It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kochs and Walmart Fight to Stop Solar Panels

page: 4
62
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 08:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Iwinder

Glad you mentioned the insurance industry.

I know from local politicians who have gone to Tallahassee(Florida's capital) that the insurance industry is a huge lobby interest and any up and coming politician gets a meeting the insurance industry and friends that tell the candidate that you are either for us(and get paid) or against us(and get your name dragged in the mud).

This is one reason why the election process is failing in America. Stand in the oligarchy's way and they will make sure the media destroys their credibility.




posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 08:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Iwinder

There are many of us who can instal our own house power using solar, wind, and a battery bank and inverter. Most are competent enough to do this our selves.

Finding the time and dealing with the local code enforcement and their red tape and fines is another story.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jamie1

originally posted by: Taupin Desciple
a reply to: Jamie1

Because lobbyists pay off elected officials and everyone but you knows it. The elected officials who have a great deal of tenure are not to be trusted. Go to the right places and you can see for yourself that they leave office MUCH richer then when they first got to Washington. Book deals, good stock investments and investment plans only explain so much.

Wally pays the lobbyists who pay the representatives in areas where solar power is a viable option. The paper trail is muddy beyond recognition, but the end result of higher taxes is as plain as the sun in Phoenix.

There are obstacles that they can't seem to get around though. Schools use the panels as large carports for staff and students, and home builders who are responsible for entire neighborhoods install them when they build the homes.



Well if everybody but me knows it, who is voting the elected officials into office?


If every possible official to be elected is by nature corruptible, then what?



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 08:56 PM
link   


Utility company position is that as solar panel ownership increases, owners of solar panels will be benefiting from the grid, while non-solar panel owners pay the entire cost of maintaining the grid.
a reply to: Jamie1

Who may I ask is benefiting from the never ending purchase of new battery banks at an extremely high cost? Check out your receipts tucked away for your car and check the price for a battery. Next multiply that by 3 times then add 19 more of them if you want to be a solar lover....... Then pay that every 3-5 years without any rebates because as sure as the sun rises they do not rebate for battery costs.

Also where do old batteries go to die? And at what cost is the battery grave yard?

Your talking mega losses for home owners and I will say not many are biting to join this stupid ploy.

Regards, Iwinder


edit on 7-1-2015 by Iwinder because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 09:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Jamie1

I would say the complaint is where those like James Hughes, published an op-ed in the Arizona Republic endorsing a proposal by the state’s biggest utility to impose a new fee on households with rooftop solar. Averaging about $50 to $100 a month.


$5 dollars no problem but when you have those pushing for $50 plus we have a problem. If there was a guaranteed cap on how much they could charge then that would give a boost in confidence to the solar market. Since there isn't a cap by them just having a tax that is open ended does a great deal of harm to the industry.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 09:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: Iwinder

There are many of us who can instal our own house power using solar, wind, and a battery bank and inverter. Most are competent enough to do this our selves.

Finding the time and dealing with the local code enforcement and their red tape and fines is another story.


No argument from me on your very good points above, then there is the never ending fees that seem to appear out of nowhere as posted below your post I am quoting.

You start talking $50.00 bucks a month that is a lot of moola.
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 09:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Jamie1



The point being it's nothing but a feel good, ad hominem attack on Walmart and the Koch brothers to demonize them. They don't vote, and they don't accept the campaign money.

No they just bribe the politicians to pass the laws they want.


Demonize the lobbyist.

Why demonize the middleman? You should always go after where the money comes from.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 09:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Iwinder


The cost depends on if you are doing it yourself or if you have a contractor instal it and on how big a system you get. You also factor in any rebates you can qualify for and how it will affect taxes depending on self instal or contracted.
a reply to: Grimpachi

You can't do the install yourself if you are talking a serious solar array, your homeowners insurance will say goodbye well before you even plug it in. Any rebates for installing one is tax payers money paying taxpayers to install a loosing system.

Try disposing dozens of batteries without having to pay the environmental fee, then you have to buy dozens more. just to dispose of those battery banks again and again....It is a lose lose situation for the average home owner.

A self install system iffy to say the least, if you don't require a electrician then it aint going to run your sump pump.
Lets not forget the panels fail a certain percentage every year from the installation date, so do your batteries.....its all down hill from the get go.

Regards, Iwinder



I am not going to have anything to do with batteries and I know all about losing efficacy each year which is negligible to the payoff. I don't have a sump pump there is no need here. My state doesn't have rebates but power companies offer $2 per watt which to qualify for would have to be done by a contractor.

As for insurance it would be the same as if I were to roof my own house it would have to be inspected and certified. Federally with taxes I can deduct 30% of what was spent on the system so if I spend 20K I get about a 6K tax credit. Which means a 20K system casts me about 14K. Solar improvements are 100% Property Tax Exempt and I will have increased the value of my home by about 18K.

Here is a rundown from a site with a system that costs $17,500.



A typical installation consisting of 5 kW of solar panels in Florida should start at about $17,500, according to Clay Electric. That might sound like a lot, but don’t freak – that’s gonna drop fast.
Even without the state’s on-again off-again rebate programs, the feds remain steadfast in their support of solar power and the people who love it. You get a 30% federal tax credit, reducing the cost by $5,250.
Next, we subtract your first year’s energy savings, which we estimate to be about $796.
Finally, subtract that tiny bump from OUL’s net metering agreement, and you get an extra $332 per year off your costs, bringing the first-year total to just $11,122.
With a conservative estimate for the future rise of electricity prices, you can expect your new solar power system to pay for itself in about 10 years.
In addition to those direct wallet-fattening savings, you also increased your home value by $15,912

www.solarpowerrocks.com...


Overall I can expect a 11.6% return on investment and it doesn't cost the taxpayers a dime.


I suggest you take some time to research solar as each year it has changed a bit and you seem to be seriously behind the times as far as information on them goes.

edit to add:

I don't think my state will add a tax described in the OP. What the power companies do here is charge $0.14 and buy back at $0.05 in most areas it changes according to your provider.
edit on 7-1-2015 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 09:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jamie1

Utility company position is that as solar panel ownership increases, owners of solar panels will be benefiting from the grid, while non-solar panel owners pay the entire cost of maintaining the grid.

The final issue was resolved by adding a monthly fee which on average comes out to $5 a month for new solar panel owners.

Current solar panel owners were given a 20-year grandfathering where they do not have to pay any additional fees to sell their electricity back to the utility company.

Doesn't sound to me like a case of evil lobbyists or bribed politicians. HuffPo is calling it a win for renewable power industry.

So what exactly is the specific complaint you have?


First off, who cares what HuffPo is calling it???

Second, Solar users aren't getting some free ride off the grid. What they pull off the grid they pay for and what they produce themselves they use themselves which never touches the grid because it's being used in the same place it's being produced. If the Power Companies can't afford the upkeep on the grid that they are using to Buy from the solar producers that's their fault. Since when does the producer have to pay the buyer to purchase what they are selling??? That would be like me paying for your car upkeep so you could drive to my store and buy something from me. It doesn't make any sense.

If they can't afford to buy the solar power from people and upkeep their grid at the same time then apparently they are paying too much for it and should shop elsewhere or redo their business model. The solar producers could Not sell it back to them and just let the extra go to waste or store it for themselves and not worry about the grid at all. If anything it seems to me that the Power Companies are the ones benefiting here. Especially if they buy the Solar for less than they buy from other sources. Maybe I'm missing something because so far the whole argument being made doesn't even make sense.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 10:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
The solar producers could Not sell it back to them and just let the extra go to waste or store it for themselves and not worry about the grid at all.


This made me think what the power companies might be afraid of, imagine no central power source (or in solar, the central power source would be the sun), the grid would connect all the people who are using solar power, and instead of letting extra go to waste, yes store it, or sell it on down the line to a home on the grid that needs more energy; if the power company was purely non for profit government owned, this would be some sort of communistic idea, or at least I suppose, the highest use of government mixed with free enterprise, the thing it comes down to is the grid and its upkeep, because this industry did not originate as a non for profit government entity, but a for profit, privately owned business, with of course a large amount of welfare from the people any way...anyway, I suppose they are scared they may get squeezed out of the picture, just imagine if every single house in america had solar panels, and they were all connected, and every so often there were some solar towels hidden into the environment as to not be an eye sore of course, in fields and forests and desserts, and then when there was a problem with the grid it would be cheaper to use the collective tax payer money to pay a 3rd party for their repair service, then, be enslaved by a 3rd party who only cares about getting as much profits as they legally and illegally can. As well, as getting tax money anyway.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 10:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Azdraik
Meh if you have the money to waste on a solar system you have money to spend on a tax.

Those systems cost more they they ever save as it is. Once those costs come down a lot, and the efficiency increases to the point it makes it worth using, I will hop on that bandwagon, until then it is just a move people do so they can say they are green and saving the planet.


Wrong. I have solar panels on my house. They provide 95% off all the power I need and It cost me no money down to install them.. just a long term lease and monthly payments. Why should I have to pay a tax for free energy? You must work for the oil/coal industry? I'm generating lots of power and should be saving hundreds of dollars per month in energy bills. I'm doing my part and trying to save money. Scumbags like the Kochs and Waltons want me to pay more money? I thought republicans were against taxes? Isn't it supposed to be the Democrats that increase taxes? What's the deal here?



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 10:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: ImaFungi

originally posted by: Jamie1

originally posted by: Taupin Desciple
a reply to: Jamie1

Because lobbyists pay off elected officials and everyone but you knows it. The elected officials who have a great deal of tenure are not to be trusted. Go to the right places and you can see for yourself that they leave office MUCH richer then when they first got to Washington. Book deals, good stock investments and investment plans only explain so much.

Wally pays the lobbyists who pay the representatives in areas where solar power is a viable option. The paper trail is muddy beyond recognition, but the end result of higher taxes is as plain as the sun in Phoenix.

There are obstacles that they can't seem to get around though. Schools use the panels as large carports for staff and students, and home builders who are responsible for entire neighborhoods install them when they build the homes.



Well if everybody but me knows it, who is voting the elected officials into office?


If every possible official to be elected is by nature corruptible, then what?


Run for office. Be the change you're seeking.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 10:27 PM
link   
a reply to: ImaFungi

There is only one problem. Storing the energy economically for night time. As it is right now there needs to be developments in battery technology for that to happen. However there are ways to store excess energy such as pumping water to storage areas which could then flow out creating hydroelectric power or it could be stored in the form of compressed air.

There are definitely ways it can be done but there are those who would fight it tooth and nail all the way.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 10:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: ImaFungi

There is only one problem. Storing the energy economically for night time. As it is right now there needs to be developments in battery technology for that to happen. However there are ways to store excess energy such as pumping water to storage areas which could then flow out creating hydroelectric power or it could be stored in the form of compressed air.

There are definitely ways it can be done but there are those who would fight it tooth and nail all the way.


There are all sorts of places and ways in which energy is used at night.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 10:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jamie1

originally posted by: ImaFungi

originally posted by: Jamie1

Well if everybody but me knows it, who is voting the elected officials into office?


If every possible official to be elected is by nature corruptible, then what?


Run for office. Be the change you're seeking.


What would be the motivation for myself not becoming corrupted in office? If everyone else was benefiting from the bribes, wouldnt I be a fool for missing out? It would just go to someone else anyway, why not me?



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 10:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: soficrow
Solar energy is cutting into energy profits...


Why don't they just use the same scam they did here in Australia?

1. Offer to pay people for the electricity they produce so people spend their own money installing solar systems.

2. A few years later, don't pay them anymore.

3. Sell the free electricity generated to their next door neighbour.

Any additional losses can be retrieved by jacking up the night time rates.
edit on 7/1/15 by NuclearPaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: ImaFungi

I know energy is used at night that is the problem.

Solar doesn't produce energy at night so the energy it produces during the day would need to be stored in some way so all those things that use energy at night can have power.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

Storage is always a problem but batteries are getting better just like the panels. Hopefully someone will come up with a breakthrough in the storage dept.

I wonder what the loss would be if you used the extra elec. to run a Hydrogen Cell??? Rather than having to use batteries you could use the extra power to split H2O into Hydrogen and Oxygen and store the H and O in tanks for when you wanted it. Then convert a Gas Generator to burn Hydrogen instead of Gas and when needed you run your Gen. off the stored Hydrogen.

No idea if that would be cost efficient or what the loss would be from converting it back and forth like that but it's an idea that would at least provide a way to convert your elec. to gas, store it in a tank and then convert it back to elec. when needed. Hydrogen burns clean too and the conversion is a clean process as well.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 10:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: Grimpachi

Storage is always a problem but batteries are getting better just like the panels.


Appliances are also becoming more efficient too, meaning less power consumption and storage capacity.

That's the trick to going off-grid... efficient appliances.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 10:56 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

I had given some thought to what you are talking about before but ultimately ruled it out for safety reasons. I wouldn't want to either have large amounts of hydrogen around or worry about compressing it.

Then there is about a 20% loss in splitting the water that you would lose even more by running a generator unless it was a very expensive and efficient one.

A better route would be an air engine that compresses air into a tank then could later run off the compressed air to generate electricity.

Such engines already exist in fact a car manufacturer in France uses them in their cars.

www.dailymail.co.uk...


edit on 7-1-2015 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
62
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join