You say: “…the charges are too low per kilowatt ($1359/18414 = $0.0738/kWh). Check your SDG&E bill and see what you pay per kWh (sum it up w/ all the charges)..” – I wonder how Tenessee rates compare to San Diego. Only when you know that relationship any compare is meaningful
Very good statement/question.. The San Diego rates are over $0.10/kWh.. and vary from bill to bill… and SDG&E is not 100% green. I also know that Green energy, on average starts at over $0.07/kWh and that is for Wind(the lower priced). I have seem some quotes of lower numbers but there is nothing backing them.. just claims. Add on top power line usage and maintenance charges (about 0.05/kWh approx).. and you are above 0.10/kWh. On average, I have seen stated that Green power is 0.02/kWh more expensive than renewable. This is also why I conditioned the statement with needs to be checked and I would say that he is not. I am not making the statement unequivocal until proven. This is one of those where someone on the board might be able to check.. I’ll have to see if I can get info from my (distant) relatives.
I’m not sure you have substantiated this claim. You just say he’s not, but on the same vein I would say he is. Until you can prove he’s indeed not carbon neutral, I’d give him the benefit of the doubt.
I would have to disagree with you on this. Considering that the consumption is 20x, and the position he is pushing with repect to AGW.. I think he (Gore) has to prove it. He has also not told us which offset he is using (there are several). http://www.ecobusinesslinks.com/carbon_offset_wind_credits_carbon_reduction.htm
Considering the link I posted earlier has someone whose home array can produce up to 45kWh in one day(net).. I think the figurehead of those fighting AGW and rise up to at least part of the challenge. (Solarwarrior also drives electric cars that are charged by his array). This person, in my opinion, is really carbon neutral.
Converting CO2 emissions (I would not consider it a pollution because lack of C02 can kill plants) to trade-able “good” is definitely novel.. but its effectiveness is questionable. How do you measure effective emissions of a trace gas? What percentage of revenues do these offset companies charge to administrative and marketing? How much of your money that you pay them, actually goes to offsetting the CO2 burden? How effective is the mechanism they are using?
I have priced setting up remote power using (generator, wind and solar) and have a fairly good feel on the costs. The amount that is being charged to offset by these companies is low compared to what is actually required to accomplish it.
Wind power is scalable, solar is (there was a large scale generating system near Barstow, CA). The problem is that cost per kWh is higher than burning fossil fuel.(not to mention lobby effects of fossil fuel cos).
The most effective way to reduce carbon footprint for the immediate short term (outside of conservation), is to use rooftop solar cells on corporate buildings (in SoCal). It drops the heat load on the roof during summer, reducing loads on the buildings Air Conditioners and at the same time generates electricity for the building (not the full building’s supply though). The company sees lower costs on their electric bill. One of the problems I have seen is that the producers of the units are still overcharging ($100 for a simple bracket?? my a**!!) Corporate buildings generally have large flat roofs which favor solar arrays.
The company I work in, is also swapping out all CRTs and replacing them with LCDs (for computers). It reduces power consumption at the same time it reduces heat load that the AC has to deal with (CRTs produce quite a bit of heat).
