What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Much Are You Over-Paying For Your Auto Insurance view!
howlifeworks.com - Car insurance rates have dropped leaving many people paying far more than they need to...
55 Comments
- thevelvetsun, on 12/17/2007, -0/+56This is how you do something good for the environment. You use some initiative and take action. You don't wait for Congress to pass a bunch of laws. You do it yourself to save the environment and save money. Good for them.
- Zera, on 12/17/2007, -0/+12Completely agreed. Environmentalism MUST happen at the individual level.
I wish the article listed how expensive this is, because I believe that spending the few hundred thousand dollars I estimate this cost, to build one big wind turbine will not only produce more power (because it doesn't need the sun shining) and windmills are almost more environmentally friendly to build and dispose of than solar cells, AND most importantly of all, the windmill will still be working in 30 years when the solar cells have almost finished deteriorating.
Actions like this are awesome, but we still have to be careful to determine what is BEST for the environment, and then go with it. - kwansolo, on 12/17/2007, -0/+12everyone should be ashamed they got pwned by fresno.
- KLowD9x, on 12/17/2007, -0/+9Of course it isn't free, what kind of question is that?
But, judging by the amount of power they are generating, the system will pay itself off in a few years. - Bukowsky, on 12/17/2007, -4/+13good for them....
- nick111, on 12/17/2007, -1/+9Kindof make sense in some ways - if there are minumum requirements for the amount of pollution a car chucks out then houses possibly ought to be built to similar standards.
There's a massive brainwashed population to get through first though... so what will probably happen is that these standards will be accepted practice in Europe... be shown to be far more cost-effective, then America will follow suit.
The irony is that George Bush's own ranch is already built along these lines. - inactive, on 12/17/2007, -3/+11Now step up and move to a much bigger scaled communities.
- truekreation, on 12/17/2007, -0/+7I wish more communities would follow this idea.
- inactive, on 12/17/2007, -3/+10I think there should be laws on the books that for any and all new development commercial or residential anywhere in the United States there should be a similar technology put in place.
- Riggs, on 12/17/2007, -0/+7It's good that select small communities are doing this sort of thing. Hopefully this will expand to cities and states in the future.
- joshreed104, on 12/17/2007, -2/+9I live in Fresno and this is a pleasant surprise. This valley is so conservative, I literally can't go a day without someone at school telling someone about all the flaws in An Inconvenient Truth. And Clovis is even more conservative than Fresno. I don't know how it happened, but I'm glad it did!
- KLowD9x, on 12/17/2007, -0/+6Why do you think that?
- Nin10dude, on 12/17/2007, -1/+7It's not that we can't take a joke, it's that your joke wasn't funny.
- inactive, on 12/17/2007, -0/+6I always thought that was the way forward - averaging the load between households at first glance seems to allow the most cost-effective way to implement existing solar technologies. Unless you live in a unique situation, it seems almost an anathema to most Americans, like me, to share at this level. But we'll learn, I think.
- kd1s, on 12/17/2007, -0/+5I'd love to go completely off grid too. Solar is really coming around at last. I noted that 2V cells are very cheap, less than $5 now. I'll have to pick up a few as I've got a great southern exposure and I know how to use a voltage regulator so I can create a nice little charging circuit that intelligently charges NiCd batteries to power my Arduino projects.
- Markpdotcom, on 12/17/2007, -1/+6It was a good comment till the ***** political end... you just lost my digg!
- Twee, on 12/17/2007, -0/+4There is a special dorm at my university that runs entirely on renewable energy from solar and wind.
- buckrogers1965, on 12/17/2007, -0/+4When you break down the return on investment, then conservatives like me are very happy about solar energy.
- diggduggjoe, on 12/17/2007, -1/+4Sorry, but I am not for mandatory regulations on how people may use their own property. Forcing people to buy into an energy commune in order to develop their land is wrong. Virtually every technology will have its day in the limelight. It is not the role of government to anoint any specific tech over another. Let the market figure out what is best.
If, anything we need to remove the laws that make the average homeowner unable to do anything without the permission of the town they live in. Many innovations like small wind or solar power are shot down by the cities, neighbors, etc for sound or aesthetic concerns. If, we need new tech, then people need to get out of the way of their neighbors and let the change happen. Maybe some ideas will not be perfect, but it will create a market for new ideas to grow in. - KLowD9x, on 12/17/2007, -0/+3You first.
- Richandler, on 12/17/2007, -1/+3Other countries wouldn't be anywhere without America inventing 90% of what they own. Those countries bought into socialism. Does that make it right? No it doesn't. In fact it led to two world wars.
- grumpyrain, on 12/17/2007, -0/+2If that were true, you would need to be standing somewhere which receives 2164W/m^2. Given that the Sahara gets about 350W/m^2, that is not somewhere I want to be standing.
- buckrogers1965, on 12/17/2007, -0/+2Ohio is not very cloudy. Solar works great even in Seattle.
- Veni_Vidi_Vici, on 12/17/2007, -2/+4When someone spits those flaws at me I ask them why the United States is the only country which has not yet adopted the kyoto protocol. I ask, if global warming is a democratic/liberal/whatever-group conspiracy, why have other country's bought into it? They don't have those groups.
- JudgeWinchester, on 12/17/2007, -1/+3This is pure style that the world can only admire and, hopefully, copy!
- mudz78, on 12/17/2007, -0/+2Well, it is an accomplishment. Congratulations. It might not be the solution to the worlds energy needs, but I for one am glad to see individuals in 1st world nations making an effort to shoulder some responsibility.
How many homes would it take to impress some people? 360, 36,000, 36,000,000?
Not too sure that I follow the points regarding collective adoption. I'm working on the assumption that the poster is saying mandatory solar power would result in an inefficient allocation of resources. I don' t really see how market forces can be relied upon for effective allocation however. The market being what it is, it will do what is best for the market (or who best represents it in the given context), and little else. Generally this means allocating resources where the greatest profits are to be made. What's "productive" for enterprise doesn't strike *me* as something that will generate the most "productive" community outcome(s).
I applaud what these people have done. We might not agree that it is a step in the right direction, but can it really be worse than continuing to travel down a road we know leads to ruin?
I'd take a society over an economy any day. -John - miles32, on 12/17/2007, -0/+2The reason that we are not signatories of the kyoto protocol is that it wasnt specific enough, if you look at it it is fairly open ended
- v3rTaBreaker, on 12/17/2007, -2/+436 homes create 200ish kw per day. It takes one nuclear power plant to produce 800ish MW per day. If my calculations are correct that is 400x more power output.
There hasn't been a nuclear accident since Three Mile Island which was in 1979. There hasn't been a fatal nuclear accident ever in US history. Investing in solar power is a good thing, but in the interim we need nuclear power or else Queens, NY will continue to have blackouts during the hot summer. - Veni_Vidi_Vici, on 12/17/2007, -4/+6Your comment is stupid.
- courtjester555, on 12/17/2007, -0/+2Although I really dig (and digg) this article, it's practically an advertisement for SolarCity. The actions are still quite admirable, but I wish SolarCity didn't make itself out to be the Jesus Christ of alternative energy.
- Phlosten, on 12/17/2007, -0/+1Baby steps people. Remember, the power industry doesn't want you to go solar because you will no longer be answering to them. Providing your own solar power means independence from the power industry.
- SteelChicken, on 12/17/2007, -0/+1after living in Clovis/Fresno for 10 years, I heartily agree.
- Gemfinder, on 12/17/2007, -0/+11-watt cells for 30¢ are coming up next year.
- blast_flame, on 12/17/2007, -0/+1If they are smart they would simply say that is an ad populum argument.
- ChiefShaman, on 12/18/2007, -0/+1Glad to see articles like this!
- Gemfinder, on 12/17/2007, -0/+1It won't be expensive for long. NanoSolar in San JoséCA just came out with a credit-card sized solar panel that will generate a watt of solar energy for 30¢.
- mos6507, on 12/17/2007, -0/+1How long does it take to build a nuke plant? Not a responsive approach to an urgent problem.
- flyingmonkey350, on 12/17/2007, -1/+1I don't see anyone else jumping off a cliff....
- mudz78, on 12/17/2007, -0/+0http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=com.microso ...
http://www.greenenergyohio.org/page.cfm
http://www.odod.state.oh.us/cdd/oee/elfgrant.htm
http://www.clean-power.com/cleanpowerestimator/odo ... - CNeovitch, on 12/20/2007, -0/+0Yes. This is a good step. As technology for solar power increases to include more spectra of light, the idea becomes a more advantageous one more and more. Also, put a personal wind powered electric generator on your lawn, they are about 6 feet tall. We must tap several sources to become better off and not put all eggs in one basket.
- grez, on 12/17/2007, -0/+0800M/200k = 4000 not 400 as you say. You make a good point otherwise though...
- mudz78, on 12/17/2007, -0/+0I am new to digg, so my initial post was not a "reply" to your post (as i had intended). I have to say though, that I am dissapointed in the nature of the rating system. *Seems* to me that only popular opinions get pushed forward. Your comment might not fit in with the flavour of the month, but it seemed a valid opinion and about the facts. I dugg it.
- djshiva2323, on 12/17/2007, -0/+0This is how you do something good for the environment...but I think they can do it cheaper
- batdan, on 12/17/2007, -2/+1I'm gonna try this in Ohio. But we needs panels that run using clouds and broken dreams instead of sunshine first.
- Richandler, on 12/17/2007, -5/+3You won't find personal responsibility from digg users.
- JudgeWinchester, on 12/17/2007, -2/+0I think you are right for it is the higher ideal!
- hardwickj, on 12/17/2007, -6/+3Well thats incredibly intelligent. With that logic, I'll vote just jump off a bridge because everyone else is jumping off a bridge.
- 0mnio, on 12/17/2007, -6/+3Ever since I lived in Santa Fe and learned about Permaculture back in 1990. I knew that true liberation occurs when local communities join together to create their own energy solutions. The BIGGEST threat to the current status quo is decentralized energy production at the community level. State subsidized alternatives which are distributed via Home Depot/Lowes or better yet contruction Co-Ops with community action workshops is the first step to this goal and the destabilizing. Prove me wrong about this, I dare you (last comment targeted to the insecure, selfish and non-empathetic Republicans in the group).
- inactive, on 12/17/2007, -6/+2i dug you down because everyone else dug you down, nothing personal
- inactive, on 12/17/2007, -7/+2Is it free?
-
Show 51 - 55 of 55 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is