8 replies to this topic

[Hayden]

SA's will be hit with higher electricity prices to cover the cost of homeowners installing solar panels.

View the full article

[tri-n-b-helpful]

Yes, thank you. I remember this. Their assessment was actually out by a long shot. The wealthier households who could "afford" solar were also cutting back on their energy usage, so the bulk of the extra money was collected from households who were not so vigilant with their energy consumption. It should have been charged based on property value, like water is here, which has been proven to be a much fairer system over many decades. Either way, 8% is eight percent - a cost that discriminates against the poor or, to put it bluntly, another "poor tax". I can relate to the extra 75% increase in electricity prices since Labor came to town. The rebate has been scaled back even further than this now because they set it far too high to start with and nearly went broke trying to maintain it. Those who could afford the solar system could actually, after rebates from both the federal government and the installer, get it for nothing, whilst the rest of us foot the tax bill. Sounds like highway robbery to me! Now it seems like our energy sector has sold out to China to recover debts from this state government's mismanagement.

[still learning]

tri-n-b-helpful, on 17 March 2012 - 03:33 AM, said:

....Now it seems like our energy sector has sold out to China to recover debts from this state government's mismanagement.

Selling off the government owned electricity utilities in South Australia started before 2000 according to Wikipedia :  http://en.wikipedia....South_Australia

[tri-n-b-helpful]

Yes, to pay for the debt caused by the Bannon Labor government. We don't mind selling out to the US or even the UK, but Chinese investment in our resources and utilities scares the living daylights out of us!

[Phil]

I posted here yesterday but my post disappeared.  What gives?  Don't think I said anything controversial, is the SW broken?

[still learning]

Phil, on 24 March 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

I posted here yesterday but my post disappeared.  What gives?  Don't think I said anything controversial, is the SW broken?

Me too.
Software problem.
I think.

[Phil]

I kind of thought so.  When it comes up Explorer more often than not has to restart the page.

I guess I'll repeat and expand what I posted.

We killed the carbon tax here.  It's a very regressive tax, hitting the poor the worst.  Instead of using the stick we are using the carrot, 30% tax credit, no dollar limit.  Our national average electric bill is something like 11 cents/KWH with the high being less tthan 25 cents.  I pay 6.5 cents because where I live we are 84% hydro.

At first I thought Washington rebates sucked but I'm warming up to them.  We get 15 cents/KWH production credit so my yearly check from the state should be around $1400-$1500 for my 10KW system.  In addition my PUD supports net metering so with the single bidirectional meter I only pay the difference.  Basically I have net metering for the utility and a separate production meter for the state.

Our electric rates do continue to increase all over the nation though, as most states, including Washington, have green production mandates.  Ours is scheduled to increase dramatically in 2013 so I expect a significant increase then.  Even though the bulk of our power is hydro, the state does not consider it green so it's solar, wind, and biomass.

All told, though our rate is only 6.5 cents, I'll still have a payback of less than 8 years which is perfect since the state credit expires 2020.  I did the installation myself and paid $22,600, or $2.25/watt.  Panels have fallen 40% since my purchase.

I think China is a double edged sword when it comes to solar.  We lose jobs but they make solar affodable.  On the whole, I tihnk in this case it's a net positive.  Panel production is highly automated so the jobs lost are relatively few.  One the other hand, the low prices have made solar competitive with coal and hydro and even cheaper than nuclear, when self installed.  Here you can buy grid tie compatible panels for $1/watt and off grid for an unbelievable 50 cents/watt.

I think solar is cheap enough now that we should drop the 30% credit and offer no/low interest solar conversion loans instead.  At this point, it's the up front costs that are stalling widespread adoption.

If I were king of the USA this is what I'd do:

Enlist Wal-Mart to make mass purchases of panels and inverters and partner with Home Depot for all the ancellary stuff.
Develop a DIY instructional video, freely available, and have Home Depot teach a class as they do now for other functions, (tiling, etc.).
Enlist Habitat for Humanity, Sierra Club, Natural Resouces Defense Council, Elks, Moose, Rotary, even the NRA, as a volunteer force to register with Home Depot so any home owner could get whatever help they'd need.  I'd volunteer in a heartbeat.

I think if we did this we could convert the nation as fast as solar panels were loaded off the ships.  The public wouldn't lose because the loan would be similar to their monthly electric bills.  The government wouldn't lose because the loans would be paid back.  The onlly losers would be the utility companies.

That's my 2 cents for a Sunday morning!

[still learning]

Phil, on 25 March 2012 - 08:56 AM, said:

We killed the carbon tax here.  It's a very regressive tax, hitting the poor the worst.  

A carbon tax doesn't need to be regressive.

Make a US  carbon tax revenue neutral by rebating all the proceeds and make it non-regressive by rebating it all equally to all adult legal residents.

Implement a very modest fossil carbon tax to begin with, taxing fossil fuels at the first point of sale, increasing predictably as time passes.  The tax bite will be passed on down to the ultimate consumers who are equally rebated the tax proceeds.
A person who consumes less fossil fuel and less fossil fuel connected products and services will have a lower increase in expenses than a person who uses lots of these things.  Drive a gas miser car and have a lower expense increase than somebody who chooses to drive an RV around.  Have a small home to heat and aircondition, have a lower increase than somebody with a mansion.

An energy conserver would come out ahead moneywise after the rebate.  An energy waster wouldn't. As fossil carbon taxes increased consumer choices would favor low-carbon energy and products and services.

See  http://www.carbontax...roduction/#what  (the rebate part is halfway down the page)
and http://www.columbia....aysAndMeans.pdf  (carbon tax on page 4)

[Phil]

While it is possible to make it less regressive, it does raise the price of everything by definition.  LIke ethanol has raised all foodstuffs, it is the poor that really pay the price.  All you do is put more people on assistance and bankrupt us even faster.

Again, I prefer the carrot.  Incentives are great at kick starting a market, then they can be removed so the negative effect is only temporary.  Taxes, on the other hand, never go away.   They may go up or down but they are there in perpituity.

Since I have 10KW solar on my roof it would be no big deal for me, in my self interest I should be for them.  But make no mistake it will be the poor that will pay one way or another.