As someone who races sailboats for a hobby, I feel this in my soul. But being "unnecessary" doesn't mean your hobby isn't worth it if it gives you satisfaction.PackardV8 wrote: Today, I see my engine building in the same category as the farrier, the dog trainer or the golf pro. We cater to obsolete, expensive, absolutely unnecessary hobbies.
But for those of us in the frozen-far-north-end-of-nowhere, neither can one generate enough sunshine for solar to be cost-effective.summit wrote: You can slap a bunch of solar PV on your roof and make your own juice, can't generate your own gasoline, nor biodiesel
I was hiking in Anchorage a couple years ago and saw houses with solar panels mounted on their sides facing southward. Besides for the low sun angle, a benefit is no snow accumulation. But your point is well taken, still, Germany is at pretty high latitude and there are lots of PVsPackardV8 wrote:But for those of us in the frozen-far-north-end-of-nowhere, neither can one generate enough sunshine for solar to be cost-effective.
jack vines
Some Frozen types are sufficiently environmentally conscious and active they will install solar even when not cost-effective. As to Germany, they have both high costs of electrical generation and a national policy to go green sooner than later. To that end, grid power is made prohibitively expensive and PV is subsidized.summit wrote:I was hiking in Anchorage a couple years ago and saw houses with solar panels mounted on their sides facing southward. Besides for the low sun angle, a benefit is no snow accumulation. But your point is well taken, still, Germany is at pretty high latitude and there are lots of PVsPackardV8 wrote:But for those of us in the frozen-far-north-end-of-nowhere, neither can one generate enough sunshine for solar to be cost-effective.
jack vines
The trouble is, this is double-counting. If you convert from ICEV to BEV, you see those savings regardless of whether you went solar. So Jack's concern still stands.summit wrote: most installer calculation only consider electrical usage. Pay-back looks much better when consider gasoline costing as well, of course it depends on the vehicle's MPG
Oh but it is always double-counting. The increase to your e-cost is not as much as the decrease in your gasoline cost. That has nothing to do with PV.summit wrote:boy we are getting OT, but it's ok. The Bolt is definitely not ugly at all in my eyes.
It's not double counting if it's done right. Eliminating gasoline increase your e-cost, and solar PV reduces that cost. In my case, I even converted the home furnace & water heater to heat-pumps. So my "pay-back" calculation included my propane cost. Am now investigating those heat-pump (sold as ventless) cloth dryer.
Cheers,