Quote:SolarCity has a business model that relies on investors and government tax breaks and grants. Since its 2006 inception, taxpayers have paid $1 billion in subsidies. The company has never made a profit.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/...tcmp=hpbt2

(01-21-2016 02:18 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

Quote:SolarCity has a business model that relies on investors and government tax breaks and grants. Since its 2006 inception, taxpayers have paid $1 billion in subsidies. The company has never made a profit.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/...tcmp=hpbt2

A lot of this is because of electric companies changing their rates to discourage customers from using solar.

Here in my city, the electric company actually attempted to raise the rates of electricity exclusively on customers who have solar.

(01-21-2016 02:20 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  A lot of this is because of electric companies changing their rates to discourage customers from using solar.

Yeah, that's called competition.

(01-21-2016 02:24 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 02:20 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  A lot of this is because of electric companies changing their rates to discourage customers from using solar.

Yeah, that's called competition.

That's not competition. It's unfair. That's like charging people who drive a Prius more for gas because they don't use as much.

There are going to be a lot of oil drilling companies going bankrupt too. So what?

(01-21-2016 02:20 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 02:18 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

Quote:SolarCity has a business model that relies on investors and government tax breaks and grants. Since its 2006 inception, taxpayers have paid $1 billion in subsidies. The company has never made a profit.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/...tcmp=hpbt2

A lot of this is because of electric companies changing their rates to discourage customers from using solar.

Here in my city, the electric company actually attempted to raise the rates of electricity exclusively on customers who have solar.

I know a guy in Los Altos Ca., who has solar panels, he actually sells power back to the electric power company. You get IRS deductions for buying solar products.

Can you provide a link that El Paso Electric charges a different and higher rate to solar users?

(01-21-2016 02:20 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 02:18 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

Quote:SolarCity has a business model that relies on investors and government tax breaks and grants. Since its 2006 inception, taxpayers have paid $1 billion in subsidies. The company has never made a profit.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/...tcmp=hpbt2

A lot of this is because of electric companies changing their rates to discourage customers from using solar.

Here in my city, the electric company actually attempted to raise the rates of electricity exclusively on customers who have solar.

Got a link to that? There is a big difference between charging solar users more than non solar users, and wanting to pay them less for the energy they put back into the grid. (Personally I think utility companies should have to pay the same thing they charge)

(01-21-2016 02:20 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 02:18 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

Quote:SolarCity has a business model that relies on investors and government tax breaks and grants. Since its 2006 inception, taxpayers have paid $1 billion in subsidies. The company has never made a profit.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/...tcmp=hpbt2

A lot of this is because of electric companies changing their rates to discourage customers from using solar.

Here in my city, the electric company actually attempted to raise the rates of electricity exclusively on customers who have solar.

According to this article El Paso Electric tried to create a distinct rate class for solar users. It was not approved it also says El Paso would have been the first regulated power company in the USA who would have done this. Bolded part is not true.

El Paso Electric sought to become the first regulated utility in the nation to separate customers with rooftop solar systems into a separate category because the cost of delivery to those customers is greater than it is for other residential customers, company CEO Tom Shockley said.
http://www.lcsun-news.com/story/news/loc.../73996874/

(01-21-2016 02:30 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  There are going to be a lot of oil drilling companies going bankrupt too. So what?

Did they all get a Billion dollar hummer from the Taxpayers?

(01-21-2016 02:20 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 02:18 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

Quote:SolarCity has a business model that relies on investors and government tax breaks and grants. Since its 2006 inception, taxpayers have paid $1 billion in subsidies. The company has never made a profit.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/...tcmp=hpbt2

A lot of this is because of electric companies changing their rates to discourage customers from using solar.

Here in my city, the electric company actually attempted to raise the rates of electricity exclusively on customers who have solar.

And even more of it is the fact that solar is far more expensive than other sources of energy... But yea somehow its the evil power companies fault

(01-21-2016 02:25 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 02:24 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 02:20 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  A lot of this is because of electric companies changing their rates to discourage customers from using solar.

Yeah, that's called competition.

That's not competition. It's unfair. That's like charging people who drive a Prius more for gas because they don't use as much.

Ahh the irony... Many governments are looking into restructuring taxes on gas and vehicles to punish the efficiency of hybrids.

(01-21-2016 02:30 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  There are going to be a lot of oil drilling companies going bankrupt too. So what?

I'd be willing to bet on average they do far better than light and magic energy companies.

(01-21-2016 02:45 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 02:30 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  There are going to be a lot of oil drilling companies going bankrupt too. So what?

Did they all get a Billion dollar hummer from the Taxpayers?

Please Lord in heaven tell me that you're not trying to claim that oil companies get no benefits or subsidies from the taxpayers.

Quote:In the United States, credible estimates of annual fossil fuel subsidies range from $10 billion to $52 billion annually yet these don’t even include costs borne by taxpayers related to the climate, local environmental, and health impacts of the fossil fuel industry. As of July 2014, Oil Change International estimates U.S. fossil fuel subsidies at $37.5 billion annually, including $21 billion in production and exploration subsidies.

http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/

(01-21-2016 02:57 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 02:45 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 02:30 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  There are going to be a lot of oil drilling companies going bankrupt too. So what?

Did they all get a Billion dollar hummer from the Taxpayers?

Please Lord in heaven tell me that you're not trying to claim that oil companies get no benefits or subsidies from the taxpayers.

The benefits actually flow through to consumers in the form of lower prices, which was the intent when they were originally passed.

Thank you billionaires of the United States for your tax money that funds this sham.

(01-21-2016 02:20 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 02:18 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

Quote:SolarCity has a business model that relies on investors and government tax breaks and grants. Since its 2006 inception, taxpayers have paid $1 billion in subsidies. The company has never made a profit.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/...tcmp=hpbt2

A lot of this is because of electric companies changing their rates to discourage customers from using solar.

Here in my city, the electric company actually attempted to raise the rates of electricity exclusively on customers who have solar.

so, are you saying that competition is a good thingy?

(01-21-2016 03:00 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  Thank you billionaires of the United States for your tax money that funds this sham.

huh????

how is alternative forms of development a bad thingy?

(01-21-2016 02:59 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 02:57 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 02:45 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 02:30 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  There are going to be a lot of oil drilling companies going bankrupt too. So what?

Did they all get a Billion dollar hummer from the Taxpayers?

Please Lord in heaven tell me that you're not trying to claim that oil companies get no benefits or subsidies from the taxpayers.

The benefits actually flow through to consumers in the form of lower prices, which was the intent when they were originally passed.

yep....regardless of the form due to constraints....

(01-21-2016 02:45 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 02:30 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  There are going to be a lot of oil drilling companies going bankrupt too. So what?

Did they all get a Billion dollar hummer from the Taxpayers?

Have solar panel companies destroyed miles of ocean, marine life, and coastline?

(01-21-2016 03:02 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 03:00 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  Thank you billionaires of the United States for your tax money that funds this sham.

huh????

how is alternative forms of development a bad thingy?

I didn't say it was necessarily, I'm simply thanking the people whose taxes pay for this "development." Thank you, rich people.