- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Solar Panels - Yay or Nay
Posted on 7/17/23 at 2:14 pm to Billy Blanks
Posted on 7/17/23 at 2:14 pm to Billy Blanks
quote:
That lien must be paid if and when the owner goes to sell the home. Plans change and you're not staying in the home for 20+ years? Too bad. Your massive equity gain over the years just got wiped out by the solar panel loan.
I forgot to address this point. fricking LOL.
They took out a loan to put something on their house. It's no different than any other type of home improvement loans thats secured against the property. Yes, you have to pay it back when you sell it if you went the loan route. No different than a HELOC. You point about it diluting equity is not supported by any data, and id be happy to look at something you present. But you're continuing to flail and have resorted to a pitiful attempt at emotional manipulation by posting someone who got scammed by people, not a solar panel.
0
Posted on 7/17/23 at 2:22 pm to LoneStarRanger
The part about not getting the value out when you sell is true. We bought a house with them and they are awesome but they were not even considered a positive selling point by the realtor.
Posted on 7/17/23 at 2:36 pm to olgoi khorkhoi
quote:Can you show me where you are right?
I really want to be wrong. Can you show me where I am?
quote:How? No power = no economy. No power also equals an immediate and violent uprising. Where power is demanded, power will be supplied. Or else.
the US seems hell bent on destroying it's ability to generate power
quote:If the grid is "overtaxed" in some areas then it is in need of repair or upgrades regardless of our energy needs going forward. I don't know why the folks who oppose EVs and renewables seem to think market forces and basic business operations do not apply here.
forcing everyone onto the already overtaxed grid
quote:I doubt anyone will be coming around to shut off your gas any time soon. If or when they do, it will be because the energy market has made it no longer economical to keep using. And I really couldn't care less if states want to ban gas hookups to new construction or whatever. It won't be the first or last time that regulation has adjusted a market.
to drive, cook and generate heat (phasing out natural gas)
quote:I predict the opposite, brown and blackouts will be less common going forward. The increased use of renewables like solar and wind creates more of a need for energy storage in order to extract more value and utilize more capacity. And not just lithium batteries, but all types and methods of storage and at all scales. What some see as a major downfall of renewables (intermittent production) is in my opinion the very quality that will lead to a more stable grid. Distributed production and storage will be more reliable than centralized production.
then anyone with a brain can see that there will be brown and blackouts coming very soon.
quote:So check it out, all it took was a little bit of unfounded fear that you manufactured yourself and you've already gone and helped to stabilize the grid in your neck of the woods. Many others have done the same except with more rational logic driving the decision.
Getting as many backup forms of power as one can afford makes total sense. I got a 60kw Lipo4 battery bank, 25kw of panels and 4 inverters and a couple dc mini splits for heating/cooling from Signature Solar for what I thought (after shopping around quite a bit) was a reasonable price. I'm going keep riding the grid as long as possible and hope I never have to fully transition to solar, but will be prepared for any eventuality.
Posted on 7/17/23 at 3:48 pm to Korkstand
You’re a GD bozo. What’s your background? Gender studies? Poli Sci? Journalism?
Posted on 7/17/23 at 3:49 pm to billjamin
I’ll say to you what I’ve posted elsewhere. What’s your background? Poli Sci? Journalism? Gender studies?
Take a hike.
Take a hike.
Posted on 7/17/23 at 3:55 pm to Deplorableinohio
quote:
I’ll say to you what I’ve posted elsewhere. What’s your background? Poli Sci? Journalism? Gender studies?
Take a hike.
I can't poke a hole in anything he said (save for some opinions).
What does his background matter?
Posted on 7/17/23 at 4:14 pm to Deplorableinohio
quote:You're the one trying to claim that your buddy's system proves that solar is a scam. If your story is even true, it is an outlier and anyone who claims to be in the industry should know that. Your buddy got scammed, solar isn't a scam.
You’re a GD bozo.
quote:I have a background in software development, fabrication, construction, and just generally knowing what the frick is going on. And what is going on right now is you are claiming to have some damning information and you are ignoring that most others have data that is not aligned with yours. Some of those people are in this thread.
What’s your background? Gender studies? Poli Sci? Journalism?
Posted on 7/17/23 at 4:19 pm to Deplorableinohio
quote:
I’ll say to you what I’ve posted elsewhere. What’s your background? Poli Sci? Journalism? Gender studies?
I've posted what I do previously. Go look it up. Or try and stick to relevant information.
Posted on 7/17/23 at 4:20 pm to SaintEB
quote:
I can't poke a hole in anything he said (save for some opinions).
Besides getting irritated sometimes, I try to stick to facts.
This post was edited on 7/17/23 at 4:23 pm
Posted on 7/17/23 at 5:05 pm to billjamin
quote:
Besides getting irritated sometimes, I try to stick to facts.
I don't know half the stuff you are talking about with the finances and rebates and cost.
I thought I was responding to the one about what Kork said. But I'm sure you have been accurate too..lol.
Posted on 7/17/23 at 5:07 pm to SaintEB
quote:
I thought I was responding to the one about what Kork said. But I'm sure you have been accurate too..lol.
it might have been. He replied the same thing to both of us. Posted on 7/17/23 at 6:19 pm to Korkstand
quote:
How? No power = no economy.
By decomissioning coal fired plants and retiring not building nuclear reactors as the left wages war on fossil fuels, coal and natural gas and moves toward a goal of 80% renewable energy in 6.5 years.
There will be some power, but it will be less reliable and consumption will have to be limited either by individual choice (not happening), mandate or by the electric companies temporarily turning off the power to different sectors of the grid at different times, like they did here in tennessee this winter.
quote:
I predict the opposite, brown and blackouts will be less common going forward. The increased use of renewables like solar and wind creates more of a need for energy storage in order to extract more value and utilize more capacity. And not just lithium batteries, but all types and methods of storage and at all scales. What some see as a major downfall of renewables (intermittent production) is in my opinion the very quality that will lead to a more stable grid. Distributed production and storage will be more reliable than centralized production.
That sounds great, can you give examples of where this has been the case?
quote:
So check it out, all it took was a little bit of unfounded fear that you manufactured yourself and you've already gone and helped to stabilize the grid in your neck of the woods. Many others have done the same except with more rational logic driving the decision.
I'm not your average Joe and can drop $40k cash on equipment and install it myself. I don't think enough people have done the same to make much of a dent and certainly not enough to cancel out the additional electricity needed to charge electric vehicles. For perspective, the average US household uses 29 kwh per day. 1 EV per houshold with a 50 kwh battery charged from 20% to full daily would mean a houshold going from 29 kwh per day to 69 kwh or a 138% increase. Some households will have 2-3 cars.
Posted on 7/17/23 at 6:22 pm to Korkstand
quote:
solar isn't a scam
Trust me!!!!!!
Posted on 7/17/23 at 7:11 pm to olgoi khorkhoi
quote:
1 EV per houshold with a 50 kwh battery charged from 20% to full daily would mean a houshold going from 29 kwh per day to 69 kwh or a 138% increase. Some households will have 2-3 cars.
That’s someone driving over 100 miles a day. That’s not normal. Want that to be in perspective since people have a big misunderstanding about EV kWh per mile and how often they need to charge.
This post was edited on 7/17/23 at 7:12 pm
Posted on 7/17/23 at 8:00 pm to billjamin
quote:
That’s someone driving over 100 miles a day.
It's also one vehicle, which is not normal. I have 5 vehicles on insurance. 2 of them are f-350s that if electric would be requiring a hell of a lot more than 40kwh to do what I do. That's not even getting into commercial vehicles like delivery trucks like UPS and USPS use, 18 wheelers, school busses etc which they also intend to or have mandated to convert from ice to ev in a relatively short amount of time.
Posted on 7/17/23 at 8:23 pm to olgoi khorkhoi
quote:it’s a ton of juice no doubt. But we shouldn’t calculate 100 miles per day when the average is 37.
It's also one vehicle, which is not normal. I have 5 vehicles on insurance. 2 of them are f-350s that if electric would be requiring a hell of a lot more than 40kwh to do what I do. That's not even getting into commercial vehicles like delivery trucks like UPS and USPS use, 18 wheelers, school busses etc which they also intend to or have mandated to convert from ice to ev in a relatively short amount of time.
40kWh in a model 3 is 125 miles.
40kWh in a F150 lightning is 80 miles. Still over double the average.
This post was edited on 7/17/23 at 8:28 pm
Posted on 7/17/23 at 9:10 pm to olgoi khorkhoi
quote:
a goal of 80% renewable energy in 6.5 years.
I have no idea where you got that figure, but it's pretty absurd. I could maybe see 80% of new production coming online will be renewable in that timeframe. We are many decades away from 80% of all energy renewable.
quote:So you use an example where the energy mix includes only 3% from wind and solar plus 10% hydro? The other 85% is coal/gas/nuke. And the cause was extreme weather and frozen switches or some shite.
There will be some power, but it will be less reliable and consumption will have to be limited either by individual choice (not happening), mandate or by the electric companies temporarily turning off the power to different sectors of the grid at different times, like they did here in tennessee this winter.
This is your example of an unreliable grid, and you're trying to blame it on renewables and EVs?! This is the type of problem that I'm telling you distributed generation and storage will mitigate. Centralized production that always has to exactly match demand is the reason rolling blackouts have to happen.
quote:I think Babcock Ranch made it through Ian pretty well.
That sounds great, can you give examples of where this has been the case?
Also it is just a basic tenet of reliable systems design. All of the high uptime services that we depend on today are distributed and redundant. Failures will always happen, so you design single points of failure out of the system.
quote:As it turns out, solar panels tend to output the most when grid load is highest, and EVs tend to be charged when grid load is lowest. Don't really need to cancel out.
I'm not your average Joe and can drop $40k cash on equipment and install it myself. I don't think enough people have done the same to make much of a dent and certainly not enough to cancel out the additional electricity needed to charge electric vehicles.
quote:Your perspective is pretty fricked. Why are we using average electricity use but well above average driving? The reality is most EV owners who do the vast majority of their charging at home notice almost no change in their electricity bill. Probably because average driving results in only 13kwh per day rather than the 40kwh you estimate.
For perspective, the average US household uses 29 kwh per day. 1 EV per houshold with a 50 kwh battery charged from 20% to full daily would mean a houshold going from 29 kwh per day to 69 kwh or a 138% increase. Some households will have 2-3 cars.
And to bring this back around to grid stabilization, we will see more and more manufacturers offer backfeed EV chargers. So when you get home, plug in your EV, and start turning on lights and appliances, you can draw from the energy stored in your EV rather than from the grid. This will work really well if your provider has time-of-use billing to further incentivize night time charging.
Posted on 7/17/23 at 9:20 pm to Korkstand
quote:
This will work really well if your provider has time-of-use billing to further incentivize night time charging.
Nothing makes me happier than fricking utilities up with tou. We did some really fun shite with the first LG chem systems and had SDG&E absolutely melting over it. They actually told us it was illegal to grid isolate then max discharge before the tou ended. They were wrong and lost, but that tells you how much they hate people creating any independence from their monopoly.
Posted on 7/17/23 at 9:58 pm to Korkstand
quote:
I have no idea where you got that figure, but it's pretty absurd. I could maybe see 80% of new production coming online will be renewable in that timeframe. We are many decades away from 80% of all energy renewable.
You don't really follow this stuff too closely do you? You seem to have strong opinions on what's coming, though.
80% renewables by 2030
Another LINK
Biden or an even worse democrat will win the whitehouse in '24 because the WWE rednecks insist on nominating an unelectable Trump again, and the absurd, as you put it, will become reality.
Posted on 7/17/23 at 10:42 pm to olgoi khorkhoi
quote:Your first link says "80% emissions-free" (which includes nuclear) and the other says "80% renewable" but probably also means including nuclear. This target also includes emissions reductions via sequestration.
You don't really follow this stuff too closely do you? You seem to have strong opinions on what's coming, though.
80% renewables by 2030
Another LINK
No way, no how, will we be anywhere close to an 80% renewable grid by 2030, nor is that anyone's actual target.
What I follow closely is reality. I find that doing so helps to avoid overreactions to absurdly incorrect interpretations or assumptions about what's in the works.
Page 9 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News