Solar Roof

[Seymore4Head]

Anyone have one?

That Musk guy makes them sound very appealing.

[Ed Pawlowski]

Last I read the introduction was delayed a bit. I don't think anyone has one yet aside from testing. Check back in six months

[Roger Blake]

Musk is a rent-seeking huckster. Without the carbon credit scam his company would have folded up a long time ago.

[mike]

What's Trump's agenda gonna do to that? And what happens to all the existing solar installations precariously supported by credits?

[gfretwell]

Most of the credits are already paid out. They were for the installation but new installations could suffer if Trump dumps the credits. I know that the thing that stopped my solar plans was when the Florida grant program ran dry. I still use solar pool heat but solar PV is still too expensive to make much sense financially. I will be dead before it pays for itself, assuming nothing breaks. One hurricane could push that out to my kid's death.

[trader_4]

I guess it depends on what credits you're counting. Some of them have expired, like some or all of the federal tax credit for installation. But AFAIK, utilities are still under constraint to buy an increasing share of their electric from clean, green, sources. Here in NJ, they are mandated to do that and one form is to buy electricity from those residential solar panels. Something obviously makes them practical here, I see new ones going up all the time. IDK what people are getting now, but the requirement that the utilities buy green was giving people with solar panels thousands a year. I think that has tapered down somewhat now, but it's still a substantial subsidy.

[Tony944]

which are to be raised to $10.00/Month. On the end of year 2016, they = calculate how much did you use over the solar. Because Solar fluctuate = with the Sun some months are more some less. You will be using PG&E at = the times when there is no Sun. The problem here is that PG&E do not = calculate on monthly bases here but on yearly, 12 months of use is added = and you are charge for max rate because when 12 months are added into = one accumulative sum that put you in Tear#4 or $0.36/Kwh. Instead if = this was calculated per month you would be below Tear#1. So: at the end = of the year you savings are next to nothing, in mean time Solar = financial group will be tripling+ their profit on your sweat and labor. = You see Ladies and Gentleman Credits/Rebates are design for the rich and = Legislators which they owe at any giving time to the Uncle Sam Thousands = of dollars so that can benefit and people on Social Security get rusted = shaft in rear. HELLO!!!=20 As I said California Government is big SCAM. DIGESTED IF YOU CAN! I CAN NOT=E2=80=9D

[trader_4]

Yeah, well, like any rebates, tax breaks, etc, you can't make everyone happy. And IDK what's going on in CA, but in many states there are incentives, subsidies other than just an income tax credit.

[gfretwell]

People on SSI are not going to be able to front up the $20,000-50,000 to install solar in the first place so this is a red herring. Solar is welfare for the rich but it is not because of the way people get paid back.

[Phil Kangas]

Wind and solar are indeed a farce. Check this out:

[Ed Pawlowski]

I'd not call it a farce, but it says we have to do things in a different manner. It will take many more years to become economically a winner. They laughed at the horseless carriage too.

[Roger Blake]

Solar should be permitted to succeed or fail on its own merits. If it is any good it does not need to be subsidized.

[mike]

In the general case, I'd agree. In some cases, the startup costs are so high that for-profit industry can't front the money to do it. There's also the issue of coordination. It's the old chicken, egg, dead chicken problem. I won't build an electric car if you won't make batteries. You won't make batteries if there are no electric cars. Nobody wants to pay more to drive an electric car...strike 3. The people, through their elected officials, for the common good, subsidize the startup.

Wind and solar certainly have their place where needs are modest and no alternatives exist. As a general solution to the world's energy needs, they're a non-starter with currently imaginable technology and insatiable demand. Subsidize the research. Build some prototypes. Don't subsidize rooftop solar panels in regions where alternatives are plentiful. Build nukes instead. Waste disposal is a far easier problem to solve than global warming past the tipping point. No, I don't have a solution, but nobody can imagine a solution to climate change past the tipping point.

The elephant in the room is global warming. The proven solution with available technology is nuclear. We could solve our CO2 problem with nuclear. There's too much fear for that to happen until we really feel the consequences of global warming. Then it's too late. So, we'll just continue on our current path to destruction. It's a self limiting situation. Our descendents will die off. No big deal for us tho. We'll all be fine...sigh... People are just too selfish to reduce current demand for some future disaster...assuming you believe the GW fear mongers.

I think the evidence is a bit thin. If Al Gore believed it, would he be flying around in a private plane to his many mansions? He should be setting an example, not exacerbating the problem.

The solution to the problem is clear. Build some nuclear power plants. Terminate half the population, sterilize most of who's left and live within the resources of the planet. Or let the planet do it for you. Same end result, just harsher conditions for the survivors.

The problem can't be fixed with the current mindset, no matter how many tree huggers march in the streets. Think how much we could achieve if all the people marching in the streets destroying property of those who have no impact on the solution set about solving the problems we already have.

[fred]

Fracking is all the rage but it pollutes the ground water supply. Has it polluted your water yet?

Burning coal spews the neurotoxin mercury into the air we breathe. Had your blood tested for mercury yet?

Nuclear? Mind if we store the waste in your basement?

Yes, solar panels are currently expensive but their price will come down and their efficiency will go up as the technology evolves.

[83LowRider]

[Frank]

Exactly right. Mandating it will not make it so. You cannot legislate science to make it do what you want. Too many decisions are made today by politicians. Does not bother me if investors lose money off bad decisions but bad public decisions loose taxpayers money.

[Ed Pawlowski]

You have to consider the long term benefit and will it help everyone and at what cost. The government does subsidize medical research, for instance. Should cures for all diseases stand on their own merits too?

I'm not against some help, but it should not be just a freebie for everyone either. Solar will be a big deal in the future and help everyone eventually. If nothing else, it powers some highway signs already.

[gfretwell]

The main thing that is bringing the price down is they are being made in Asian countries with no environmental regulations for handling the hazmat they produce, using coal fired plants and coolie labor. We are basically sending our government subsidy dollars to China and being told to feel good about it.

[Frank]

I'm not necessarily against it getting started but do not like continuous subsidies. PBS is a good example. I remember when there were only 3 local TV channels and PBS brought in a fourth. Today on the cable there are over 1,000 TV channels. Time for PBS to wing it alone.

[makolber]

the subsidies for solar help people that can afford to be part of the solar experiment, pay a little less.

the subsidies for solar are not for basic research as your analogy with medical research suggests.

i too am in favor of basic research