From Metro:Despite Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s vow to install more solar panels on rooftops, outlined in his PlaNYC, the number of panels in the Big Apple compose only 3 percent of the nation’s total, according to testimony.
Councilman James Gennaro said New York needs to speed up adding solar panels to building tops, especially since the city is “the rooftop capital of the state,” he said.
But creating solar energy can be expensive — a city Department of Buildings spokesman testified that outfitting a regular brownstone with panels might cost as much as $50,000 for the labor and permits required.
The city provides a rebate to reimburse 20 percent of the installation fee, but council members said more incentives would help ease the expense for New Yorkers.
25 comments:
What's the hurry? We must ask ourselves who really benefits from solar panel installations. Ironically I just discovered that the amount of sunlight reaching the earth has been diminishing for years and we are receiving 20% less sunlight than just 5 years ago.
Haven't you noticed the persistent jet contrails littering our skies? These contrails spread out and create an obscuration that turns a clear sky day into a sky laced with artificial cloud cover. Do a Google search for the term "chemtrails" and be prepared to be shocked!
Check out the link on the Queens Crap home page for "NewYorkSkywatch as well. The site has a lot of pertinent information about these geo-engineering programs that are changing the planet. Here's a link to an article that is also relevant to this topic:
http://www.infowars.com/colossal-geoengineering-in-plain-sight/
Note how the video points out that the soil is laden with aluminum (not naturally occuring) and so Monsanto is developing aluminum-resistant seeds!
Therefore, are solar panels a solution in NYC? Which companies and individuals will benefit from taxpayer funding? Whose pockets will get fatter? Are these incentives really necessary?
these government gangsters have not heard of SOLYNDRA ? the obama Greenies in the Dept.Of Energy just lost $500,000.00 of taxpayer loan guarantee money when this company went bankrupt.
it appears that obama democrat campaign bundlers are getting many of the green energy guaranteed gov. loans. a number of U.S.solar companies have failed recently.
see:California Valley Solar Ranch got $1.87 billion loan,Sunpower Corp., NRG Energy, etc. etc.
Spain just curtailed their solar panel industry when it did not create the jobs predicted and companies are failing.
the Chinese solar industry imports coal(the cheapest source of energy) from the U.S. to run their solar factories. which they then can sell the solar panels cheaper than any nation, including the U.S.
when the gov. tax subsidy is removed ,homeowners can not afford solar panel heat. and it does get removed eventually.
check to see if our local dem. pols have invested in the companies that they will contract with. and then check to see who they donated campaign bundled $ to.
the wind and solar energy industry /obama gov./bundlers have names like
PODESTA/PELOSI/GORE as players.
It will never take hold here.Not only that,have you seen the the new construction ofbuildings in the last 5 years? minimal insulation,incandescent lighting.........the greatest city in the world. We are only 10 years behind current technolgy!
The first commenter is absolutely correct! The effectiveness of solar panels has vastly decreased over time due to the weather modification/geo-engineering programs that are ongoing and ILLEGAL!!! This is global and has caused changes to our atmosphere leading to the strange weather events being reported over the last few years.
Until communicating with Dane Wigington of Mt. Shasta, California, I was unaware of the effect of the spraying programs and now I want to alert Queens Crap readers about what's going on. Below is a link to an article that encompasses these issues:
http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?44074-Aluminum-Resistant-Gene-patent-7582809
Please note the following:
"Wigington became concerned about SAG when he began to notice dramatic changes in the solar power that he uses to supply his home and property. Owner of one of the largest residential solar systems in Northern California, he began to notice very high declines in solar power. It can be decreased by as much as 60 percent on what he calls “heavy spraying days”. Wigington said, “The trails are literally blocking the sun”. He also went on to say that he regularly samples the fine dust layers on top of his solar panels and other outdoor surface areas and frequently finds very high levels of aluminum and barium. Wigington believes that these are a product of SAG programs."
The New York Skywatch team spoke with Mr. Wigington over four years ago. You can find that interview here:
http://newyorkskywatch.com/2007/08/30/
skywatch-radio-august-29-2007/
Once again our boneheaded elected officials are finding new ways to take taxpayer funds and put them into the wrong hands. As already mentioned, the incentive program for solar panels will ultimately fail but SOME people will financially benefit nonetheless!!!
Anon No. 2:
While you're at it, check to see which elected officials have had their pockets filled by the oil companies (and what party they're in).
Anonymous 3: have you seen the TR8, a form now required by the Department of Buildings, certifying compiance with current NYC/NYS Energy Code?
Well now it makes sense. Our beautiful blue marble planet now looks bluish gray. What a difference between the deep blue as seen in the photos taken during the days of lunar exploration decades ago and what we're seeing from the space station. What a shame. What impact will this have on future generations?
RE: #2...CORRECTION... the obama dept.of energy "greenies" just lost $500,000,000.00 MILLION in government loan guarantee taxpayer money.
RE: #5... it ie reported that AL GORE is heavily invested in OCCIDENTAL OIL CO.(formerly communist U.S.S.R.) based in RUSSIA.
and Robt. Kennedy Jr. does tv commercials for Communist Chavez's ,Venezuela oil company CITCO.
Speaking of Robert Kennedy:
"President John F. Kennedy’s nephew, Robert Kennedy, Jr., netted a $1.4 billion bailout for his company, BrightSource, through a loan guarantee issued by a former employee-turned Department of Energy official."
Makes SOLYNDRA look small.
Follow the money.
Anon #1.
Sorry to tell you but we are not receiving less sunlight other then the small reduction that is normal during periods between solar maxes. We are currently between SC23 and SC24.
Check out:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/solar/
Check out the Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) charts.
What is happening is that the peak sunspont count for SC24 appears to be lower than normal as well as being later.
But in terms of watts/m^2 we are still getting the usual 1362 watts/m^2, +/- 2 watts.
Sorry to tell you but we are not receiving less sunlight other then the small reduction that is normal during periods between solar maxes. We are currently between SC23 and SC24.
BULLCRAP!!!
Are you trying to tell us that what we are able to see with our own eyes is a lie? Please! Do NOT insult our intelligence with such a response. We can see what those persistent contrails are doing and your "solar max" crap has nothing to do with it!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Solar max? Really? Try reading this after you take your head out of your arse:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming
Be informed by watching this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf0khstYDLA
touchy aren't we...
and wikipedia is your source?
your own wikipedia says:
"The effect varies by location, but worldwide it has been estimated to be of the order of a 4% reduction over the three decades from 1960–1990. However, after discounting an anomaly caused by the eruption of Mount Pinatubo in 1991, a very slight reversal in the overall trend has been observed."
not quite the "20% less sunlight than just 5 years ago." you refer to.
try finding the NASA report that is referred to in your original reference to infowars (another stellar scientific reference).
ew-3 said...
touchy aren't we...
and wikipedia is your source?
.............................................
I believe the person from California who uses solar power and has seen the reduction first hand. I also believe my own eyes and see the dimming for myself.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/contrail-effect.html
There is much to be done without solar panels that are unaffordable. Take care of the low hanging fruit first!
Nova is not a particularly good source for science. They have their own agenda and none of the work is peer reviewed.
Lets try some common sense.
The earth receives about 99.8% of it's heat from the sun. That last bit is due to gravitational affects on the molten core and some nuclear activity in the core.
If the sun suddenly stopped outputting it's energy the temperature of the earth would likely drop to something on the order of -200C (the moon is -233C for example) from it's current temperature of 15C.
If we lost 20% of the solar energy (TSI), assuming a linear response, the earth temperature would be about -28C(18F). We'd be frozen and dead.
You want to measure TSI, get a photocell and measure it's output. Don't trust your eyes.
And be careful of anecdotal evidence like the guy in CA with a solar set up. There could be many reasons he's getting less juice. The surface of solar cells can become opaque over time thus reducing output.
There is much to be done without solar panels that are unaffordable. Take care of the low hanging fruit first!
True dat!
"If we lost 20% of the solar energy (TSI), assuming a linear response, the earth temperature would be about -28C(18F)"
My bad, the temp in Fahrenheit would be -18.4.
Agree there a lot of low hanging fruit out there which is way better to pick then solar. (particularly in NY) But then the feds are giving away big money to their friends in the business.
Also, you folks may want to think about the solar panel installation shown in the picture. It's pretty much useless as is. Putting panels flat like that are a waste. But, coincidently, that is the best way to install the most panels for a given flat surface area. Even though they will produce less electricity then panels slanted at a proper angle properly spaced.
Sounds like they are more interested in the number of panels (installed capacity) then the actual output.
Imagine how much these panels will produce after 6 inches of snow.
And be careful of anecdotal evidence like the guy in CA with a solar set up. There could be many reasons he's getting less juice. The surface of solar cells can become opaque over time thus reducing output.
______________________________________________
Really? I guess the fact that this man's home and technology has been widely recognized means that we should ignore his research and believe everything you tell us. Who died and made you chief scientist at the Queens Crap blogsite? Making believe this is your area of expertise impresses me...NOT!!!
PS Changing the argument to temperature from obscuration is clearly an indication that you are off the mark. Solar cells rely on degrees of illumination and NOT temperature. Your arguments are baseless and meant to confuse. Once again, I'll take Dane Wigington's research over yours any day of the week.
http://homepower.com/view/?file=HP98_pg14_Wigington
"Solar cells rely on degrees of illumination and NOT temperature"
Degrees of illumination ?
No such term.
Illumination is measure in lumens.
ew-3
Brooklyn Tech class of 70
40 years of engineering and science experience.
"Solar cells rely on degrees of illumination and NOT temperature"
Degrees of illumination ?
No such term.
Illumination is measure in lumens.
----------------------------------------
Doesn't seem to change the argument. Good at deception, aren't you?
TV Sitcom oldtimer (socialist),ED Asner is presently on radio commercials trying to sell the public on installing solar panels, before the government(taxpayer) 20% incentives are stopped.
in other words, solar energy is not at a price that is affordable to homeowners.
just like the GM (obamamotors), who has lowered their ownership from 61% to 26.5 % ,recently.
the U.S.Treasury Dept. has estimated that obama's GM bailout will now lose $23 Billion, up from $14 BILLION. this is because of the steep stock decline of GM Co. Obama's rebate of $7500. per chevy volt is not working out.
Post a Comment