Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Skilled legal advice with
accessible & personal attention

Solar power will destroy us all

By Martlark - 23 April 2012 61

I’ve read Graham Downie’s excellent arcticle in the Canberra Times regarding the almost useless and expensive solar power system we Canberran’s have been stuck with.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/high-price-paid-for-low-solar-return-20120422-1xfca.html

At peak radiation times, not even 1% of power is generated by solar.  And during peak demands, on cold nights, yes Sherlock, it’s 0%, not doubt due to the slackness of the sun having a few hours off.

For this hippy, green tinged, good feeling, all us lower class subjects of the ACT are charged $50 a year.  That money flows right into the pockets of the yuppies who had the spare cash to lash out on these things.

Using a back of the envelope calculation of $5k per system; the ten thousand systems in the ACT cost us $50 million dollars to install and an ongoing $5 million per year to subsidise.

I’m annoyed.  This money and effort could have been spent on more worthwhile facilities.

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
61 Responses to
Solar power will destroy us all
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
CatlikeTread 9:50 pm 25 Apr 12

PeterLang said :

CatlikeTread,

You asked the basis of the costs. Refer to comment #35 (all referenced)

For more information read this http://bravenewclimate.com/2012/02/09/100-renewable-electricity-for-australia-the-cost/ . If you want to dig deeper follow the links to the authoritative government sources. These provide the figures used by Treasury and the other government departments for the modelling of the CO2 tax and ETS and the Energy White Paper.

For a start the article you quote is talking about 100% of energy from renewables – that is nothing to do with the price of small scale (about 1% we were discussing) PV inputs and the relative costs and benefits. Secondly the assumptions used are way off the real world. Thirdly the projections seem suspect in the extreme because of the assumptions and simplifications used. Based on that there is little point in chasing down original sources.

Referenced or referred to does not equal good, I am afraid Peter. Do you have any associations with Ian Plimer and similar people that you would like to declare Peter? I can see that the website you reference is also part of the advocacy for nuclear energy – not that this is wrong but it is useful context.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site