If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Denver Post)   Federal government attempts to auction "solar rights," with predictable results   (denverpost.com) divider line 70
    More: Amusing  
•       •       •

10455 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Oct 2013 at 4:18 PM (44 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



70 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-24 04:23:13 PM
"We are going to have to regroup and figure out what didn't work," said Maryanne Kurtinaitis, renewable-energy program manager in the BLM's Colorado office.

I'm gonna go ahead and bet that the solution is more government.  Just like everything else.
 
2013-10-24 04:23:48 PM
not exactly accurate subby...gotta read AND understand the effing article these days.
 
2013-10-24 04:26:16 PM
Snows a lot in the Winter around there. And the Summer monsoons are like clockwork. Not seeing much sense in building solar there.
 
2013-10-24 04:29:25 PM
Come on, people. This is quality surface area. In some places you'd pay double or triple what we're asking for this particular plane of area exposed to the sun.
 
2013-10-24 04:29:55 PM
metrouk2.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-10-24 04:32:10 PM
So can I buy the solar energy rights to the land and then sue because all those federally owned trees are stealing it?
 
2013-10-24 04:33:02 PM

Treygreen13: Come on, people. This is quality surface area. In some places you'd pay double or triple what we're asking for this particular plane of area exposed to the sun.


Well, sure, but in this particular area there really isn't a lot of demand. I can give give you $300.
 
2013-10-24 04:33:53 PM
How about nope, BLM. Is nope good with you? We're going to go with nope.
 
2013-10-24 04:34:42 PM
If the federal government was serious about restricting solar power, they would be packing up Indians in Fema trailers and taking them out of the stinking desert already.
 
2013-10-24 04:36:08 PM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: So can I buy the solar energy rights to the land and then sue because all those federally owned trees are stealing it?


Sue the folks across the street who have solar panels and/or curtains pointed toward your panels collecting/blocking that reflected light!
 
2013-10-24 04:36:51 PM
If they guaranteed no impediments, there would be investors.
 
2013-10-24 04:38:16 PM
Naw, you can only go there at night.
 
2013-10-24 04:41:53 PM

Maud Dib: Snows a lot in the Winter around there. And the Summer monsoons are like clockwork. Not seeing much sense in building solar there.


282 days of sunshine a year.  65 days a year with measurable precipitation (and they are typically, as you note, the late Spring monsoons, which last for like an hour or so).

Good place for solar.
 
2013-10-24 04:41:57 PM
Just like cattle grazing rights, right?
MORONS.
Who comes up with this nonsense?
 
2013-10-24 04:50:04 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: Just like cattle grazing rights, right?
MORONS.
Who comes up with this nonsense?


Is that a Rain-Barrel you have there?
 
2013-10-24 04:52:03 PM

paygun: "We are going to have to regroup and figure out what didn't work," said Maryanne Kurtinaitis, renewable-energy program manager in the BLM's Colorado office.

I'm gonna go ahead and bet that the solution is more government.  Just like everything else.


Yawn
 
2013-10-24 04:56:02 PM
Sure you can buy the rights to the land..but good luck being able to build without some special interest group going nut job and protesting it.
 
2013-10-24 04:56:20 PM
Land rights for mining, that I understand, but solar rights,  that's about as asinine as selling wind rights... The whole idea blows...
 
2013-10-24 05:04:45 PM

pkrzycki: Land rights for mining, that I understand, but solar rights,  that's about as asinine as selling wind rights... The whole idea blows...


www.cineol.net

Linus Caldwell: (Mr. Yen) owns all of the air south of Beijing.
Abigail Sponder: (disbelieving). The air?
Linus Caldwell: Let me put it to you this way: try building something taller than three stories in the Tiangjin province, and see if his name comes up.
 
2013-10-24 05:09:59 PM
Next up, Oxygen rights in the atmosphere.  And they'll throw in the nitrogen for free!
 
2013-10-24 05:14:53 PM

Random Anonymous Blackmail: Sure you can buy the rights to the land..but good luck being able to build without some special interest group going nut job and protesting it.


This is what held them up more than anything else.  This being federal land, the nuts will be harassing you for years.  The ultra right wing "we don't like solar" morons, or the super left wing "any form of energy is bad, even solar and wind" folks.  The lawsuits will keep you busy for 5 years before you could install the first panel.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-10-24 05:19:26 PM
The San Luis Valley sites did have access to transmission, and the minimum bid prices for the parcels ranged from about $3,350 an acre to $4,280 - low prices, Borngrebe said.

That sounds like a high price to me, considering the desolate location. Apparently bidders agreed.
 
2013-10-24 05:20:09 PM

Random Anonymous Blackmail: Sure you can buy the rights to the land..but good luck being able to build without some special interest group going nut job and protesting it.


Does anyone around here read the article before posting any more?
 
2013-10-24 05:22:12 PM
Answer is simple Obamapower. JUst get men with guns to force people to use it.
 
2013-10-24 05:23:23 PM

Pincy: Random Anonymous Blackmail: Sure you can buy the rights to the land..but good luck being able to build without some special interest group going nut job and protesting it.

Does anyone around here read the article before posting any more?


We certainly couldn't do it any less.
 
2013-10-24 05:25:55 PM

Pincy: Random Anonymous Blackmail: Sure you can buy the rights to the land..but good luck being able to build without some special interest group going nut job and protesting it.

Does anyone around here read the article before posting any more?


What do you mean "any more"?
 
2013-10-24 05:27:57 PM
Tax incentives, no-interest government loans, subsidies and mandatory green energy portfolios to the rescue.
 
2013-10-24 05:29:28 PM
DAMMIT, COHAGEN
 
2013-10-24 05:29:55 PM
I bought the Sun.
 
2013-10-24 05:32:11 PM

Pincy: Random Anonymous Blackmail: Sure you can buy the rights to the land..but good luck being able to build without some special interest group going nut job and protesting it.

Does anyone around here read the article before posting any more?


encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com
 
2013-10-24 05:35:13 PM
sure, "Watch me make this pencil disappear . . ."

www.moviequotesandmore.com

about what I would do if offered, "The Sunlight to bid on"
DNRFA
 
2013-10-24 05:38:16 PM

lockers: How about nope, BLM. Is nope good with you? We're going to go with nope.


Because there's no future in renewable energy, amirite?
 
2013-10-24 05:38:28 PM

Maud Dib: Snows a lot in the Winter around there. And the Summer monsoons are like clockwork. Not seeing much sense in building solar there.


Other than the 300 sunny days a year.  And keeping snow off of a steeply sloped, black surface is easier than you might think.  My parents use solar to heat their house in Colorado and getting the snow off of the panels is one thing they never have to worry about, if you don't mind being woken by an avalanche shortly after sunrise.

See that that valley below the center of Colorado, marked in red to indicate optimum solar availability?  That's the area they're talking about:

www.c2es.org
 
2013-10-24 05:40:00 PM

AliceBToklasLives: Maud Dib: Snows a lot in the Winter around there. And the Summer monsoons are like clockwork. Not seeing much sense in building solar there.

282 days of sunshine a year.  65 days a year with measurable precipitation (and they are typically, as you note, the late Spring monsoons, which last for like an hour or so).

Good place for solar.


But solar developers will spend their money developing the best places first.  Once this good place becomes the best due to development taking up better spots, then development will occur.
 
2013-10-24 05:41:43 PM
If I'm gonna build a solar panner whatsit, I'm going to build it in a place where it never snows and where I can get the maximum number of daylight hours every year.  That means I'm gonna build as far south as possible, not in Colorado.  There's whole chunks of empty Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas where I don't have to worry about snow, earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc.
 
2013-10-24 05:52:15 PM

jtown: There's whole chunks of empty Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas where I don't have to worry about snow, earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc.


Well, some of Texas.

smokeys-trail.com
 
2013-10-24 05:55:09 PM

Treygreen13: jtown: There's whole chunks of empty Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas where I don't have to worry about snow, earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc.

Well, some of Texas.

[smokeys-trail.com image 624x417]


That graphic shows killer events, not total events.  It therefore is weighted too far east near more densely populated areas.  For building solar installations you want to look at total events whether killer or not.
 
2013-10-24 06:01:43 PM

pkrzycki: Land rights for mining, that I understand, but solar rights,  that's about as asinine as selling wind rights... The whole idea blows...


You understand it is a manner of 'renting' the land for a specific purpose, and restricting what they do on the land only to a certain activity.  They would be able to go in, install the panels, connecting wiring and only return for maintenance reasons.  The government would also be able to require the panels to be at a certain height if that would allow the wild life to go on without issue.  It's like you own a house on a lake with a private boat ramp, and you sell boat ramp rights to an avid fisher.  You don't own the lake, but for a price you can control who uses it from your property.
 
2013-10-24 06:04:03 PM

Treygreen13: jtown: There's whole chunks of empty Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas where I don't have to worry about snow, earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc.

Well, some of Texas.

[smokeys-trail.com image 624x417]


Exactly.  That nub under New Mexico is perfect.  That nub is bigger than a lot of states and countries.  :)
 
2013-10-24 06:05:46 PM

Teufel Ritter: Treygreen13: jtown: There's whole chunks of empty Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas where I don't have to worry about snow, earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc.

Well, some of Texas.

[smokeys-trail.com image 624x417]

That graphic shows killer events, not total events.  It therefore is weighted too far east near more densely populated areas.  For building solar installations you want to look at total events whether killer or not.


*sigh*
Fine.

www.insurancerescue.com
 
2013-10-24 06:10:32 PM

edmo: Treygreen13: Come on, people. This is quality surface area. In some places you'd pay double or triple what we're asking for this particular plane of area exposed to the sun.

Well, sure, but in this particular area there really isn't a lot of demand. I can give give you $300.


Actually, this.  $3350 to $4250 an acre?  $335 to $425 and now we're talking.  Oh, yeah, pre-build the grid tie in - "close by" only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades and Thermonuclear weapons.

Then maybe they'll see some bids.
 
2013-10-24 06:10:58 PM
You can't OWN the sun, man.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-10-24 06:11:07 PM
Treygreen13

The site for your graph implies it's used for insurance risk rating.

In New England the building codes don't even consider those tornado wind speeds. Residential code in Connecticut (when I looked in the mid-1990s) was to withstand barely hurricane force, more or less, with 90+ mph required along Long Island Sound where a hurricane could hit at strength.
 
2013-10-24 06:12:50 PM

Treygreen13: jtown: There's whole chunks of empty Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas where I don't have to worry about snow, earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc.

Well, some of Texas.

[smokeys-trail.com image 624x417]


If you look at the map a couple comments above yours, the solar "sweet spot" of Texas just happens to also be the tornado-free corner.
 
2013-10-24 06:13:15 PM

ZAZ: Treygreen13

The site for your graph implies it's used for insurance risk rating.

In New England the building codes don't even consider those tornado wind speeds. Residential code in Connecticut (when I looked in the mid-1990s) was to withstand barely hurricane force, more or less, with 90+ mph required along Long Island Sound where a hurricane could hit at strength.


Someone just said they wanted to go somewhere pretty safe from tornados, like Texas. I grabbed the first chart that worked and now I'm not going to argue residential code compliance. Let's just say don't put anything that you don't want to blow away in Texas.
 
2013-10-24 06:16:01 PM

Teufel Ritter: But solar developers will spend their money developing the best places first. Once this good place becomes the best due to development taking up better spots, then development will occur.


If you look at the map directly above this comment, the San Luis Valley is the one part of Colorado that is as good as Arizona or New Mexico for solar.
 
2013-10-24 06:16:13 PM

Treygreen13: Teufel Ritter: Treygreen13: jtown: There's whole chunks of empty Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas where I don't have to worry about snow, earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc.

Well, some of Texas.

[smokeys-trail.com image 624x417]

That graphic shows killer events, not total events.  It therefore is weighted too far east near more densely populated areas.  For building solar installations you want to look at total events whether killer or not.

*sigh*
Fine.

[www.insurancerescue.com image 850x610]


Lol.  My original comment was not meant to imply that I disagreed with yours, just pointing out the issue.  Thanks for finding that additional image, though.
 
2013-10-24 06:18:26 PM

Treygreen13: Come on, people. This is quality surface area. In some places you'd pay double or triple what we're asking for this particular plane of area exposed to the sun.


You're not buying the surface area, you're buying the fact that there's nothing of value underneath it.
 
2013-10-24 06:19:17 PM

flondrix: Teufel Ritter: But solar developers will spend their money developing the best places first. Once this good place becomes the best due to development taking up better spots, then development will occur.

If you look at the map directly above this comment, the San Luis Valley is the one part of Colorado that is as good as Arizona or New Mexico for solar.


No.  It is nearly as good.  Not as good.  There are spots with better weather; once those spots are taken, these will be developed.  It looks like a good spot, just not yet the best one left.
 
2013-10-24 06:30:34 PM
Is there a minimum bid?
 
Displayed 50 of 70 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report