24 Sep 08
I have never been to Germany, but from what I have read they seem to be one of, if not the most, progressive nations taking on foreign energy dependency.
From what I understand the German government is issuing loans to homeowners with zero interest in order to install solar and wind power which creates energy the government BUYS BACK!
This is possible buy abandoning the construction of power plants and using the money saved to pay off individual renewable energy creators.
Everyone wins except the electric company.
Will this strategy work elsewhere?
25 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by nihilismorOnly if the government has the cahunas to go against the centralised energy lobby.
I have never been to Germany, but from what I have read they seem to be one of, if not the most, progressive nations taking on foreign energy dependency.
From what I understand the German government is issuing loans to homeowners with zero interest in order to install solar and wind power which creates energy the government BUYS BACK!
Everyone wins except the electric company.
Will this strategy work elsewhere?
Would a democracy still allow its citizens to be free? By allowing energy and electrical production to be de-centralized, you also put power into peoples hands so to speak. People thus empowered have a fundamental need serviced and are therefore less likely to take the first available option given to them in terms of the employment they may take on etc.
I think some politicians and energy lobbies would fight hard against this taking on elsewhere. Personally I think this is the best long term energy solution. Make each home self sufficient with renewable and only have traditional base load carrying capacity for industry and essential services.
26 Sep 08
Originally posted by kmax87So you agree this is a way to thwart the current "world power?"
Only if the government has the cahunas to go against the centralised energy lobby.
Would a democracy still allow its citizens to be free? By allowing energy and electrical production to be de-centralized, you also put power into peoples hands so to speak. People thus empowered have a fundamental need serviced and are therefore less likely to take the first a ...[text shortened]... wable and only have traditional base load carrying capacity for industry and essential services.
How much "power" will be in the peoples' hands?
Why is power at the social level a bad thing?
(The answer to that may have been in what remained of your post but the wordings confused me. Please elaborate/clarify.)
26 Sep 08
Originally posted by nihilismorSure it would. We did that "...during the energy crisis of the 1970s, when President Jimmy Carter donned a sweater, turned down his thermostat --and had a solar-powered water system installed. It was later removed by President Ronald Reagan, who shipped the panels off to Unity College in Maine, where they still heat the water for the school's cafeteria."
I have never been to Germany, but from what I have read they seem to be one of, if not the most, progressive nations taking on foreign energy dependency.
From what I understand the German government is issuing loans to homeowners with zero interest in order to install solar and wind power which creates energy the government BUYS BACK!
This is possib ...[text shortened]... gy creators.
Everyone wins except the electric company.
Will this strategy work elsewhere?
Regan's action was sheer idiocy when you think that 99% of the cost of a solar heating system is the installation.
Reagan was making a powerful political statement, though -- that Republicans wanted the US to be completely dependent on fossil fuels for energy.
Interestingly, Bush in 2003 had a small solar electric system installed. "But if the new systems are primarily symbolic, no one, it seems, has told the White House. President Bush, who uses solar power on his ranch in Texas, has yet to trumpet the little-noticed panels, as evidence, perhaps, of his support for renewable energy."
So these events raise an important question:
Why do Republican Presidents, even if they are for renewable energy privately, not make their views known?
Probably because large energy companies who make lots of money available to Republican candidates view renewable energy as a threat to their business model. So they lobby hard at every level to convince elected officials that renewable energy is a waste of time.
They have the right to do that, in our system.
But we have the right to stop electing Republicans if they listen to those lobbyists.
26 Sep 08
Originally posted by nihilismorWe have some similair incentives over here in Belgium and we've installed solar panels on our roof.
I have never been to Germany, but from what I have read they seem to be one of, if not the most, progressive nations taking on foreign energy dependency.
From what I understand the German government is issuing loans to homeowners with zero interest in order to install solar and wind power which creates energy the government BUYS BACK!
This is possib ...[text shortened]... gy creators.
Everyone wins except the electric company.
Will this strategy work elsewhere?
The question that sould be asked though, is, what are the costs/benefits as compared to larger renewable energy projects ? If they loaned the same amount of money to energy companies, could they then build wind farms or something similair with a higher energy output ?
26 Sep 08
Here in the US, lobbyists and corporation control everything. A prime example is vehicles that run on hydrogen taken from water. The car companies have squashed this for years. This T. Boone Pickens billionaire keeps talking about going green....why don't he use the billions he made on oil to purchase these vehicles for the public....GREED....
26 Sep 08
Originally posted by steve645Hey, the whole debacle is a wonderfully Biblical morality tale. All that's needed is a prophet of stature to let the people know how God feels about their disgusting antics in front of the Golden Calf (as seen on the cover of Vogue).
Here in the US, lobbyists and corporation control everything. A prime example is vehicles that run on hydrogen taken from water. The car companies have squashed this for years. This T. Boone Pickens billionaire keeps talking about going green....why don't he use the billions he made on oil to purchase these vehicles for the public....GREED....
28 Sep 08
Originally posted by spruce112358Or it could be something less conspiritaorial than that.
Sure it would. We did that "...during the energy crisis of the 1970s, when President Jimmy Carter donned a sweater, turned down his thermostat --and had a solar-powered water system installed. It was later removed by President Ronald Reagan, who shipped the panels off to Unity College in Maine, where they still heat the water for the school's cafeteria. ...[text shortened]... .
But we have the right to stop electing Republicans if they listen to those lobbyists.
Perhaps they like renewables, but didn't feel they were ready to be forced on everyone as a matter of policy.