Ohio solar project a go | The Columbus Dispatch

The largest solar-power project in the Midwest will be built in a rural area of eastern Ohio. Full Story
First Prev
of 5
Next Last
watcher

Columbus, OH

#1 Jul 6, 2011
I dont want to pay AEP 25 cents more per month to make this happen. If it is not self supporting, and if private industry does not think it is worth investing in, then why should we the customers have to pay for this????

Another boondoggle about to happen and we will have to pay for it.

Judged:

11

10

5

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
N Viroloon Eco-Nut

Reynoldsburg, OH

#2 Jul 6, 2011
watcher wrote:
I dont want to pay AEP 25 cents more per month to make this happen. If it is not self supporting, and if private industry does not think it is worth investing in, then why should we the customers have to pay for this????
Another boondoggle about to happen and we will have to pay for it.
Because it's "green"! Why do you hate Mother Earth? Get green or get out!
Frankie

Columbus, OH

#3 Jul 6, 2011
Watcher has a point. If it is such a good deal, why the customer subsidy?
Unrepentant Cynic

Pickerington, OH

#5 Jul 6, 2011
The only long term job for this project will be mowing the weeds that will be blocking, sweeping leaves that will be blocking, and scraping the snow that will be blocking and ice that will be blocking (and ruining) these panels. The rest of the time the clouds and the rain will prevent them from functioning.
What a waste of money.
Benjamin

Columbus, OH

#6 Jul 6, 2011
AEP will do anything to get more money from it's users. Green energy is the future of the energy industry. Live with it! You are seriously going to complain about 3.00 a year!! If it prevents even a small amount of Mercury going into the atmosphere from coal fired plants, it is well worth it.

We need more of these projects!
TJohn

Cleveland, OH

#8 Jul 6, 2011
Unrepentant Cynic wrote:
The only long term job for this project will be mowing the weeds that will be blocking, sweeping leaves that will be blocking, and scraping the snow that will be blocking and ice that will be blocking (and ruining) these panels. The rest of the time the clouds and the rain will prevent them from functioning.
What a waste of money.
Actually that's wrong. Solar panels will still work in dim conditions - not as well, mind you - and they are high off the ground. Yes, snow can cover them up, but typically the glass surface is treated and they are angled so that the snow slides off.
TJohn

Cleveland, OH

#9 Jul 6, 2011
Every company gets subsidies to bring jobs to an area. Every energy sector is subsidized by the government. Fossil fuels are no exception. The free market IS making solar happen, just look around. 1 gigawatt was installed in the US last year alone, doubling the entire history of US PV installations.
bob

Rutland, OH

#10 Jul 6, 2011
watcher wrote:
I dont want to pay AEP 25 cents more per month to make this happen. If it is not self supporting, and if private industry does not think it is worth investing in, then why should we the customers have to pay for this????
I don't suppose you read the article:

By buying the power, AEP will be complying with the benchmarks in a 2008 state energy law that has escalating requirements for solar power. By 2025, the state's investor-owned utilities will be required to get 0.5 percent of their power from the sun.
Noah Way

Columbus, OH

#11 Jul 6, 2011
Get real, it'll only generate enough electricity to power 4 mobile homes in Noble County...Let the utility pay for it to be done, not the consumer...
Joel

Houston, TX

#12 Jul 6, 2011
AEP will not actually be making any money from this deal. The profits go to the company that is building and selling the solar power. AEP is merely carrying the power through its wires, charing us for the power and paying the solar developer for the power.
SAL

United States

#13 Jul 6, 2011
Good for the Strickland administration! Cynic that I am, I doubt that AEP would choose a plan that doesn't actually work.

That being said, it IS amusing to think that Ohio, with more overcast days than Seattle some years, is that high up w/re to solar enterprises. How'd that happen?

Hopefully, those folks in Ontario, OH will recoup their losses and get back on their feet also. It was pretty exciting to think about having that industry here. I'd like to know more about why that Calif. company felt it couldn't meet the deadline. A lot of unanswered questions in that Dispatch article.
James Burkes

Dublin, OH

#14 Jul 6, 2011
What a boondoggle. The 50 MW of installed capacity will be lucky to achieve a 20% capacity factor, given the lousy weather most of the time, and no matter how you slice it, night still happens, which drops your capacity factor by 50% right there. So 50 MW becomes an effective 10 MW. That is about 1% of the capacity of a conventional plant. Kind of tough to carry the load with that kind of output.
Thrifty mom

Columbus, OH

#15 Jul 6, 2011
This is a great project. I'm happy to pay 25 cents a month to support it. Y'all probably lose more than that in your washing machine every week. Hardly a big deal.
ralan

Columbus, OH

#16 Jul 6, 2011
Putting a Solar farm a rural area hardly seems 'environmental' in any way.
Large roofs and parking lots that already use land would make the project more environmental.
With Parking lot placement, the cars parked below would be cooler thus using less gas for AC.

Could someone please explain the logic of:
1)filling up a rural area with panels
2)running power lines thru the country to send power to where it is needed.
3) creating places where nature can't thrive due to blocked sunlight.

There are plenty of urban places already in place to accomodate a solar farm, why destroy more?
Just Saying

Newark, OH

#17 Jul 6, 2011
@ralan

This project is being built ontop of an abandoned strip mine. The land is not good for much else; it certainly has no other "development" potential.
Nanny State Losers

Columbus, OH

#18 Jul 6, 2011
Let's see - tax "credits" for buying solar equipment, "tax incentives" to build a plant that supposidely will build the photoelectric cells and panels, "tax incentives" to AEP for building the field, and a "supplemental charge" on your electric bill to pay for the more expensive electricity.

Gee - now I see why solar energy is such a bargain.
Educated One

Columbus, OH

#19 Jul 6, 2011
So in order to replace the EPA proposed death of coal MW's (50,000MW), a typical 1300MW coal fired plant will now need 19,500 acres of solar panels. Solar megawatt per hourly production cost $210, gas $125 and the all-wretched coal $95. Thanks to the tree-huggers, Ms Jackson's EPA dictatorship and Obama's promise to kill coal - we will pay for the $180 billion that it will annually cost to retrofit the existing coal and produce new electricity avenues. We cannot leave well enough alone and now we will get to pay for it.
Educated One

Columbus, OH

#20 Jul 6, 2011
forgot to mention that it is still not scientifically proven that coal is the devil and reason for all of our health reasons. But, agendas need to be pushed and the only way to that in today's world is to overexaggerate everything to get what one wants at the cost of others. Boy our selfish society is just great.
the percentage

Columbus, OH

#21 Jul 6, 2011
diversification requirement for this alternative energy source is miniscule.

Time to open the state 'credits' and 'incentives' to all Ohio homeowners.
UhHuh

Columbus, OH

#22 Jul 6, 2011
Until John Kasich inevitably provides Montgomery Burns a piece of the deal, we should all be okay...for now.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Ted Strickland Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Story: Ohio high court allows vote on racetrack... (Sep '09) Oct '14 Tyler 2
Same-sex marriage arguments flooding federal co... Oct '14 Missylynn 28
NCR dumps Dayton for Atlanta (Jun '09) Oct '14 Tina 18
Welcome to Columbus: Ohio stinks for women Sep '14 TonyD2 30
Democrats find living on minimum wage is tough Aug '14 Anonymous of Indy 493
The path to the Supreme Court for same-sex marr... Aug '14 WeTheSheeple 1
Gay marriage arguments ring a bell in Cincinnati Aug '14 WasteWater 2
More from around the web