Your Questions About Green Living

Solar panels as an investment and saving – sounds too good to be true!…?

(Firstly I apologise for the length of this, but I wanted to explain the whole situation just so there’s no ambiguity).

Here in Brisbane, Australia we get 7-8 sun hours per day on average (source: http://www.livingin-australia.com/sunshine-hours-australia/ ); our household uses ~20kWh per day based on the average of all the power bills for 2009. Using this calculator ( http://www.bdbatteries.com/panelcalculator.php … too lazy to crunch the numbers myself) it tells me the ideal system is 3.2 kW. Our house has a large north-facing roof so that is good enough for solar panels. For practicality (and to keep the numbers conservative) I sourced the figures for a 3.5kW system which is within the price range of $30-40k, but after selling RECs (Renewable Energy Certificates) and taking advantage of federal and state subsidies and offsets it is priced at ~$15-20k; I’ll assume a worst case (say, $25k) to keep it conservative.

With a Home Equity Line of Credit Loan we currently have $220,000 in debt overall. At ~6.5% interest the monthly repayments are ~$1,190. If we were to throw the $25,000 for the entire solar setup onto the loan, the loan would increase to $245,000 and interest would be ~$1,330 per month, a $140 increase. Since we are currently paying $126 per month ($4.20 per day) in power bills, it seems it is not worth it. However, 3.5kW x 7.5 avg sun hours gives 26.25kWh daily, or ~6.25kWh more than is needed. When taking into account the 44c/kWh feed-in tariff that is a lowest possible return of ~$82.50 per month (I say “lowest” because it is real-time net metering, so if we have nothing running during the day it will send a lot of power priced at 44c/kWh to the grid; when we buy it back when we are back from work at night it will cost only 16c/kWh, so overall we will gain more than $82.50 per month).

So then if we had to pay $140 extra per month on the loan but that eliminates $126 per month in power costs and includes $82.50 at the minimum in feed-in credits, is that is effectively a saving of $68.50? I know it isn’t really a saving per se since simply paying loan interest doesn’t reduce the loan’s size, but to me it seems to be a saving since the power cost of $126 per month will always be there so it may as well be moved from one account (elec) to another (HELOC loan) without making much difference financially; also the HELOC loan can be paid off and thus interest repayments become lower, while the cost of electricity is only set to rise (on top of inflation-adjustment each year, we are expecting sharp rise when the carbon trading scheme gets passed, and the generators were granted a 16% increase for January 2010 anyway!!!). Additionally when the 3 kids have moved out of home the power use will drop, leaving more electricity for the grid (so more money returns) in addition to less expenses overall (so the HELOC loan will be easier to pay off) – seems like a double win!

There are two major downsides that I can immediately see: variable interest rate rises and home valuation. However for the latter, I am not sure whether it is really a problem. For all I know, solar panels would most likely increase the value of one’s home (seems to be logical anyway), which in turn means more flexibility regarding the floor of the HELOC loan if it is needed.

I am somewhat naive regarding how HELOC works so that is my main concern in this plan. So is this too good to be true, or have I missed something (I generally don’t believe in “too good to be true” hence why I am asking).
Naive re HELOC; I am one of the 3 kids mentioned in the question (19yo) so this is just for me to propose to my parents as an idea.

Ron Paul supporters, where do you stand on these issues?

Abortion
Crime to harm a fetus in the commission of another crime
Restricting rights of minors to travel to other states to get abortion
Contraception
Paper money versus gold standard
Gay marriage recognized by the state
Don’t ask, don’t tell
Equal pay laws for genders
Legal gay adoption
Funding for nanotechnology
Hate crimes
Terrorist rights
Penalties for illegal pornography
Drug war
Education of evolution and God
Homeschooling
Grants for Black and Hispanic colleges
Vouchers for private schools
Big oil profits
Tax incentives for renewable energy
Oil drilling in ANWAR
Recycling
Protecting free roaming horses and other wildlife
Israel to give up land for peace
US funding to the UN
Travel ban to Cuba
Trade with China contingent on human rights and product safety
Free trade
Earmarks
Term limits
Politicians invoking God
Soft money for campaign reform
Right to privacy for contraception
Abortion
Roe v. Wade
Gay Marriage
Don’t ask, Don’t tell
Gay adoption
Gender equal pay
Protect the Pledge of Allegiance
Affirmative action for college admission
Funding for nanotechnology
Share holders in corporations to vote on executive salaries
Anti-gay hate crimes legislation
War on drugs
Military on the border
Student loan constitutionality
Evolution and god
Home schooling
Private vouchers
Tax credits for Christian schools
Funding for Green schools
Big Profits for Oil Companies OK
EPA should regulate greenhouse gasses
Oil company subsidies
Incentives for alternative fuels
Drilling in ANWAR
Implement Kyoto protocol
Recycling
Protect free roaming horses
Amber Alerts
Islam is inherently warlike
Israel land for peace
Free trade agreements
Limit attorney fees
Airlines to choose if to allow passengers to have guns
Euthanasia
Invading Pakistan to get bin Laden
911 was our fault
Birthright citizenship
Border fence
Minimum wage good or bad
Christian faith in public OK
Abolish social security

How would I be categorized politically?

I support unborn rights and would support a pro-life amendment to the constitution, with the only acceptation for the mother’s life.

I would abolish the department of education because it’s a local and state level responsibility.

I support the right to bear arms, concealed weapons licenses, hunting, stand your ground laws, etc.

I support a 2 strikes and your out drunk driving law.

I support a his body his choice law banning infant circumcision unless it is to treat a legitimate medical condition.

I support the decriminalizing of marijuana because it is less harmful than alcohol.

I think the drinking age should be 18 to match the age of adulthood.

I think it is of the highest urgency to become and stay energy independent.

I support nuclear power and increasing the number of nuclear power plants across America.

I would push the auto makers to make electric cars available for drivers who want them.

I would set and push for goals of energy independence, curing cancer, and paying down the nation debt.

I oppose the endangered species act because it has failed to protect one species and has only given government control of people’s land.

I would raise the levels of fines on employers hiring illegal aliens.

Homeland security should only be used as an anti-terror agency and criminal law enforcement should be handled by other agencies.

I don’t believe there is such thing as a gay marriage and think we should give them the same privileges that comes with marriage but call it something else.

I think capitalism is the greatest antipoverty tool the world has ever seen and encourage the economy, not put outrageous taxes on it.

I don’t believe humans are warming up the Earth but I think we need to clean up some of the messes we are making such as air quality.

I believe in a small federal government. I don’t think the general public should even notice the federal government unless they visit their local military recruiter or post office.

No more ethanol, it causes higher grocery bills and less MPG.

I support Boone’s plan.

I support the rights of nudists to live their lifestyle on their privately owned property without the government telling them they must put clothes on.

I am a Christian but don’t think it’s the government’s job to push morality, I think morality must come from the people up. Not the government down.

I support net neutrality, and oppose bandwidth caps.

I would revert our copyright laws back to that of the Webster and Benjamin Franklin years: An item can be copyrighted for 14 years, renewable once, then falls into public domain.

We allow men to go out in public shirtless. I support amending the law allowing both genders to do the same. One gender shirtless is discrimination. I support women’s rights to breast feed in public. That is the function of the breast. I don’t think anyone has ever been harmed for seeing a breast.

I think smokers should be required to pay their own way when they get cancer and heart disease. Not get public money to fight a self imposed condition.

I would allow people to own their social security accounts and allow them to invest in a Roth IRA within their social security account so the people may build a nest egg to retire on. Each person will own their account and congress may never dip into it.

I would make it illegal for credit card companies to raise interest rates, at will, with no delinquent activity: banning universal default.

Absolutely, no more national debt. No more borrowing.

I believe terminally ill patients should be allowed to take experimental drugs that have yet to receive FDA approval.

Lets get rid of the IRS, replace tax system with flat tax or national sales tax. The IRS and current tax code only exists to control people.

I oppose taxes on broadband internet access, sales tax on in items bought online, and regulation of online content.

I don’t believe our government is up to the task of providing national heath care and it’s much better off left in the hands of the private sector.

I think adults should legally be able to take steroids for body building if he is not competing in competitive sports.

I think daylight savings time should be expanded to a year round project.

I oppose the government regulating the content of literature, films, video games, etc.

what’s your opinion on the article Doer’s drive to clean the air ?

Doer’s drive to clean the air
NDP leader wants to model California’s crackdown on vehicle emissions

By Mia Rabson
MANITOBANS could have more than just sunny skies in com­mon with California if Gary Doer is sent back to the premier’s office next month. Doer marked Earth Day Sunday with a series of campaign promises to pro­tect the environment, including forcing all cars on Manitoba roads to spew out fewer greenhouse gases. “We want to work using the California method on vehicle emissions,” Doer said in the backyard of a private residence in Wolseley. California set tailpipe emissions stan­dards 41 years ago, and has long been the North American leader on the sub­ject, including recent plans by the state to cut by 10 per cent the carbon content of gasoline sold in the state.
Cars sold or imported in California must meet that state’s emissions standards or they aren’t allowed on the road, and Doer wants to set the same standards here.
He said he believes the federal gov­ernment should set a national standard for tailpipe emissions to ensure car man­ufacturers are forced to act.
“Having said that, just like California is not going to sit back and wait for Washington, we’re not going to wait for anybody else,” he said.
Doer said the tailpipe restrictions will not just be for new cars sold in Manito­ba, but also include incentives for people with older cars to cut back on emissions. “We believe carrots are the best in this regard,” said Doer.
Doer repeated his pre-election pledge to pass a law requiring Manitoba to meet its greenhouse gas reductions targets under the Kyoto Protocol by 2012. But, for the first time, he said he’d like to meet that goal with actual reductions, not by buying credits from other juris­dictions that have fewer emissions or have

Top

cut back more.
Manitoba’s Kyoto target requires a cut of 2.3 megatonnes of greenhouse gases. The province currently emits about 20 megatonnes a year, more than one third of which come from vehicles.
Other promises in his environment platform include building renewable energy sources for the communities in Manitoba that don’t have access to hydroelectricity, and requiring all land­fills to capture emissions.
Curtis Hull, project manager of the Manitoba-based environment crusader group Climate Change Connection, said overall the Doer environment platform “looks promising.”
But he said he’d like to see more ini­tiatives to get people out of their cars in the first place, including investments in public transit, particularly in rural Man­itoba, and higher gas taxes, though he acknowledged that is a hard sell.
“Increased gas prices won’t be popu­lar, especially at election time, but when it comes to getting people out of their cars, that’s the big one,” said Hull.
Doer was joined at the microphone by Lloyd Axworthy, who was once the senior federal Liberal in Manitoba and is now the president of the University of Winnipeg. Though Axworthy’s presence implied he was endorsing Doer’s cam­paign, he said that’s not true.
But he did laud Doer for showing lead­ership on climate change in Canada.
“I’m not here in a partisan way, I’m here because as a citizen of this province I think it’s important we continue to build on what’s been accomplished,” said Axworthy.
Liberal Leader Jon Gerrard, who also made environment announcements Sun­day but didn’t get the boost of Axworthy’s presence, sniped that he thought it was funny that Doer felt the only way he’d get credibility for his environment announce­ment was by having a Liberal present.

■

Federal Tax Credit question?

What is a federal tax credit? The context of where I found it is:
If you purchase an energy-efficient product or renewable energy system for your home, you may be eligible for a federal tax credit.
Thanks