Posted by anthony.dunk on June 4, 2007, 5:14 am
My electric off-peak water heater just died, so I looked into the cost
of replacing it with a solar water heater. Even with the full
government rebates, the cost is still three times that of installing
an electric water heater! Since the payback period would be about 10
years, and I'm probably going to be moving sometime in the next 5
years or so, I can't justify the expense - even though I'd love to do
the right thing for the environment.
What we need is higher rebates for solar hot water in Australia. If
its was only twice as expensive as electric, I'd definitely go for it.
Posted by Morris Dovey on June 4, 2007, 5:37 am
| What we need is higher rebates for solar hot water in Australia. If
| its was only twice as expensive as electric, I'd definitely go for
Absolutely! Higher government subsidies for my Australian friends! Eh?
Higher taxes first to pay for the rebates? No problem - just raise the
taxes for the people getting the rebates. Seems perfectly fair to me.
Anthony, you'll have to continue taking cold showers for about a year
after your tax increase. Sorry - it was the best that could be done.
Perhaps if you built your own you could have solar hot water _and_ not
need the rebate (nor pay the higher taxes needed to fund the rebate)
_and_ not pay to electrically heat your water...
DeSoto, Iowa USA
Posted by anthony.dunk on June 4, 2007, 5:58 am
Seriously, how many people do you expect to build their own solar hot
water systems !? The whole point about solar hot water is to reduce
climate change, no ? And if its in the interests of society as a whole
- i.e. no catastrophic climate change - then why shouldn't society pay
for people to install environmentally friendly technology like this
through taxes ?
Posted by Steve O'Hara-Smith on June 4, 2007, 7:26 am
On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 22:58:06 -0700
Not really the main point is to reduce dependency on
non-renewable resources that are fast running out (oil, gas, coal).
Consider the case that governments and industry do nothing until the price
of fossil fuel has risen by a factor of 20 and availability has fallen way
below demand. Those with solar heated homes and a wind generator may be the
only private individuals with heat and light.
Climate change is a bogeyman AFAICT. Yes climate change happens
(there have been and probably will again be ice ages) but it is far from
clear that it has anything to do with human activity or CO2 levels (indeed
the best evidence I can find indicates that increased CO2 is a result of
increased global temperature not the other way round). Fossil fuel depletion
OTOH is clearly happening and has everything to do with human activity and
will spell an end to the oil economy we currently enjoy.
OK now let us assume that it is indeed in the interests of society
as a whole (ie everyone) for there to be universal adoption of solar
heating. So in that case either a) those who own properties can buy and
install solar systems or b) those with money can have it taxed, counted and
doled out by swivel servants to buy and install solar systems. Now given
that the groups of people involved in a and b have a very large
intersection and given that the extra swivel servants require paying which
option is cheaper for those that will have to foot the bill ?
Yes spending tax money on the problem is a good idea IMHO but spend
it on researching more and better alternatives to the options we currently
have because they do not seem to fill the gap.
C:>WIN | Directable Mirror Arrays
The computer obeys and wins. | A better way to focus the sun
You lose and Bill collects. | licences available see
Posted by Lee on June 4, 2007, 7:33 am
Solar water heaters have to date been pretty pricey but the last few
weeks I've noticed some selling on eBay. These are the evacuated
tube types. I've been experimenting with these tubes and they are
very impressive. Here's an example:
$245 for the collector. If your current tank is not leaking then
maybe you could retrofit to that. You wouldn't have any backup for
long periods of cloudy whether though.
On Jun 4, 3:58 pm, anthony.d...@gmail.com wrote: