[thunderhead]

Assuming a cost of $1800 dollars per kw solar installed, a yearly capacity factor of 15%(realistic for GEG), and 10c per kwh of cheap hydro available over the grid, and net metering remains in this state for that timeframe, home solar installations would pay for themselves after about 18 years of operation. 20 years is a good figure for lifespan/long range planning, so by itself this is a promising figure, being just cheaper than grid power. Adding maintenance/cleaning likely pushes the costs of home solar at GEG just above the cost of grid electricity, but we are nearing parity which is good. If one is competent enough with electricity to install and maintain them yourself, then home solar really starts to look attractive, so long as less than ~20% of your neighbors do the same thing. Once >20% of people try this, costs get prohibitive real quick and the net metering assumption will no longer be valid. EDIT: We should be able to push easy integration here above 20% because we have the awesome storage capacity of the great dams on the Columbia and its tributaries. So long as idiots are not allowed to cut down the snake river dams to save a few fish.

[thunderhead]

I think my 1800 per kw installed relies on tax subsidies. On its own it is not yet competitive in Spokane, although the end user wouldn't care about that. Bottom line is if you can install a system in eastern wa for less than ~1.5 dollars per watt, its probably a good idea.

[thunderhead]

http://www.freecleansolar.com/10kW-Solar-Kits-s/153.htm ~1.2 dollars per watt for the raw kit for a typical small home sized unit. Installation not included. If you include tax credits and are a DIYer, and live in an unshaded spot eastside and assume grid metering will continue for the next 20 years(probable in spokane) I think installation would be a good idea.

[MtnGoat]

More shenanigans...IPCC votes to redefine 'climate' in order to benefit it's claims.

[Ski]

more rhetorical questions?

[MtnGoat]

I don't do rhetorical. Questions don't become rhetorical, just because some don't want to answer them. So from here on out, remember...the IPCC has voted to ditch the classical, empirical definition of climate as something has already occurred, and been empirically measured..... in favor of a definition which includes their predictions.

[MtnGoat]

Open letter by climate scientists to Heads Of State ..

[Ski]

just between you and me and the wall, I don't think there's a lot of distance between you and I when it comes to opinions about the IPCC.

[thunderhead]

Cost Effective Carbon-Free Nuclear Free choose up to 2 (If you are as poorly managed as Germany choose 0, lol)

[gb]

This recent study published by the National Academy of Sciences shows that 55% of the increases in forest fire activity in the last four decades in the Western United States is attributable to ACC (Anthropomorphic Climate Change). The increase is tied to observed changes in the metrics of a number of measures of fuel aridity across the west, most of which have become manifest since the early 1980's and show an increasing divergence from what would be expected based on natural climate variability in that period. It is a good read and shows the ridiculousness of the Mass blog on forest fires this August. Increase in Forest Fire acreage (hectares) burned in the Western US in recent decades

[thunderhead]

Industrialization of the US west has caused a overwealming decrease in forest fires

[MtnGoat]

They use modeling to argue their claims, hence the claims are no more accurate than the modeling failures. Heck, last week it was claimed the oceans ate even more heat than was believed...which itself is yet another implicit statement of finding massive error in projections and models.

[gb]

[gb]

[thunderhead]