So, what if..............

The whole damn BP thing is due to the green weenies from the get go...

CASE CLOSED ON THAT ONE....

And if anyone wants to save on a/c costs in summer, paint your house roof bleach WHITE....I"m getting ready to do that here.....cut that heat load in the attic by a easy 50f maybe more....

solor water heaters on the roof are a easy trick, just need thermostat valves to switch the water around for morning showers...vs evening wash work....

:drink:
 
mrvette said:
The whole damn BP thing is due to the green weenies from the get go...

CASE CLOSED ON THAT ONE....
Click to expand...

Nope. If it wasn't profitable, BP would not have a well there. It's about the $$$. If they can't do it responsibly, don't do it all. You want the profit? Take the risk? Pay the price.

Don't you guys like clean water and air?

We can have both, and build this country back up as the envy of the world.

Oil is the "easy" way out, and we are paying for it.
 
without OUR tax money going into support 'alternative energy sources'.....

they are not viable, which in totality, means they are not anyway, subsidy or not....need tons more of major breakthrough in energy storage/batteries and then power generation....honestly the only thing makes any sense in the totality of it, is NUCLEAR....even the Sierra club had to switch sides on that issue....reality has a habit of intruding on dreams that way....

:gurney:
 
big2bird said:
mrvette said:
The whole damn BP thing is due to the green weenies from the get go...

CASE CLOSED ON THAT ONE....
Click to expand...

Nope. If it wasn't profitable, BP would not have a well there. It's about the $$$. If they can't do it responsibly, don't do it all. You want the profit? Take the risk? Pay the price.

Don't you guys like clean water and air?

We can have both, and build this country back up as the envy of the world.

Oil is the "easy" way out, and we are paying for it.
Click to expand...

That well is profitable because the green weenies and greedy socialist scum have run up the gas prices to astronomical heights
 
big2bird said:
mrvette said:
The whole damn BP thing is due to the green weenies from the get go...

CASE CLOSED ON THAT ONE....
Click to expand...

Nope. If it wasn't profitable, BP would not have a well there. It's about the $$$. If they can't do it responsibly, don't do it all. You want the profit? Take the risk? Pay the price.

Don't you guys like clean water and air?

We can have both, and build this country back up as the envy of the world.

Oil is the "easy" way out, and we are paying for it.
Click to expand...

Jeff, you're wrong. They're out in the middle of nowhere because that's the only game in town. Drilling on land or closer to shore would be preferable if they could. But the wackos and bought-off politicians are interfering with getting to sources that are easier to work at.

Let me ask you. Why aren't you and I working at the Playboy mansion? Answer: Because we don't have permission to be there. So, we work at other locations that aren't as pleasant, and certainly don't have the same view, just to make money to survive, or hopefully, live halfway decently.
I've never had the opportunity to pick exactly where I make a buck, so I've always just picked secondary places where the benefits outweighed the pain. BP is doing the same thing.

And, oil is the only way out. If there were acceptable alternatives out there, they'd already be in the market place. Not to get too theological about it, but what was the point of God putting all this oil in the ground if he didn't want us to use it? As long as we're responsible about its retrieval and use, I don't see a problem. (Yes, I know He also put a bunch of silicon in the earth, but we're not smart enough at the present time to be able to use it to fabricate efficient PV panels. So, let's keep using domestic oil sources while our scientists figure out how to make these panels efficient enough where people will spend their own money to buy them.)
 
69427 said:
big2bird said:
mrvette said:
The whole damn BP thing is due to the green weenies from the get go...

CASE CLOSED ON THAT ONE....
Click to expand...

Nope. If it wasn't profitable, BP would not have a well there. It's about the $$$. If they can't do it responsibly, don't do it all. You want the profit? Take the risk? Pay the price.

Don't you guys like clean water and air?

We can have both, and build this country back up as the envy of the world.

Oil is the "easy" way out, and we are paying for it.
Click to expand...

Jeff, you're wrong. They're out in the middle of nowhere because that's the only game in town. Drilling on land or closer to shore would be preferable if they could. But the wackos and bought-off politicians are interfering with getting to sources that are easier to work at.

Let me ask you. Why aren't you and I working at the Playboy mansion? Answer: Because we don't have permission to be there. So, we work at other locations that aren't as pleasant, and certainly don't have the same view, just to make money to survive, or hopefully, live halfway decently.
I've never had the opportunity to pick exactly where I make a buck, so I've always just picked secondary places where the benefits outweighed the pain. BP is doing the same thing.

And, oil is the only way out. If there were acceptable alternatives out there, they'd already be in the market place. Not to get too theological about it, but what was the point of God putting all this oil in the ground if he didn't want us to use it? As long as we're responsible about its retrieval and use, I don't see a problem. (Yes, I know He also put a bunch of silicon in the earth, but we're not smart enough at the present time to be able to use it to fabricate efficient PV panels. So, let's keep using domestic oil sources while our scientists figure out how to make these panels efficient enough where people will spend their own money to buy them.)
Click to expand...

HEY Mikey, U rite!!!

since playing with PV cells back in the dark ages of 'vacuum tubes'.....I thought that was neat shit, wind blows, but the power is not as free as we would like to think,

we wanna play, but somehow we gotta get a way to reduce the price of all this shit....it will happen in time, but maybe take 100 years too, but then again maybe not, look at the typical life 100 years ago with nearly everyone on earth smelling the ass end of the mule just to live....

today, we drive all over the joint, and so live 2x longer for the privilage because it is the TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM that enables the USE of otherwise dead head time...to think of new concepts and ideas....inventiveness....but methinks most of the simple shit is already done....

do a Google on Alexander (Sandy), Sawchuck in grade school daze we went to the same church in NW Wash DC.....

now there is the man who was involved with video presentations from a physics standpoint doing krazy shit in Kalifornia labs....I suspect some of his stuff is todays plasma or LCD TV's....nature of his projects I remember from decades ago....no surprise to me....the man is a pure genius....

Last I looked he was Prof, Emeritus and about ready to retire....

the guy smokes anyone I ever knew....or met, I bet....

:cool:

OH it fits in the family...his father was a head engineer in the construction of the Federal Highway Administration....read INterstate highway network.....as in planning, construction specs...etc.....
 
Last edited:
BBShark said:
3 to 4 years? I use 500kw avg per month and pay about $65/month avg. So if payback were to begin in 4 years, I would have to find a system that cost $3500.
Click to expand...

Irrelevent, and a misconception. What you use is not the point.

Think of yourself as a power plant.

If you can install a system that "generates", (forget what YOU consume), $100 a month worth of power. It costs you $10,000 to install.
After 8 years, you are "making" $100 a month pure profit.
If that $10,000 system generates $200 worth of power a month, after 4 years, you profit $200 a month for the life of the system.
The utility would pay you for the difference.
This would also apply to Deps arguement.
It does not matter what his A/C draws. What matters is return from investment.
A person with the best solar supply and the highest rates would benfit the most.
 
010752 said:
So the Dutch were way ahead with all those windmills.
Click to expand...

LOL, we hardly have any. Leaders in windmills & solar panels are the Germans. A buddy of mine has a neighbor who's house looks like something that came from NASA. All the roof sections are covered in panels It's hideous and no doubt affecting the value of his house.
 
Twin_Turbo said:
010752 said:
So the Dutch were way ahead with all those windmills.
Click to expand...

LOL, we hardly have any. Leaders in windmills & solar panels are the Germans. A buddy of mine has a neighbor who's house looks like something that came from NASA. All the roof sections are covered in panels It's hideous and no doubt affecting the value of his house.
Click to expand...


Do houses have value any more?
 
big2bird said:
BBShark said:
3 to 4 years? I use 500kw avg per month and pay about $65/month avg. So if payback were to begin in 4 years, I would have to find a system that cost $3500.
Click to expand...

Irrelevent, and a misconception. What you use is not the point.

Think of yourself as a power plant.

If you can install a system that "generates", (forget what YOU consume), $100 a month worth of power. It costs you $10,000 to install.
After 8 years, you are "making" $100 a month pure profit.
If that $10,000 system generates $200 worth of power a month, after 4 years, you profit $200 a month for the life of the system.
The utility would pay you for the difference.
This would also apply to Deps arguement.
It does not matter what his A/C draws. What matters is return from investment.
A person with the best solar supply and the highest rates would benfit the most.
Click to expand...

Your math is a little off. To generate $100 a month of electricity, I would need to "generate" 750kWh average per month, that is 30kWh per day. Let's say I get an average of 5 hours of full sun per day (optomistic for Ohio). So divide 30kWh by 5 and now I need to generate 6kWh (or 6000 watts) every hour I have sun.

The average installed cost of solar electric is $9.00 per watt. That's 6000 x 9= $54,000 fucking dollars (not $10,000). I will be 100 years old when I break even. Sorry, that's a deal breaker for me :sick:
 
Yes, someones math is off allright.
So. Cal. Edison is spending millions in solar in So. Cal., not because they have to, but because they want to. I gaurantee the payback is not 50 years, nor $9 a watt in cost.
With only 5 hours of daylight, I can see why your in the dark.
 
big2bird said:
Yes, someones math is off allright.
So. Cal. Edison is spending millions in solar in So. Cal., not because they have to, but because they want to. I guarantee the payback is not 50 years, nor $9 a watt in cost.
With only 5 hours of daylight, I can see why your in the dark.
Click to expand...

OK, tell me how I "generate" $100 per month of solar electricity for $10,000?

Look at this map and tell me that 5 hours per day isn't optimistic. Keep in mind that solar cells don't always point to the sun:

http://www.solarcraft.net/sun-hours-map.htm
 
big2bird said:
BBShark said:
3 to 4 years? I use 500kw avg per month and pay about $65/month avg. So if payback were to begin in 4 years, I would have to find a system that cost $3500.
Click to expand...

Irrelevent, and a misconception. What you use is not the point.

Think of yourself as a power plant.

If you can install a system that "generates", (forget what YOU consume), $100 a month worth of power. It costs you $10,000 to install.
After 8 years, you are "making" $100 a month pure profit.
If that $10,000 system generates $200 worth of power a month, after 4 years, you profit $200 a month for the life of the system.
The utility would pay you for the difference.
This would also apply to Deps arguement.
It does not matter what his A/C draws. What matters is return from investment.
A person with the best solar supply and the highest rates would benfit the most.
Click to expand...

Ahhhh....the Al Gore "carbon credits" theory. Unfortunately, Al Gore forgot about one thing. Capitalism and doing business in the USA. Besides the raw power, electric companies have other expenses to deal with. Things like line maintenance of transformers and paying the salaries of it's workers and buying those big high tension line towers, etc., etc. In New Mexico, where solar is the "in" thing in power since we get so much sun for so long, people are finding out there is a distinct downside to poking your nose into the business of the electric company. Our rates have skyrocketed ever since people started "going off the grid". The electric companies have also figured out this free electricity thing and have figured out how NOT to lose any profits from it. Got a surplus? No problem. They pay a LOT LESS for that surplus than what they CHARGE for that energy. So the "theory" of the more power you make the more you benefit goes right out the window. One guy in NM has actually got a special "power drainer" setup so that he DOESN'T make too much power.
 
DJ Dep said:
The electric companies have also figured out this free electricity thing and have figured out how NOT to lose any profits from it. Got a surplus? No problem. They pay a LOT LESS for that surplus than what they CHARGE for that energy. So the "theory" of the more power you make the more you benefit goes right out the window. One guy in NM has actually got a special "power drainer" setup so that he DOESN'T make too much power.
Click to expand...

The energy policy act of 2005, signed by BUSH in New Mexico, MANDATES net metering by the PUC. The price you PAY is the CREDIT you earn.
 
BBShark said:
big2bird said:
Yes, someones math is off allright.
So. Cal. Edison is spending millions in solar in So. Cal., not because they have to, but because they want to. I guarantee the payback is not 50 years, nor $9 a watt in cost.
With only 5 hours of daylight, I can see why your in the dark.
Click to expand...

OK, tell me how I "generate" $100 per month of solar electricity for $10,000?

Look at this map and tell me that 5 hours per day isn't optimistic. Keep in mind that solar cells don't always point to the sun:

http://www.solarcraft.net/sun-hours-map.htm
Click to expand...

I guess you have to move here Larry. Those figures are from an actual install by a close friend of Vettezuki here in so cal.
As stated before, the costs and payback vary greatly by local and demand. Perhaps the economy of Ohio is shrinking, and not expanding, which motivates this usage the most.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top