Opinion

Solar discussion invites more creative proposals needing discussion.

Published

8 years ago

4 minute read

Let us consider the carbon footprint issue in more ways than mega-projects. Let us start at home.
There is a lot of information about the average home. For example the average home has 2.5 residents. The average home costs $25.000 to install enough solar panels.( there is debate that it may be as little as 14,000 but I would like to prepare for costs overruns) It takes 75 hours of labour to install enough solar panels including electrical and non-electrical labour. So to go solar it would cost $10,000 per resident and require 30 hours of labour per person. This is based on the U.S. which is higher than countries like Germany who are more involved and takes advantage of economies of scale. Germany averages only 33 hours.
Red Deer has about 100,000 residents, so to go solar in such a big way would cost a billion dollars and require 3 million man hours of labour. Spread out over 10 years and 3 levels of government, federal, provincial, and municipal. It would cost each level of government 33 million per year. It would create 300,000 manhours of work and if a full time equivalent is 2,000 hours per year then it would create 150 full time equivalent jobs directly in installation. Each direct job would create several indirect jobs in manufacturing, transportation, hospitality etc. Someone offered 7 indirect jobs but I do not know.
When you look at previous bail outs for jobs, this is not that extreme. The economic impact would be huge. The tax base would increase, employment would increase, and our carbon foot print would decrease.
The economics of scale would lower the costs, the natural evolution of solar efficiency would lower the costs, and experience would lessen the labour time and costs but the benefits would be the same.
Red Deer College could get involved in training. The city could become an eco-friendly destination for residents and tourists.
If we were to download a portion of the costs onto the home owners through a loan, and incorporate into their property taxes based on 3% interest. 40% of the costs over 10 years would mean $100 per month for 10 years, which would probably be less than their current electrical bill. If as some suggest it would be $14,000 and even if the home owners bore all the costs then it would be $150 per month for 10 years.That is based on current costs on a small scale.
This will not happen overnight. Three levels of government, training, planning, and manufacturing etc. will take time. I remember satellite dishes that were once so huge, that are now so small, and the same goes for solar panels, once so huge they are increasingly getting smaller and more efficient.
The amount of money is not insurmountable. In a equal-shared scenario with the provincial and federal governments, the costs of building the planned footbridge from the Riverlands to Bower Ponds for example would convert about 2500 homes.
I hope the city continues to discuss and explore these possibilities with other levels of government. Talking about the environment, talking about innovation, and talking about infrastructure spending, here you go.
Another idea could be doing a neighbourhood project like Drake’s Landing Solar Community in Okotoks which had 10 years of uninterrupted service with solar fraction of 100% during the summer and a low of 92% during the coldest winter.
We could look at using our river for hydro-electric, mandate architectural restrictions like reflective roofs, encourage green roofs to name but a few as the dialogue widens.
I hope the city continues the discussions after their March 6 2017 meeting.

Follow Author

California’s soaring electricity rates strain consumers, impact climate goals

Crime / 2 hours ago

Former UK MP says ‘nothing was done’ with child trafficking information given to police, MI5

National / 5 hours ago

Chrystia Freeland’s WEF page deleted after she announces bid to replace Trudeau

International

California’s soaring electricity rates strain consumers, impact climate goals

Published on January 21, 2025

Todayville

From The Center Square

By Madeline Armstrong

While the greenhouse gas reduction programs that raise electricity rates are part of California’s climate goals, the increased prices actually discourage individuals from switching away from using fossil fuels impacting California’s ambitious climate goals.

California has completed yet another year with some of the highest electricity rates in the country – almost double the national average. The state’s electricity rates have been increasing rapidly, outpacing inflation in recent years by approximately 47% from 2019 to 2023. This is due largely to the high rates charged by the state’s three large investor-owned utilities (IOUs).

According to a report published by the California Legislative Analyst Office, the factors driving rate increases are wildfire-related costs, greenhouse gas reduction mandates, and policies and differences in utility operational structures and services territories. Ratepayers bear the brunt of these costs with those who earn lower incomes and live in hotter areas of the state the most severely affected.

The report points out that while the greenhouse gas reduction programs that raise electricity rates are part of California’s climate goals, the increased prices actually discourage individuals from switching away from using fossil fuels impacting California’s ambitious climate goals.

These programs include the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), which requires utilities to provide a percentage of retail electricity sales from renewable sources, raising costs for ratepayers. Additionally, SB 350 directs the CPUC to authorize ratepayer-funded energy efficiency programs to meet California’s goal of doubling energy efficiency savings by 2030.

“While many other states operate ratepayer-supported energy efficiency programs, on average, we estimate that Californians contribute a notably greater share of their rates to such programs than is typical across the country,” the report notes.

Electricity rates pay for numerous costs related to the construction, maintenance and operation of electricity systems including the generation, transmission and distribution components. However, these rates also pay for costs unrelated to servicing electricity.

“Most notably, the state and IOUs use revenue generated from electricity rates to support various state-mandated public purpose programs,” the report says. “These programs have goals such as increasing energy efficiency, expediting adoption of renewable energy sources, supporting the transition to zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs), and providing lower-income customers with financial assistance.”

The largest public purpose program is the California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE), which provides discounts for lower-income customers. However, the report notes that while CARE benefits certain customers, it shifts the costs onto other slightly higher-income customers and that the majority of Californians spend a larger portion of their income on electricity compared to other states.

“According to data from the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, California households in the lowest quintile of the income distribution typically spend about 6 percent of their before-tax incomes on electricity, compared to less than 1 percent for the highest-income quintile of households,” reads the report. “Notably, high electricity rates also can impose burdens on moderate-income earners, since they also pay a larger share of their household incomes toward electricity than their higher-income counterparts but typically are not able to qualify for bill assistance programs.”

Electricity bills also reflect other state and local tax charges including utility taxes that are used to support programs such as fire response and parks in addition to the state-assessed charge on electricity use that is put into the Energy Resources Programs Account (ERPA). This account is used to pay for energy programs and planning activities.

While many of the funds recovered through electricity rates are fixed costs for programs, these costs increased in 2022 following the repeal of a state law that limited fixed charges at $10, requiring the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to authorize fixed charges that vary by income. These come out to be around $24 per month for non-CARE customers and $6 per month for CARE customers.

Wildfire related costs have also been increasing. Before 2019, wildfire costs included in electricity rates charged by IOUs were negligible, but now it has grown between 7% and 13% of typical non-CARE customers. Reasons for this increase include California’s high wildfire risk and the state’s liability standard holding IOUs responsible for all costs associated with utility-caused wildfires.

“The magnitude of the damages and risks from utility-sparked wildfires have increased substantially in recent years,” reads the report. “Correspondingly, IOUs have spent unprecedented amounts in recent years on wildfire mitigation-related activities to try to reduce the likelihood of future utility-caused wildfires, with the associated costs often passed along to ratepayers. Furthermore, California IOUs and their ratepayers pay for insurance against future wildfires, including contributing to the California Wildfire Fund.”

According to the report, electricity use and rates for Claifornians are only expected to increase and the legislature will have to determine how to tackle the statewide climate goals while reducing the burden on ratepayers.

Madeline Armstrong

Reporter

Daily Caller

Pastor Lectures Trump and Vance On Trans People, Illegal Immigrants

Published on January 21, 2025

Todayville

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Nicole Silverio

President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance visibly rolled their eyes as the Episcopal bishop of Washington, Mariann Budde, lectured them on being kind to transgender people and immigrants at Tuesday’s National Prayer Service.

Budde requested that the newly sworn-in president and vice president “have mercy” on gay, lesbian and transgender people as well as illegal immigrants who are allegedly “scared” by the new administration. The new leaders did not appear amused by her lecture, with Vance repeatedly shooting looks to his wife, Second Lady Usha Vance.

“In the name of our God, I ask you to have mercy on the people in our country who are scared now,” Budde said. “There are gay, lesbian and transgender children in Democratic, Republican and independent families, some who fear for their lives. And the people who pick our crops and clean our office buildings, who labor in poultry farms and meat packing plants, who wash the dishes after we eat in restaurants, who work the night shifts in hospitals. They may not be citizens or have the proper documentation, but the vast majority of immigrants are not criminals. They pay taxes and are good neighbors, they are faithful members of churches and our mosques, synagogues and temples.”

WATCH:

Trump and Vance attended the National Prayer Service along with Usha, First Lady Melania Trump and their families at the Washington National Cathedral. The interfaith service was held to “offer prayers of thanksgiving for our democracy” at the beginning of the new administration, according to a statement from the National Cathedral.

Budde, a staunch critic of Trump since his first term, said during a phone call in 2020 that she was “outraged” by the president’s speech about the importance of law and order at St. John’s Episcopal Church after it was set ablaze by Black Lives Matter protesters. She further seethed at Trump for allegedly being given no notice that the area surrounding the church would be cleared with tear gas.

Trump signed a slew of executive orders Monday evening to terminate birthright citizenship for children born to illegal immigrants, declare a national emergency at the U.S.-Mexico border and to direct the federal government to only recognize two sexes, male and female.

An Axios/Ipsos poll from Sunday found that 66% of Americans support deporting immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally, an action that Trump had promised to enact throughout his campaign. The poll surveyed 1,025 adults between January 10 to 12 with a 3.2% margin of error.

A national poll by PPRI in June 2023 found that 65% of Americans believe there are only two genders. The poll surveyed 5,000 adults between March 9-23 with a 1.5% margin of error.