Re[3]: [at-l] Home Solar Power (Non-Hiking)

[spiriteagle99@hotmail.com (Jim and/or Ginny Owen)]

Weary wrote:
>Present electricity costs are a blend of long paid for plants and new 
>plants that are coming on line. Solar doesn't have to compete with 
>electricity from ancient power dams, but with needed new power sources as 
>Jim pointed out a day or so ago.

Hmmm - sorry, Bob, but I said no such thing.  The first statement is 
partially true but for oil/coal/nuclear, cost per unit figured on a long 
term basis is affected more by fuel cost than initial construction.  The 
initial cost is amortized over a relatively long period of time which tends 
to keep the per unit cost lower.  But fuel cost is both constant and 
variable (LOL - figure that one out).  Solar cells are another ball game - 
the initial cost is high - and so is the replacement cost.  Second - new 
power sources will survive only so far as they compete successfully 
economically with older sources.  Or are supported by those who believe 
they're "saving the Earth" or by those who are simply into "being different" 
- and are willing to pay the price for new and sometimes unproven 
technology.   There is no free lunch - and private industry doesn't (and 
shouldn't) function without regard to economic realities.  If it doesn't 
pay, then they shouldn't be doing it.  How do you think Enron got in 
trouble?

Walk softly,
Jim

_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com