Oregon's lie, Green Energy and Wyoming's Coal Pollution

[Old Rocks]

Solar PV Rooftop Systems Can Help Defray Warehouse Electrical Costs - Facilities Management Energy Efficiency Feature

Solar PV rooftop systems are used to generate electricity at warehouses. Warehouses typically make ideal solar installation candidates since they often have large, unobstructed flat roofs that can accommodate large solar PV systems. Solar PV installations are entitled to a 30 percent tax credit. When using either the credit or the grant, the five year Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS) deprecation method is available; for 2012, there is 50 percent bonus tax depreciation. A building owner may be willing to make the investment for a rooftop warehouse solar installation if the warehouse tenant will agree to enter into a power purchase agreement to purchase its electricity from the building at a set price for a fixed period of time, usually 15 to 20 years. The building owner will use a combination of sources — the power purchase agreement annual revenue; the tax credit or grant; utility rebates, if available; green tag emission payments; and net metering electricity payments for selling the excess power back to the grid — to generate an acceptable economic return. With a power purchase agreement, a warehouse owner is essentially renting the roof as an alternate energy electrical generator.

 

[elektra]

Solar PV Rooftop Systems Can Help Defray Warehouse Electrical Costs - Facilities Management Energy Efficiency Feature

Solar PV rooftop systems are used to generate electricity at warehouses. Warehouses typically make ideal solar installation candidates since they often have large, unobstructed flat roofs that can accommodate large solar PV systems. Solar PV installations are entitled to a 30 percent tax credit. When using either the credit or the grant, the five year Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS) deprecation method is available; for 2012, there is 50 percent bonus tax depreciation. A building owner may be willing to make the investment for a rooftop warehouse solar installation if the warehouse tenant will agree to enter into a power purchase agreement to purchase its electricity from the building at a set price for a fixed period of time, usually 15 to 20 years. The building owner will use a combination of sources — the power purchase agreement annual revenue; the tax credit or grant; utility rebates, if available; green tag emission payments; and net metering electricity payments for selling the excess power back to the grid — to generate an acceptable economic return. With a power purchase agreement, a warehouse owner is essentially renting the roof as an alternate energy electrical generator.

Yes, making me pay for your solar power, at that I do not want it so now the Government dictates that I must be a customer and I must pay more for milk, beef, water, literally everything because of your idea's that are failing.

What about fire on top of a warehouse?

What about water leaks, no warehouse erected before today was designed for this type of a load.

How do you repair the roof when it does leak? They do leak all the time.

How will you clean the Panels?

All questions those in the Solar Industry ask and in which a thousand articles can be linked to. Watch how easy it is to find one article.

How will we fight fires on a roof with Solar Panels?

Dietz & Watson warehouse blaze: solar panels hampered firefighting, officials say | NJ.com

DELANCO — More than 7,000 solar panels on the roof of a burning warehouse in Burlington County proved too much of a hazard for firefighters, local officials said today.

"We may very well not be able to save buildings that have alternative energy," William Kramer, New Jersey’s acting fire marshall, said after Delanco Fire Chief Ron Holt refused to send his firefighters onto the roof of the 300,000-square foot Dietz & Watson facility, ablaze since Sunday afternoon.

Solar panels are particularly hazardous to firefighters for a number of reasons, according to Ken Willette, a division manager with the National Fire Protection Association.

"There is a possibility of electric shock because the electricity to the panels can’t be shut off," he said, "and not having a clear path on the roof to cut a ventilation hole is another challenge.

wow, so it is a problem. I guess this new Green/Renewable energy is not so green and renewable nor safe we now learn.

Rooftop solar is incredibly stupid, seeings how we will use Coal produced electricity to pump water to the rooftops just to clean them. Imagine all the soot from a city that needs to be cleaned off, and not with simply water, you need to wash them panels, but who cares, there is no drought in the west? yes?

anyhow, how about those solar panel warehouse fires, who would of thought.

 

[Old Rocks]

OK, so you think that we are incapable of engineering all the problems you mention out? As for weight, thin film weighs very little.

And in any case, you will not be consulted. Forward thinking people will do the smart things and people that are stuck in the mud with stay stuck in the mud.

 

[elektra]

OK, so you think that we are incapable of engineering all the problems you mention out? As for weight, thin film weighs very little.

And in any case, you will not be consulted. Forward thinking people will do the smart things and people that are stuck in the mud with stay stuck in the mud.

Most of Old Crock's posts are stuck in the mud, here you make a statement hence Old Crock can weasel out of debate. Sure I can sting back, very fast as Old Crock has learned. But, in all seriousness the solution to our problem is here, to use our resources wisely. How much money has been wasted, $500 Billion. In the last two years. How much wasted in the last 20 years. How many MAN-HOURS in research Old Crock in the last ten years? All wasted because Green Energy will always be insignificant in comparison to cheap Nuclear Power which is a safe proven technology.

Zero research needed for Nuclear Power.

How many more millions of man-hours of research and billions dollars of failed experiments sold to the public as being successful, will it take to solve the physically impossible, make Green Energy stand on its own merit.

so go ahead, blabber-mouth, go to google, find a card, and play it, "Go Fish"!

 

[elektra]

Seems some wish to discuss this outside of this thread. Where is RGR and old crock

 

[Old Rocks]

OK, so you think that we are incapable of engineering all the problems you mention out? As for weight, thin film weighs very little.

And in any case, you will not be consulted. Forward thinking people will do the smart things and people that are stuck in the mud with stay stuck in the mud.

Most of Old Crock's posts are stuck in the mud, here you make a statement hence Old Crock can weasel out of debate. Sure I can sting back, very fast as Old Crock has learned. But, in all seriousness the solution to our problem is here, to use our resources wisely. How much money has been wasted, $500 Billion. In the last two years. How much wasted in the last 20 years. How many MAN-HOURS in research Old Crock in the last ten years? All wasted because Green Energy will always be insignificant in comparison to cheap Nuclear Power which is a safe proven technology.

Zero research needed for Nuclear Power.

How many more millions of man-hours of research and billions dollars of failed experiments sold to the public as being successful, will it take to solve the physically impossible, make Green Energy stand on its own merit.

so go ahead, blabber-mouth, go to google, find a card, and play it, "Go Fish"!

Solar Energy Market Growth | Solarbuzz

Global Market Size

Solar electric energy demand has grown by an average 30% per annum over the past 20 years against a backdrop of rapidly declining costs and prices. This decline in cost has been driven by economies of manufacturing scale, manufacturing technology improvements, and the increasing efficiency of solar cells.

In 2009, the photovoltaic solar industry generated $38.5 billion in revenues globally, which includes the sale of solar modules and associated equipment, and the installation of solar systems. Solarbuzz produces various forecast scenarios which, depending on the factors, see growth in the world PV market from $46.3 billion to $96.8 billion in 2014.

PV installations grew to 7.3 GW in 2009, up 20% from the prior year. Expected to reach 8.4‑13.1 GW in 2010, the various forecast scenarios predict demand rising to 15.4‑37 GW in 2014, more than five times the size of the 2009 market. The worldwide on-grid segment grew by 20% in 2009, and the off-grid market grew 23% in 2009, faster than on-grid for the first time in 15 years but on a much smaller base.

 

[Old Rocks]

Global Statistics | EWEA

February 2013
The Global Wind Energy Council 2012 market statistics show continued expansion of the market, with annual market growth of almost 10%, and cumulative capacity growth of about 19%. A record year for US installations and a slower market in China mean that the two countries all but tied for the top spot in 2012.

“While China paused for breath, both the US and European markets had exceptionally strong years”, said Steve Sawyer, Secretary General of the Global Wind Energy Council. “Asia still led global markets, but with North America a close second, and Europe not far behind”

 

[editec]

Nuclear, Coal, Natural Gas, Oil.

That is power. All four survive without Solar or Wind Power, yet Wind Power and Solar Power must have one of the four simply to operate.

Partially right.

Wind and solar only need additional power sources if their energy is being direc6tly fed into the power grid.

If their power is STORED as potential energy and meted out over time, they can be THE primary energy source.

However, doing THAT is highly inefficient as converting the solar or wind energy into POTENTIAL energy means a huge loss of the original power.

 

[Old Rocks]

At present that is the case. However, solar put out power at the peak usage period. Wind varies quite a bit, but with more and more farms feeding into the grid with differant peak periods, that will average out. Geothermal has the potential of evening out the other renewables, plus being a source of minerals, particularly zinc, lithium, and the rare earh elements.

Nuclear is also a good source, but very expensive, and even one accident is too many. Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukashima are object lessons on Murphy's Law.

 

[elektra]

At present that is the case. However, solar put out power at the peak usage period. Wind varies quite a bit, but with more and more farms feeding into the grid with differant peak periods, that will average out. Geothermal has the potential of evening out the other renewables, plus being a source of minerals, particularly zinc, lithium, and the rare earh elements.

Nuclear is also a good source, but very expensive, and even one accident is too many. Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukashima are object lessons on Murphy's Law.

Old Crock the old liar.

The only thing that is expensive about Nuclear Power is all the regulations and lawsuits that Green Energy gets a government mandated exemption from.

Solar Power uses massive amounts of fossil fuels and raw materials, more than Nuclear Power.

Geothermal is too expensive as well, and again exempted from all environmental laws that nuclear power must follow. Geothermal also gets a big pass from the environmentalist. As far as recovering minerals, thus far there is no commercially viable mineral recovery at a geothermal plant, in fact one can go back a few years and site some 300 million dollars worth of bankruptcies at the Salton Sea as proof of this.

Wind Turbines have the same problem as Solar Power, they are extremely inefficient. Physically speaking they are 10,000 times larger physically than any other known power source hence they natural resource pigs.

In order to understand the filth and lies that is Green Energy, one must acknowledge that these extremely large Solar and Wind monstrosities are mass produced by Heavy Industry. That is an extremely polluting Heavy Industry.

Old Crock states that Green Energy is cheap and that Nuclear Power is expensive, yet after building thousands and thousands of Solar and Wind energy plants across the nation electricity has gone up in price.

Electricity, should be cheaper if Old Crock was not a liar.

We have not added one Nuclear Power plant in this time, in fact because of the environmentalists lawsuits, we have shut down maybe 10 nuclear power plants, at least 4 in California alone.

Electricity, Food, Gas, and Water are more expensive as we spend $500 billion on Green Energy.

Green Energy = Lower Standard of Living

 

[Old Rocks]

At present that is the case. However, solar put out power at the peak usage period. Wind varies quite a bit, but with more and more farms feeding into the grid with differant peak periods, that will average out. Geothermal has the potential of evening out the other renewables, plus being a source of minerals, particularly zinc, lithium, and the rare earh elements.

Nuclear is also a good source, but very expensive, and even one accident is too many. Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukashima are object lessons on Murphy's Law.

Old Crock the old liar.

The only thing that is expensive about Nuclear Power is all the regulations and lawsuits that Green Energy gets a government mandated exemption from.

Solar Power uses massive amounts of fossil fuels and raw materials, more than Nuclear Power.

Geothermal is too expensive as well, and again exempted from all environmental laws that nuclear power must follow. Geothermal also gets a big pass from the environmentalist. As far as recovering minerals, thus far there is no commercially viable mineral recovery at a geothermal plant, in fact one can go back a few years and site some 300 million dollars worth of bankruptcies at the Salton Sea as proof of this.

Wind Turbines have the same problem as Solar Power, they are extremely inefficient. Physically speaking they are 10,000 times larger physically than any other known power source hence they natural resource pigs.

In order to understand the filth and lies that is Green Energy, one must acknowledge that these extremely large Solar and Wind monstrosities are mass produced by Heavy Industry. That is an extremely polluting Heavy Industry.

Old Crock states that Green Energy is cheap and that Nuclear Power is expensive, yet after building thousands and thousands of Solar and Wind energy plants across the nation electricity has gone up in price.

Electricity, should be cheaper if Old Crock was not a liar.

We have not added one Nuclear Power plant in this time, in fact because of the environmentalists lawsuits, we have shut down maybe 10 nuclear power plants, at least 4 in California alone.

Electricity, Food, Gas, and Water are more expensive as we spend $500 billion on Green Energy.

Green Energy = Lower Standard of Living

A lot of blabbermouth claims, zero links to back them up.

 

[skookerasbil]

Green energy makes the poor poorer. Its not even debatable. One can find many, many links proving this in this thread.......very well documented >>

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/313851-more-proof-the-skeptics-are-winning.html


What people fail to realize is this is all part of the plan.......make the middle class poorer and expand the poor class. The green energy push has always been about crushing people and making them more dependent upon government = power. Think about it......if you crush people with taxes, higher energy costs, higher medical costs, and higher food costs.......you won them. There would no longer be any need for elections.......the party offerring to pay for everything would invariably be in power forever. Green energy fits right in with the plan.........why do you think they have to go full blown mental case on the climate change stuff?? Those who can connect the dots with any kind of ability, get it.

 

[elektra]

At present that is the case. However, solar put out power at the peak usage period. Wind varies quite a bit, but with more and more farms feeding into the grid with differant peak periods, that will average out. Geothermal has the potential of evening out the other renewables, plus being a source of minerals, particularly zinc, lithium, and the rare earh elements.

Nuclear is also a good source, but very expensive, and even one accident is too many. Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukashima are object lessons on Murphy's Law.

"A lot of blabbermouth claims, zero links to back them up."

 

[Old Rocks]

http://www.geothermal-energy.org/pdf/IGAstandard/Russia/MEGB-2006/20Bloomquist.pdf

The current market for lithium is estimated at approximately $350 million per year for use in the
production of ceramics, glass, and aluminum and in rechargeable lithium batteries. Total U. S.
consumption of lithium compounds is approximately 2,800 metric tons per year while the
potential production of lithium from a single 50 MWe geothermal plant in the Salton Sea
geothermal area could potentially produce in excess of 3,400 metric tons per year thus flooding
the United States and world markets and almost certainly driving the market price for lithium
down.

Just one well processing the mineral content of the brine could significantly reduce the cost of batteries and other devices that depend on lithium.

 

[Old Rocks]

Cost of electricity by source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

While calculating costs, several internal cost factors have to be considered.[2] (Note the use of "costs," which is not the actual selling price, since this can be affected by a variety of factors such as subsidies and taxes):

Capital costs (including waste disposal and decommissioning costs for nuclear energy) - tend to be low for fossil fuel power stations; high for wind turbines, solar PV; very high for waste to energy, wave and tidal, solar thermal, and nuclear.
Fuel costs - high for fossil fuel and biomass sources, low for nuclear, and zero for many renewables.
Factors such as the costs of waste (and associated issues) and different insurance costs are not included in the following: Works power, own use or parasitic load - that is, the portion of generated power actually used to run the stations pumps and fans has to be allowed for.
To evaluate the total cost of production of electricity, the streams of costs are converted to a net present value using the time value of money. These costs are all brought together using discounted cash flow.[3][4] The marginal cost of production at very low levels of output should be relatively low. Small amount of wind due to nature would result in very low levels of output. However, the wind turbine is the initial investment of producing wind energy; therefore, once the turbine has been built, not much money will be invested into producing wind energy other than maintenance. Having a very low level of output means the turbines have already been built, but since wind is free, to produce an extra unit of energy solely depends on nature, which in this case, wind is free. Therefore, the marginal cost would be relatively low due to the fact that wind, the energy source is free and the maintenance of the turbines would be relatively low.[citation needed] Wind power normally has a low marginal cost (zero fuel costs) and therefore enters near the bottom of the supply curve. This shifts the supply curve to the right, resulting in a lower power price, depending on the price elasticity of the power demand. In general, the price of power is expected to be lower during periods with high wind than in periods with low wind. As mentioned above, there may be congestions in power transmission, especially during periods with high wind power generation. Thus, if the available transmission capacity cannot cope with the required power export, the supply area is separated from the rest of the power market and constitutes its own pricing area. With an excess supply of power in this area, conventional power plants have to reduce their production, since it is generally not possible to limit the power production of wind. In most cases, this will lead to a lower power price in this sub-market.

Many factors involved in the cost of electricity. But nuclear remains very costly in spite of the promises made by those in the industry. And the government has to wholly subsidize their accident insurance. The whole of the insurance industry could not pay for the costs of a Fukashima type accident in the US.

 

[Old Rocks]

Wish I had a bank account that would grow at this rate

New Map Shows Explosive Growth of U.S. Wind Energy | Weather Underground

 

[elektra]

Wish I had a bank account that would grow at this rate

New Map Shows Explosive Growth of U.S. Wind Energy | Weather Underground

Good thing that the Federal Government has the bank account, it is called our tax money. Explosive growth year after year, in just 2 years $500 billion has been spent.

Does everyone feel how great it is, prices of food is rising, the price of gas at hits highest level for the longest time, skyrocketing water bills, skyrocketing electric bills, more coal is being burned to provide the energy Oregon needs.

$500 billion is a lot of money, forget about the bankruptcies, think about how much the Banks make loaning the money.

I wonder who gets all that money, considering we get next to zero energy from it.

 

[mamooth]

I'm sure the makers of buggy whips sounded much the same when those horseless carriages started showing up.

 

[elektra]

Wow, Oregon gets rate increases higher than inflation yet Old Crock tells us Nuclear Power is too expensive? Sure, regulate the hell out of Nuclear Power so it is expensive, tie up Nuclear Power in the courts driving up the cost, and then claim the cost is too high well at the same time they develop Green Energy, which is an extreme expense.

Thank Old Crock the next time you buy Lettuce, it comes from California, takes electricity to pump water to Lettuce, that electricity costs much more because we build Green Energy instead of the much more economical Nuclear Power.

PGE asks for new 4.6 percent rate increase, announces earnings | OregonLive.com

Final update with information on requested rate increase:

Portland General Electric on Thursday asked regulators to approve a 4.6 percent rate hike for 2015, the latest in a string of such requests as the utility looks to meet state renewables mandates and bolster its own generation.

In its latest filing, the state’s largest electric utility is seeking to begin recovery of its $500 million investment in a Southeast Washington wind farm, Tucannon River, and a $300 million set of gas turbines being installed next to its existing Port Westward plant in Clatskanie

The investment story is a good one on Wall Street, as the company’s increasing rate base should help drive earnings growth for shareholders. Indeed, PGE’s share price is hovering at levels not seen since before the great recession.

But the ongoing investments will squeeze PGE’s 830,000 customers in Oregon, who are likely to see rates increases higher than inflation for the foreseeable future.

Pay more for Green Energy that is being sold to California, Oregon gets dirty Coal Power produced electricity, and the people get to pay more for electricity. What a bunch of fools in Oregon.