0 members (),
408
guests, and
18
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,931 Likes: 34
Member
|
Did Gates or Jobs need a subsidy to grow businesses so big in 25 years they could pay off the US national debt with their spare cash? Not even close. You could take all the money from the Forbes 400 and not pay off the $14 trillion we owe. To put it in perspective, if you took every dime from the 10 richest Americans, it would run Medicare for about 145 days. Of course then there would be no more Microsoft, Berkshire Hathaway, Oracle, Koch, Wal-Mart or Bloomburg. If you took every dime from the Forbes 400 it would not pay off the debt. These are scary numbers most people can't comprehend. You are right when you say we really can't afford to pour money into technologies that do not make economic sense. Maybe without all of these subsidies there would be more incentive to make cheaper technology. Everyone is spinning the story about a German city that is making 300% of the power it needs from a massive solar plant and actually making $5 million a year from the excess. What they don't say is they paid $4 billion for the system. Payback period ... 700 years.
Greg Fretwell
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 98
Member
|
Those numbers are WAY off!
The largest system in Germany couldn't have cost 1/8 of that number and no one builds a commercial system that doesn't have a payback period of less than 15 years, most are 10 years or less.
PV Module cost is very rapidly approaching $1/watt and the BOS is the big problem now. Many of the small companies are folding, but the biggest are just getting bigger and some are posting record gains and a few of the silicon suppliers are sold out till 2013-2015.
The industry is leaning more towards utility scale plants instead of resi scale. The GW scale arrays in planning and construction right now in California dwarf the largest European arrays and are being installed at substantially lower $/W numbers.
There's a LOT of PV hype (good and bad) and very little of it is really true, at least in the context in which it is hyped.
It won't be, but a few years before subsidies are no longer needed, but without them the industry would have never got to where it is today.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,931 Likes: 34
Member
|
As the man says, I only know what I read.
Greg Fretwell
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 98
Member
|
I didn't see anything in here referring to the numbers you posted though. Interesting that this community is doing almost all of this without government subsidies too. Looks to me like they invested wisely. http://www.jgpress.com/archives/_free/002409.html
Last edited by Vindiceptor; 08/23/11 04:52 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,931 Likes: 34
Member
|
I can't find the article. When I get some time I will look again
Greg Fretwell
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,803
Member
|
Greg, I was not suggesting for a millisecond that Apple Inc pay of anyones' debts, let alone a Govermment's ones, merely that commercially viable businesses don't need vast public handouts from hard-pressed taxpayers to make them 'profitable', based on scare-mongering doomist's wild guesses. My fellow countrymen in the UK are now working for the Government till well into July before a penny goes in their pockets. Nor for that matter do viable countries, but that's just in IMHO. Even so, Apple has over US$76 billion in cash and probably double that in short term liquidisable assets, quite apart from its other business assets and intellectual rights which dwarf those sums. All this from a company that did not even exist till 1974. I know we don't do politics,so I'll shut up, but perhaps Steve or Bill should stand for President!?
Wood work but can't!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 98
Member
|
Apple wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the government buying their basement priced crap for decades so our kids could be brainwashed into thinking they're the best thing since sliced bread.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,392
Member
|
It's not economicaly viable at this point in the technology. I'm not at all surprised that these folks are having an extra-tough time competing on a level playing field.
I've always said that 'subsidies' are a way to entice you to make the wrong decision. please take a short cruise through this> ( da*ned if i can get the link to work!)http://www.bootsontheroof.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=32:requirements-for-solar-installation-a-incentives-by-state&catid=14&Itemid=65 this is what i'm competing with btw>Licensing (PV)
•Currently, the State of Vermont does not offer or require a specific license for installing PV. Renewable Energy Vermont and other industry leaders have proposed the creation of a Renewable Energy Specialty (S) license which would be required for the electrical portion of a PV installation which includes the wiring from the panels up to and including the AC interconnectionmore from the IAEI>http://www.iaei.org/magazine/2008/0...s-for-solar-energy-system-installations/[ b]Certification Program[/b]The North American Board of Certified Energy Practitioners (NABCEP) offers an independent certification for PV system installers; however, it is not a governmental license or endorsement to engage in trade practice or contracting.
3 Candidates for this certification qualify based on documented PV systems installation experience and training, must pass a 4-hour 60-question examination, sign a code of ethics, and maintain practice and continuing education for re-certification every three years. A job task analysis for PV installations has been developed by NABCEP, and is the basis for the certification program and examination content.
While intended as a voluntary, value-added credential, NABCEP certification is becoming increasingly important to participate in this industry. For example, Maine and Ohio both require NABCEP certification to become eligible for state rebate funds*, and Utah requires the certification to qualify for their solar contractor license. Numerous specifications are now requiring the bidder to retain or employ a NABCEP-certified individual on the project. However, not all NABCEP certificants are legally licensed and entitled to pull permits and engage in construction contracting. Many are architects, engineers, educators, salespersons, journeypersons or others who may be integrally involved with PV projects, and may work with or for contractors or integrators, but are not contractors themselves.* as is Vermont btwof course i may stand corrected , i.e.- level playing field, when someone points out the 12,000 hours as prerequisite, that WE all did...
~S~
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,382 Likes: 7
Member
|
~s~:
Your attempted link, and my laptop protection watchdog......no go, amigo.
That said, here in the Garden state (NJ) licensed electrical contractors are required for PV installs, panels to grid tie. Racking can be done by 'others'.
That said, enterprising people have worked around the rules, but nothing is perfect.
Time for a little google...
John
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,382 Likes: 7
Member
|
`s~: I got to the 'home' page whick is looking for contact info in order to proceed further. I really don't care to dump my info into something that the birddog said could be tainted. What I saw gives me the feeling of a $$$ course with a hint of 'unemployement' assistance?
Perhaps it may be time for the great state of Vermont to look into the 'Jersey' way?
John
|
|
|
Posts: 57
Joined: August 2003
|
|
|
|