Reply to thread

Great up to this point, and given that the average electric bill in this area is between $250 and $300 per month, $75 a month is a $125-$225 savings.  Even if you have to pay for it yourself, with no grants or incentives, the $40,000.00 system you propose still only costs you $166.66 a month, which is still a substantial savings over the current bill.




But no longer than it would if you were to borrow $40,000 for a new car, so that doesn't matter.  I find it absolutely amazing that people will readily go out and spend $30-40k for a new car and never really think about the cost, but they turn into blithering idiots when they talk about spending the same amount of money to power their own home.  What are you, APARTMENT DWELLERS??? 


We're talking about adding 12-15% to the construction costs of a brand new home here, and NOT having an electric bill, EVER.  If you're building a new $225,000 home, and adding another $30,000 to it, assuming a 30 year fixed at 5.75%, you're only talking about adding $175.00 a month, which, based on the average electric bills around here, means that you're COMING OUT AHEAD between $75 and $125 a month, EVERY month.  If you're REALLY smart, you'll take that money, EVERY month, and throw it in with your mortgage and have it applied to the principle and your home will be paid off somewhere between 25 and 28 years instead of 30.  HELL, the interest savings alone are worth that!  If you applied the $75 a month to your mortgage, you'd save $38,077 in interest alone, and if you applied the $125 a month, you'd save $57,677!!!  And NONE of that is counting the CHECK (as opposed to a BILL) that you'll be getting from your local electric company for providing power TO the grid instead of buying it FROM the grid.


Look, before you start "poo-pooing" wind and solar, at least take the time to REALLY study it, and ALL of it's ramifications, so that you'll get the WHOLE picture instead of sounding like the 3 blind guys and the elephant.




And I see no justification in the Constitution for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare, Food Stamps, WIC, Section 8 housing, HUD, the Department of the Interior, the Department of Education, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Labor, the Department of Energy, the Department of Veteran Affairs, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, or the Department of just about anything else you'd care to name EXCEPT the Department of Defense, the Department of State, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of the Treasury, so how about we cut the "poor me" and "immoral subsidies" routine and get off the backs of a program that actually SAVES the government far more money than it spends. 


Do you have ANY idea what it costs to build a brand new coal fired power plant?  Do you have any idea to what extent the DOE grants "immoral subsidies" to power companies so that they can build one of these new power plants?  First things first.  The new Alliant power plant in Wisconsin is projected to be over $1.2 BILLION dollars for their new 300 megawatt plant.  And that's just to BUILD it, not to operate it. The proposed AMP Ohio power plant is currently projected to be near, if not over $3 BILLION dollars for a 1000 megawatt plant.  Who foots the bill for this, YOU DO!  The DOE gives "loans" (at unbelievably low interest rates) to these power companies to build their plants, using YOUR tax dollars, and the only thing you get for your money is higher taxes and an electric bill.  At least with "on the grid" home generated power, the people who are providing the power to the grid are actually giving YOU something for your money, in the way of your local power company NOT having to build a new plant for BILLIONS of dollars.


As far as the system needing repair, again, SO WHAT?  Isn't your $40,000 car going to need maintenance and repair?  Doesn't your existing home need maintenance and repair (unless you really ARE an apartment dweller). You see, this is what we call a STRAWMAN argument, and not even a very good one at that.


Back
Top