I looked into getting solar in Seattle. There are really great incentives to do it. The deal will close in 2015, but I could have save $15k of the cost by sourcing locally made panels and having a deal for buy back from the local power co. State has not extended the support, so now it is not really that great a bargain, as it will not amortize long enough to see a positive return.
The morons we vote into office and the career bureaucrats dither and piss themselves instead of actually providing leadership and effective governance. Witness the weed industry mishandling, such that the state has failed to collect the taxes they expected. The idiots got greedy and then screwed up the implementation, so that there was not enough product in the pipeline to generate the massive tax income they thought was coming. The screwed up the initial Lotto program 30 years ago, and it took them a few years to get that straight. Meanwhile, Native Casinos are raking in funds tax free and no longer dependent upon state welfare programs to keep them above water. clay On Aug 17, 2014, at 10:18 AM, G Mann via Mercedes wrote: > On the other side of that coin, Arizona has now laws that over-ride any HOA > rules and with great specificity, state that any home, any where can, at > the desire of the homeowner, install as much solar as they wish. > > New EPA rules [I believe, some government agency, perhaps Dept of Energy, > who can keep them sorted] now requires that 15% of all electricity sold > must come from "alternative energy sources" by 2015, by 2020 that number > rises to 25%, I believe. > > The two power companies in Arizona, SRP & APS, both have active programs to > buy all power from homeowners with grid tie solar systems. They have until > just recently, offered a cash rebate to owners who installed solar systems > with said grid tie, to help defray the costs. It has been extremely popular. > > Good city friend installed a 10.5 KW solar system on his roof, with grid > tie, and now sells more electricity than he buys. His power bill went from > about $400 per month [summer air condition in AZ] to roughly $80 per month. > The solar system he installed is on a "lease/purchase" contract. $100 down > and $130 per month over 25 years, transferable should he sell the house. > > It works, and works well.. as soon as sun comes up, he runs his swimming > pool pump and AC on sunlight [both high current draw items]. It does help > that AZ has an average of 262 "solar days" each year. For once, government > here, "got it right"... for now.. > > Ecce panis angelorum eluceat omnibus lux. > > ex animo > Grant... > > > On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 12:32 PM, Archer75--- via Mercedes < > mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote: > >> >> South has tons of sun but rules that cloud solar industry >> >> Florida is one of several states, mostly in the Southeast, that combine >> copious sunshine with extensive rules designed to block its use by >> homeowners to generate solar power. >> >> Few places in the country are as warm and bright as Mary Wilkerson’s >> property on the beach near St. Petersburg, Fla., a city once noted in the >> Guinness World Records for a 768-day stretch of sunny days. >> >> But while Florida advertises itself as the Sunshine State, power-company >> executives and regulators have worked successfully to keep most Floridians >> from using that sunshine to generate their own power. >> >> Wilkerson discovered the paradox when she set out to harness sunlight into >> electricity for the vintage cottages she rents out at Indian Rocks Beach. >> She would have had an easier time installing solar panels, she found, if >> she had put the homes on a flatbed and transported them to chilly >> Massachusetts. >> >> “My husband and I are looking at each other and saying, ‘This is absurd,’ >> ” said Wilkerson, whose property is so sunny that a European guest under >> doctor’s orders to treat sunlight deprivation returns every year. The >> guest, who has solar panels on his home in Germany, is bewildered by their >> scarcity in a place with such abundant light. >> >> Florida is one of several states, mostly in the Southeast, that combine >> copious sunshine with extensive rules designed to block its use by >> homeowners to generate power. >> >> States like Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York — not known for clear, >> blue skies — have outpaced their counterparts to the south in the >> installation of rooftop solar panels. >> >> While the precise rules vary from state to state, one explanation is the >> same: opposition from utilities grown nervous by the rapid encroachment of >> solar firms on their business. >> >> The business models that have made solar systems financially viable for >> millions of homeowners in California, New England and elsewhere around the >> country are largely illegal in Florida, Virginia, South Carolina and some >> other Southern states. Companies that pioneered the industry, such as >> SolarCity and Sunrun, do not even attempt to do business there. >> >> “We get all kinds of inquiries every day” from the South, said Will >> Craven, spokesman for SolarCity. “People there want to be our customers.” >> >> Florida, in particular, is known as the “sleeping giant” of his industry, >> Craven said. “It has a ton of sunshine, a ton of rooftops,” he said. “But >> there is no rooftop-solar industry in Florida.” >> >> In South Carolina and Virginia combined, only a few hundred homes have >> solar panels, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association. New >> Jersey has 21,500; California, 234,600. >> >> *Lease agreements* >> >> Under the typical business model for the solar industry, homeowners sign >> lease agreements with installation companies. The homeowners pay the cost >> of the panels over time and sell any excess power the systems generate. >> >> Along with tax breaks and other government incentives, the lease >> agreements have made solar installations increasingly affordable. >> >> States where solar thrives typically pay homeowners attractive rates for >> the excess power they generate and require utilities to get a considerable >> share of their power from renewable sources. That gives companies an >> incentive to promote use of solar. >> >> Southern states, several of which cherish low electricity rates afforded >> by extensive use of coal, typically have far fewer solar incentives. >> >> Several also have rules that specifically discourage homeowners from going >> solar. In addition to the bans and restrictions on leasing arrangements, >> some Southern states assess taxes and fees on solar equipment and >> generation that do not exist elsewhere. >> >> When Washington and Lee University in Lexington, Va., installed solar >> panels a few years ago, for example, the local utility, Dominion Virginia >> Power, threatened legal action. The utility said that only it could sell >> electricity in its service area. The university and the solar firm it >> worked with had to change their lease arrangement and forfeit valuable tax >> credits. >> >> Soon after, in South Carolina, objections from another utility forced the >> cancellation of about 80 contracts under which a solar firm had planned to >> provide panels free of charge to churches and school districts. >> >> The resulting backlash forced a change in the state’s law, but a limited >> one. South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley last week signed a bill that directed >> regulators to establish rules under which leasing would be permitted. >> >> The details still need to be worked out, however, and solar firms worry >> the rules will be heavily influenced by electric companies that will insist >> on provisions to discourage installations. >> >> For now, many homeowners and businesses that want to install panels are in >> the same predicament as Wilkerson. Finding no viable option to lease a >> system in Florida, she is exploring paying cash to buy one outright for >> three of the cottages she owns. The cost: $106,000. >> >> *Burden on the grid* >> >> Utility officials say the policies inhibiting solar installations result >> from more than a mere turf battle. Utilities bear the cost of maintaining >> the power lines, switches and extensive computer networks that make up the >> electrical grid. >> >> How much of a burden homeowners who install rooftop-solar systems place on >> the grid is hotly debated between utilities and environmentalists. >> >> “We want to bring on more renewables, but we also want to make sure the >> cost of electricity stays reasonable,” said Randy Wheeless, a spokesman for >> Duke Energy, which serves customers in the Carolinas, the Midwest and >> Florida. >> >> Officials at Dominion Virginia Power say they are moving as aggressively >> as they can to promote solar in a heavily regulated, fiscally conservative >> state reluctant to subsidize homeowners who go green. >> >> Nearly two years ago, the company launched a pilot program that mimics the >> SolarCity and Sunrun models for leasing solar equipment to businesses. So >> far, two systems have been installed. >> >> “It might sound small,” said Dianne Corsello, manager of customer >> solutions at Dominion, but she says regulators want to see evidence that >> such programs will not create unreasonable costs for the utility. >> >> Solar-installation firms scoff at such utility programs. Sunrun Vice >> President Bryan Miller calls the Dominion rooftop effort “a make-believe >> program” designed for public relations, not to entice customers to install >> panels. >> >> Back in South Carolina, solar advocates were pleased last week to see the >> governor sign the new law loosening restrictions on the industry, but were >> are also growing impatient. >> >> “There is so much pent-up demand,” said Blan Holman, at the Charleston >> office of the Southern Environmental Law Center. “The sunshine is so >> obviously abundant. It is 98 degrees here today.” >> >> http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2024313538_solarpowerxml.html >> >> _______________________________________ >> http://www.okiebenz.com >> >> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ >> >> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: >> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com >> >> All posts are the result of individual contributors and as such, those >> individuals are responsible for the content of the post. The list owner >> has no control over the content of the messages of each contributor. >> > _______________________________________ > http://www.okiebenz.com > > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com > > All posts are the result of individual contributors and as such, those > individuals are responsible for the content of the post. The list owner has > no control over the content of the messages of each contributor. _______________________________________ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com All posts are the result of individual contributors and as such, those individuals are responsible for the content of the post. The list owner has no control over the content of the messages of each contributor.
