Here in the brothels. Does anyone else think that this might be a good idea? Might even help Dennis with the electric bills.Plus we'd be helping our planet.
I am 100% behind solar energy. Especially for the Ranches in southern Nevada (in the middle of nowhere) where the sun is bright and brutal a decent chunk of the year. That will power quite a many things. And yes, installing solar energy is sticker shock when you first look at it. That's why it's called an investment. Installing solar panels and utilizing that as the energy source you cut off from the power grid - so that utility bill (which is monthly, and can fluctuate greatly depending on use) is no more. It won't take long for it to pay for itself. And of course there's all the ecological benefits as well. Besides the technology is getting cheaper and cheaper. I see middle class suburban homes with solar panels. I know they're not millionaires.
Going to chime in and then run back into hiding. If getting solar panels is something which is decided on, look towards getting a solar microgrid (could also be called nanogrid depending on scale). Also pretty sure Nevada has some annoying net metering policy that went into effect last year and upheld this year (could be off with the dates) that would impact solar panels.
I worked for a solar panels installation company its around $7-$9 per watt: A 5 kW system would cost around $25,000-$35,000 many utility companies offer incentives, and some subsidize as much as 50% of system costs but I don't know anything abou NV rules & regulations. Gotta go green. great suggestion Dessert.
Thank you all for voting on this one too. I'd love it if Dennis and Suezzet would agree on this too, but I don't believe that they understand all the benefits just see it as very expensive adventure.
Heck yeah if only we could get Dennis on board too it would be awesome . Thank you all very much for your input on this .
First is where, and why? As it can cost arm & leg to do it! Some of the companies out there are idiots ! Then you might have zoning issues...In my case, I'll have to use a crane. To put the panels up!
That's very true it can be super expensive but I feel like in the long run it's worth it to help save our ecosystem.
Through currency manipulation, the Chinese have lowered prices on panels, even PERC panels are very affordable and as much sol as you have in Carson, solar is advisable, grid-tied, of course. From the postings of others, wind power ought be part of the conversation.
Does the government have to subsidize it? If the answer is yes then it is not economically viable. Just like windmills it sounds good in theory but it just doesn't pencil out. You should be asking for modern nuclear reactors instead.
Lol, you made me laugh, but I'm not looking to destroy anything. I'd just like our power at the brothels to have a back or more natural way to help our environment.
Solar has been around since I was a kid and it has never pulled it's own weight. It always had to be subsidized. Same with windmills The new nuclear reactors are safe, efficient, and provide power day and night.
I posted this elsewhere, so this is a repeat: ***************************************** As someone who lives off-grid, with a true negative carbon footprint property in Idaho, running mainly on solar power and wood, I vote no. Make that a hell no. It sounds good in theory, but there's SO much that goes into solar power. The cost to get it up and running at the ranches would be insane, and would probably take too long for an appropriate payback, if you break even within your lifetime. Solar works best for new construction. In order to effectively use solar, you have to have a structure designed to work WITH the environment, incorporating things like passive solar design. Most modern structures are designed AGAINST the environment, with the idea that energy is cheap and abundant. Trying to take a structure that’s not designed properly and converting it to "green" energy, without massive renovations, means you will strain the heck out of your energy system to try to supply needs, and you'll need a much larger system to do it. Meaning cost and waste. Let's set aside all the massive amounts of red tape just to get an installation going, and the price that comes with all the start up and contractors, it would still be a crap investment. One: Heating elements. The wattage needed to run the heating system in Sagebrush alone would suck up your entire winter solar hour usage. I'm not aware of anything that sucks up power more than heating elements. ONE hair dryer uses about 1875 Watts. A standard solar panel is in the 200watt to 250 watt range. Running a hair dryer for ten to fifteen minutes would use up close to 500watts. To provide that energy, it would take 2 or 3 solar panels, in 100% full solar at precise solar matched angle, an entire hour to recover that energy. You only have about an average of 6 hours of usable productive sun each day (yes, 6. Going into the details of why will take an essay to write), then the angle and diminishing light drop voltage significantly. So 3 panels of your array are out of commission for an entire hour of your 6 hours of energy production each day, just to run ONE hair dryer, for fifteen minutes. That's the reality of solar power. A single standard light bulb that runs for 24 hours (there's about 50 of them on that red light district sign) consumes a whopping 2400watts. That one sign would use about 120,000 watts per day. To cover that sign alone, you'd need 100 standard 200Watt panels in full sun for an entire day to generate that energy. One hundred panels, completely, entirely, 100% dedicated, to only powering that sign. And that is not accounting for system inefficiencies (usually 10-15% loss) and not accounting for overproduction needs to accommodate for low light days/snow days/stormy day/overcast days. It’s assuming perfect days, every day. So, in reality, you need significantly more panels just to offset that one sign’s electricity. At a GENEROUS standard industry pricing of $1 a watt for solar panels (it’s closer to $1.50-$2.00 a watt), you need a dedicated solar array whose panels alone cost over $20,000, just to power that one sign. And that $20,000 is not the entire system cost. You need to buy land to place the one hundred panels with good southern orientation and exposure, plus, the charge controllers, inverters, wiring, fuses, array stand, grid-tie components, etc. The system will easily hit closer to $40,000 dollars for installation and all components, plus another maybe $30,000+ in land price (it has to be nearby). So between $40,000 and $70,000 dollars … to power one sign. Plus, you are dependent on grid tied electricity to function, so you are still linked to a oil/coal/gas power. Grid electricity is required to be supplied to you at night to keep the lights on. You are burning oil and coal 18 hours a day, and only producing green energy for 6 hours. You are simply hoping you generate enough during the day to offset your use at night. And the more panels you buy to ensure that offset, the more mining, materials, production and greehouse emissions you're responsible for in their production. There's a lot of pollution that goes into making solar panels. Last I checked, it takes about ten to fifteen years on standard installations to reach environmental impact neutral. And that’s for arrays of only 15 to 20 panels. You are talking about a 100 panel array just to power a sign. Plus standard installations require all power to be cut in the event of a power outage to prevent back-flow energizing the lines as workers are trying to repair power lines during a storm. Thus when the city power goes out, so do you. Don't even get me started on off-grid systems. They're a completely different animal, requiring battery banks. The ranches deal with lighting, industrial refrigerators, dozens of computer systems, hair dryers and curlers and other heating elements, hot water heaters, stoves and ovens (CRINGE!!), microwaves, etc. Unless you replaced every single unit to energy efficient DC units and LED constructs, you're shooting yourself before even hooking up the panels. We would suck up every bit of power those panels created, and we would still be dependent on the grid tied power to bridge the gap between production and demand; sell back wouldn't even be an option. Not even close. I'll exaggerate here for effect, but you would probably need ACRES of solar panels to make gains for all of the ranches. Lots and lots of acres. Oh, and you will need someone to remove all the snow and ice off them in winter as well. Snow on the panels = no energy creation. Even a tiny amount of shade on just one quarter of one panel can tank the power output. One large bird crap, or a single leaf blowing onto a panel can dramatically drop its output. I had a weed grow tall enough to shade one cell on one of my bottom most panels, and it became a power suck that dramatically dropped the output from the entire array. You see, panels always produce amperage, but the voltage varies by light and shading. The voltage is what PUSHES the power around. Without enough voltage, all the power being generated by the panels won't go anywhere. Wind power is a bit of a joke, and no way could we create sufficient energy to realistically offset costs at the ranches. I have a 950 watt wind turbine on my homestead. Basically a 1 kilowatt wind generator. It's a PITA and I plan to dismantle it so I can turn it into a bicycle generator instead. I'll get more use out of it that way. It's basically useless. And it’s a low wind speed cut-in model too. I can go on and on and on about this, but this is already insanely long and I haven’t even hit details. Don't get me wrong, I love solar and love my solar powered house, and I was able to do it very inexpensively ... but I also built the cabin to accommodate solar power. Not the other way around. Solar can work. But you need to be realistic about it, and understand its limitation, which can be severe.
