Quake3World

Off topic but after our last discussion on wind farms it got me thinking.

If the turbine will fund itself over the course of its operating life, which doesn't make it profitable to business folk without government help, why don't we have a government scheme where they provide wind farms / solar energy under the understanding that the public will fund it over the lifetime at current cost. Mr Joe public keeps paying his energy bill, the government have a clean energy scheme that's effectively costing them nothing and in the long run prices drop forcing dirty burners to compete.

I already mentioned kinda how it's impossible to go full green but this is a good middle ground, no ?

Vote Chunk - the not so green and a little bit socialist party !

This is cool as shit n all, I think Eraser had it right. I would like to know the cost though before I start singing its praises.

You mean subsidies? We have a system like that in place in Holland. It pales in comparison to the superior program the Germans have, but it's there and it works. It's too slow in the sense that i think they should make it far more attractive for folks to install alternative energy stuff and occasionally you'll read something weird like "farmer demolishes wind turbine and replaces it for newer model for subsidy profit" - but it does work.

Hey there should even be some European subsidies availa... oh, never mind

and in the rest of the Netherlands as well.

What do you call something that becomes a term for something else? A synonym? Yeah, it's that. Look it up in a dictionary... It's like America / US, or Geoff / 'classless moron' - interchangeable words that have different origins but language is a fluid process and shit changes over time.

You'd be hardpressed to find an American agreeing that the 'Mid-West' is in fact a synonym for 'The USA' though.
Or a Dutchee thinking Brabant is also correct term for the Netherlands :shudder:

And yes, shit changes over time. But in this case that time hasn't come yet. Groninger.

I suppose it would really only work in certain climates too. In northern states where roofs are generally covered in snow for a few months out of the year, it would make the return on investment take even longer. That's not to say I'm all for it though.

MKJ wrote:You'd be hardpressed to find an American agreeing that the 'Mid-West' is in fact a synonym for 'The USA' though.
Or a Dutchee thinking Brabant is also correct term for the Netherlands :shudder:

And yes, shit changes over time. But in this case that time hasn't come yet. Groninger.

Midwest? Brabant? Whuh? Why bring that into it.

Think you'll find most of our yank friends would see no real difference between 'America' and 'US', indeed it seems to be a regular thing for their politicians call upon a fantastical supreme being to bless. That a Peruvian national might disagree with that is tough luck, no?

Anyway, here's a link for you to digest: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/holland?s=t

Ryoki wrote:You mean subsidies? We have a system like that in place in Holland.

Nah, we tried that and it's just giving money to business ?, as there's no profit without subsidies these business models become completely reliant on state funding which is why the British wind farm industry has gone to shit since the Torys took over. In my mind this would provide zero cost to the tax payer - beyond purchases anyway.

You're right in that it works by providing the farms through private ventures, it's just there's money going to waste, not very efficient and makes it less attractive to investors.

Lieutenant Dan wrote:I suppose it would really only work in certain climates too. In northern states where roofs are generally covered in snow for a few months out of the year, it would make the return on investment take even longer. That's not to say I'm all for it though.

This is why a dirty burner would always be required, even in the windy UK efficiency is severely hit as at any given time a decent proportion of the farms won't be producing anything or a reduced amount, which also means overspend. I believe although I maybe wrong, but the price pmw figures that can pay off the farms require 100% efficiency which does place a bit of a hole in my arguement. Same with solar.

Need to consider that energy demands alter throughout the course of the day too, so if everyone puts a kettle on at 5pm cos they just finished work but it's a beautiful summers day then the only choice is for the national grid to pull power from dirty burners, or you could be over output on a windy winters day but everyones in work at 2pm. These are obviously 2 extremes but you get the idea.

I got a better idea... Why doesn't Russia drop a bunch of satan2 missiles on Europe as a show of force in the opening round of the cold war part 2...

clues in the word 'cold' you fucking dipshit

scared? wrote:I got a better idea... Why doesn't Russia drop a bunch of satan2 missiles on Europe as a show of force in the opening round of the cold war part 2...

Cos Putin couldn't buy a decent car, get a decent meal, find some decent clothes or find a decent kebab

Doombrain wrote:clues in the word 'cold' you fucking dipshit

Just becuz Russia nukes Europe out of existence, doesn't make it a hot war for a real country like America...

So good you strive for European cars

Dipshit

Germany is the only country in Europe that's counts... I'm sure they would be spared any nuke attack...

losCHUNK wrote:
Need to consider that energy demands alter throughout the course of the day too.

That's where Tesla's Powerwall comes in

Pricey

This is when we come back to current technology only being able to fund itself over its own lifetime, when you add something like a powerwall into the scenario you're making it less efficient and Tesla have said that most households would need atleast 2 if they were looking at disconnecting from the grid entirely

I believe the payback for a solar roof was something like 25 years if you can sell to the national grid (dodgy) with the efficiency of the powerwall dropping to less than 80% in 10 years, or 5000 cycles. This is assuming good efficiency too.

The good news is that the cost of solar panels are falling like a stone and it was a while back when I looked into it.

So one day maybe. btw if you wanna grab some figures and post them up I'll be interested to read them.

It's also said that this is pretty much the same battery they slap in their road cars n all ? - which could show a hidden outlay, making these cars almost disposable and difficult for resale ? (those are my assumptions but something I found mildly interesting)

Lol at incoherent walls of text...

All speculation. We don't even know the price of these roofs...

Not talking about these roofs, I'm talking about when I was looking at getting some fitted and proved to be un economical. I even tried reducing the cost by making them myself and importing the cells from China then when the government kept reducing the cap on the sell back cost I gave up. You'd see a return on your investment after 25 years, beyond the lifespan of the roof provided you get max efficiency, the sell back cost remained the same and excluded the price of fittings, the converter and battery packs, maintenance etc. Plus you really had to guess on your calculations for savings AND you still needed to pull from the grid if you turned the kettle on...

You can buy more efficient cells but that's reflected in the cost.

Living in the UK, it proves to be too much a risk as there's a few people in my area that had them removed after being subsidised for them. If you don't have a West facing roof then you're fucked anyway. I looked at wind power but it's not really viable in built up areas, it needs to get above the influence of traffic / houses n shit and requires a big ass pole with planning permission.

I decided to wait it out, hoping mass production would keep forcing the price down.

losCHUNK wrote: Need to consider that energy demands alter throughout the course of the day too, so if everyone puts a kettle on at 5pm cos they just finished work but it's a beautiful summers day then the only choice is for the national grid to pull power from dirty burners, or you could be over output on a windy winters day but everyones in work at 2pm. These are obviously 2 extremes but you get the idea.

Interesting and slightly off topic, but the USSR's response to Eurovision (Intervision) voting didn't involve calling in to vote:

Intervision didn’t allow its viewers to vote by text message. Instead, those watching at home had to turn their lights on when they liked a song and off when they didn’t, with data from the electricity network then being used to allocate points.

A unique way to tally votes. Anyway, back to the topic at hand..

Lieutenant Dan wrote:

Intervision didn’t allow its viewers to vote by text message. Instead, those watching at home had to turn their lights on when they liked a song and off when they didn’t, with data from the electricity network then being used to allocate points.

Wow

Yall don't get too excited about any of this. looks like the powers that be are dedicated to undermine the entire sector, one way or another:

---QUOTE----------------------------------------------------
LUS quietly clouds solar’s future
It is now unlikely that new solar power systems would ever pay for themselves as a result of LUS’ new solar tax and the phase out of Louisiana’s solar tax credits.

http://theind.com/article-24174-lus-qui ... uture.html
---------------------------------------------------------------

won't be long before this cancer spreads throughout the country.

...and before someone comes up with the brilliant idea of completely going off the grid, may I remind you that you may not be allowed to do so by law...

http://www.offthegridnews.com/current-e ... s-illegal/

climate change is real!