Comments about ‘Dixie solar farm basking in rays’

Rainbow bridge needs solar panels...

I want a solar panel for my pick up truck!

lots of open space in Zions, Bryce, and the shoreline of Lake Powell, too . . .

Good first step. Now all we have to do is decentralize power entirely.

If electricity is that expensive, it won't become widely used.

The average family cannot afford it; it's a feel-good toy for the well-off.

TO: Thinkin' Man...
...please start doing what your handle implies: Think Man!!!

Yes, currently the cost of solar power is a bit expensive but not prohibitively so. It's the same with all newer technology: How much did a mirowave cost 20 years ago vs. today; how much did a flatscreen TV cost 5 years ago vs. today? The more this technology is used the more demand there will be for the manufacturing of the solar-voltaic panels; the cost will come down...it already has from a couple of years ago. This technology has little down-side (the only being the non-"green" manufacturing of the panels); it uses current power grid infrastructure; it doesn't require huge plants to manufacture it; it requires little or no maintainance.

Please give me an example of how current electrical generation systems are better, FAR more cost effective, and better for the environment than this technology.

Let's see... current residential electricity costs are under 10 cents per kWh. According to the article, each unit is expected to generate 140 kWh per month. That means that each unit is effectively generating less than $14.00 of electricity per month. As each unit costs about $50 per month, we would have to see the price of electricity rise to over 35 cents per kWh. And that doesn't take into consideration the 19-year commitment required (at about 7.7% interest, I might add - at least someone's making money here)

To "Anonymous | 9:01 a.m." per square foot, nuclear power plants offer more power to the system.

Nuclear power plants have fuel that can be recycled over and over again.

Nuclear power plants are not large black hot pads that cover up large areas of wilderness (Yes they take up space, but if you wanted to power a large city it would be less space than for solar plants)

Solar cells are running at less than 30% efficiency when converting solar energy to electricity. Nuclear power plants do much better.

Solar cells loose efficiency when it is cold, cloudy, dark, dirty, and can be damaged easily by severe weather.

Okay RedShirt since it so great, can we store the waste generated in your backyard? Even if you recycle the fuel rods there is still waste. Can we tear out your lawn to provide water for the plant? Think it through a little.

Actually PV modules increase efficiency when it is cold. Also nuclear is actually too slow, too expensive, and the technology is too limited. When you compared other factors like the issue of toxic waste, the speed with which new supplies can be brought on stream, the flexibility of the technologies, or the question of, pound for pound, how many jobs are created in each case, renewable energy beats nuclear hands down.

We won't place an oil well where it'll never be seen because it makes a pristine forest look bad. 10,000 solar panels on the other hand add a real classy look to almost any environment.

While I support efforts to move forward in alternative energies, this kind of "advancement" seems like a sham.

I agree with Dave. We need battery-powered cars that can recharge with a solar panel on top. Now wouldn't that be cool!

Agree with NLMike and RedShirt
Nuclear power makes electricity cheap in the midwest. It is "clean".
It's less a blight on the lanscape than solar panels.

Solar panels have that energy storage problem and there is also an "environmental impact" to that.

People are just trying to make up a crisis so they can gouge us. Follow the money.

PV panels only have a "storage problem" when you have a stand-alone system. When they are grid-tied and net-metering then you actually get 100% efficient storage and no "environmental impact". In fact PV could actually make you money whereaz nuclear has no such advantage for you. "Environmental impact" of nuclear does way more damage than PV.

I like solar panels. All it takes to prank them is a big old blanket. Its too tough to pull pranks at a nuclear plant.

Re: cost... at 11:50

You have a good point about the cost per kWh, but I don't think anyone is making money (except the people who sold the panels to the city, which is OK.) It seems like if the companies sold all 100 shares and got their $600,000 back, they would end up charging 100 customers about $10 less per month, which sounds reasonable for maintenance of the plant. Solar power is costly - you're right that it looks like about $.35 or so. If you disregarded interest, which you can't, it's still more than $.18 per kWh.(That's 140kWh x 12 months x 19 years divided into $6000) Add another $6000 or so for interest and it's $.37. (And that's if the panels get the 140 - remember, the companies are only willing to guarantee only about 67 kWh per month, which amounts to about $.79 per kWh.) I hope energy costs don't go up high enough to make that a good deal. And is solar worth it? Could I use my $12000 over the next 19 years to help the environment in some other way? I don't really know.

My husband and I did buy the $6000 - solar panel from Dixie Escalante Electric and the City of St. George. We live in a 2500 sq. ft. house. Our electric bill during the winter is around $125--150 per month (heater at 73-74 degrees). We used 97 KWH for the time period of 12/6/08 to 1/2/09. Our adjustment for the Sun Smart Solar Credit was $3.90. I do not know where anyone including the Deseret News got the idea we are paying interest. No where in any of our paper work is there anything about an added amount of interest. I will call Dixie Electric tomorrow and ask them if/why we would be paying more to them in interest. We are happy that we can buy into the program. The ribbon cutting ceremony was great yesterday and the cookies were excellent. Wish all of you had been there. Energy costs will go up! To put solar panels on our roof at home would cost $60,000. We are going to get a Utah rebate of up to $2000 and could get a federal rebate of up to $3000 if we were to buy this year (2009).

To: Smart Buyer at 8:15 You are correct in that you do not pay interest to Dixie Escalante.
I am quite certain the interest to which the writer refers is interest you are losing by tying your $6000 with the the utility for 19 years. It is a very real cost that unfortunately must be added into the cost of the shares, unless you were going to keep the $6000 under your mattress where you would be losing the interest for 19 years, anyway. Also, you are very fortunate that you can pay $6000 just like that; some people may have to borrow the money to buy units, and of course will have to pay interest on that. Regardless, the $6000 must have some interest consideration, don't you agree? It would be simple to ask a bank what you could have earned on that $6000 investment over 19 years. With all due respect, are you satisfied with $3.90 return on an investment of $6000 plus lost interest for a total of about $12000 investment over 19 years? None of us want prices to go up, but we especially do not want mandated programs leading to price increases for us all.

The people that bought the shares are called early adopters. Hence they are not always looking at just the dollars. In the past I have early adopted new products for fun, just to try them out, bragging rights, curiosity, etc. Solar panels will get more efficient and cheaper and electricity costs from other sources will get more expensive. There will come a point at which many more people will want shares. It is a great idea and I think it will take off. I just hope that the panels don't get stolen.

Thank you TK. I now understand what you are saying about the interest. Yes, we did take the money out of an account that was earning 3% interest, now I see what you mean about the 19 years. My husband was already to buy a boat, which the rest of our family thought was a waste of money, gas guzzler (back when gas was $3.75 or more per gal.). Thank heavens he decided against that one. We work hard for our money and I decided $6000 for solar was better than $45-60,000 for a boat and we had investigated solar for quite sometime. "Maybe it is 1/2 dozen of one and 6 of the other" - you know that old saying. Are you planning on stealing the panels? I hadn't thought about that. It never ends does it - ideas people have? Who knows about interest - do you remember when it was 10% and we could deduct credit card interest from our taxes? With the newly elected government in Washington DC our taxes and interest on money could go sky high - it's going to get worse than better. Maybe we should buy food storage!