Australian government to dump their carbon tax and "green initiatives".

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**cadbren**

Krellnus wrote:
I personally think a long term solution would be to require or incentivise all buildings to have solar power and/or water heating where structurally feasible.

It reduces peak stress on the grid, saves money on everybody's bills once the panels are paid for and makes our current energy reserves last longer, its a win, win, win, once you get the money together for them anyway.

I think, for residential buildings, solar panels can free people from the grip of the power companies. It would also free up the infrastructure to focus on industry which requires high intensity usage. Solar panels should be mandatory in new homes.

**AlmightyWalrus**

cadbren wrote:
Krellnus wrote:
I personally think a long term solution would be to require or incentivise all buildings to have solar power and/or water heating where structurally feasible.

It reduces peak stress on the grid, saves money on everybody's bills once the panels are paid for and makes our current energy reserves last longer, its a win, win, win, once you get the money together for them anyway.

I think, for residential buildings, solar panels can free people from the grip of the power companies. It would also free up the infrastructure to focus on industry which requires high intensity usage. Solar panels should be mandatory in new homes.

This is new, a post where I 100% agree with cadbren. Must be due to global warming.

**whembly**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
cadbren wrote:
Krellnus wrote:
I personally think a long term solution would be to require or incentivise all buildings to have solar power and/or water heating where structurally feasible.

It reduces peak stress on the grid, saves money on everybody's bills once the panels are paid for and makes our current energy reserves last longer, its a win, win, win, once you get the money together for them anyway.

I think, for residential buildings, solar panels can free people from the grip of the power companies. It would also free up the infrastructure to focus on industry which requires high intensity usage. Solar panels should be mandatory in new homes.

This is new, a post where I 100% agree with cadbren. Must be due to global warming.

Solar panels for electricity just isn't cost effective/efficient yet... we have a long way to go before it can be massed produced commercially.

Now, solar heating for wather/residential heating? That gak works... we ought to start with that.

**Alfndrate**

whembly wrote:
Solar panels for electricity just isn't cost effective/efficient yet... we have a long way to go before it can be massed produced commercially.

Now, solar heating for wather/residential heating? That gak works... we ought to start with that.

Surprisingly, Ohio is on top of this... though they're starting with the folks that dislike technology.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10506342

Teaser wrote:The Amish, widely known for adhering to low-tech traditions, are fueling a local boom in solar power in a community in Ohio. Solar panels are popping up as many decide to embrace a new, safer technology than their traditional natural gas and kerosene.

**Krellnus**

whembly wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
cadbren wrote:
Krellnus wrote:
I personally think a long term solution would be to require or incentivise all buildings to have solar power and/or water heating where structurally feasible.

It reduces peak stress on the grid, saves money on everybody's bills once the panels are paid for and makes our current energy reserves last longer, its a win, win, win, once you get the money together for them anyway.

I think, for residential buildings, solar panels can free people from the grip of the power companies. It would also free up the infrastructure to focus on industry which requires high intensity usage. Solar panels should be mandatory in new homes.

This is new, a post where I 100% agree with cadbren. Must be due to global warming.

Solar panels for electricity just isn't cost effective/efficient yet... we have a long way to go before it can be massed produced commercially.

Now, solar heating for wather/residential heating? That gak works... we ought to start with that.

Yeah the efficiency of solar cells, is somewhat left wanting, its because no-one uses them, so there is not much point in improving the technology, create the interest, the improvements will come along.

@cadbren, I agree 100% for new homes, the cost of the panels is not much extra in comparison to the cost of the house and land, not only that, but its part of your mortgage, that pays itself off, which is worth it for the novelty of it myself.

**djones520**

Does anyone know what solar panels do to insurance costs? I imagine not a lot of good.

**Krellnus**

Nothing to my knowledge.

**AlexHolker**

Krellnus wrote:
Yeah the efficiency of solar cells, is somewhat left wanting, its because no-one uses them, so there is not much point in improving the technology, create the interest, the improvements will come along.

Improvements to solar technology are not retroactive. Forcing people to buy and install an inferior product now to fund development of a superior product later is stupid.

**Maddermax**

Meanwhile, the new Abbott Government has had a string of fark-ups in the two months it's been in power, and would now lose to Labor if the election were held today, making theirs one of the shortest honeymoon periods ever. Well done Tony.

I guess this shows the problem with riding to victory on the back of the protest vote. Hopefully Labor will stop having leadership issues (which were really soap-opera like over the last few years), and make the next election one where you actually vote FOR someone.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-25/labor-leads-government-in-first-nielsen-poll-since-election/5113798

**chromedog**

Ah, an election where you have a choice to vote for someone you want - as opposed to voting against someone you don't want.

Luxury.

**Bullockist**

This "luxury" does not exist. I always numb er from who I don't want and go upwards , except in local elections, I don't vote in them at all.

**sebster**

whembly wrote:
Solar panels for electricity just isn't cost effective/efficient yet... we have a long way to go before it can be massed produced commercially.

Solar panels have dropped in price so much in the last few years they are now cost effective for power used right then and there. The issue now is developing decent power storage, so power captured in the middle of the day can be stored and used that night when people are home, instead of being returned to the grid and mostly lost.

Now, solar heating for wather/residential heating? That gak works... we ought to start with that.

Solar hot water has been standard over here for a few decades, but is now in decline. It's okay, but ultimately you want hot water in winter, when the sun is giving you least heating.

**whembly**

sebster wrote:
whembly wrote:
Solar panels for electricity just isn't cost effective/efficient yet... we have a long way to go before it can be massed produced commercially.

Solar panels have dropped in price so much in the last few years they are now cost effective for power used right then and there. The issue now is developing decent power storage, so power captured in the middle of the day can be stored and used that night when people are home, instead of being returned to the grid and mostly lost.

It's still not quite there as most folks don't have enough space for all the panels needed (or, it may be against code). They need to be more efficient on a smaller panel as you can't fill up your back yard with 'em in some places

Funny thing about the storage, the technology is there... the demand just needs to reach critical mass in order for it to be cheaper.

Now, solar heating for wather/residential heating? That gak works... we ought to start with that.

Solar hot water has been standard over here for a few decades, but is now in decline. It's okay, but ultimately you want hot water in winter, when the sun is giving you least heating.

Huh...

I guess it matters where you live and how much you use on a daily basis.

My folks live on a mountain in Colorado (on the dry side of the peak)... in the winter, it's fething cold and windy as a mother f'er. When I stayed with them, there was enough hot water for daily use and the residual amount was used as "radiant heating" through out the night. The electric heater barely kicked in while I was there...

*shrugs*

**Krellnus**

AlexHolker wrote:
Krellnus wrote:
Yeah the efficiency of solar cells, is somewhat left wanting, its because no-one uses them, so there is not much point in improving the technology, create the interest, the improvements will come along.

Improvements to solar technology are not retroactive. Forcing people to buy and install an inferior product now to fund development of a superior product later is stupid.

True, but its the only way we can get development dollars and given the price drops seen in photovoltaic cells, the only challenge to really overcome is power storage, which likely would be retroactive, perhaps some type of capacitor would be our best bet, since it can hold charge more or less indefinitley.

**sebster**

whembly wrote:
It's still not quite there as most folks don't have enough space for all the panels needed (or, it may be against code). They need to be more efficient on a smaller panel as you can't fill up your back yard with 'em in some places

I've often wondered why solar panels seem to be fixed to certain sizes, that no-one just covers a whole roof in panels. Might be a limitation of the technology, or maybe the weight placed on the roof.

That said, the big thing with solar panels is recognising that they aren't ever going to provide all your energy needs. It isn't about having enough panels to cover all your costs, but about having panels cut your energy consumption by a certain percentage, and that saving in energy costs justify the expense of the panels.

Funny thing about the storage, the technology is there... the demand just needs to reach critical mass in order for it to be cheaper.

**Maddermax**

sebster wrote:
whembly wrote:
It's still not quite there as most folks don't have enough space for all the panels needed (or, it may be against code). They need to be more efficient on a smaller panel as you can't fill up your back yard with 'em in some places

I've often wondered why solar panels seem to be fixed to certain sizes, that no-one just covers a whole roof in panels. Might be a limitation of the technology, or maybe the weight placed on the roof.

That said, the big thing with solar panels is recognising that they aren't ever going to provide all your energy needs. It isn't about having enough panels to cover all your costs, but about having panels cut your energy consumption by a certain percentage, and that saving in energy costs justify the expense of the panels.

Funny thing about the storage, the technology is there... the demand just needs to reach critical mass in order for it to be cheaper.

I think people recognise the demand is there at this point (I mean there's been such an explosion in houses with solar panels, everyone must recognise the scope for having energy storage in the home). And business is quite good at recognising and costing according to a future market. I think it's more about refining the engineering so the cost is brought down to commercial levels. The tech is there, as you say, but it's still pretty new.

Huh...

I guess it matters where you live and how much you use on a daily basis.

My folks live on a mountain in Colorado (on the dry side of the peak)... in the winter, it's fething cold and windy as a mother f'er. When I stayed with them, there was enough hot water for daily use and the residual amount was used as "radiant heating" through out the night. The electric heater barely kicked in while I was there...

*shrugs*

Interesting. Over here solar is declining, during the 80s it seemed like every new house had solar hot water installed. Maybe the tanks installed were too small, but the shortfall in hot water covered by electrical heating was significant. Enough so that the electricity bill typically ended up higher than if you used gas for your water heating.

There are now solar hot water systems boosted by gas (my house has one) so that's not as much of an issue, but for the cost of the solar unit and their lifespan, I'm not sure it's that cost effective. That said, here in Western Australia we do have stupidly cheap natural gas, so that probably skews the market.