Most EVs Cost More to Drive Than Their Gas-Powered Rivals:

It was a generalization. Most people don't. You barely do. That was my point. Solar isn't worth bothering with. It's like you pay a dollar to wander around for 20 years picking up a penny occasionally and at the end of 20 years you might have a dollar plus a few pennies to show for it.

It gets even worse when you scale it up to commercial levels. There it doesn't even become competitive.

I doubt he breaks even or even comes close to it. Poorboy is just boasting. He does this fairly frequently. He is again conveniently ignoring the cost of maintenance or repair of the array, or the subsidizing to get the price of his array so low, or the inability to generate power at night.
 
I believe every ideology has a place somewhere.

For instance, when we go into space and start colonizing planets it will most likely be under some sort of communist system.

Our military is essentially communism.

Since communism produces nothing, it must steal wealth. It can only steal wealth from capitalism, the only economic system that creates wealth.
Military is not an economic system.

Rifles, grenades, pistols, missiles, tanks, and even ships for the navy and all their onboard equipment are built by companies. The uniforms, the MREs, the planes and rockets, even the bullets and shells, all built by companies. Capitalism.
 
I am coming round to the conclusion that EV's need a special tax because of the fact that they cause extra wear and tear on roads.
 
Agreed. Government has NO place manipulating energy markets.

The federal government does have some role such as pipelines that cross state borders, energy as it relates to defense and other federal functions, and energy extraction on federal lands, but it shouldn't be the manipulator of the whole market that it is.
 
Gawd. You spent too much for a generator!

It was installation also.

But yes, I bought one of the best generators.

ocean3.jpg
 
The federal government does have some role such as pipelines that cross state borders,
None, other than regulating safety of pipelines.
energy as it relates to defense and other federal functions,
That's just being a buyer.
and energy extraction on federal lands,
Damn little. They are public lands. Those lands belong to the States, not the federal government (other than federal installations like buildings and forts).
but it shouldn't be the manipulator of the whole market that it is.
Quite right.
 
Nope

They stick on the roof of the boat.

I assume as in the example you gave here.
It DOES preclude the use of that roof as a weather deck though, and it can make it more difficult to get to the rigging to fix a jam in a hurry. So...yes...they take up space, but it's space you are willing to give up.
 
It was a generalization. Most people don't. You barely do. That was my point. Solar isn't worth bothering with. It's like you pay a dollar to wander around for 20 years picking up a penny occasionally and at the end of 20 years you might have a dollar plus a few pennies to show for it.

It gets even worse when you scale it up to commercial levels. There it doesn't even become competitive.

I barely break even if I make a 35% return over 20 years if inflation averages 2%?
I don't think you understand what barely break even means.
 
Those $22,000 panels are subsidized, Poorboy.
And they don't produce power at night.

I didn't include the subsidies in my calculations. If you don't understand simple math, then there is no hope for you.
The claim was made that solar panels could never break even if they weren't subsidized. I showed that that is false. Whether they produce power at night is irrelevant to the cost calculations.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top