amazingdrx wrote on April 17, 2008 05:39 AM: http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2008/4/17/3644376.html

Las Vegan wing nut calls alternatives to coal powered gambling, air conditioning, lawns, pools, fountains in the desert and flying in the suckers to pay for it all on gas guzzling aircraft a commie conspiracy to destroy america? Yeah, pretty much.

In a place that sucks the Colorado river dry before it gets to the sea, destroying the jungle haunt of the black jaguar in Mexico. The massive hydro-electric power of the river wasted to light up the plastic abomination in the desert.

The rooftops of Vegas are a solar gold mine. That would power the whole city and export power into the national grid, the revenue dwarfing the failing casino/resort income.

With gambling being legalized here and there around the country, on reservations, and in economically stressed regions; just how long do the corporatists who run Las Vegas think their gambling paradise will keep going?

How many people are willing to wait in airports for days to get there? And risk 10 years in prison if they complain too loudly. And have their baby's sippy cups confiscated as possible terrorist devices.

When they can gamble or vacation nearer to home?

I guess this sort of attitude, on the part of this Las Vegan editorial writer, represents the ultimate ignorance of failing american corporate anti-culture. Maybe even better than Bush the dancing duuh...bya does?

Well no, nothing beats the tap dancing shaved ape as a symbol of pure ignorance. I would suggest that publications like this adopt a dancing duubya logo in the corner of each online page!

Combine your moronic pronouncements with the image of the poster chimp of corporate feudal stupidity!!

Alex 77 wrote on April 16, 2008 04:38 PM: Every word of this editorial is a deception. I can't believe that I'm reading such a farce in 2008. Congratulations to the coal industry, and American Electric Power in particular, for influencing this editorial board to such an extreme degree that this piece of propaganda could be printed. A true testament to the power of your dollars.

Rhetoric is Fun! wrote on April 16, 2008 08:49 AM:
"Half of our country's newspapers have conservative whacko editors. Half. Imagine the resources we would save if every paper news source were banned..."

Get a clue R-J - you're up in the night. This kind of rhetoric doesn't solve anything - and it doesn't win over the middle to your position either...

Kevin Jamison wrote on April 15, 2008 06:33 PM: Damn the torpedos, full speed ahead, to doomsday!

Common Sense wrote on April 15, 2008 06:14 PM: ""Still waiting" won't get you very satisfactory results in any of life's endeavors."

Especially if you're waiting on someone who refuses to answer the question.

John F wrote on April 15, 2008 05:36 PM: The RJ is owned by Stephens Media, a subsidiary of the Stephens Group.

Go to:

http://www.stephensgroup.com/aboutourpartners/currinv-energy.html

See what companies the Stephens Group has large interests in and then ask yourself why this paper is consistently calling for more use of fossil fuels and less support for renewable energy sources.

Mr. Evans makes a great point. In this climate solar panels can generate enough energy to power your entire house, probably with some left over to sell back to the electric company. The problem is you have to be certain that you're going to be staying in your house for a number of years in order to recoup your investment. If I was building a new home or knew that I'd be staying here a while, putting in solar panels would be an easy decision. The start-up cost is high, but the long-term savings are immense.

Socrates wrote on April 15, 2008 05:27 PM: I'm glad there's an interest in renewable energy here. It much too complex to provide a detailed explanation in this forum, however the information is available to anyone who wants to do their homework.

Don, you have provided some very good input, thanks.

One key to the equation: Don't forget about the equity increase when adding PV to a home. It is a very real, tangible home improvement that increases in value as energy rates rise.

Another key that Mr. Schaffer mentioned: Energy Efficiency. Do that first, then add the solar. It's much more cost-effective. Most of us waste so much energy and we're not even aware of it (until the bills get too high).

For in depth financial in on solar, try http://www.ongrid.net/papers/index.html is a good place to start. Although the financial analysis is based on California energy conditions, much of the information is true no matter where one lives. We don't have tiered pricing here so we basically subsidize the higher cost of peak energy. Not a free market condition by any means and another example of how the playing field tilts away from reality.

The bottom line is to educate yourself, or be prepared to pay someone who has. Asking for the information here and then using the lack of details to "prove" your case is really just being lazy, isn't it? "Still waiting" won't get you very satisfactory results in any of life's endeavors.

Doesn't matter to me either way. My bills are under $100 per year (just the monthly customer service charge) and will stay that way for the life of the house. That works for me!

This is not us vs. them, green vs. brown. Efficiency and renewables make good sense; socially, economically and environmentally. It speaks to the triple bottom line.

Power of, by and for the people!

Don Evans wrote on April 15, 2008 05:11 PM: "Common Sense",

While we're waiting for someone that uses P.V. to respond, let's calculate the rate of inflation experienced in oil (another finite fuel) in the past four months. I believe the figure is now approaching 33%. This effect will accelerate, as finite resources become both; more hard to come by, and in more global demand.

Double the cost of the system to account for a larger p.v. system, if it suits you. The interest on the investment is still tax deductible (unlike power bills), and the increases in energy prices (far greater than 3%/year) would still justify the expenditure.

With China and India now coming on board the "fossil fuel express", the break even point (otherwise known as the point of indifference) for non-finite fuels is here, as I've said.

I believe fossil fuels are on the way out, either by choice (the least expensive way), or by force (ever-increasing energy prices that force us to abandon them at an inopportune time in the future). I do appreciate your willingness to listen, however, "Common Sense".

tim wrote on April 15, 2008 04:50 PM: you cant argue with the green crowd.not everybody can afford 20,000 dollar solar panels. but if it makes you feel better than the next guy,let everyone know.probably learned that in the third grade.

Mark Schaffer wrote on April 15, 2008 04:49 PM: The belief that dollars and cents are an absolute value makes common sense the most obtuse poster of this day on these forums.

Read All Comments