Organizers and Leaders: Start Here

Comment

Comment by Bob Shultis on November 13, 2009 at 12:17pm

Thanks gentlemen.

Best regards,
Bob

Comment by William Engwer on November 13, 2009 at 12:08pm

I agree with Bob Shutis completely, and that's why I've been so very disappointed in what I see as a complete and total failure of the current administration to develop a holistic and integrated approach to providing for America's energy future. As Mr. Shutis correctly points out, there is no one solution that works everywhere, and we need to all be aware of the benefits and drawbacks of ALL the available technologies. At the risk of drawing flack as usual, I go on record again as believing that the energy mix needs to include nuclear. If France can make it work so well, so can we...after all, we invented it. Coal burning always gets the greens going too, but there is emerging technology that makes it clean, like what James Tracy is working on, and the environment CAN be restored after mining operations are finished. Losing the mind-set that there is only one best-way-out of this mess is imperative if America is going to break the bonds of foreign energy suppliers, and provide for the continued comfort and prosperity of her people. It's important to stay informed as to what's happening in energy worldwide, and to keep our minds open to all possible solutions, while we do what we can TODAY to eliminate waste. William Engwer

Comment by Richard Barnard on November 13, 2009 at 12:02pm

Bob - You’re not wrong. Thank you

Richard

Comment by Bob Shultis on November 13, 2009 at 11:45am

Folks, please correct me if you think I'm wrong. I feel that solving the energy issue, either on a personal or national scale, requires a holistic approach. On the personal level, the approach one takes will vary according to their situation.

William, you live in Georgia, Richard, you live in California. Both relatively mild winter climates. I live in an open, wind-swept area in Iowa. Our climate can be extreme- I've seen wind chills of 74 below zero and heat indices of +131- in the same year. Our whole house runs on electric, our bills average about $150/month, give or take a bit. Solar power is of some use here in the summer to assist with air conditioning, of little value in winter since it is so often cloudy. Wind is a great resource here, especially November-April when it often howls.

Our solutions have been to live in a super-insulated house (ice block construction- basically 6" of poured concrete with 2" of dense insulation inside and out- basement to roof line). and to heat with wood. I burn about 7-9 cords a winter, the electric furnace is supplemental for extreme conditions only. I'd also like to add a residential wind turbine, at which time my meter might run backwards as well.

The point of this being, nobody should lock on to one solution as "the answer". There are many potential solutions and all have a great deal to offer.

I do think we need to buy and support American technology and products wherever possible.

Best regards,
Bob

Comment by William Engwer on November 13, 2009 at 11:04am

Richard, I'm in Georgia. My house is well insulated, tree shaded, and I cool it by opening the windows at night to the 60 to 70 degree air, with exhaust fans. I close it in the daytime, it stays relatively cool, and I sometimes run dehumidifiers to make it more comfortable. I've replaced all my lighting with low energy units, and I turn things off when not in use, other than the computer and entertainment stand-by loads. In the winter, I open the house in the daytime if it's warm. The leaves are gone then, so I get significant solar gain as well. Backup heating is gas, cooling electric from the grid. Winter heating runs about $100 more than summer water heating, which is $35, most of which is add-on fees since de-regulation here. W.Engwer

Comment by William Engwer on November 13, 2009 at 10:50am

I'm not a utility. My business is engineering consulting, and building the little car in the picture. I try to pay attention to alternatives and developments in energy, when I have time, and I think the SunEdison model is a good one to get photovoltaics in the hands of consumers. It sidesteps the major capital commitment for the end user, and pays the company a return on its investment. Win-win. W.Engwer

Comment by Richard Barnard on November 13, 2009 at 10:45am

I apologize if your business is a secondary utility. I agree a revenue stream is good business. Whatever the market will bear has and always will be the mantra for success.

There is another revenue stream and that is to sell PV directly to the home owner who then can be his own utility. If you are a secondary utility good luck in all you do. PV is good no matter who sells it. It’s just that the buyer should know all his alternatives. Or – I guess another way of stating it is buyer beware and study all your alternatives.


Richard Barnard

Comment by William Engwer on November 13, 2009 at 10:45am

Richard, do you already have a photovoltaic array on your roof? Or do you want somebody else to fund it and let you make the profits? I agree entirely that if you've spent the money for an array, you should be able to sell your excess to PG&E on your own. I wonder about your $600 a month bill. I have a large house in the South, with a full machine shop, and mine runs not more than $60. What do you do with all that power? W.Engwer

Comment by William Engwer on November 13, 2009 at 10:35am

My guess is that FirstSolar, like most businesses including mine, needs an actual revenue stream in order to keep their own lights on. If consumers aren't buying enough product to stay in the black, they have to sell to somebody, yes? If you don't like the structure of your local electric utility rates and policy, it's time to start working to change them. SunEdison developed an interesting business model, wherein they put up the substantial capital for rooftop photovoltaic installations on a business, and sell the resulting electricity to the business cheaper than it comes in off the grid, and still show a profit. William Engwer

Comment by Richard Barnard on November 13, 2009 at 10:25am

William – I pasted First Solar’s web page below. I did the calculation they asked for based on my average $600.00 a month PG&E bill and Solar City would bill me $480.00 a month if I allowed them to sell my generated electricity back to PG&E. Sounds like a scam to me. Again I want to sell my solar generated electricity to PG&E. I want to be responsible for running my own meter backward. CA has made it easier for us to sell our generated electricity back to CA utilities. We don’t need to share with a middle man.

http://www.firstsolar.com/residential_roof_power_plants.php

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last