Welcome to SP!  -
Areas & RangesMountains & RocksRoutesImagesArticlesTrip ReportsGearOtherPeoplePlans & PartnersWhat's NewForum

Owen's Valley Solar

Regional discussion and conditions reports for the Golden State. Please post partners requests and trip plans in the California Climbing Partners forum.

Owen's Valley Solar

Postby tarol » Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:46 am

There is a push to zone much of the floor of the Owen's Valley for solar development -

Learn more here: http://www.deepestvalley.com/

Not sure how y'all feel about views like these being affected, but I don't like it. I'm not against solar, but prefer it be located on areas already disturbed, and goodness knows there is plenty of that already in Southern CA.

http://www.summitpost.org/sierra-100-mi ... eak/448920
User Avatar

Posts: 90
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 2:07 pm
Location: Northeast, Oregon, United States
Thanked: 1 time in 1 post

Re: Owen's Valley Solar

Postby norco17 » Tue Mar 18, 2014 4:28 am

Why can't people mount their solar panels to their roof? I find it funny that the people pushing for solar are also the ones pushing for a cleaner environment; yet they can destroy thousands of square miles of desert to put in a few panels.
User Avatar

Posts: 847
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 12:53 am
Location: riverside, California, United States
Thanked: 200 times in 135 posts

Re: Owen's Valley Solar

Postby MoapaPk » Tue Mar 18, 2014 5:59 am

I would like to see an engineering analysis, for the cost per household for solar energy if it's self-provided, or provided through a utility with square miles of panels.I know that analysis is out there.

A start:

We live in Vegas, and considered a roof-top installation for years -- but the initial outlay (>$20k) is daunting. We opted to spend the money on other passive energy-saving measures (insulation e.g.) and more efficient AC.

I'm guessing there is a much greater redundancy of electrical components with individual installations.

It is a little disturbing to see each local playa get filled with panels. Some years ago, after 1000 square miles of BLM land was released for solar development, I looked at the real production of power per acre. I figured if all those 1000 square miles were used for a mix of PV and steam-generation solar plants, they could replace only 3% of US energy consumption at best.
User Avatar

Posts: 7770
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 7:42 pm
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
Thanked: 784 times in 516 posts

Re: Owen's Valley Solar

Postby peninsula » Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:52 pm

We are having the same problem with commercial solar installations cluttering up an otherwise uncluttered landscape in eastern San Diego county. If one has an all-electric home and lives in a sunny environment, home-owner installations are most cost effective if one qualifies for a 30% federal tax credit as did I. My ground installation will pay for itself in 12 years. (I've done the math based on the first two years of performance.) The idea is to stay out of the more expensive tier 3 and 4 billing. If one over-builds their installation and produces more than they need, the electric utility will buy it back at a wholesale rate, but that is not enough to generate a return on investment. In L.A., if one attempts adding onto their home greater than 500 square feet, they can be required to install solar in order to obtain a building permit. Home solar is cost effective under many circumstances. Commercial solar installations are an eye sore and I am absolutely against them, especially if they are visible to local homeowners who will not only suffer a loss in the otherwise pristine landscape, but also lost value in their home.
User Avatar

Posts: 1724
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 8:10 am
Location: San Diego, California, United States
Thanked: 81 times in 54 posts

Return to California


  • Related topics
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

© 2006-2015 SummitPost.org. All Rights Reserved.