You know the neighbor that put up a roof full of solar panels? You bought em. At least about half of them.
Looks like the Democratically controlled Corporation Commission (soon to be under a new direction in January when Pearce and Burns are seated), put in aggressive measures to provide incentives to move Arizona to a solar player. The problem is the ACC is actually hurting the Arizona consumer.
First the ACC isn’t supposed to be taxing bodies and by adding a solar tax on each rate payers bill to pay for a few solar panels they are in effect taxing me to pay for someone else.
Second because the state is throwing these tax incentives panel installers have popped up everywhere installing cheap solar panels. The real money should be put into technologies, R&D and finding a way to make solar more effective and survive without almost 50% incentives to make the numbers work out.
Third, you’d think our geniuses at the state would have learned after the natural gas conversion program in the early 2000′s. The tax credit to ‘convert’ your car to natural gas was so rich that the rebates put the states budget in jeopardy. How many natural gas suburbans are you seeing on the roads today?
Just because solar is the fluffy new feel good idea don’t get sucked it. It doesn’t return on the investment and the efficacy is marginal at best. Let’s hope the technology catches up to the hype. My prediction is when the Obama administration is out of office, possibly in 2012, solar will be dropped until the technological break through hits.
Why don’t greenies like nuclear?
Arizona Public Service Co.’s renewable energy plan for 2011, calls for a slight bump in bills while laying the groundwork for more solar installations.
The plan, OK’d by the Arizona Corporation Commission, also calls for incentives and development of $96 million in renewable projects, rooftop solar and other items.
Homeowners will see a 59-cent increase on their bills for a total surcharge of $4.05. Businesses also will seen an increase depending on how much power they use. The approval clears the way for APS to begin funding incentives for residential and commercial solar projects. The utility has been hammered by requests and cut incentives this year before running out of money in October.
The new plan puts the incentives at $1.75 per watt for now, down from the current rate of $1.95. APS’ initial plan called for a gradual drop in the amount. If the utility has commitments for 50 percent of its incentive money by July 1, the amount will drop to $1.60. If it’s at the 75 percent mark, the amount will drop to $1.45 per watt.
The commission rejected a proposal that would have allowed applicants to accept a lower $1 per watt incentive and move to the front of the line.
Read more: APS renewable plan boosts rate, projects | Phoenix Business Journal
17 Comments
Leave a Reply
Pages
Blogroll
Misc Links
Categories
Archives
- April 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
Loading ...
For you next topic, maybe do some investigative footwork on much of your tax money goes into subsidizing fossil fuels.
Solar is close to grid parity, and I’m gladly not complaining about the surcharge on my utility bill that subsidizes my neighbor’s PV system.
You yourself might benefit by going solar and getting an electric car, which would make the US more energy dependent. Economies of scale are needed, and you can be a hero like other early adopters, instead of a complainer.
Now wait just a darn minute Land Lawyer… You want politicians to actually LEARN something based upon consequences of past actions??? Isn’t that the ultimate oxymoron?
Amen Land Lawyer. People I know are getting these installed. I think that instead of saying” check out my new solar panels” they shoud be saying “thank you”
Subsidizing fossil fuels??? Get real!
When > 50% of fossil fuels are subsidized I may give a rats derriere.
Gas moves cars, electricity/natural gas heats homes. Use the right souce for the right need. Solar is much more expensive per Kwh.
We LOVE selling power back to TEP and appreciate everyone supplementing our solar power array.
Attention all solar loons,.. stop with the subsidy argument. Read this 2008 DOE report showing more federal subsidies for renewables than coal, natural gas and nuclear combined. Not to mention the subsidy by kWh is astronomical for renewables.
You guys are totally operating off the government gravy train. Stated another way, your artificial industry exist by taking money from the rest of us. Please stop blundering us and get real jobs.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/subsidy2/index.html
See table ES1 and ES5 in the executive summary.
If solar was so friggin’ cool, it wouldn’t need subsidies to survive in the market place. I hear the ads all the time “reduce your water bill by 50% if you go solar [+++all the federal i.e. taxpayer funded rebates]. Let’s do the math. The bill to heat my water is $18/month. Average solar panel installation is approx $2500. I can cut my gas bill by 50%, so my new gas bill is $9. So it will ONLY take my 27 years to recoup my ‘investment”? Hey Solar partisan, go sell stupid someplace else.
“Subsidizing fossil fuels??? Get real!” Well, yes we do subsidize fossil fuels but not as directly as renewable energy. While I agree with the post the fact is that obtaining, transporting, and using fossil fuels impose an enormous cost on the world economy that is not reflected in the cost of the fuel but has to be made up some where. Who’s going to pay for the costs of the BP oil spill? Who pays to clean up abandoned coal mine tailings? Consumers generally directly subsidize wind and solar energy through surcharges on utility bills but the the full cost of fossil fuels is spread out in taxes, increased consumer good prices, and other commodities.
For your information the ACC presently has a Republican majority. Three R’s and 2 D’s.
Hey William, Please get off the R’s vs. D’s thing. It’s really old and the only purpose it serves is to keep us fighting amongst ourselves. [Which is exactly what the Big R’s and D’s in office want us to do. dude it’s now us against them. If a government subsidized program can’t even make it in the real world, then we need to take a serious look at the usefulness of the program, no matter who is holding the reigns.
William, it’s your money and it’s my money too. Just saying I aint seeing a big ROI here.
Solar can give a return on your investment. It may take a while. Also consider grid-tie in solar systems where some homeowners could actually end up getting a monthly check from the electric company.
Who is footing the bill for the BP oil spill? Um, BP. Duh. Therefore BPs customers. Goverment is still collecting taxes on the gasoline sold.
Well said Curtain. A reminder to all. The entity that has the HIGHEST profit from crude oil is the US Federal Government.
James L.,
Fossil fuels make all our goods and services LESS expensive, not MORE. Oil, coal, and natural gas would exist fine without any government subsidy. Grid-tied solar PV would vanish overnight without massive subsidy.
Why is it that the solar loons are so out of touch with reality?
joesolar123@gmail.com
Curtain-do you really believe that ALL the costs related to BP’s oil spill are being paid by BP? The federal government’s costs? The costs to businesses harmed by the spill? The long term costs to fisheries and the fishing industry? Come on? Its not that simplistic. And JoeSolar-I agree completely. My point is that fossil fuels also have costs that aren’t borne by producer (ie-subsidies).
Yes, I do. certainly the vast majority of them.
I was going to say that at least with gas my taxes don’t go towards buying someone else’s car…but then I thought of “Cash for Clunkers” and I guess you’re right, we have to subsidize fuel-efficient cars for our neighbors. How #%@&$* sad is that that our current lib government has to expand the loser solar model to the vehicle industry.
But the Arizona “alternative fuel vehicle” fiasco also proves what a crappy “incentive” model that was. Darn near bankrupted the state so people could get an expensive car for half price. No gas stations sell CNG, it never caught on. Fail.
Curtain. I agree with the alternative fuels fiasco but that didn’t come from a “lib” government. Both houses of the legislature were GOP and so was Hull. Bad government doesn’t have a party label or a philosophy. Its just bad.