Daily Review 14/08/2015

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 pm, August 14th, 2015 - 40 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

Hillary Clinton Bernie Saunders donors

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Don’t forget to be kind to each other.

40 comments on “Daily Review 14/08/2015 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Draco T Bastard 1
    14 August 2015 at 6:52 pm

    Solar bill will help power NZ’s transition to green economy

    Parliament will get to vote on a simple amendment to the Electricity Industry Act that would guarantee households a fair price for any excess renewable electricity they supply back to the grid, the Green Party said today.

    It will be interesting to see what National and Act do but I’m reasonably certain that they’ll both come down on the side of the new private owners of electricity generation.

    The Māori Party and Dunne’s Future may come down on the side of the people.

    • DH 1.1
      14 August 2015 at 8:48 pm

      The Greens seem to be always one step behind on it Draco. Selling power back to the grid isn’t the way to go, that really only works out financially when the Govt mandates an artificially high feed-in tariff like they do in Aus.

      For the average householder its better to figure out ways to use the surplus solar power rather than send it to the grid. That’s not as hard as people might think; just needs a few smarts, some habit changes and a bit of research.

      Two five minute showers in the morning will use about 4kW/hrs of power. With a 2kW water heater that’s two hours to reheat the water after our morning showers. Typically we’d use that power from the grid, the solar panels will barely have started generating power by the time the water is back to temperature.

      It doesn’t make a lot of sense to buy 4kW/hrs off the grid in the morning & then sell it back later in the day at a lower rate. 4kW/hrs is about $1 worth of power and we’re unlikely get more than 50% on feed-ins so we’d be spending $1 per day and receiving back less than 50c from the solar generation.

      Put a timer on the water heater so it turns on around 11am and you’d reduce the feed-in on a 3Kw solar system to bugger all most days. Work out other items you can turn on with a timer, such as washing machine, dishwasher, drier etc, and you’d pretty much dispense with the bother of feed-in tariffs.

      • Draco T Bastard 1.1.1
        14 August 2015 at 10:22 pm

        I don’t view it as a feed in tariff – I view the present set up as the power companies looking to make a profit from other peoples investment and work while those people still lose money.

        You right that the Greens are going about it the wrong way though. The correct way would be to have it so that households and businesses are charged the same rate* for electricity and are paid that amount back for any power that they produce. This has two benefits:

        1. People aren’t ripped off by the power companies as they are now
        2. Households will be far better off financially giving a boost to other areas of the economy

        * Businesses are charged about a third of the rate of households but both use the total same amount so it’s obviously not a question of scale. What this means effectively is that households are subsidising business to a huge amount. Fully two thirds of the power companies income comes from households.

        • ianmac 1.1.1.1
          15 August 2015 at 10:56 am

          Very timely for us as we are trying to decide whether or not to go solar electric. A 3kw unit would cut usage by about 44% and by going onto low user charges the cut in line charges would help. A lot of money though as a capital outlay. About $11,000! To get a guaranteed buy back price would help and later efficient battery storage would also help. Go the Greens Amendment. To be continued.

          • DH 1.1.1.1.1
            16 August 2015 at 9:06 am

            You’d really want to shop around a bit more there ianmac. $11k is quite outrageous for a 3kW system, it also makes solar rather uneconomic.

            If you funded it by adding to the mortgage $11k over 20yrs is about $900 annually. You’d need the panels to generate more than $900 of power each year to make it worthwhile.

            A typical solar system will generate around 1100 kW/hrs annually per Kw of panels, that’s 3300 units for a 3kW system. If you’re feeding it back to the grid at 10c unit that’s only $330 worth of power generated annually. Use that solar power and it’s $825 worth of power at 25c unit.

            You should be able to buy a 3kW system for closer to $5k which is only $400 per year to pay off. Then it starts to add up but only if you use the power.

            • dv 1.1.1.1.1.1
              16 August 2015 at 9:25 am

              We have an installed solar system, and we get about 8% return. Mind you we have a17cent buy back.

            • ianmac 1.1.1.1.1.2
              16 August 2015 at 10:43 am

              You might be right DH.3.16kw $11400 incGST,percent of bill covered 43.09%, annual savings $840. annual output 4666kwh. Return on investment7.37%. Using the Micro System. What do you think DH?
              (I think Solar water is about $5,000.)

              • DH …
                16 August 2015 at 11:48 am

                Solar panels are definitely worth it if you’re going to be in the same house for a long period ianmac, well as long as you get it all for a reasonable price anyway. You just need to do the quiet research; get to know what you’re buying & what you’re getting for your dollar.

                $11k would either be top brands or an unreasonable profit margin (or both). The top brands don’t really gain you much and you need to weigh up the risk/reward picture between the expensive German & Japanese stuff and reasonable Chinese manufactured equipment at half that price.

                • dv …
                  16 August 2015 at 11:58 am

                  Apparently you can remove to panel to your next house- about 1k I was told

                  • ianmac …
                    16 August 2015 at 2:23 pm

                    Yes dv. Wondered about that. In time we could advertise a house for sale excluding solar unit. Then offer it to the house buyer at cost price or take it to the new house. On the other hand a house with solar installed would sell for more and more easily.

        • ianmac 1.1.1.2
          16 August 2015 at 10:36 am

          Draco, I think the power providers argue that they want to charge buyback at the same rate that they buy on the wholesale market, which they say, is about 7cents.

          • DH 1.1.1.2.1
            16 August 2015 at 12:06 pm

            That’s correct ianmac, and the Govt is very unlikely to force them to buy back at above cost. I respect the Greens efforts on this but I can’t see it going anywhere.

            IMO it’s best to think of the grid more as a load balancer and work to export as little back to the grid as possible. It does take some thinking and a little bit of work but it also makes us more aware of power and how we use it which is a good thing IMO.

            • Draco T Bastard 1.1.1.2.1.1
              16 August 2015 at 12:43 pm

              Thinking of the grid as a load balancer is the best reason to make it a government monopoly that maintained and expanded via taxes as it would become an integral part of the necessary infrastructure of the country and competition in it would cost too much – same as roads really.

              • DH …
                16 August 2015 at 1:01 pm

                I don’t see it that way. Grid-tie is only a temporary measure that we use because it works & makes for the lowest capital cost.

                Solar is already way cheaper than mains power, its the cost of storing electricity that presently costs too much. So we use the grid, but that’s not a permanent thing. When a cheap battery (finally) comes on the market we’ll ditch the grid-tie inverter and swap it for an inverter/charger.

                Longer term we’ll be getting off the grid completely. There’s no inflation on sunshine, there is inflation on electricity generation, so there’s only one logical direction this can go.

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  16 August 2015 at 1:23 pm

                  Ah, false economics.

                  Everyone having a battery is going to cost more, in real terms, than having the grid and not using the hydro stations. The hydro stations become the battery. We can point to wind farms as well as they, too, can be turned off.

                  Maintaining and upgrading the grid and even the huge power generators doesn’t really cost that much. In fact, I suspect that it would cost less than the maintaining and replacement of millions of batteries.

                  This is the problem when people view themselves in isolation rather than as a functioning society. More resources get used up rather than it being cheaper but it’s all seen as good as there’s more profit in it.

                  • DH …
                    16 August 2015 at 1:37 pm

                    It’s your economics which are flawed Draco. It does cost that much to maintain and upgrade the grid, and each year it costs more. That’s what inflation does, it increases prices. Sunlight has zero inflation.

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      16 August 2015 at 1:52 pm

                      It does cost that much to maintain and upgrade the grid, and each year it costs more. That’s what inflation does, it increases prices.

                      Actually, increasing productivity means that it costs less.

                      Increasing productivity means that, if all else remains the same, prices should decrease.

                      So why do monetary prices keep going up when real costs keep going down?

  2. Sanctuary 2
    14 August 2015 at 7:33 pm

    Can anyone explain to me why the death of Connor Morris led the news tonight? Morris was a two bit street hoodlum totally inculcated to the ways of a destructive criminal organisation that has contributed precisely nothing constructive to society.

    That a slightly more than ordinary member (it appears his father was/is also a senior member of this gang) of a criminal organisation that relies on casual violence and intimidation should be killed in the utterly banal circumstances of a pointless and squalid drunken street brawl concerns me not a jot; It appears the only point of marginal interest is that his tragically stupid girlfriend of precisely no personal importance is the daughter of a long deceased broadcaster.

    And that is enough for it to lead the news? Really? tell me it isn’t so!

    • Jilly Bee 2.1
      14 August 2015 at 8:33 pm

      ‘Tis the (Elder) Holmes effect I would think.

      • Sanctuary 2.1.1
        14 August 2015 at 8:35 pm

        Does my head in.

        • Anne 2.1.1.1
          14 August 2015 at 10:05 pm

          Me too. Haven’t watched the news since the trial began. I think of the many victims of murderous crimes and how few people cared a hoot about them – especially if they were Maori. But just because this one involved a former celebrity’s daughter we have to endure endless false and cloying stories relating to her every word and deed. If Ms Elder was someone of maturity and integrity she would have sent the media wolves packing a long time ago.

          • Draco T Bastard 2.1.1.1.1
            14 August 2015 at 10:46 pm

            f Ms Elder was someone of maturity and integrity she would have sent the media wolves packing a long time ago.

            If she was any of that she wouldn’t have been hanging out with the Head Hunters.

    • b waghorn 2.2
      14 August 2015 at 8:37 pm

      Drug dealer two the elite of Auckland plus the soap opera value of Paul’s daughter being invloved , at a guess!

    • Tricledrown 2.3
      14 August 2015 at 9:20 pm

      Soap opera news

      • Rodel 2.3.1
        16 August 2015 at 7:28 am

        Soap opera news…yes. I call it easynews. News papers are especially culpable with big visuals and little text. Not evil but not a lot of professional effort required .

    • Draco T Bastard 2.4
      14 August 2015 at 10:42 pm

      And that is enough for it to lead the news? Really? tell me it isn’t so!

      Nope, can’t tell you that because that’s exactly what it appears to be.

      The question that I raised tonight was: Would it have been reported to this depth if it was the person Conner Morris was beating up had died?

      Because I’m pretty sure that the answer to that question would be: Hell NO!!!
      And for the same reason that this one was so massively over reported.

  3. Pat 3
    14 August 2015 at 8:20 pm

    Gerry dear – now listen here –
    ‘Tis very sad to see
    The troubles mounting daily
    For your precious EQC.

    Do not blame the builders –
    For it may come to pass
    That some of them were members
    Of your High School woodwork class!

    The fault lies so much nearer –
    Just accept it like a man,
    And plead for our forgiveness
    ‘Ere more sh%t hits the fan.

    To us it is so obvious-
    You are in it to the hilt –
    And your legacy will long remain
    In houses Gerry-built.

    anon

  4. CnrJoe 4
    14 August 2015 at 9:01 pm

    (an exchange from twitter just now)

    – “Glad we got beef tonight cos we didn’t want lamb, those suckers are all in Saudi Arabia anyway” – John Key, Warehouse Gala dinner #TWGgala

    – NO! He didn’t really make that joke? Did he?

    – honest he did. He’s now making a case for flag change

  5. maui 5
    14 August 2015 at 9:20 pm

    Sanders overtakes Hillary in New Hampshire polling, was unthinkable a couple of months ago:
    http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/us_politics/2015/08/poll_bernie_sanders_surges_ahead_of_hillary_clinton_in_nh_44_37

  7. greywarshark 7
    15 August 2015 at 4:09 pm

    A nasty headline in a British on line paper. Russia ‘preparing for war’ against Britain and Nato as Ukraine conflict escalates
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/597746/russia-nato-war-michael-fallon-ukraine
    Is followed by a couple of paras talking about an organisation called a think tank (with apparently the name ‘The European Leadership’), outside the government, which is talking up war with Russia.

    A leading European think tank has said a Russian military exercise in March demonstrated that Russia “is actively preparing for a conflict with Nato”.
    The European Leadership network also claimed a similar exercise by Nato in June indicated that the two powers were training their forces to get to grips with each other’s strengths and military plans.

    Further down there was a picture of the Defence Secretary who should be called Fatuous Fallon, looking smug as if he has just made a good play in golf.
    Questions:
    Do these politicians take their job seriously?
    Does that job include conducting politics so as to maintain strength, co-operate as much as possible with other countries, and limit moves that involve avoidable conflict?
    Do they have to do some sort of political studies at uni which involve international relations and conflict deflation?
    And does government discourage the role of outside advisors who are not beholden to the people, and have their own agendas different from those of the taxpayers?