New solar energy project at Utah Olympic Oval will save $$$

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    July 23, 2014 8:20 a.m.

    To "TMCK" the fact that they have to give you a 30% tax credit to make it affordable should say something about it.

    The point is that if you look at the total price without the tax credits and grants, solar power is not affordable. Right now the only reason why solar prices have dropped is because the government subsidizes it so heavily. For every $1 that coal, gas, or nuclear power get in tax credits, solar power is getting nearly $20.

    Right now solar is not a viable solution. If you want it as a back up power system or for whatever reason you want, that is fine. Just don't expect the tax payers to subsidize 30% of the cost.

  • TMCK san fransisco , CA
    July 22, 2014 10:15 p.m.

    Redshirt1701 - There is a lot more to the financial return of a solar investment then electricity savings. Right off the bat you need to factor and a 30% discount on the sticker price for the Federal Investment Tax Credit, not to mention any other state incentives to go solar. Next you need to factor in the accelerated depreciation which solar assets can claim on their balance sheet. Also, lenders are becoming increasingly more comfortable with loans due to the steady predictable returns solar projects achieve. Using this leverage solar investments can start to pencil out nicely and with a lot less risk then the stock market.

    It would be great if you would do a little more research before criticizing an area you clearly have no knowledge in. I'm sure the author did a little more research on the payback than dividing the cost of the project by revenue.

    Solar may not be as cheap as burning coal, but with effective policy, which encourages solar investment (not just dumping money into projects), solar prices have plummeted in the past few years and are reaching the point of grid parity...Hopefully we can make it there before someone kills it.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    July 22, 2014 12:17 p.m.

    To "Esquire" actually it won't pay for itself in 6 years. The total cost is $1.4 million, so that means it would take 14 years for payback. The funny thing is that if you took that same $1.4 million and invested for long term payback, they could have an extra $100,000 to $140,000 per year for paying their electric bills for ever. The average long term investment in the stock market makes 10% interest. If the money for the solar panel was invested, and they only took out 8%, they would have $112,000 each year for power bills, and with the 2% growth, they would have sufficient to handle inflation each year and would be able to pay about 1/7 of their power bill for ever.

    Financially this makes no sense.

  • Jester:) Martinsburg, WV
    July 22, 2014 10:17 a.m.

    We need to stop being so dependent on fossil fuels and start using common sense no brainer modes of energy. For example: We discover magnetic forces and the best we can do is stick them on our fridges? Come on Man! What are we? Cavemen? I know we can do better than this! But I know why we continue to stumble and fail to progress. One reason is the fossil fuel company's send hitmen to snuff out and disrupt the world changing inventions which occasionally come along. Another reason is the same story it has always been. $$$$$$$$$$$ Hey! Who's that knocking on my door?...............

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    July 22, 2014 7:52 a.m.

    So, solar energy is feasible. The investment will pay itself off in less than 6 years. Seems like there is a lesson to be learned here.

  • Kings Court Alpine, UT
    July 21, 2014 4:31 p.m.

    After Rocky Mountain Power raises their fees for being "connected to the grid" I doubt they will save a dime.