Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
79 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
If Solar was subsidized like Fossil fuels (Original Post) packman Oct 2014 OP
Rec. truebluegreen Oct 2014 #1
Bringing the oil and gas out of the ground is becoming more and more expensive. JDPriestly Oct 2014 #15
What if there was a movement to take subsidies given for Cleita Oct 2014 #2
This is what is needed. A major movement. It needs to be serious, more than petitions. Maineman Oct 2014 #72
There will never be a replacement for the fossil fuel consumption rate today. L0oniX Oct 2014 #3
Maybe not in this country packman Oct 2014 #4
The production of solar cells is highly toxic. Taking a step back is no where close to achieving... L0oniX Oct 2014 #7
More toxic than fracking? Nuclear waste? Coal tailings? immoderate Oct 2014 #10
It's not a matter of how toxic it is. Manufacturing a lot of tech things is a toxic process. L0oniX Oct 2014 #37
Why is it not possible to use solar energy to manufacture solar cells? immoderate Oct 2014 #47
So, if it can't be completed in YOUR lifetime ... staggerleem Oct 2014 #20
Welcome to DU. antiquie Oct 2014 #22
My life time has nothing to do with it. L0oniX Oct 2014 #31
Thank goodness someone agrees with the fossil fuel industries ProfessorPlum Oct 2014 #59
Thanks for your intelligent rational input. L0oniX Oct 2014 #68
And thank you, too ... staggerleem Oct 2014 #79
And, considering fossil fuels, including conventional crude oil, are finite resources... ChisolmTrailDem Oct 2014 #5
Can't say I am shocked by the lack of rational thinking about it. Coal will out last oil. L0oniX Oct 2014 #28
That's really more encouraging than you think. immoderate Oct 2014 #49
IOW: We're doomed! immoderate Oct 2014 #6
Mocking reality is also doomed. L0oniX Oct 2014 #8
Having a hard time understanding your position/comments packman Oct 2014 #9
You could start with basic physics. You can't get something from nothing... L0oniX Oct 2014 #39
I could be wrong.... daleanime Oct 2014 #23
Okay, I'll play. Why not? And you can't say cost. We always have money for endless war. nt valerief Oct 2014 #12
You can't buy your way out of this. L0oniX Oct 2014 #33
Off to Ignore for you! valerief Oct 2014 #46
Oh boy ...I'm on ignore. LMFAO L0oniX Oct 2014 #51
I take it you do not live in Southern California. We WILL replace fossil fuels with solar. JDPriestly Oct 2014 #14
Hwy 101 is what 10 lanes? Imagine all those cars and trucks using solar power. Can you? I can't. L0oniX Oct 2014 #34
It's a matter of developing the technology. And we can do it. JDPriestly Oct 2014 #36
I've seen the solar car college projects and contests. I don't hold out any hope that they... L0oniX Oct 2014 #38
We don't grow much food for cattle or even hogs in Southern California. JDPriestly Oct 2014 #45
We can use solar energy to create hydrogen to power fuel cells. immoderate Oct 2014 #50
Precisely. The solar cars run on electricity that is from the solar panels. JDPriestly Oct 2014 #56
You seem to be totally ignorant of plug-in electric cars... Thor_MN Oct 2014 #61
Thanks for your rational explanation as to how we can replace the expanding usage of oil with solar. L0oniX Oct 2014 #66
How will you expand the use of oil, when it runs out? immoderate Oct 2014 #74
Huh? You have nothing... Thor_MN Oct 2014 #75
exactly bmac19gg Oct 2014 #54
You mean electric cars using batteries? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #76
It's also not possible to continue dumping CO2 pscot Oct 2014 #21
You think people will stop using cars? Not a chance. China is accelerating car use as well. L0oniX Oct 2014 #30
It won't be our call pscot Oct 2014 #44
Jacobson et. al. has a plan and would disagree Agony Oct 2014 #26
Ah ...so he has figured out how to stop people from using cars. Good for him. L0oniX Oct 2014 #29
no he uses the EIA International Energy Outlook to calculate how to replace fossil fuels with WWS Agony Oct 2014 #40
Now on to forcing people away from their car addictions. Good luck. L0oniX Oct 2014 #41
the stinking putrid air over Beijing is forcing people to analyze their addictions Agony Oct 2014 #42
...despite all the bicycle use too. It's not all from cars for sure. You'd think that... L0oniX Oct 2014 #43
Much as the social fabric dramatically changed during the market changes from horse to combustion en LanternWaste Oct 2014 #67
Wrong. Solar/electric vehicles are already cheaper! grahamhgreen Oct 2014 #53
says the extraction industry ProfessorPlum Oct 2014 #58
Your snark is touching. Got nothing else huh. Figures. L0oniX Oct 2014 #65
Also, the COST OF WAR is another subsidy of oil. nt valerief Oct 2014 #11
yep - my guess is we won't have to go to war rurallib Oct 2014 #24
K&R. We have so much sun. Why aren't we using it? JDPriestly Oct 2014 #13
Next we will invade the Middle East to steal their sun. Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2014 #16
+1 Auggie Oct 2014 #17
K&R DeSwiss Oct 2014 #18
It's a bit cheaper here in Connecticut NewJeffCT Oct 2014 #19
Fucking Reagan... If he hadn't stopped Carter's move towards solar SomethingFishy Oct 2014 #25
I agree but that would only have prolonged the inevitable and that was before China got on board. L0oniX Oct 2014 #32
says the extraction industry ProfessorPlum Oct 2014 #57
can you provide a link to the source? DeadEyeDyck Oct 2014 #27
With some googling, I think it sources back to treehugger.com originally Electric Monk Oct 2014 #35
Thanks for the reference packman Oct 2014 #71
thanks nt DeadEyeDyck Oct 2014 #78
k&r... spanone Oct 2014 #48
Oil is dead. Long live the sun! grahamhgreen Oct 2014 #52
The world economy is still based on fossil fuels. Jenoch Oct 2014 #55
Kicked and recommended! Enthusiast Oct 2014 #60
fyi--The Koch Attack on Solar Energy RiverLover Oct 2014 #62
per unit of energy produced, renewables get 25x subsidies ctaylors6 Oct 2014 #63
Germany is opening 10.7 Gigawatts of new coal plants Progressive dog Oct 2014 #64
i installed solar at the begining of september rdking647 Oct 2014 #69
kicl samsingh Oct 2014 #70
Ain't goin' nowhere if the Carlyle Group doesn't make a profit from it. WinkyDink Oct 2014 #73
90 billion not enough? maced666 Oct 2014 #77
 

truebluegreen

(9,033 posts)
1. Rec.
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 12:23 PM
Oct 2014

Any sane society would be subsidizing solar instead of those poor fossil fuel companies.

Actually, I read somewhere that if fossil fuel companies were not subsidized, they would be unprofitable now. Not unlike the banks, whose profits track suspiciously close to the level of subsidies they receive. Very odd, that.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
15. Bringing the oil and gas out of the ground is becoming more and more expensive.
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 01:35 PM
Oct 2014

Those rigs out in the ocean? Fracking?

When oil was first brought to market from Pennsylvania fields it was just oozing up out of the ground. Took a while to get the technology we have today that permits extracting it from the arctic or from the ocean floor.

Solar is still in its infancy. We need to subsidize it. Here in Southern California, solar energy is a no-brainer.

We would have it, but our electricity bill is far to small to make it pay. If it were subsidized as it should be, we would have it.

We don't have air conditioning. We have trees. That's of course another form of solar power in a kind of round about way. The sunshine makes the trees grow, and the trees shade our house. We are just lucky because if we did not have our trees we would need air conditioning.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
2. What if there was a movement to take subsidies given for
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 12:26 PM
Oct 2014

fossil and nuclear energy and put them into clean and renewable energy like solar instead? I would sign petitions, march, sit in and vote for such changes.

 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
3. There will never be a replacement for the fossil fuel consumption rate today.
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 12:30 PM
Oct 2014

It's nice that some people have the money to play with solar and wind but there's no chance that it ever be enough. It's just not possible.

 

packman

(16,296 posts)
4. Maybe not in this country
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 12:35 PM
Oct 2014

but I am a pessimist , or realist, in view of the death-grip fossil fuel companies have on our lawmakers and economy. But, other countries - look at chart regarding Germany- are taking a step back from fossil fuels. I think the development of a storage battery, which is making great strides, will be the lynchpin for the solar industry.

 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
7. The production of solar cells is highly toxic. Taking a step back is no where close to achieving...
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 12:46 PM
Oct 2014

an equivalency. Energy use world wide is at an all time high and growing with the population. We will end up using coal in the end and the necessity of energy use will trump global climate change. Many who were once advocates of clean energy change after examining the facts. There was one of these converts on PBS the other night who was saying the same thing. If you look at enough pie charts concerning fossil fuel use compared to clean energy use you can see the enormous and impossible challenge it really is. There's no way to stop the train that has left the station a long time ago. I wish it was not so but then I'm on my way out in the next ten to 20 years.

 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
37. It's not a matter of how toxic it is. Manufacturing a lot of tech things is a toxic process.
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:59 PM
Oct 2014

I'm just stating that solar cell manufacturing produces toxic waste ...like a lot of other processes. Solar is not pure energy in that respect. There is a lot of energy used to produce solar cells as well. They are not hand made in someones basement. Could you produce enough energy on the same plot of land from solar cells to power the manufacturing of solar cells on that same plot of land? Heh ...I seriously doubt that. Energy use in all of its forms produces various amounts of waste ...nothing new there. The large hurdle to get over is the energy used for transportation. When they figure out how to accomplish that hurdle then maybe the train can be stopped. otherwise it's going to go on until it crashes.

 

immoderate

(20,885 posts)
47. Why is it not possible to use solar energy to manufacture solar cells?
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 09:44 PM
Oct 2014

The jury is far from consensus on the best way to make solar cells, including minimizing waste materials. It's a technology in infancy. (Remember when car brakes were made of asbestos? And they wore out in 5000 miles? And they said that asbestos was irreplaceable?)

The entire energy appetite of the country could be satiated by a few hundred square miles of solar grid. Some countries, and a few states, already get a significant percentage of their power from renewables, and in some areas of the world, solar is the only electrical generator they will ever know, due to economics.

--imm

 

staggerleem

(469 posts)
20. So, if it can't be completed in YOUR lifetime ...
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 02:15 PM
Oct 2014

... then there's no reason to do it at all? I wonder how your grandchildren would feel about that attitude?

Just as no energy sector has ever flourished without government largess, there is also no completely clean form of energy. Coal mining is toxic. Oil production is toxic. Fracking is toxic. There's not an insurance company in the world that will write a liability policy for a nuclear plant - the government has to provide that insurance (i. e., YOU & ME! ... is that a business that you WANT to be in?) Are you advocating that we completely forget about a pretty good solution while we look for the perfect one?

So, who's "baking" your pie charts? Exxon/Mobil? The Heritage Foundation? ALEC? Koch Industries? Are you unaware that the Kochs are HEAVY subsidizers of PBS? - but that support is quite contingent upon content control.

I'd assert that if we stopped subsidizing fossil fuel, your metaphorical train would either be converted to run on renewable energy, or it would, indeed, just STOP!

My guess would be that you, personally, are heavily invested in fossil fuels, so your opinion about what's good for EVERYBODY is completely decided by what's best for your bottom line. Or ... perhaps you just don't give a tinker's damn about anyone else.

 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
31. My life time has nothing to do with it.
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:38 PM
Oct 2014

Jeeze attack is all you got. Whatever. Don't like what someone has to say so you go on the attack. Not very mature IMO.

Are you advocating that we completely forget about a pretty good solution while we look for the perfect one?
Really ...now I am advocating for a perfect solution? Jeeze ...can't have a real chat with you I guess.

My guess would be that you, personally, are heavily invested in fossil fuels, so your opinion about what's good for EVERYBODY is completely decided by what's best for your bottom line. Or ... perhaps you just don't give a tinker's damn about anyone else.


LOL Nice try but I have no investments whatsoever ...you have no clue but thanks for playing.

ProfessorPlum

(11,285 posts)
59. Thank goodness someone agrees with the fossil fuel industries
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 08:01 AM
Oct 2014

I was hoping their views would be put forward here.

 

staggerleem

(469 posts)
79. And thank you, too ...
Thu Oct 30, 2014, 02:16 PM
Oct 2014

... for so handily demonstrating your belief that the ONLY sign of intelligence is sharing YOUR opinion.

 

ChisolmTrailDem

(9,463 posts)
5. And, considering fossil fuels, including conventional crude oil, are finite resources...
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 12:39 PM
Oct 2014

and taking into consideration your comment, our civilization will collapse. Attitudes like yours will not help to drive fossil fuel depletion (or climate change) mitigation and neither will simply "playing" with solar and other renewable energy sources.

 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
28. Can't say I am shocked by the lack of rational thinking about it. Coal will out last oil.
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:24 PM
Oct 2014

Last edited Tue Oct 28, 2014, 12:44 AM - Edit history (1)

Cars will not and can not go back to steam power. Solar cars have been tested and will never replace conventional weight transportation methods. At best they can only transport one person for a very limited amount of miles and that's only if the vehicle is covered in cells. Same thing with air craft. The physics of mass come into play when considering how much energy it requires to move mass over various terrain paths. With a little research one can find charts and stats that will confirm that is it impossible to replace world fossil fuel consumption at the increasing rate of use per year. Here's just one chart that shows how far away anyone is from fossil fuel use replacement. I would dig up more but I realize most are not going to accept the reality of our situation anyway. The train has already left the station and it is not going to stop until it meets the end of the track.

 

immoderate

(20,885 posts)
49. That's really more encouraging than you think.
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 09:56 PM
Oct 2014

The proliferation of renewables is increasing exponentially, while its cost are decreasing similarly. The production of fossil fuels is at, or near, its peak and will only get more expensive, as it takes more energy to extract and refine the obtainable fossil fuel.

Why don't you dig up a chart to show how much renewables have taken of the total energy market over the last 20 years?

--imm

 

packman

(16,296 posts)
9. Having a hard time understanding your position/comments
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 12:53 PM
Oct 2014

We all here understand the reality of the status quo, it is - I hope - the goal of everyone on a progressive site to hope and to work to change that seemingly intractable mire we find ourselves in. Reality is -forgive the pun - relative. Reality , at one time, meant 12 hr. work days, women not voting, slavery, no ACA, dirty air/water, etc., etc.

Sorry, not going to throw up my hands and "mock" reality-too defeatist.

 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
39. You could start with basic physics. You can't get something from nothing...
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 08:07 PM
Oct 2014

and nothing ever disappears but only changes form. When we get around that we will have a solution.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
14. I take it you do not live in Southern California. We WILL replace fossil fuels with solar.
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 01:30 PM
Oct 2014

Solar is the gift that keeps giving out here. The toxicity involved in making solar panels pales compared to the toxicity of what goes into most of our electronic gear, nuclear energy, and the fracking of gas. You make a solar panel and it lasts for a long time.

I believe we will get better at producing solar panels and use less toxic materials as we produce more solar panels. Markets motivate innovation. If the market for solar panels continues to grow as it has been growing, the toxicity problem will be solved.

Southern California. Haven't seen rain in months and months.

 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
34. Hwy 101 is what 10 lanes? Imagine all those cars and trucks using solar power. Can you? I can't.
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:46 PM
Oct 2014

Any real solution is going to have to deal with the use of cars and trucks. Are you going to commute from Oceanside to LA or San Diego everyday with a solar charged car? Good luck.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
36. It's a matter of developing the technology. And we can do it.
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:57 PM
Oct 2014

We have done amazing things in this country.

We will develop solar energy and it will make fossil fuels and nuclear energy obsolete. It will take time, but it will happen.

 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
38. I've seen the solar car college projects and contests. I don't hold out any hope that they...
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 08:04 PM
Oct 2014

have a chance of replacing fossil fuel based transportation. If people were really serious we could slow it down a lot by eliminating meat consumption. That ain't gonna happen. The energy and fuel needed to supply meat is enormous. Bottom line is we are all spoiled and we are not going to give up what we have right now without a fight ...and a large part of that is to remain willingly ignorant.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
45. We don't grow much food for cattle or even hogs in Southern California.
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 09:16 PM
Oct 2014

We are the land of sunshine, a desert basically. We will be using primarily solar energy within 30 years, faster if we subsidize solar as much as we do fossil fuels. It gets more expensive to extract fossil fuels slowly but surely day by day.

We passed the time when fossil fuels make economic sense some time ago.

 

immoderate

(20,885 posts)
50. We can use solar energy to create hydrogen to power fuel cells.
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 11:37 PM
Oct 2014

A car that runs directly on solar power is not currently practical. And I don't hear anybody claiming it is. But very few cars are driven more than a hundred miles a day, and it won't be long before battery power will be double that. Fuel cell cars are being tested.

That fossil fuels will run out is a certainty. Here's a long shot that no body talks about because wolf cries have been aplenty:
http://aviationweek.com/technology/skunk-works-reveals-compact-fusion-reactor-details

--imm

 

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)
61. You seem to be totally ignorant of plug-in electric cars...
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 08:55 AM
Oct 2014

Deriding cars powered by onboard solar cells - that's your best argument?

These are a bit of the expensive side, but have come down in price in five years from pipe dream to slightly spendy commuters. But then you don't care because you decided that you will have bought the farm by the time the become the dominant commuter vehicles.

http://www.plugincars.com/cars

 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
66. Thanks for your rational explanation as to how we can replace the expanding usage of oil with solar.
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 10:29 AM
Oct 2014

You got nothing ...huh.

 

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)
75. Huh? You have nothing...
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 01:29 PM
Oct 2014

You have derided solar cell cars run in endurance tests by universities, because you want to avoid the topic of real, production electric cars that are on the roads right now. (Hint, you have to click the link)

When the cost of extracting oil becomes too high (and it will, there's in no denying it) electrics are the only existing alternative.

For someone who doesn't care because you are going to be dead soon (your statement, not mine), you sure seem to expend a lot of energy denying...

 

bmac19gg

(96 posts)
54. exactly
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 01:40 AM
Oct 2014

When solar technology (or any other green tech) matures the market will demand its dominance. But until that happens oil is what we've got so like it or not its what we're going to use.

Erich Bloodaxe BSN

(14,733 posts)
76. You mean electric cars using batteries?
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 01:36 PM
Oct 2014

Sure, electric cars are actually ideal for relatively short commutes, as opposed to, say, cross country hops.

And you can get the electricity to put in those batteries from any source that generates electricity. Coal, oil, steam, nuclear, hydro, even solar or wind. Electricity is electricity, it doesn't care what the original energy source was.

pscot

(21,024 posts)
21. It's also not possible to continue dumping CO2
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 02:36 PM
Oct 2014

into the atmosphere so where does that leave us?

 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
30. You think people will stop using cars? Not a chance. China is accelerating car use as well.
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:31 PM
Oct 2014

Everyone believes that they have a right to do the same that the US has been doing. Who's going to stop them from using fossil fuel and or coal? Good luck with that.

Agony

(2,605 posts)
26. Jacobson et. al. has a plan and would disagree
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:02 PM
Oct 2014

...with the very real caveat " But the big question remains – do we have the political and popular will to make it happen?"

http://thesolutionsproject.org/#tsp-section-stats

Agony

(2,605 posts)
40. no he uses the EIA International Energy Outlook to calculate how to replace fossil fuels with WWS
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 08:13 PM
Oct 2014

for the transportation sector

https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/JDEnPolicyPt1.pdf

page 1158 table 2

biggest problem is still political and popular will

 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
41. Now on to forcing people away from their car addictions. Good luck.
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 08:15 PM
Oct 2014

You'd have to rearrange cities and work places so people could get to and from work without cars.

 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
43. ...despite all the bicycle use too. It's not all from cars for sure. You'd think that...
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 08:37 PM
Oct 2014

massive new damn they have would be reducing the use of coal too.

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
67. Much as the social fabric dramatically changed during the market changes from horse to combustion en
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 10:32 AM
Oct 2014

"You'd have to rearrange cities and work places so people could get to and from work without cars..."

Much as the social fabric dramatically changed during the market changes from horse to combustion engine.

rurallib

(62,508 posts)
24. yep - my guess is we won't have to go to war
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 06:33 PM
Oct 2014

over access to the sun or the wind or the waves for that matter.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
13. K&R. We have so much sun. Why aren't we using it?
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 01:26 PM
Oct 2014

It's as if we were given this great gift and we do nothing with it.

We prefer instead to waste enormous sums on nuclear energy and burn up our environment with oil and coal when we could simply convert the sun we have been given for our fuel.

We could at least use solar energy to run our air conditioners during the day. It is absurd that we in California burn gas or oil or coal or use nuclear energy to run air conditioners. Here in Southern California we live in the desert. With the exception of very few days, it cools off at night. Almost every night.

We need bigger subsidies for solar and smaller subsidies for other fuels. The subsidies for nuclear energy are particularly galling.

SomethingFishy

(4,876 posts)
25. Fucking Reagan... If he hadn't stopped Carter's move towards solar
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 06:41 PM
Oct 2014

then 1/3 of the power we get today would be coming from solar.

 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
32. I agree but that would only have prolonged the inevitable and that was before China got on board.
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:43 PM
Oct 2014
 

packman

(16,296 posts)
71. Thanks for the reference
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 12:20 PM
Oct 2014

like an idiot I forgot to post the source of the chart which was Pureenergies.com

 

Jenoch

(7,720 posts)
55. The world economy is still based on fossil fuels.
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 02:12 AM
Oct 2014

I believe the only way to change this situation is based in superconductivity technology, that or something else that has yet to be discovered. Passive technology such as wind and solar can help to reduce our reliance in fossil fuels, but it will never be the answer.

Enthusiast

(50,983 posts)
60. Kicked and recommended!
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 08:29 AM
Oct 2014

The fossil fuel industry will fight us to the death to prevent solar energy from being widely adopted in the USA. They get free money. Why would they give that up.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
62. fyi--The Koch Attack on Solar Energy
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 09:01 AM
Oct 2014

4/2014~~

"At long last, the Koch brothers and their conservative allies in state government have found a new tax they can support. Naturally it’s a tax on something the country needs: solar energy panels.

For the last few months, the Kochs and other big polluters have been spending heavily to fight incentives for renewable energy, which have been adopted by most states. They particularly dislike state laws that allow homeowners with solar panels to sell power they don’t need back to electric utilities. So they’ve been pushing legislatures to impose a surtax on this increasingly popular practice, hoping to make installing solar panels on houses less attractive.

Oklahoma lawmakers recently approved such a surcharge at the behest of the American Legislative Exchange Council, the conservative group that often dictates bills to Republican statehouses and receives financing from the utility industry and fossil-fuel producers, including the Kochs. As The Los Angeles Times reported recently, the Kochs and ALEC have made similar efforts in other states, though they were beaten back by solar advocates in Kansas and the surtax was reduced to $5 a month in Arizona.

But the Big Carbon advocates aren’t giving up. The same group is trying to repeal or freeze Ohio’s requirement that 12.5 percent of the state’s electric power come from renewable sources like solar and wind by 2025. (me: Koch bought our Gov Kasich quite successfully and he put a "freeze" on renewable incentives in Ohio.) Twenty-nine states have established similar standards that call for 10 percent or more in renewable power. These states can now anticipate well-financed campaigns to eliminate these targets or scale them back.

The coal producers’ motivation is clear: They see solar and wind energy as a long-term threat to their businesses.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/27/opinion/sunday/the-koch-attack-on-solar-energy.html?_r=0

ctaylors6

(693 posts)
63. per unit of energy produced, renewables get 25x subsidies
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 09:07 AM
Oct 2014

of fossil fuels. That's just to look at it another way.

Progressive dog

(6,937 posts)
64. Germany is opening 10.7 Gigawatts of new coal plants
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 10:07 AM
Oct 2014

over 2011 to 2015.
I'm curious as to why this is necessary if solar power is so heavily subsidized.

 

rdking647

(5,113 posts)
69. i installed solar at the begining of september
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 11:02 AM
Oct 2014

i had a monitoring system installed at the end of september (there was a delay for various reaons)
in the month ive had the monitoring system operating ive generated 860 KWH of electricity.
based on my cost of 10.8c/kwh that is a savings of $92 off my bill.
i expect payback in 10-12 years assuming a 4% annual increase in electric costs,and also assumin that if i sell my house after that 12 years the solar panels add nothing to the house value

Kick in to the DU tip jar?

This week we're running a special pop-up mini fund drive. From Monday through Friday we're going ad-free for all registered members, and we're asking you to kick in to the DU tip jar to support the site and keep us financially healthy.

As a bonus, making a contribution will allow you to leave kudos for another DU member, and at the end of the week we'll recognize the DUers who you think make this community great.

Tell me more...

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»If Solar was subsidized l...