Date: 2011-06-22 03:40 am (UTC)
On the day that the first item on that list is not "environment", but "economic" without any form of subsidy, I will agree that they are worthwhile.

Here's the thing, dollars and carbon emissions are fungible. What I mean by that is that *if* electricity from a given source costs $.12/kwh, then it emits half the co2 compared to electricity that costs $.24/kwh. This is true because, when you ponder the ultimate destination of the money, it is almost invariably to carbon emissions that the money goes (more on that at request). It does not matter *who* pays the money, the true cost is the only thing that matters. Subsidies, tax credits, etcetera... all of them are engineered to mask the true cost, which ultimately harms the environment.

At current, rooftop PV generated electricity costs around $.25/kwh, or twice the national average of $.12/kwh at the consumption level ($.03-$.05 at the production level).
http://solarbuzz.com/facts-and-figures/markets-growth/cost-competitiveness

Essentially... It makes no economic or environmental sense at this time to install rooftop solar.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

liveonearth: (Default)
liveonearth

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
1819202122 2324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 30th, 2025 03:00 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios