlive in the Pacific Northwest where it rains a lot.
We shold tap ANWAR, The Florida Coast, Gulf of Mexico, and coast of California. Also untap all the oil rigs that have been shut down for years.
And in the mean time while we use the domestic oil, wecan have technology getmorefule efficient cars, and help drive down the costsofthe hybtrids and get rid oftheboondongle of biofueltha is costing usmoreto make than notto make. It is driving up cost infood and also in gass prices. Cutthe subsidies to the biofuel farms and seehow much it reallycosts the American people for this ridiculous wasteof food.
Stix - 11:05am on 05/06/2008
A solar panel subsidy is foolish. The cost per unit of power is too high, and the amount of power produced by a home solar power system is next to trivial. This proposal does sound liberal, because it is.
Craig - 01:05pm on 05/06/2008
A solar panel subsidy is foolish.
I’m not talking about substituting solar power for the power from the main grids. Again, I’m talking about supplementing it.
Is it the answer to cutting our dependance on OPEC? No. It’s a drop in the bucket.
Got a better idea, Craig?
Pilgrim - 01:05pm on 05/06/2008
...why not give a full tax credit for the entire cost of installing a solar panel on your home? Or if you live in the country, a windmill for power? Want to save on energy? Produce your own. I’d install a solar panel tomorrow if I could get a total tax credit to do it…
I think oine good way to gemore energy isto build Nuclear Power Plants…
I still have not seen anyone make the link between electricity production and transportation fuels. Electricity has been affordable for very long time in the US, and we have a surplus at night.
Where are all of the electric cars?
How will more electricity alleviate the high cost of transportation?
Bueller? Bueller?
electnixon - 02:05pm on 05/06/2008
I have no objection to solar panels, unless I’m forced to pay for them.
robert108 - 02:05pm on 05/06/2008
Robert108: In the People’s Republic where I live, the Public Utilities Commission wants to force taxpayers to pay for off-shore wind-farms.
Pil: I agree completely that we can solve our present problems with technology; I do wonder why you think that subsidizing solar panels is either necessary or desirable, though. The example of our synthetic rubber technology didn’t require any subsidies, did it?
The truth is that solar technology will not be competitive with fossil fuel technology in the foreseeable future, even with $200/barrel oil(if that ever happens). The predictions of $4/gal gas was made in 2005, and isn’t here yet. I don’t think it’s ever wise to take action on the basis of predictions, especially economic predictions.
r108,
The solar panels could and would take a lot of strain off of our aging power grids as well. I don’t think it would be a replacement for fossil fuel energy, but a supplement.
I think your requirement for a subsidy tells the real story. If and when solar panels are competitive on a level playing field, they will make it in the market.
I hope the ethanol example will be a lesson to everyone that the market knows best.
Hmmm, have you forgotten about cloudy conditions and short winter days when the highest energy consumption is when there is no sunlight? Solar energy will always have to be suplemented by other energy sources.
I think oine good way to gemore energy isto build Nuclear Power Plants. That would help with powering homesand businesses. If you live in the desert, solar power iffine,but wahtif you live in the Midwest where stormswill block the solar panels. Or if youlive in the Pacific Northwest where it rains a lot.
We shold tap ANWAR, The Florida Coast, Gulf of Mexico, and coast of California. Also untap all the oil rigs that have been shut down for years.
And in the mean time while we use the domestic oil, wecan have technology getmorefule efficient cars, and help drive down the costsofthe hybtrids and get rid oftheboondongle of biofueltha is costing usmoreto make than notto make. It is driving up cost infood and also in gass prices. Cutthe subsidies to the biofuel farms and seehow much it reallycosts the American people for this ridiculous wasteof food.
A solar panel subsidy is foolish. The cost per unit of power is too high, and the amount of power produced by a home solar power system is next to trivial. This proposal does sound liberal, because it is.
I’m not talking about substituting solar power for the power from the main grids. Again, I’m talking about supplementing it.
Is it the answer to cutting our dependance on OPEC? No. It’s a drop in the bucket.
Got a better idea, Craig?
I still have not seen anyone make the link between electricity production and transportation fuels. Electricity has been affordable for very long time in the US, and we have a surplus at night.
Where are all of the electric cars?
How will more electricity alleviate the high cost of transportation?
Bueller? Bueller?
I have no objection to solar panels, unless I’m forced to pay for them.
Robert108: In the People’s Republic where I live, the Public Utilities Commission wants to force taxpayers to pay for off-shore wind-farms.