If Walmart is making money on it, then it's economically viable. If it
can generate "rent" then any renter must be figuring on a profit that
is large enough to enable signing a lease.
Sounds as if their is money to be made.
Leasing the roof is econmically viable, but we weren't (as you well
know when you aren't trying to obfuscate) talking about renting roofs,
but rather the ability to make money off of generating electricity
through solar panels.
The renter is probably figuring a profit, but that is hardly a
guarantee that they are going to get it. The collapse of ethanol
industry is a sterling example of market forces overcoming feel good
capitalism with a rather nasty vegence.
We don't know if it was profitable or how profitable. We also don't know
(which is probably an even more important metric long term) is how much
of any profit was related to all the tax and other incentives available.
If (when) they go away, the profitability estimates will change
radically. Or not, since the above mentioned ethanol industry tanked
even with economic incentives out the wazoo.
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 06:35:39 -0500, email@example.com wrote:
How much do you figure they pay for ads talking about their social
conscience? There are some tax writeoffs too (essentually governmet
You could use the German PV system as an example if you want. The cost
was 55 Euro cents a KWH last summer when I read the article. The
government ate 30 cents of it in subsidies so the user cost was 25
cents a KWH (if you ignore the taxes they pay).
I have looked into a PV array several times and I still can't make any
economic case favoring the idea, even assuming 20 years with zero
In a state with 3-4 land falling hurricanes a year, on average, and an
ass kicking thunderstorm almost every afternoon in the summer, that is
I keep waiting for that magic photocell that is cheaper than utility
power over my lifetime but it always seems to be "a few years away".
This does not include local streets, parking lots, etc. I doubt anyone
is suggesting that 100% of power needs could be met by solar.
You could come up with enough excuses to keep things as they are, but I
don't think that works long term any better than the windmills.
I suspect that may also be why the guys I know with hybrids don't get
the advertised mileage. A/C is pretty much a year round thing here. I
imagine you need to have the engine going to get the AC compressor
going. When you are stuck in traffic on a hot day you start losing the
advantage of being able to turn off the engine.
I live in Central TX and I do get better mileage in cooler months but if I
keep my a/c on 78 degrees it's not too much of a drain. Probably drops
around 2 mpg. If you put it on "max" forget it.
Obviously you aren't looking at a Camry hybrid. We routinely get 37 mpg.
We check each tankful. Your V6 will probably get 21 at best. My wife would
not have been satisified with the 4 cylinder acceleration though it would
get 28 mpg or so.
safety/emissions equipment adds weight/complexity/cost, and most
consumers just don't want bare-bones transportation. (personally, I'm
all for it - I have fond memories of several A1-chassis Volkswagens -
but it's clear that I'm sadly in the minority.)
Not completely nate. The best vehicle of some 12 or 15 we have owned
and or driven (including a few company cars assigned to me etc.), also
several VW bugs. since the 1950s, was a 1991 Nissan four cylinder
pickup which we bought for $2200 in 1997. We were the fourth owners.
We got it painted and did some repairs including a clutch, brakes etc.
See total costs over some 7 years. It took my son back and forth to
college for over 3 years and we also used it most weekends in our
small business. It finally rotted out at age 13 due to our corrosive
maritime climate and the heavy use of road salt here with almost
300,000 kilometres (about 190,000 miles).
It was a 'better' truck than the newer 1995 Nissan extra cab pickup
also bought that year; to replace a used 1985 Toyota. The 1995 is now
also rotting away with less than 200,000 kilometres at 12 years old.
The 1991 had more power than the 1995, and was nicer to drive. We also
loaded it pretty heavy too.
The 1991 was one of the simplest vehicles. The only 'extra' it had was
a heater. Single tone horn, one speed wipers, manual windows, standard
5 speed transmission etc. no power steering, no radio, all very basic.
If maintained nothing went wrong; very, very reliable. Oh come to
think of it seem to remember we did put in a wheel bearing cos some
previous owner had not adjusted the bearing slack correctly. Also a
supposed rebuilt replacement master cylinder that turned out be faulty
took a bit of effort.
The 1991 had been manufactured in Japan! So for example a couple of
things including the wiper linkage that did break on the 1995 Nissan
which was an almost identical vehicle used in an almost identical and
interchangeable manner by the same two drivers; but which had been
manufactured or assembled in the USA and shipped to Canada. A note
here btw; many of the vehicles purchased here (in Canada) are
manufactured in the USA!
A year later the previous owner who had bought a brand new North
American vehicle and among other things operated a car wash facility,
wanted to buy back our 1991 Nissan. We declined. Also along the way we
found that the 1991 had been the first vehicle owned by a friendly
Nissan dealer's mechanic of our acquaintance!
Over some 7 years, until we gave it to another mechanic to be scrapped
we calculated that the first cost of the 1991 vehicle plus all major
repairs worked out to less than $80 per month! That did not included
gas, insurance etc. since those were virtually identical to those for
When we went to buy a 2002 replacement, the thirstier V6 Frontier t
(USA built again) that we now drive came with all sorts of unnecessary
and hence unused options. Nissans are pretty reliable so nothing has
gone wrong, we have had no recalls and no warranty work needed for
over 6 years. We have done the rear brakes once and front brakes
twice. It's mainly city/short distance driving.
Whereas a neighbour who consistently drives V8 GM pickups seems to be
always doing brake jobs, front end work etc. His pickup is lightly
used to drive to and from work. It's never had a load of bricks or
load of logs in the back for example.
I wish one could buy a good simple (no frills) four or five year old
(Presumably Nissan or Toyota) pickup for say 20 to 25% of the cost of
a new one!
BTW: If GM etc. want to get out of the red perhaps they should build/
sell Toyotas or Nissans!
Toyota just opened another North American plant and you know they
hiring North Americans, paying North American wages and paying North
American taxes etc. And no they are not staffed by cheap immigrant
labour. Canada and Canadian provinces have pretty strong minimum wage
and labour legislation.
Overall am wondering if this business of throwing away only partially
used up items is responsible for overproduction and therefore overuse
of the world's resources and is in part leading to the credit crunch.
For example someone here has just advertised along the lines of 'Free,
take it away, washer and dryer five years old. Wife has joust bought
new and wants them gone. Contact ABC-1234 etc.".
Geez; I don't have on appliance that new. Five years old is barely run-
in! How wasteful. The very much used dryer (20+ years old?) am using
now, for example, was similarly acquired; for a case of beer, five
years ago IIRC. And the current stove is I believe third hand; works
No wonder we have a healthy bank balance and no debt. Now about those
investments that have lost some 30%!!!!!!!!
Anyway have to go and move a ladder with the 2002 truck. Cheers.
Know what you mean. A few years before, I bought a Ford Custom with a 427
Interceptor engine, 4 bbl carb, six-ply nylon ultra-high speed pursuit
tires, 8-quart crankcase, large radiator, radio interference suppression
wiring, heavy duty shocks, anti-sway suspension, truck frame, rubber floor
and vinyl seats, speedometer calibrated to +/- 1 mph with a max reading of
155, built-in roll-bar.
It got nine mpg in the city.
Loved that car.
You could be crusin' thru the 'hood at eighty or so, in the rain, and, if a
child happened to step in front of the car, just tap the brakes. You'd stop.
Or, instead of a child, you could go over some railroad tracks at the same
speed and all four tires would stay on the ground.
I had a 72 Jeep that just ate clutch cables, actually the clevis that
connected the cable to the pedal. I drove it home a couple of times
without the clutch until I just started carrying a spare. I lost a
cable once too. After that I redesigned the whole cludge with parts I
made up myself and never had another problem. (cable with a thimble
and eye and a clevis like you use on chain)
I did get pretty good driving without a clutch tho. Start it in gear
and just engine match the gears to shift. You do have to plan ahead
and don't tailgate but that is good advice any time. It is a little
tough in DC rush hour traffic tho.
I had a 63 Dodge cab over pickup, the one
based on the van chassis with the slant 6
between the seats. I drove the 20 miles to
the house which was on top of a mountain
after the clutch rod broke. It was a very
This thing is real easy to replace, just a pin with a cotter pin. The
first time it was a little harder because they really bent the cotter
pin up very neatly and I had to pick at it to get it out. After that I
used a retaining pin that just pulled out. I got to the point that I
could replace the clevis between changes at a long light. I didn't
even have to see what I was doing, I could do it by feel.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.