Originally posted by chuckChuck
					
						
						
							
							
							
							
								
								
								
								
									View Post
								
							
						
					
				
				
			
		Announcement
				
					Collapse
				
			
		
	
		
			
				No announcement yet.
				
			
				
	
Coronavirus response can ‘reshape the future of energy,’ IEA says in annual report
				
					Collapse
				
			
		
	Logging in...
Welcome to Agriville! You need to login to post messages in the Agriville chat forums. Please login below.
X
- 
	
	
	
		
	
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
	
		
	
	
	
	Guest
theres those godamn details again, poor chuck !Originally posted by Hamloc View PostNo Chuck2 all you posted was what you claimed the output was. I asked you what it cost to install, what you were getting paid for the electricity and how much you were subsidized all which you refused to answer.
Comment
 - 
	
	
	
		
	
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
	
		
	
	
	
	Guest
its obvious he doesn't read half the drivel he posts or half the posts he criticizesOriginally posted by Hamloc View PostFml too funny, so renewables will meet “80% of demand growthâ€! So this means that renewables will do nothing in relation to existing use of electricity. Is this lost on you Chuck2 or don’t you understand what you cut and paste?
Comment
 - 
	
	
	
		
	
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
	
From the IMF. For those who think fossil fuels aren't subsidized!
According to the IMF Canada subsidies are $43 Billion USD, 2.7% of GDP, $1191 USD per capita.
https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2019/05/02/Global-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies-Remain-Large-An-Update-Based-on-Country-Level-Estimates-46509 https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2019/05/02/Global-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies-Remain-Large-An-Update-Based-on-Country-Level-Estimates-46509
Global Fossil Fuel Subsidies Remain Large: An Update Based on Country-Level Estimates
This paper updates estimates of fossil fuel subsidies, defined as fuel consumption times the gap between existing and efficient prices (i.e., prices warranted by supply costs, environmental costs, and revenue considerations), for 191 countries. Globally, subsidies remained large at $4.7 trillion (6.3 percent of global GDP) in 2015 and are projected at $5.2 trillion (6.5 percent of GDP) in 2017. The largest subsidizers in 2015 were China ($1.4 trillion), United States ($649 billion), Russia ($551 billion), European Union ($289 billion), and India ($209 billion). About three quarters of global subsidies are due to domestic factors—energy pricing reform thus remains largely in countries’ own national interest—while coal and petroleum together account for 85 percent of global subsidies. Efficient fossil fuel pricing in 2015 would have lowered global carbon emissions by 28 percent and fossil fuel air pollution deaths by 46 percent, and increased government revenue by 3.8 percent of GDP.
Comment
 - 
	
	
	
		
	
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
	
Your like Donald Trump Chuck2, you get crazier every day LOL! So basically your article says that because fossil fuels in the above countries weren’t taxed at a high enough level it is considered a subsidy, what a bunch of B.S. So if a country wants to increase economic growth by letting the market decide what fossil fuels are worth they are subsidizing fossil fuels, really? The best part of your cut and paste is how well it illustrates the falsehood of the lefts claim that fossil fuels are highly subsidized, the absence of government pricing intervention or absence of taxes is not a subsidy!!Originally posted by chuckChuck View PostFrom the IMF. For those who think fossil fuels aren't subsidized!
According to the IMF Canada subsidies are $43 Billion USD, 2.7% of GDP, $1191 USD per capita.
https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2019/05/02/Global-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies-Remain-Large-An-Update-Based-on-Country-Level-Estimates-46509 https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2019/05/02/Global-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies-Remain-Large-An-Update-Based-on-Country-Level-Estimates-46509
Global Fossil Fuel Subsidies Remain Large: An Update Based on Country-Level Estimates
This paper updates estimates of fossil fuel subsidies, defined as fuel consumption times the gap between existing and efficient prices (i.e., prices warranted by supply costs, environmental costs, and revenue considerations), for 191 countries. Globally, subsidies remained large at $4.7 trillion (6.3 percent of global GDP) in 2015 and are projected at $5.2 trillion (6.5 percent of GDP) in 2017. The largest subsidizers in 2015 were China ($1.4 trillion), United States ($649 billion), Russia ($551 billion), European Union ($289 billion), and India ($209 billion). About three quarters of global subsidies are due to domestic factors—energy pricing reform thus remains largely in countries’ own national interest—while coal and petroleum together account for 85 percent of global subsidies. Efficient fossil fuel pricing in 2015 would have lowered global carbon emissions by 28 percent and fossil fuel air pollution deaths by 46 percent, and increased government revenue by 3.8 percent of GDP.Last edited by Hamloc; Oct 14, 2020, 07:45.
Comment
 - 
	
	
	
		
	
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
	
Not true I posted all this several months ago. And I will post this again once I have a chance to get more office work done.Originally posted by Hamloc View PostNo Chuck2 all you posted was what you claimed the output was. I asked you what it cost to install, what you were getting paid for the electricity and how much you were subsidized all which you refused to answer.
You can also ask Klause for his numbers. Here are the basics from memory:
My 25kw system puts out about 35,000 kwh per year. Its net metering under the old Sask plan so I get the same price I pay for electricity for the first 10 years. I use a bit more than I produce depending on the year and how many fans I run for grain drying.
I know even without the Saskpower rebate I estimated the long term cost of electricity from my solar system will be around 8 cents per Kwh. We pay around 14 cents to Saskpower.
But there are several things that will change the cost estimate. Life span, I think I used 25 or 30 years, equipment failure and replacement, small annual declines in output.
Comment
 - 
	
	
	
		
	
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
	
		
	
	
	
	Guest - 
	
	
	
		
	
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
	
You write the IMF and tell then your concerns! LOL And you are an economist? Where did you do your degrees?Originally posted by Hamloc View PostYour like Donald Trump Chuck2, you get crazier every day LOL! So basically your article says that because fossil fuels in the above countries weren’t taxed at a high enough level it is considered a subsidy, what a bunch of B.S. So if a country wants to increase economic growth by letting the market decide what fossil fuels are worth they are subsidizing fossil fuels, really? The best part of your cut and paste is how well it illustrates the falsehood of the lefts claim that fossil fuels are highly subsidized, the absence of government pricing intervention or absence of taxes is not a subsidy!!
Comment
 - 
	
	
	
		
	
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
	
Interestingly enough you still haven’t told me what it cost to install and how much government subsidy you received. I can however extrapolate that if your cost of electricity was 8 cents a kwh and you based it on a lifetime of 25 years the cost of your system was $70000 dollars or $2 an installed watt. Still doesn’t tell me how many tax dollars were used to subsidize your installation. Also ground mount or roof mount? Do you change the angle spring and fall?Originally posted by chuckChuck View PostNot true I posted all this several months ago. And I will post this again once I have a chance to get more office work done.
You can also ask Klause for his numbers. Here are the basics from memory:
My 25kw system puts out about 35,000 kwh per year. Its net metering under the old Sask plan so I get the same price I pay for electricity for the first 10 years. I use a bit more than I produce depending on the year and how many fans I run for grain drying.
I know even without the Saskpower rebate I estimated the long term cost of electricity from my solar system will be around 8 cents per Kwh. We pay around 14 cents to Saskpower.
But there are several things that will change the cost estimate. Life span, I think I used 25 or 30 years, equipment failure and replacement, small annual declines in output.Last edited by Hamloc; Oct 14, 2020, 07:53.
Comment
 
- Reply to this Thread
 - Return to Topic List
 
Comment