2007-05-21 09:49:25 · 9 answers · asked by Jaime Kay 1 in Environment ➔ Green Living
Incentives. If there is no money to be made by an action, generally most municipalities, city and federal view any initial expenditures as drains on the economy. But if they are selective about what issues have a long range positive outlook, they should definitely look into solar as well as wind machines. I also know of a few other applications which can be used by individuals even if your govt is not "user-friendly"
2007-05-21 20:09:48 · answer #1 · answered by jobec5 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Have you looked at the price of solar panels and how much it would cost you to produce your household needs. If there is an efficient, dependable, affordable and available solar energy system Arizona would not need to mandate anything. Homeowners, commercial property owners, manufacturers and even you would be buying and installing those systems. Mandating your life and all the lives of the Arizonians is just not a good idea for future freedoms. What if Arizona has a better alternative energy system later, then your mandates are plainly and simply a waste of time and energy and punitive to those less fortunate. If you could use your Yankee ingenuity and make those incredibly cheap efficient solar systems you would make a fortune. Good Luck
2007-05-21 18:47:24 · answer #2 · answered by b w 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In some countries - such as Greece and Israel, it is common to see solar panels on roofs- but they are not the kind that make electricity - Instead, they heat water for showers and other purposes. For many , the solar panels are the only source of hot water. In some places, almost every house has a solar panel - You even see them on hotels - because it makes good economic sense. Also many people in these places don't have a lot of money so they are willing to put up with the inconvenience of not having hot water all the time.
People will use solar energy when they see that it will save them an amount of money that they consider to be significant for the trouble involved. In the U.S. - this means that energy will have to get more expensive before there will be a large scale switch to solar power.
2007-05-21 17:48:41 · answer #3 · answered by Franklin 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I guess they could mandate that all electricity in homes come from solar. Then they can go without electricity as the electric companies get out of the Arizona business. The cost to convert is too great and the cost to maintain is too great. The best that Arizona could do is to offer tax incentives to the electric companies and to homeowners to convert. Also, put in programs to allow homeowners to sell their unused solar electriciy back to the electric companies at something higher than the wholesale rate.
2007-05-21 16:54:35 · answer #4 · answered by A.Mercer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
People should not be forced to use solar energy.
Do you live in Arizona? If so, are you using solar energy?
2007-05-21 20:46:23 · answer #5 · answered by Tony 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Arizona is one of the lowest paying states in the US. Who would pay for this? Sure it would be great--but we'd need to get the government to pay.
2007-05-21 16:53:15 · answer #6 · answered by Holiday Magic 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because with all the deserts, it's perfect for a Nuclear power plant.
2007-05-21 16:52:26 · answer #7 · answered by gosolo9100 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
mandates fines and punishments seem sure to fail in our antagonistic culture. how about rewards and incentives instead.
2007-05-21 18:41:32 · answer #8 · answered by who da wha? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Please explain to me why any government should be allowed to mandate any personal choice.
2007-05-21 19:53:08 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋