Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NPR story on utilities fighting back against solar

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by DanKegel View Post
    Just call me a skeptic. I'd love to hear more details about fraud induced by solar subsidies.
    You got to be kidding right? Government gives out free money and you think people are not going to line up with every scam possible.

    Are you aware how manu panel manufactures there were back in 2005 to 2010 that appeared over night to get a piece of the action and gone today. During that time First Solar stock soared to $400 a share and collapsed to $4 per share. They were lucky and survived, most have not. Remember Solyndra the one numb nuts NoBama touted? Hell even I got a piece of the action when I bought solar panel stock. I knew it was false market and sold just before the collapse back in 2008. I even put my hands in your pockets and bought myself an Obama Golf Cart in 2009. Where I lived at the time me and my neighbors bought over 200 brand new golf carts for pennies on the dollar. Every golf cart manufacture could not keep up with orders. These were not your average golf carts, they were NEV's with larger batteries, controllers, lights, turn signals bucket seats, seat belts and real windshields.

    Don't be a fool. Installation contractors are milking every dime they can before the party ends in Dec 2016 when the industry collapses when Obama and the subsides go away.
    MSEE, PE

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Sunking View Post
      Don't be a fool. Installation contractors are milking every dime they can before the party ends in Dec 2016
      In what way is that a problem? The goal of the subsidies was to jumpstart the market.
      During the time the subsidies were in place, prices declined greatly.

      The subsidies waved a big red flag to investors, saying "THERE IS A MARKET OPPORTUNITY HERE",
      and by gum, they responded. Yes, a few solar companies failed, but that's normal even in a
      completely free market. Do you think the price of solar panels would be so low at the moment
      if Europe and the US hadn't jumped in to solar with both feet with subsidies back then?

      You can make a pretty good case that the price decline would have happened eventually.
      The question is, how much longer would it have taken, and did we as a people get our money's worth?

      If you believe that all taxes are bad, and that the government should do nothing but run the courts
      and the military, then I suppose you're going to say "No, we did not get our money's worth".
      That's a reasonable disagreement, and it's what the ballot box is for.
      Or if you actually tally up the costs and benefits, and show that we really didn't get our money's
      worth, that's cool too. (Though I haven't seen such a tally yet.)

      What I find sad is when people get so emotional about things that they accuse
      those who honestly and reasonably disagee with them of being insincere or evil.
      That is, alas, the state of politics today in the US. Not sure what to do about it.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by DanKegel View Post
        In what way is that a problem? The goal of the subsidies was to jumpstart the market.
        During the time the subsidies were in place, prices declined greatly.
        No they are not, it is the government trying to pick a winner. The free market picks the winner. Always has and always will. You cannot change that.

        The prices fell because to many dang manufactures flooded the market with way too much product. Manufacturing stopped, and inventory was sold for a loss to recover as much money as possible before filling bankruptcy and preventing creditors from getting their money back. Take away the incentives (subsidies using my money) and Net Metering and solar is a dead duck.

        The two strongest panel manufactures are only worth 1/10 what they were in 2007. The rest are gone or in much worse shape barely hanging on to make it to the end of 2016 when the market will collapse in the USA.
        MSEE, PE

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Sunking View Post
          Take away the incentives (subsidies using my money) and Net Metering and solar is a dead duck.
          So you contend that solar will come to a screeching halt when the federal tax credit decreases from 30% to 10%?

          The companies that survived the shakeout - and that's a lot of them - may beg to differ.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by DanKegel View Post
            So you contend that solar will come to a screeching halt when the federal tax credit decreases from 30% to 10%?

            The companies that survived the shakeout - and that's a lot of them - may beg to differ.
            What those companies are already doing is developing a market in South America, Europe an Asia. Even if the Sunking is correct and the Solar Market in the US nose dives the manufacturers have already gotten orders for very large solar arrays elsewhere.

            Comment


            • #36
              Correct me if I'm wrong but I understand that the Business ITC tax credit for solar goes from 30% to 10% at the end of 2016. But that is only for the business tax credit. The residential solar tax credit for homeowners goes to zero.

              Now the Obama White House proposed budget released last month wants to retain the 30% tax credit for everyone and make it permanent.

              The solar industry growth hangs in the balance.

              Comment


              • #37
                Great thread, wish I had a crystal ball, cheers

                Comment


                • #38
                  I don't do this very often, but here's my rant.

                  Incent something and you get more of it......tax something and you get less of it.

                  We as a nation have committed to the world to reduce our carbon footprint and to increase our development of renewable energy. IMHO that is a good thing.

                  The renewable energy industry should not be whipsawed by incentives that go from 30% to 10% or less in a cliff drop. A much better management would be to connect the incentives to the goal. That is the incentives should vary year by year based on how we are doing in achieving our renewable energy goals. And the incentives should not gyrate wildly especially when you are dealing with long lived assets.

                  And lastly I would recommend that we as a nation take 1% of our social program budget and specifically target funding of energy storage technologies and energy transmission technologies. The return on that investment would be priceless both for the utility industry and everyone else.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Laptops and electric cars are already pushing battery technology forward very nicely.
                    It seems inevitable that, as utilities introduce peak demand pricing, that customers will eventually respond by installing peak-shaving storage systems and smart appliances that avoid all running at the same time.
                    Given that, I don't think a huge subsidy effort is appropriate at this time.

                    There are already a few smaller subsidy programs, see e.g.
                    http://www.greentechmedia.com/articl...entives-and-RF

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by DanS26 View Post
                      The residential solar tax credit for homeowners goes to zero.
                      You're right.

                      Still, even with the subsidy zeroed out, the worst that will happen IMHO is a pause of a year or two, followed by gradual uptake.
                      The panels just keep getting cheaper and better, and people keep figuring out how to install them more cheaply.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Sunking View Post
                        No they are not, it is the government trying to pick a winner. The free market picks the winner. Always has and always will. You cannot change that.
                        The railroads, nuclear power, the interstate system, hydropower, canals etc etc etc. Plenty of places government money has positively impacted economic development with new technologies.
                        We won't know 10-20 years if government solar incentives made sense.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by donald View Post
                          The railroads, nuclear power, the interstate system, hydropower, canals etc etc etc. Plenty of places government money has positively impacted economic development with new technologies.
                          We won't know 10-20 years if government solar incentives made sense.
                          The issue with solar is that is will always and can only be a part of the power generation mix even with storage technology improving 10 fold. There is too much demand on a 24/7 basis to be able to supply the world what it wants if it only comes from renewable energy.

                          Until people get that through their heads they will continue to go down the path wearing rose colored glasses thinking that if we get rid of all the carbon producing generation we will live long and happy with unlimited power. As much as I want and will support solar I know it is not the perfect solution. Anyone believing it will solve all of our energy problems is living in a fairy tale.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X