Tonight's debate

[JJ Husker]

 

In an ideal world perhaps. Too bad we don't live in that world. I have seen, first hand, a building/renovation plan be changed to accommodate a bonus for some of those involved. And in did involve a great deal of used instead of new equipment. So, it would be at the project management level that the greed took effect. The guys actually doing the work were rather pissed off by the changes, it made their job more frustrating.

 

Re #1 When they do this as described they are, in the vast majority of cases, building a 'box' set up either as a stand alone, or more commonly as a 'strip mall' format. Bayed units set to minimum code. And the renter of the space is allowed to make some limited number of modifications based on the planned use.

 

The 'build to suit' is not as common. And anymore the majority if not all the cost goes to the leaser and not the land owner. Generally in a rent the space, and be responsible for the building sort of thing.

 

The solar panels thing gets into that the property owner(especially in the strip mall type setup) just doesn't care about the costs, he does not pay the utilities, the renter for each bay does. And as his renter bases is going to change repeatedly, he is going to go for the minimum and not worry about it.

 

I'm not saying the minimum energy efficiencies and such are necessarily at the levels they need to be in all instances. Your example of strip malls and buildings that obviously will be occupied by lease or renters could have a little higher standard placed on them. But, I feel the bigger point is that the front end cost for this technology is still prohibitively high. I do not know enough about it to know if the maintenance, upkeep, or life expectancy is commensurate with old technology. I think it is just a bit naive to posit that every roof should should be covered with solar panels. That will happen if and when it makes economic sense across the board.

[strigori]

 

In an ideal world perhaps. Too bad we don't live in that world. I have seen, first hand, a building/renovation plan be changed to accommodate a bonus for some of those involved. And in did involve a great deal of used instead of new equipment. So, it would be at the project management level that the greed took effect. The guys actually doing the work were rather pissed off by the changes, it made their job more frustrating.

 

Re #1 When they do this as described they are, in the vast majority of cases, building a 'box' set up either as a stand alone, or more commonly as a 'strip mall' format. Bayed units set to minimum code. And the renter of the space is allowed to make some limited number of modifications based on the planned use.

 

The 'build to suit' is not as common. And anymore the majority if not all the cost goes to the leaser and not the land owner. Generally in a rent the space, and be responsible for the building sort of thing.

 

The solar panels thing gets into that the property owner(especially in the strip mall type setup) just doesn't care about the costs, he does not pay the utilities, the renter for each bay does. And as his renter bases is going to change repeatedly, he is going to go for the minimum and not worry about it.

 

I'm not saying the minimum energy efficiencies and such are necessarily at the levels they need to be in all instances. Your example of strip malls and buildings that obviously will be occupied by lease or renters could have a little higher standard placed on them. But, I feel the bigger point is that the front end cost for this technology is still prohibitively high. I do not know enough about it to know if the maintenance, upkeep, or life expectancy is commensurate with old technology. I think it is just a bit naive to posit that every roof should should be covered with solar panels. That will happen if and when it makes economic sense across the board.

 

Its kind of a catch 22. To lower the cost, we need to get more installed, and to get people more interested in getting them installed the price needs to come down. Every new tech has this barrier. You just don't get the level of venom and ignorance tossed out to every new tech that comes along.

[JJ Husker]

 

 

Its kind of a catch 22. To lower the cost, we need to get more installed, and to get people more interested in getting them installed the price needs to come down. Every new tech has this barrier. You just don't get the level of venom and ignorance tossed out to every new tech that comes along.

 

I agree with you about the catch 22 situation to an extent but I don't feel it is a mass production efficiency issue or lack of demand issue. I just don't think it is quite ready for prime time. Not because they aren't manufacturing enough but simply because the technology in them is expensive and not in a condition to yet go head to head with existing technologies. It will get there. Rising fossil fuel costs will force it there.

 

And that brings me to the venom and ignorance statement. I believe much of that, if it really exists in any measurable form, is brought about by things like our stimulus dollars being funneled directly to individual companies such as Solyndra or many of the others that took the money, contributed to campaigns, paid off investors, and then went out of business. Wasting taxpayer money like that will generate a whole bunch of venom and resentment but, it should not be directed at the industry in general. It should be directed at the system that allowed elected officials to attempt to pick winners and losers in the market. Another contributing factor for venom would be Obama's apparent stance that these alternative technologies won't come to fruition until we are paying enough at the pump and to heat our homes. He has basically admitted that rising energy are a good thing because it helps make these alternative energies more viable. Yeah, that will generate some venom and resentment of an industry.

[strigori]

 

 

Its kind of a catch 22. To lower the cost, we need to get more installed, and to get people more interested in getting them installed the price needs to come down. Every new tech has this barrier. You just don't get the level of venom and ignorance tossed out to every new tech that comes along.

 

I agree with you about the catch 22 situation to an extent but I don't feel it is a mass production efficiency issue or lack of demand issue. I just don't think it is quite ready for prime time. Not because they aren't manufacturing enough but simply because the technology in them is expensive and not in a condition to yet go head to head with existing technologies. It will get there. Rising fossil fuel costs will force it there.

 

And that brings me to the venom and ignorance statement. I believe much of that, if it really exists in any measurable form, is brought about by things like our stimulus dollars being funneled directly to individual companies such as Solyndra or many of the others that took the money, contributed to campaigns, paid off investors, and then went out of business. Wasting taxpayer money like that will generate a whole bunch of venom and resentment but, it should not be directed at the industry in general. It should be directed at the system that allowed elected officials to attempt to pick winners and losers in the market. Another contributing factor for venom would be Obama's apparent stance that these alternative technologies won't come to fruition until we are paying enough at the pump and to heat our homes. He has basically admitted that rising energy are a good thing because it helps make these alternative energies more viable. Yeah, that will generate some venom and resentment of an industry.

Your first statement about fossil fuels and the second one are at the same time linked and disjointed. You said yourself rising prices are inevitable. Obama is just pointing that out also. He is not out to raise prices, that is more of those right wing conspiracy theories.

 

The venom has less to do with the tax money, I doubt many people who spew venom about 'green energy' even know there were companies given grants. Its about the global warming argument. And the people who refuse to believe science at all. The word 'green' alone gets some people very upset.

 

The gov either needs to balance the whole playing field, or not play at all. As long as oil, natural gas and coal all have massive tax breaks then things are bent in that direction. We subsidize the oil companies for billions a year, and they are making billions a quarter.