Once again demonstrating the leadership and forward-thinking that has made his name synonymous with progress, thrift, and government efficiency, Barack Obama has ordered that solar panels be added to the Whitehouse to commemorate the one year anniversary of his not so efficiently named "Executive Order 13514 on Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance."
Of course, the "leadership" shown in installing solar panels isn't exactly groundbreaking. It was first tried by previously-worst president Jimmy Carter way back in 1979. And President George W. Bush installed three separate solar energy systems on the Whitehouse grounds, thereby triggering global warming.
Obama's new system will consist of solar energy panels to generate electricity (which he has been unable to do personally since 2008), and a solar water heater which will send hot water directly to the family residence.
And of course, the system is predicted to be the most efficient in the world because, as the mainstream media so frequently reminds us, the sun rises and sets on Barack Obama.
-
16 comments:
That, and all the sunshine blowing out his backside..
Bold move Obama, and so easily achieved when someone else is paying for it.
I recently asked an engineer who works for a major heating/cooling company (Trane) what the payback was for current solar systems. (Solar industry estimates are about 16 years.) He said that because of system degradation over time, the systems will NEVER pay for themselves.
Anonymous- One of the biggest problems with Green energy is that the "green" it runs on is usually taxpayer dollars. Ethanol takes more energy to produce than it's able to deliver...yet the government keeps pumping money into it. The production of Solar panels is energy intensive and, as you say, the panels break down before reaching their break-even point. Wind farms? Oh please. There are very few spots where the wind is consistently strong enough, and most of those spots are off limits because liberals either don't want to look at the wind turbines, or are afraid that the occasionally spinning blades will puree migrating birds.
With all of that being said, we're in favor of continuing research into renewable energy...but it's a bad and dangerous joke to pretend that any of the current technologies can even begin to address our country's energy needs. We need oil, we need nuclear plants, and we need them now - without the regulatory roadblocks the Democrats have put in place.
Stilton:
Drill, baby, drill. Now who said that?
I love the talk about the lack of energy efficiency in the programs being shoved down our throats. My hubby's an auto tech and HATES biofuel. It's bad for cars, especially since "hippies" put it in every damn vehicle they have regardless of if it's made to process the damn stuff.
He came home a couple of weeks ago pissed at a new process requiring them to change exhaust fluid now as well. Exhaust fluid what a joke. To help kill the toxins before they exit the vehicle. So far this is only for diesels. Thought up, no doubt, by someone who "bikes" to work. (no offense to those that do, you know what I mean).
My fave tidbit is the irony in use of cow urea...that's right, cow piss. lol. I guess what I'm getting from that is it's ok to use cow pee to break up diesel exhaust, but if you cow farts you're getting a bill.
BTW: I'm a proud Suburban driving soccer mom with three car seats in the back! And we own a '64 BelAir. Anyone know when they're going to start taxing classics? lol
The other problem with biofuels is that in the case of ethanol it gobbles up a big part of the corn supply that was used for livestock feed and other food products. The consumer ends up paying higher prices for groceries as a result.
I disagree with the payback period on residential PV. I used to spend about $3000/yr on electricity and now I spend about $500/yr. It cost me $31000 and the generous taxpayers (thank you!) kicked in another $17000. Given the increasing electricity rates, time value of money, etc..., my spreadsheet shows a personal payback in 10.5 years. Obviously I would never have done it without the taxpayer shaft (did I say thank you?) and the ability to sell my excess peak power back to the power company at peak rates, thereby shafting the other customers (thank you as well).
I have friends who use rooftop water heaters which work quite well and are unsubsidized. Propane/electricity are expensive here so their payback is quick. But just like PV, you still need a backup system for when the sun does not shine.
Taxpayer subsidies are foolish and direct activity into areas that do not make any financial sense.
TheOldMan spent a total of $48 G's for solar power on his (I assume) single family residence. I can only imagine what WE are paying for the shit they are going to install on the White House. Ten million? ONE HUNDRED million! MORE!!! Does anybody have a guess on the payback? ...something greater than 10.5 years??
And the Vacationer-In-Chief is never there to use it.
Gotta hand it to Obama...he will always find a new and exciting way to shaft the taxpayin' worker!
Readers- Isn't it interesting that he gets solar panels, and we get the cost shoved where the sun don't shine?
Ethanol is a great fuel. Making it from corn is only practical if you are making Whiskey. In areas where sugar cane grows like a weed it is practical now and Brazil powers their cars with it now. When science advances to break down cellulose it will be practical elsewhere. That's not a pipe dream, it's a perfect problem for modern bioscience to tackle. However, WHEN that happens it will MAKE money, not require government subsidies. BU just bought the entire ethanol portion of Verenium Corp for 100 million dollars.
When solar is the cheapest solution, it will be used WITHOUT subsidies. Or grandstanding.
Once bio fuel becomes the norm, the price will rise just like gasoline and diesel. No matter what the product it will still be controlled by big oil, so its not going to make a difference if vehicles use gas, bio or cow piss, prepare for fuel to cost just the same or more as it does now. Its all part of the big plan.
Was it part of the "big plan" for gas prices to drop two years ago from $4.00/gal to $1.29/gal in 3 months? I'm suspicious of conspiracy theories...
If in the '80s "big oil" had suggested that they were going to start "watering down" our gasoline with ethanol, (a fuel literally almost water with a lower heat content) there would have been cries of outrage from consumer advocates, investigations in Congress, and complaints of greedy capitalism out of control.
@Niki - don't come to Colorado, our soon-to-be-gone governor and the State house and senate crew are working to do just that...
Post a Comment