Taxing Solar Energy

[chala]

It will be taxed one day, the production of solar energy need to be controlled.

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by thinwater

This "sell back to the grid" problem has been kicking around for 50 years. Nothing new here, though it deserves resolution.

I think the sell back to the grid idea is nuts, here is why.
It costs x amount to make the power, but it is sold at 10X because there is a whole lot more to it than making it, distribution and all kinds of other overhead, but I'd bet the law says they have to buy it back at the rate they sell it, which is unfair to them, cause they can make it much cheaper, and they may not need it at the time they are having to buy it back.
Its a gimmick and I'll bet money that it was enticing cause consumers were told that by the time they got all the subsidies and tax breaks, that they could force the utility to buy power and would be making money, and now what they are upset about is that they won't be making money for doing nothing more than supplying a rooftop.
I don't know, but I bet that is why the demand skyrocketed.
For example here a few years ago the electric vehicle tax credits were such that you could buy a golf cart and claim it as an electric vehicle which it is of course, and you would lessen your tax by more than the golf cart cost.
I bet the NV Solar deal was similar?
I didn't do it cause I felt it unethical.

[uncle stinkybob]

Originally Posted by DeepFrz

A precedent has been set in the US where a private power utility company sued a hotel chain for lost profits when a new hotel installed enough solar to take them off the web. The hotel has to pay the utility company because it went off the grid.

More to the point of this forum there is some talk in the US that solar energy should be taxed as income. How do you feel about maybe having to pay income tax on the "free" energy you get from your expensive solar cells?

I thought that the US was a bastion of free enterprise? It looks more like the kind of protectionism that corporations want in the TPP. Even greater corporate and shareholder protection than is provided in NAFTA.

As solar installations multiply, U.S. utility companies fight back - World - CBC News

Does this reek of Fascism?

Bastion of free enterprise? you have been misinformed! this is the matrix, we are nothing more than small batterys powering the evil machine with tax's. Here you are free to pay your tax or go to prision.

[ReMetau]

"I'm gonna soak up the sun
While it's still free" - Sheryl Crow

[zboss]

The argument that solar users are being subsidized by non solar users is complete horse manure being perpetrated by large corporate interests.

The market for energy is changing and they want to keep things the same way. Keep that money rolling in. So rather than innovate their business to deal with not being the only energy production company around they will force you to pay for their energy one way or another.

If they cannot deliver power to my company as needed and on demand then I'll find some other way or getting that energy.


Follow us on tikitreksailing.com

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by zboss

The argument that solar users are being subsidized by non solar users is complete horse manure being perpetrated by large corporate interests.

Follow us on tikitreksailing.com

No it isn't really, not if you get government subsidies and tax breaks for installing Solar and you have a ready market for it, that is if the Government requires the Electric company to buy it from you.
IF the above is true, then I have to think that the general public is subsidizing Solar users

[SV DestinyAscen]

Originally Posted by zboss

The argument that solar users are being subsidized by non solar users is complete horse manure being perpetrated by large corporate interests.

The market for energy is changing and they want to keep things the same way. Keep that money rolling in. So rather than innovate their business to deal with not being the only energy production company around they will force you to pay for their energy one way or another.

If they cannot deliver power to my company as needed and on demand then I'll find some other way or getting that energy.


Follow us on tikitreksailing.com

As I mentioned before - grid is owned and operated by separate entity as those that generate electricity. IOW, the grid doesn't particularly care about whether the energy comes from nuclear, coal, solar/wind farm - at least not sources that are functionally equivalent. A health grid needs redundancy and ability to ramp up and down according to electrical demands, that requires interconnecting and good maintenance and planning.

My concern with the simplistic view is that individuals adopting solar and wind but want the security blanket offered by the grid are basically freeloading - they want to be paid for the surplus they pump into the grid (which actually makes grid planning/infrastructure expenses higher), but don't want to be responsible for the grid costs.

IOWs, a bunch of middle/low income customers in suburbs or cities - who geographically cannot go "green" pay for the grid maintenance - those with means and resources who go "green" then get paid for the grid doing them a service.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by DeepFrz

One step up from the privatization of water.

Have not some States in the US of A already made catching and storing rain water a criminal offense for private citizens..
And you worry about Trump creating a Fascist Country.. methinks you got there quite a while back..

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by chala

It will be taxed one day, the production of solar energy need to be controlled.

Damn right mate.. all those panels draining the energy will shorten the suns life for sure..
In Germany and a few other EU countries private individuals sell their excess solar power to the National Grid.. that's democracy at work..

[SV DestinyAscen]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Have not some States in the US of A already made catching and storing rain water a criminal offense for private citizens..
And you worry about Trump creating a Fascist Country.. methinks you got there quite a while back..

No. That's patently false - individuals who have been prosecuted for "merely storing rainwater" were building surface dams without permits. Not talking about barrels or even tanks of water - but crude earthen dams that present actual danger to others, nuisance to neighbors and threat to public health and safety.

[Thorne]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Damn right mate.. all those panels draining the energy will shorten the suns life for sure..

OMG you are right........

Now that I think about it, what about those geothermal power plants......

Aren't they cooling down the earths core.....?

And isn't the earths core rotating that creates the magnetic shield around the earth?

And isn't that what keeps the solar wind from frying us?

So, let's add all this up.
1. Can't use wind mills cause they kill birds and disturb the thermal layers.'
2. Can't use solar cause it need sto be controlled and taxed.
3. Can't use coal cause it pollutes.
4. Can't use oil cause it puts out CO2.
5. Can't use nuclear power cause it is dangerous.
6. Can't use Hydro cause it kills fish
7. Can't use wave power cause it is not economical
8. Can't use Tide power for the same reason
9. Can't use geothermal cause of the above reasons

Guys it's back to sail power..... It's the only thing that works.

[zboss]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

No it isn't really, not if you get government subsidies and tax breaks for installing Solar and you have a ready market for it, that is if the Government requires the Electric company to buy it from you.

IF the above is true, then I have to think that the general public is subsidizing Solar users

And you don't think the power companies aren't getting incentives from our tax dollars?


Follow us on tikitreksailing.com

[DotDun]

Originally Posted by SV DestinyAscen

As I mentioned before - grid is owned and operated by separate entity as those that generate electricity. IOW, the grid doesn't particularly care about whether the energy comes from nuclear, coal, solar/wind farm - at least not sources that are functionally equivalent. A health grid needs redundancy and ability to ramp up and down according to electrical demands, that requires interconnecting and good maintenance and planning.

My concern with the simplistic view is that individuals adopting solar and wind but want the security blanket offered by the grid are basically freeloading - they want to be paid for the surplus they pump into the grid (which actually makes grid planning/infrastructure expenses higher), but don't want to be responsible for the grid costs.

IOWs, a bunch of middle/low income customers in suburbs or cities - who geographically cannot go "green" pay for the grid maintenance - those with means and resources who go "green" then get paid for the grid doing them a service.

That is why some states are allowing a 'grid' charge. Pay $10-$15/month for the connection to the grid. Surplus, if paid for, should be a low wholesale rates.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

I would argue the water is different as it is a finite resource, and in fact that my next door neighbor may not have the right to pump millions of gallons out of wells thereby dropping the water table under my land, but unless his Solar panels were shading my property, that is different wouldn't you agree?

Fresh water is an infinite resource on our boat equipped with two watermakers.

[chala]

Originally Posted by DotDun

That is why some states are allowing a 'grid' charge. Pay $10-$15/month for the connection to the grid. Surplus, if paid for, should be a low wholesale rates.

Or do not allow you to supply to the grid anymore.