JACKSON, N.J. (AP) - A theme park plans to cut down more than 18,000 trees for the construction of what it says will be the largest solar farm in New Jersey.
Six Flags Great Adventure says the facility will generate 21.9 megawatts, or enough to power about 3,100 homes, and capable of meeting all of the park's needs.
The facility will be located east of the safari park in Jackson and is expected to be operational during the second half of 2016.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
A real nice trade , trees for solar energy that is not even proven to be cost effective.
ReplyDeleteWhile I don't advocate removing trees for a photovoltaic system I don't think that your claim that solar energy is not cost effective is valid. I can assure you that mine is. In the first year alone the profit on my system was $550. I paid nothing for my electricity usage. Electricity is probably going to get more expensive and with a conservative analysis I will make at least 14% return on my investment. That is more than just cost effective. It is even better that you can ride by my home and not even know that I have a solar array. But not having an electric bill is thrilling!
ReplyDelete7:59 Who did your installation?
ReplyDelete759-Solar, on a Per KWh and on a Per MWh basis, is more expensive than any other traditional forms of power generation. Solar has the highest levelized capital costs, fixed O&M, and transmission investment. That's for utility scale, the numbers are far worse for a personal/home solar system.
ReplyDeleteROI? A typical home solar setup won't even pay for itself over a 20 year period in Maryland. In fact, after 20 years, you'll still be in the hole.
7:59 ,Bull! I am an electrician who has installed many solar panels. They do not work as advertised, the average panel puts out less than 85 watts half of which you lose in the conversion ,they are prone to failure expensive and horrid to look at.
ReplyDelete"A typical home solar setup won't even pay for itself over a 20 year period in Maryland. In fact, after 20 years, you'll still be in the hole"
ReplyDeleteThis is exactly what we were told by every single one of the few installation companies we contacted. They said the focus is not on savings but a "cleaner" (not clean but cleaner) form of energy is the selling point. On
average, a 3kW Photovoltaic system will take 17.5 years to recoup its initial
investment of $10,500. (that after the 30% federal tax credit.
Without such a credit, the system would take 23 years to pay itself off.) In order to use the A/C it would cost an additional approximate $7000.
Because the average lifespan for a PV system is 20 -25 years, this means that residential users actually lose money.
We don't ever plan on selling but we were also informed due to the "estate" nature of our property, solar panels would actually lower the value because those who are inclined to buy such a bucolic property look at the panels as "monstrosities" and "eyesores."
Check your facts. Mine will have paid for itself in six and a half years.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, it probably won't. That's just what your solar retailer told you. You're basing your figures off of the array capabilities when installed and under ideal weather conditions. Each PV panel will lose approximately 10-15% of it's generating capacity each year. I worked for a large solar company in California for many years and while the technology has improved tremendously over time, it's still not a sound return on investment for residential use.
DeleteSolar farms can work well in corporate installations where they can be overbuilt to compensate for the decreasing efficiency but the average rooftop home installation is not ideal.
To 8:13 Paradise Solar on Snow Hill Road. Great people to work with.
ReplyDeleteTo 8:13 Paradise Solar on Snow Hill Road. Great people to work with.
ReplyDeleteLooking at the facts you realize that wind and solar are really red herrings and will not solve our energy problems. Solar and wind have their uses such as isolated cabins when coupled with a battery system, but economically they do not compete against central generating (ie the utility grid). Proponents of wind and solar ignore all the grid costs that must be maintained to back up solar and wind. I was big on S&W until I read a paper or two it (to which both opponents and proponents agreed) Wind and sun can not be predicted to any degree, so conventional power plants must be maintained and running to backup sun and wind. Shut down a generating plant and unexpected clouds form, whose lights do we shut off. Leave the plants manned and operating as backup and no cost savings are realized. In fact you now will now have double costs W&S and conventional plan. Will help the environment to some degree but financially it does not work.
ReplyDelete7:59 and 8:24. Who is right?
ReplyDeleteWho cares! Never in my life have witness such a bunch people worried about what others chose to do or not do. Mind your own house.
ReplyDelete1005-I have checked the facts, and your claims are not factual.
ReplyDeleteI will let you know in six and a half years. Say what you will, I paid nothing for electricity this year in fact I made over $500 on srec's which means I made a profit. I don't know how you do math but if you spend some time studying Germany as an example they have used solar for a long time and they are very successful at it. All of my equipment came from Germany because they know how to produce quality solar equipment. My panels are warranted to produce 85% of the electricity that they made on day one at year 25. If it is such a losing proposition then why is 70% of Germany's electric made in this manner? Solar arrays are not a replacement for power plants or grids but they are a supplement and one that I will benefit from. There is a business in this county with a rooftop system that paid for itself in three and a half years. That's a fact.
ReplyDeleteMardela hardware store loves its solar panels! The trick is to have enough of them to work! Then you can send electric back to the ultilty co for money back !
ReplyDeleteThe reason the homeowner is saving money is because taxpayers and ratepayers are absorbing a huge part of the cost. On paper, it makes sense for homeowners because of the hidden cost that others bear. So this is everyone's business because we are all subsidizing solar panels.
ReplyDeleteThe reason the trees were cut down is to reap the tax credits. Trees reduce C02 and produce oxygen. This is so ironic, Wake Up America.
ReplyDelete