Another Antivaxer Convoy In Saskatchewan

[chuckChuck]

And if you ever had any doubt about why the marketing arm was dismal, look no further than the former CWB poster above who is justifying spending small fortune on solar panels because it costs about the same as a new truck in less than an RV.

From the guy who says we are going to run out of CO2? LOL

I guess you are too busy collecting your farm subsidies and complaining about all the other subsidies to estimate how much a 25 year old truck is worth? At 20,000 km per year it will have 500,000 km on it so the answer is not much.

I have never actually had a truck or camper that produces its own energy and pays for itself.

According to you in the 25 years the price of electricity will be unaffordable.

So that will make my solar system look like even a better deal because it will be many times cheaper than the "unaffordable" price.

Do you have that factored into your calculations?

[AlbertaFarmer5]

to estimate how much a 25 year old truck is worth? At 20,000 km per year it will have 500,000 km on it so the answer is not much.

I have never actually had a truck or camper that produces its own energy and pays for itself.

According to you in the 25 years the price of electricity will be unaffordable.

So that will make my solar system look like even a better deal because it will be many times cheaper than the "unaffordable" price.

Do you have that factored into your calculations?

Yes, because the very factor that will cause electricity to be unaffordable is the adoption of unsustainable levels of renewables.
Under that scenario, electricity generated while the sun shines will be less than worthless, as everyone and their dog will also be producing excess electricity at the exact same time, hoping to sell it back to a grid with no storage. You will pay the grid to take your production, then when the sun goes down, prices will skyrocket, as all the solar production goes off line, and you will be buying electricity back at extortionate rates. You will in no way be able to take advantage of the artificially created high prices.
As for your truck depreciation analogy. No one is taking out a 25-year mortgage on a truck. I was generously assuming 25-year financing on the solar panels. If you want to compare apples to apples, figure out the annual payments of a five or seven year term on the solar panels and get back to me.

[chuckChuck]

Yes, because the very factor that will cause electricity to be unaffordable is the adoption of unsustainable levels of renewables.
Under that scenario, electricity generated while the sun shines will be less than worthless, as everyone and their dog will also be producing excess electricity at the exact same time, hoping to sell it back to a grid with no storage. You will pay the grid to take your production, then when the sun goes down, prices will skyrocket, as all the solar production goes off line, and you will be buying electricity back at extortionate rates. You will in no way be able to take advantage of the artificially created high prices.
As for your truck depreciation analogy. No one is taking out a 25-year mortgage on a truck. I was generously assuming 25-year financing on the solar panels. If you want to compare apples to apples, figure out the annual payments of a five or seven year term on the solar panels and get back to me.

Renewables can already be stored in ammonia, hydrogen and batteries. They are already are displacing fossil fuels and saving money without much mass storage. There are additional costs to integrating them into the grid but if you want to expand capacity rapidly and cheaply they have a significant role to play.

In jurisdictions where oil and gas are a major part of the economy there is lots of resistance to renewables because they are worried about loss of market share. And so they should be.

For example EVs are much more efficient (80% vs 20%) and cost much less to operate per km than ICE vehicles. And prices will relatively come down and EV technology will improve. Competition is driving innovation. Its early days in the transition.

[chuckChuck]

Yes, because the very factor that will cause electricity to be unaffordable is the adoption of unsustainable levels of renewables.
Under that scenario, electricity generated while the sun shines will be less than worthless, as everyone and their dog will also be producing excess electricity at the exact same time, hoping to sell it back to a grid with no storage. You will pay the grid to take your production, then when the sun goes down, prices will skyrocket, as all the solar production goes off line, and you will be buying electricity back at extortionate rates. You will in no way be able to take advantage of the artificially created high prices.
As for your truck depreciation analogy. No one is taking out a 25-year mortgage on a truck. I was generously assuming 25-year financing on the solar panels. If you want to compare apples to apples, figure out the annual payments of a five or seven year term on the solar panels and get back to me.

Renewables can already be stored in ammonia, hydrogen and batteries. They are already are displacing fossil fuels and saving money without much mass storage. There are additional costs to integrating them into the grid but if you want to expand capacity rapidly and cheaply they have a significant role to play.

In jurisdictions where oil and gas are a major part of the economy there is lots of resistance to renewables because they are worried about loss of market share. And so they should be.

For example EVs are much more efficient (80% vs 20%) and cost much less to operate per km than ICE vehicles. And prices will relatively come down and EV technology will improve. Competition is driving innovation. Its early days in the transition.

And I dont know why you are worrying about financing costs of solar panels or trucks in your comparison. Because they would be similar. No farmer would take out a 25 year loan on a $70,000 farm purchase. I paid cash so no finance costs only lost opportunity costs.

More importantly the price of electricity is rising while the cost of solar PV electricity is more or less stable. That is one of the most important factors to look at when comparing investment in solar PV.

In my case they are saving about $5000 per year in electricity costs depending on how much electricity prices go up. Sask Power paid me and other early adopters a rebate to encourage adoption of solar pv so that means mine will be paid off in about 11 years.

Many farmers received rebates for various projects under the Environmental Farm Plans just like solar PV. So if you missed out on an open public rebate program that's your fault.

[shtferbrains]

The price of storing renewable electricity works out to be multiple times more expensive than the less than favorable cost of producing it.
None of it works without continuing huge subsidies and willing taxpayers.
The taxpayers are starting to realize the wind and sun are not as free as they have been promoted.
We are at the point now where taxpayers are are awakening to the fact the money is going to come out or their pocket and the spending is hardly started.

[chuckChuck]

The price of storing renewable electricity works out to be multiple times more expensive than the less than favorable cost of producing it.
None of it works without continuing huge subsidies and willing taxpayers.
The taxpayers are starting to realize the wind and sun are not as free as they have been promoted.
We are at the point now where taxpayers are are awakening to the fact the money is going to come out or their pocket and the spending is hardly started.

Without subsidies its still the cheapest form of electricity in many countries .

And the fossil fuel industry is also subsidized and doesn't pay the full cost of pollution and harm which drives up total costs even further.

[shtferbrains]

[AlbertaFarmer5]

.

And the fossil fuel industry is also subsidized and doesn't pay the full cost of pollution and harm which drives up total costs even further.

By that logic, how do the fossil fuel companies go about sending the bill to society for all of the beneficial CO2 they have released into the atmosphere?
Should farmers be the ones responsible since we are the net beneficiaries? Or the consumers themselves? Or the processors and retailers? Taxpayers? Any economic analysis of CO2 emissions is going to come up very much net positive to society..

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Without subsidies its still the cheapest form of electricity in many countries ..

Perhaps you could provide some examples of countries where the adoption of renewables has resulted in cheaper electricity prices? You repeat this often enough , you must be basing it on something better than conjecture

[Guest]

[ATTACH]13384[/ATTACH]

And yet the sheeple are in denial ?

[newguy]

Perhaps you could provide some examples of countries where the adoption of renewables has resulted in cheaper electricity prices? You repeat this often enough , you must be basing it on something better than conjecture

It is important to diversify our energy needs.It would be irresponsible for a country not to. Seems most Progressive Conservatives have ditched the progressive part.

[Hamloc]

It is important to diversify our energy needs.It would be irresponsible for a country not to. Seems most Progressive Conservatives have ditched the progressive part.

Newguy I asked you this question in a different thread you never responded. You are obviously in favour of the carbon tax, can you tell me how it has positively affected your farm?!

A little math for you. Under Justin Trudeau’s “make Canadian energy unaffordable plan” the carbon tax will be $170 a tonne by 2030. The carbon tax on natural gas will be $8.70 a gigajoule at that point. Today the carbon tax $3.33 a gigajoule and the market price of natural gas $2.85. The carbon tax in 2030 will be more than the carbon tax and cost of natural gas today. Does that seem reasonable to you?