Friday, December 4, 2020
Home Right Column Obama goes solar -- to power only 22 light bulbs?! Report: 'White...

Obama goes solar — to power only 22 light bulbs?! Report: ‘White House installed enough solar panels ‘to power twenty-two 100-watt bulbs for 20 hours each day’

-

Report Reprinted From: http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/they-re-back-solar-panels-now-atop-the-white-house.html

[Update: Article reprint below includes revised figures reflecting the corrected number of light bulbs that could be powered by the solar panels.]

They’re Back! Solar Panels now atop the White House

The Reprinted Article Below Was Written by CCD (Climate Change Dispatch) Editor on .

Carter with his solar panels

Obama is officially the new Jimmy Carter of presidents

A solar panel array now adorns the roof of the White House and will produce an elephantine amount of solar power when the sun is actually shining: about 44 kilowatt hours of electricity a day. 

If 44 kilowatts hours sounds like a lot of energy, it isn’t. The average home consumes about 30 kilowatt hours (kWh) of power each day. The average annual electricity consumption for a U.S. residential utility customer was 10,837 kWh according to the EIA for 2012 or 30 kWh per day average.

Slightly less than the 44 kilowatt hours per day that will be produced by the new solar panels adorning the White House. According to data from TradeWind Energy, one 100-watt light bulb running for 20 hours will use two kilowatt-hours of electricity (100 watts x 20 hours = 2,000 watt-hours = 2 kWh).

In other words, the White House installed enough solar panels to power twenty-two 100-watt light bulbs for 20 hours each day. And if you’ve ever been inside the White House, or seen it from a distance, you’ll notice it’s lit up like a klieg light. Excerpted from Boston.com:

Citing security and other concerns, the White House won’t say how many panels now encase the top of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. or how much they cost. But the panels are expected to generate 6.3 kilowatts of solar power whenever the sun shines, the White House said, improving the building’s energy efficiency.

…snip…

The project required technicians to first drill down to the concrete on the White House roof, then use epoxy glue and threaded rods to install a gridded subassembly onto which the solar panels could be secured. The solar components, converters and the labor to install the panels were all domestic, the White House said, declining to name any of the companies involved in the project.

If the average American knew how much this cost the taxpayer, they’d realize this is not cost-effective at all. Which is specifically why the White House refuses to release the numbers.

Obama seeks to use his personal example to spur American families and businesses to do more to reduce reliance on foreign energy and cut emissions blamed for global warming.

The new solar array, not seen since the Jimmy Carter Administration, and later, George W. Bush (who used it to power a maintenance building and heat some pool water), will be able to power 22 100-watt bulbs for 20 hours (unless it rains, snows, or is a cloudy day), far less than his two predecessors.

“Being at the White House, we do have some security concerns. We can’t cover the entire roof, although that would be good from an energy savings standpoint,” said James Doherty, the White House usher.

The only way this would be energy efficient is if Obama covered the entire roof, and all the acres of land surrounding the White House, and threw in a couple of wind turbines. But that would be plain ugly for one of the most prestigious presidential residences.

But not ugly enough for Americans to spend vast amounts of money to cover their roofs with solar panels and other so-called clean technology.

#

End article reprint

Related Links: 

Obama’s War on U.S. Energy – According to the Institute for Energy Research, “solar energy provides two-tenths of one percent of the total energy consumed in the United States. While the amount of solar electricity capacity in the U.S. has increased in recent years…it still only accounts for 0.1% of net electricity generated…the least among the renewable sources of hydroelectric, biomass, wind and solar.”

James Lovelock concedes: ‘A lot of investment in green technology has been a giant scam, if well intentioned’

Bjorn Lomborg: ‘The rich world generates just 0.8% of its energy from solar and wind, far from meeting even minimal demand’

Watch Now: Bjorn Lomborg on Fox Business: ‘Fracking, just in the U.S., reduces carbon emissions more than all the solar and wind in the entire world’

Report: Renewable energy in decline, less than 1% of global energy

Report: Obama’s solar energy revolution failing to take hold – ‘Since 2009, only 20 solar power plants are on track to being built out of 365 applications to build such plants on federal lands, reports the Los Angeles Times. Only three large-scale facilities have gone online — one in Nevada and two in California. Furthermore, the first federal lands auction for solar developers last fall failed to attract a single bid.’

 

468 COMMENTS

      • Shoot, with all the trades (i.e. Unions) involved, I am sure it cost a lot more than that. I once saw these guys at work. It took three guys to change a light bulb. A journeyman electrician to “teach” the apprentice electrician how to change the light bulb. Ok, I can suspend a little disbelief in reality. So, I then asked about the third guy. He was an apprentice carpenter who had to move the ladder for the electricians. I thought as I walked away, I guess they are thankful that the apprentice carpenter had already been “trained” to move the ladder or else it would of taken 4 guys to change a light bulb.

      • You think this bozo and his consuming wife care about savings. This is all for show for the lefty green freaks that contribute to the Dems to show them that they caaaaaare.
        Ahahahaha let the good times roll….

    • I would bet it cost the US taxpayers 10 times that much for something that won’t ever save any money. It was a govt. contract after all. It wasn’t just a normal solar panel installation on somebody’s rooftop either. That would have cost $20-40K to begin with. This was a installation where people needed background checks and clearances plus the installation itself was highly specialized bc of the construction of the White House and it’s security aspects built in. It had to be $200-250K to do this and I wouldn’t be surprised if it cost more, all to power 6 light bulbs. But don’t forget, who uses 50 watt bulbs? A 40 watt bulb is very dim and I don’t know if I have ever seen a 50 watt bulb, but 60 watt bulbs are common. So, it would be enough to power 5 60 watt bulbs, which is less power than I have on in my den right now typing this comment.

      So, the question is, would you spend a quarter of a million dollars upfront in order to power one room of your house for free for the next 10-20 years? Yeah, me neither.

    • Good chance it’s going to turn out even worse than that, Kihafidhina1776.
      The amortization of the original capital costs is almost certainly VASTLY understated by virtually all analyses gov’t subsidized solar installations provide — because of excessively optmistic “estimates” for both maintence costs AND the working lifespan of the equipment. Furthermore, no one calculates the OPPORTUNITY cost of taking that money away from other more efficient energy production methods already in use and well proven.
      Furthermore, it is pretty much impossible to find a true “energy accounting’ which includes the energy CONSUMED in manufacturing the solar panels, which really ought to be subtracted from what they produce to get their true NET production of energy — because this bit of honesty, like all the others which are characteristically omitted, will mean the “total” (ie the vastly underestimated) costs would have to be divided over fewer units of energy and thus make the energy appear more expensive, and thus a tad closer to its true cost, instead of granting solar’s advocates yet another fudge factor to falsely reduce their official figure for the cost of its energy.
      The biggest unknown, and probably the most important, is all the hundreds of billions of dollars wasted on this boondoggle which dries up the funds available for research into productive areas. Most of the research money is nowadays doled out by government, and it is a gravy train for 4th rate scientists to make a good living doing useless make-work down dead ends. Basically, there is a single mind set behind the allocation of most energy research funding, and it is the wrong mind set to boot. There are undoubtedly thousands if not more people out there who have, or would have come up with, valid ideas to pursue in other directions which they could never get funding for, so they stopped thinking about energy improvements and switched careers, or acquiesced in the “politically correct” criterion for science research in order to keep bread on their families’ tables, and live demoralized lives in careers where the best ideas of their intelligent brains will never be permitted to be investigated.
      If it weren’t for too big, too economically involved government’s heavy and stupid hand, the average American would currently be living the lifestyle which is affordable only to someone with a net worth of over $2 million. Someone did that calculation, and in my opinion it is a tremendous understatement. We would probably also have life expectancies much, much longer than they actually are, and medical costs would CERTAINLY be TREMENDOUSLY lower than they are now.
      More and more and ever more solid evidence keeps on coming in (as if we need still more!!) even after the entire need for alternative energy has been conclusively disproven a thousand different ways, any one of which would have been sufficient.
      Alternative energy is the spawn of the Anthropogenic Global Warming hoax. All material economic goods, ALL, require energy for their production. This scam continues to linger because it is going to make a small elite of our race into UNPARALLEDED King Midases, wealthy beyond imagination, and also give them STUPENDOUS power over the course of the political future of the whole planet. The stakes are higher than any scam or even any economic endeavor of history. ALL production is ultimately for consumption, and ALL of that requires energy. EVERYTHING THAT EVERYONE OR ANYONE, ANYWHERE, HAS OR HAS CONSUMED, used or uses energy. Do NOT underestimate the super wealth that those at the foundation of this political scam are aiming at. It is their SOLE goal and aim, and the sole reason this grand hoax was invented in the first place.
      Al Gore, Jim Hansen, Michael Mann, the “scientists” at East Anglia University in England who maintain and INTENTIONALLY FUDGE (this is an irrefutably proven fact) the historic data upon which all the claimGlobal Warming theory rests., Prof Steven Schneider of Stanford Univ; et all, ad nauseum are ALL of them outright intentional liars. Gore’s movie, which won him a Nobel prize decided by the same people who gave Yassir Arafat (terrorist extraordinaire who “invented” the idea of hijacking and blowing up commercial aircraft) the Peace prize — that Gore documentary was proven in British courts to be loaded with gross errors and outright falsehoods and is prohibited from being shown in English schools unless the information exposing its lies is also supplied. Meanwhile, Gore himself saw his net worth go from under $2 million in the eyar 2000 to AT LEAST a bit over $100 million before 2010. ALL from his pushing of this hoax and scamming the investing public with “green” firms he and his pals create in order to loot them of the grant money they get from Gore’s political pals — before they go bust.
      Meanwhile, REAL scientists concur that we’re entering a very significant period of global COOLING of at least a couple decades, which could very easily be the start of another 90,000 year ice age. We should be spending our money building inventories of conventitional fuels and funding nuclear power and informing the public so people can take their own measures.. We are doing EXACTLY the opposite of what we shouled be doing. This WILL result in at least a few hundred thousand unnecessary deaths of elderly and poorer Americans, and could cause the deaths of MANY millions if worse moves JUST A BIT closer to worst.
      And the enviro airheads, like sheep, still cling to their religion, DENIERS of the scientific facts which a MAJORITY of real scientists in relevant fields understand to be true. Toleration of the continuance of this boondoggle could EASILY, and very literally, result in the deaths of quite a few people you know, no matter who you are.

    • It’s not about that, it’s about advancing the technology. If cost were always the barrier to doing ANYTHING, we’d all be riding horses now. Ironically, the world would probably be better off for it, though.

  1. “Obama seeks to use his personal example to spur American families and businesses to do more to reduce reliance on foreign energy and cut emissions blamed for global warming.”

    Hey, Barry. Maybe a few less taxpayer-funded fund raisers and fewer vacations for the first lady and her mother would reduce emissions more significantly than installing solar panels on the White House to light a half dozen 50 watt bulbs . . .

  2. calling o’dumpo a fool is much to kind! he’s an idiot with the brain of a worm. people are finally realizing what a fake was ‘selected’ to lead the once greatest country on earth. didn’t take but 6 years to dumb it down to his level! aren’t we so proud?!?!

  3. Check your units. 6.3 kilowatts power or 6.3 kilowatt-hours of energy per day? If it’s 6.3 kilowatts, times 8 or 10 hours (average power on a long summer day) it’s fifty or 60 kilowatt-hours, enough to power fifty or sixty such bulbs for 20 hours, or maybe 3% of the average lighting power of the White House. A paltry sum, but let’s get the units right – power x time = energy. I see this omission all the time, and it confuses the story.

    And by the way, in winter or heavy overcast (if it cuts the useful wavelengths of sunlight) the panels will be useless. And if installed by an Obama crony, I am sure job will cause water damage from leaking mounting points, that will cost far more than the panels…

  4. Ahh.. Yet another journalist that doesn’t understand the basic physics of the subject they want to lecture us on. Kilowatt’s aren’t energy they are power. The technical inaccuracies, 3 sentence into your article, prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you have no idea what your talking about and have no business lecturing anyone.

    • I see this all the time, from people on both sides of this argument. If it’s 6.3 kw it’s still a paltry sum, but you’re right, it might be 100 50-watt bulbs when the sun is out; still a small part of the WH energy usage.

      • Fair enough. The WH certainly uses more energy than the average home, and can’t possibly have the roof space to generate what they do use.
        As an example however.. put 6kw netmetered on every capable roof in the country and it’s no longer paltry..

  5. Whoever wrote this article obviously knows nothing about the energy industry and the difference between installed capacity and energy production and consumption. I am not an Obama fan but your math is very far from correct.

  6. There is enough wrong with Obama without having to make stuff up. A 6.3 kW system will produce 6.3kW *20hours = 126 kW-hours in 20 hours. A 50 watt light bulb will consume 50W*20hours = 1kWh in 20 hours. So a 6.3kW system can run 126 50W bulbs, not 6. In fact, a 6.3kW system in a sunny area will produce more energy than a 3000 sqft home with electric pool pumps consumes. I know because I have one.

  7. So presumably the panels generate 6 kilowatt-hours a day, not 6 kilowatts. That’s a surprisingly small number; I’d expect the White House, which spends money like water, would go for a much larger array. Or is this article screwy, and it means it generates 6 kilowatts under maximum sunlight — which will generate far more than 6 kilowatt-hours during a sunny day? That sounds more likely to be the case.

    The vital question for any energy project is whether it produces more energy than it consumes, when you take into consideration manufacture and maintenance. In this case, obviously running a few lights for free will never justify the costs of installation and periodic cleaning.

    I wonder where they’ll get the panels. Not from Solyndra! This is probably just another of Obama’s programs to maintain full employment in China.

  8. While the world laughs thinking this Obama guy is a joke, the reality is that we are the joke for putting him in office and for putting up with his arrogant incompetence and obvious contempt for the American taxpayer.

    • Mr. turn down the heat and put on a sweater .. we couldn’t afford the heat under Carter .. we had no choice .. nearly froze to death. Now we have another POS hurting American Citizens .. build the D. pipeline!

  9. This article has confused a kilowatt and a kilowatt-hour. If the sun shone for 12 hours, and it generated 6.3 kilowatts, this would be 76 kilowatt-hours, enough to power 76 of those supposed light bulbs for 20 hours. Obviously its still inefficient. Also, the average home should use some number of kilowatt-hours not kilowatts.

  10. Marc Morano doesn’t seem to know the difference between power and energy. Kilowatts are power, which is energy per time period. The energy generated by a 6.3 kilowatt panel over 4 hours of sunshine is 25.2 kilowatt-hours, so the panel is about right for a single home.

  11. The author is confusing kilowatts (power) with kilowatt-hours (energy). Power is the rate at which energy is used or produced.

    A 6.3 kilowatt array would generate roughly 6.3 kilowatts of power at noon on a sunny day. If it generated this amount of power for one hour, then the energy generated would be 6.3 kilowatt-hours. But over the course of a sunny day, it would probably generate at least 27 kilowatt-hours of energy.

  12. A 6.3 kW solar array can generate a maximum of 6.3 kW of electricity as long as there is full sunlight. In a sunny place – like where I live – we average about 7 hours of good sun a day, meaning that a 6.3 kW array would generate about 44.1 kilowatt HOURS of electricity a day – or enough to power roughly 44 50 watt bulbs for 20 hours a day.

    It’s called MATH…

    • It probably cost well over 1 million dollars to power how ever many light bulbs for 20 hours. Wow we saved a lot of money there! How many decades will it take to realize the savings? Do that math.

  13. BLM, failed bids on Federal land for solar projects, China, Harry Reed, Nevada, White House roof. Yup, it all kinda of makes sense now, doesn’t it? I’ll bet Barry really hates it when a plan doesn’t come together.

  14. A 6.3 kW array is pretty nice and can produce a large percentage of an average home’s power needs. And one can often get tax breaks for purchasing the panels. However, the power comes when it is not needed (except perhaps for air conditioning). One solution is to sell it back to the grid. Some power companies will buy it back at a premium because it is solar and they can boost their prices for green energy. Of course, that expense is passed on to the other consumers; particularly those who cannot afford their own solar arrays. In the end, tax money is spent on rich people’s hobbies and the poor pay more for their power.

  15. This is another reason why journalism majors should take science classes. Energy usage is measured in kW-hr (one kilowatt for one hour produces 1 kW-hr). Typically you could expect 5-6 hours of sunlight per day (year round average). A 6.3 kW system would then produce some 30-35 kW-hr per day (so more like thirteen 100 watt bulbs that are on continuously-24 hours a day). This is still a small fraction of White House energy usage but I think the goal was symbolism more than anything….

  16. The author writes: “In other words, the White House installed enough solar panels to power six 50-watt bulbs for 20 hours each day.”

    The author of this story is incorrect. 6.3 kW is the rate of power being supplied when the panels are operating at peak efficiency.

    This means that at mid-day, when the panels are absorbing sunlight at their maximum efficiency, they could power 6300k/50w = 126 50w light bulbs for that instant in time.

    But over the course of a day, the efficiency of the panels would vary between 0% all through the night, and during the daylight hours of a sunny day, 50% efficiency on average from dawn to dusk.

    So for a 24 hour cycle with 12 hours from sunrise and sunset on a cloudless day, the efficiency would be 25% at best.

    Factor in cloudy periods, and the solar panel efficiency could drop to 10% on average over a 24 hour cycle.

    So Obama’s 6.3kW solar panels might provide enough power for a 630W appliance on a 24 hour cycle.

    That would be enough to power 12 50W light bulbs on a 24 hour basis. (Slightly more in the summer, but far less in the winter, with its long nights and cloudy days.)

    Not exactly President Reagan’s “shining city on the hill”, is it?

    I’m betting that Obama’s silly little science experiment didn’t cost any less than $100,000 including installation.

  17. The units in this article make no sense. Kilowatts is a time rate of energy per second. Kilowatt-hours is the integrated total energy usage. If the solar panels produce 6.3 kW that means in one second the panels produce 6.3 kJ of energy. A 50 W bulb consumes 50 J in one second. That means that with 6.3 KW of continuous power, they could power 126 50 W bulbs at the same time.

    Their analysis would make sense if the panels produced at most 6.3 kW-hours per day. Which is NOT what is claimed.

    It also makes no sense to say the avg. American household uses 27 kW per day. It does make sense to instead say 27 kWh per day.

    If the solar panels produced 6.3 kW continuously all day (which they do not, the 6.3 kW is peak produced during midday) they would produce 151.2 kWh per day. Which is certainly not a lot of energy for whatever they paid for it, but this analysis is misleading.

  18. People think Puppethead is Mr. Greengenes but this dimbulb merely uses it as a way to skim off government money for companies that borrow taxpayer money only to go bankrupt and disappear into the night with the money. ObamaFail, it is all encompassing. Own it Obots.

  19. So, what will the White House do when Obama’s EPA goes AL GORE, and those bulbs are no longer permitted to be used? Hypocrisy Rules again.
    We The People aren’t permitted to use regular light bulbs..or the ENERGY Cops will fine us. Mister Jimmy C. Obama is at it again.

  20. An ultra-expensive publicity plan to push the ever expensive solar power. It could be seen more as joke, but this White House itself, is more of the joke, and an expensive one at that, and I don’t mean this little experiment in pulling the wool over America’s eyes.

    • Exactly. This has been the issue for all alternative energy sources. Nothing is as practical as fossil fuels when accounting manufacturing, and energy expended to extract and refine exotic minerals and elements for these alternative energy sources.

      People using Prius’s for example never see any savings, as the car costs much more to buy, then maintain and insure than a comparable non-hybrid sedan. Environmentally friendly? Please. Prius’s use lots of toxic chemicals to make. Then the batteries need to be disposed of and replaced (more energy used). The cars use MILES of copper wiring which all has to be mined and refined and manufactured at some point. Etc.

      Solar panels same way. Great if you want some independence from the grid, but not practical dollar and cents-wise.

  21. Between 80 and 100 billion dollars spent on “green” energy projects. Where is the outrage at these enormous sums of money that have been wasted by our government? The only people who have benefited were the recipients of these government backed loans and outright grants of free money. Is no one bothered that these people were all Democratic donors?

  22. 6.3 kW of power would power 126 50 Watt light bulbs (6300/50 = 126). But the sun isn’t shining all day. I would assume the power is being stored in batteries. I assume that 6.3 kW varies throughout the day and seasonally. There are also losses in battery storage.

    • Greetings all you white crackers…this is Michelle Obama tweeting from the White House(finally got back from China!) I want to thank you crackers for voting for me and my Husband twice!

      We are truly living the American dream! In just five short years we have become millionaires!!

      I love my new $30 thousand dollar dress..it’s just as nice as any dress my sisters in Hollywood wear!!

      Oh…and I really love our pizza maker that we fly in from New York for a mere $20 thousand dollars…it is the best pizza ever!!

      Cheers…I will keep you up to date on our many vacations!!

      Oh….and make sure you sign up for my husband’s wonderful health care!!

  23. Back in the 70’s the green movement was at its peak, designers and homeowners came up with revolutionary ideas using passive and geothermal systems. Conservatives like Reagan, pro oil, removed those panels, and most of the innovation was burried and forgotten. Now this clown Obozo, is making a mockery of the photovoltaic solar panel systems. This $60K system is bad design, just like the healthcare portal system.

  24. Solar and wind are just fantasies that can NEVER be used in a practical sense. They can’t replace any power needed on the grid because they can’t be depended on to be there when called upon. You can’t ever guarantee that X-amount of power will be available at all times bc no one knows when the wind will blow or the sun will shine. There are also huge problems with transmission of the power bc locations for large wind farms and solar arrays need to be placed well away from population centers, where it is needed. This causes huge losses in the amount of power collected vs. usable at the end source.

    Also, solar power is incredibly damaging to the environment to produce. Minerals needed in the production of solar panels occur in granite and must be mined. The only problem is that they are LESS abundant than uranium so A LOT of granite must be mined, wiping out entire mountains like those on the west coast of Peru which were leveled for solar panel production. Solar power also destroys the environment when it is mounted in ground arrays by killing all the foliage below them and thereby ruining the soil in turn, and by being hazardous to birds flying over them because of the massive heat generated by the absorption of light. In other words, they are a catastrophe for the environment, not a ‘sustainable’ energy source that is good for the environment.

    Of course, everyone knows that wind power is a joke, it kills massive amounts of birds, everyday and endangered species, indiscriminately. It is incredibly expense to build and maintain the precision parts needed to efficiently produce any power whatsoever. Frequent replacement of major, very expensive components is necessary and the windmills themselves don’t produce anything unless the wind is blowing but also need to be locked down and stopped if the wind blows too much. It is a expensive, pointless folly.

    • Wind and solar “farms” are also ugly. I drove out west and hadn’t been for years and I was appalled to see for miles and miles huge white windmills spinning away spoiling a once beautiful “Big Sky”. Absolutely shameful.

  25. “If 6.3 kilowatts sounds like a lot of energy, it isn’t. The average home consumes 27 kilowatts of power each day. Far more than the 6.3 kilowatts that will be produced by the new solar panels adorning the White House.”

    6.3 kiloWatts is exactly zero energy. Watts are a unit of power, not energy. On an electrical bill, energy is measured in kiloWatt hours. A six kilowatt solar array would be expected to yield about 30 kWh per day of electricity in Washington. The “27 kiloWatts” that an average home uses should be kiloWatt hours. Therefore this array should yield a bit more energy per day, on average, than the home average home uses.
    Clearly, the author does not know what he is talking about.

  26. Watch now how Obama will try to deny that this has any White House fingerprints all over it. Even though its on the White House roof itself. Like Benghazi and Fast and Furious, and the IRS Scandal, including ObamaCare, the White House will say they had no part in it.

  27. 1st sentence. “kilowatts” doesn’t describe energy. it describes power. power = energy / time. that’s like saying a bucket holds 2 gallons of water per minute. it doesn’t make sense. gallons per minute is a flow rate, not a fixed amount of water. open up an eighth grade physics book

    • Exactly! Author Marc needs to finish his high school diploma before writing articles. I could use 27 kilowatts for one second out of the day or 27 kilowatts for the whole dang day and the power bill is going to be drastically different.

  28. The answer to the energy problem is simple: Incorporate the Founding Fathers spinning in their graves into the wind generator grid, and let President Spidermonkey continue urinating on and wiping himself with the Constitution. Since nobody in the country has the “teeth” or courage to stop him outright, it should at least generate enough rotational torque to light up North America for the foreseeable future.

    • If you think that people think W did no wrong, you are barking up the wrong tree. Fact is, his administration did lots of dorky things like this to appease your crowd. It never worked though, you and yours were going to hate on him regardless of what he did, as evidenced by your statement above.

    • Only good it will be is to supply power to few emergency devices on a sunny day in case power was lost and the main generator failed. Sufficient battery backup can be fully charged over a very long time priod with solar power for extended and evening use but lead batteries need to be changed out after about 6 years. Not cost effective. I bet dollars to donuts the solar panels aren’t electrically connected and just for show.

  29. Might of been cheaper to send the Obama family on another vacation instead of the re-installing the solar panels and hiring a crew of 6 to perform corrective and preventive maintenance on it.

    Wait, don’t forget to hire a couple of qualified operators to operate the panels, plus benefits.

  30. “Obama seeks to use his personal example to spur American families and businesses to do more to reduce reliance on foreign energy and cut emissions blamed for global warming.”

    Please… businesses and American families don’t get to spend other people’s money on these boondoggles like the White House does. Besides, they didn’t even install enough solar panels to power the Wookie’s hairdryer.

      • No cost to taxpayers? Really? Who’s paying for it then? Who purchased the materials, did the installation labor, does the maintenance and upkeep, replacement parts, upgrades, and so on? All out of thin air?

          • Some people seem to think solar is maintenance free, but when they get the bill for replacing the batteries alone they’ll give that a second look. I doubt this was installed as some sort of charitable effort to begin with, but even if it was there is still maintenance and I’m sure that someone being so charitable didn’t also decide to forgo writing off the outlay on their taxes. One way or another someone has to pay the bill. Suggesting the taxpayers aren’t paying it is a pipe dream.

      • Even if the array and installation were donated for the purposes of publicity (kind of strange since the White House won’t release the names of the contractors involved), those arrays and installation cost someone money. … and it was way more that the $5.29 per day (at $0.12 per kWhr that is going to generate. i.e, at that amount, that’s a savings per year of $1,933 per year. It’s going to take a while to break even, even if zero maintenance is required for that installation.

          • I know every time I’ve looked into it, the payback period is 15+ years (being very optimistic). … and that’s with zero maintenance and given the fact that I live in a place where the sun shines way more than in D.C. i.e, you are right, at this point of development, solar electric is a lot of “feel-good” with no common sense attached.

    • WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?!?!?! That makes all the difference in the world! The whole point of this article was to make fun of the number of bulbs powered, but it did the math completely wrong.

      Look, I realize you baggers never made it out of grade school, but please, if you’re going to attack science, you need to get the math right.

      • As an electrical engineer I would suggest you check your math, in order to get close to you’re figures you have to be a couple decimal places off when calculating a kilowatt hour, besides with all the energy required to produce the solar panels, and related equipment, upkeep, expected life span of the equipment, and all the toxic waste produced manufacturing everything, it’s not even a break even deal, look at all the toxic waste the taxpayers are still on the hook for from Obama’s personal friends solar ventures.

  31. Ummmm, do you idiots know the difference between a KiloWatt and a KilowattHOUR????

    Watt is a unit of power. Multiply that by time, and you get energy.

    Thus, the solar panels produce 6.3 Kilowatts. Assume you have a 50 watt light bulb, that DOES IN FACT mean that you could run 120-ish of those bulbs at full sun.

    Not a dozen, but 10 dozen.

    Now assuming a battery and ONLY 8 hours of full sun, you would have about 50 Kilowatt HOURS of electricity stored, or enough for FIFTY, not six bulbs. With no battery, you could power 125-ish 50watt bulbs while the sun is out…but that’s just silly. More exactly, you could power about 30 television sets as long as the sun is shining.

    But the article as written makes no sense.

    And there folks, you know why teabaggers and climate deniers are not to be trusted…they just make stuff up.

        • I have no idea what that was suppose to mean, either. I think that there’s a huge misunderstanding of how the solar array works. Sure, it’s expensive; however, solar, to me, is about independence. This is what makes it difficult for me to understand why so many conservatives are against renewable energy. I feel like conservatives should be the biggest supporter of renewables. For starters, they’re key when it comes to living off the grid. Who does not that kind of self reliance? Who wants to rely on being tied in to a power grid? Who wants the government to be able to monitor how much power they are consuming. It’s expensive for now. The efficiency of a PV cell is about 17.5% on average. That’s pretty low, but we start low and work our way up. They’ve got cells that are a lot more efficient, but they’re a lot more expensive. The issues with renewable energy isn’t the production, it’s the storage. Storage is becoming much more efficient, as well.

          • As a conservative I agree, but it’s not based on a conservative issue. Instead it’s based in out of control government. There simply is no authority for any of our governments to dictate to the people. The people are over the government, not under it, yet these traitors will use force to create and maintain their wannabe dictatorship until we finally get mad enough to throw them out bodily.

            Have you found where federal government gets the authority to claim they can dictate how much water you flush through your toilet in a single flush? I haven’t. The authority to tell you what light bulbs you will use and won’t use?

            • I certainly don’t have anything to say that is contrary to your statement. The government is absolutely out of control. We do, however, need some controls in place; otherwise, we could have some of our water resources looking like India’s. Sadly, some people just don’t give a rats behind about conservation. Everything has to be whatever is convenient to them at the moment.

              The problem with renewable power is that it got politicized. Once a party decides to adopt it, the other side hates it. That’s with everything, it seems. I consider myself environmentally aware, but I’m very skeptical of the EPA and all of the man-made global warming BS. I do, however, think that people are very wasteful and that pollution is a very big problem.

                • INterstate commerce clause of the Constitution. Electricity/the grid is an interstate “thing”, and thus falls under the control of the Federal Government. Please read the document you likely parrot whenever they want to ban bazookas in the home.

                  • In other words you publicly admit that you know nothing of our form of government, other than your contempt for it, and especially nothing of the Commerce clause, as you have so obviously stated.

                    I’d venture a guess that you haven’t the first clue what a bazooka is without at least looking it up on Wikipedia as I highly suspect you did not serve in WW II nor Korea.

                    • Your response is ridiculous and not worthy of any more of my time. I will let others thank you for your service.

            • “Perfected” is almost a 4-letter word. To me, “Improved” is a bit more palatable. Just look at the battery capabilities in some of our EVs (Tesla comes to mind). Some technology will come along that will provide a breakthrough that we need. Look at semiconductors, transistors and microchips. It didn’t take long for us to make big strides — huge — after they came about.

      • Why would you say that? How do you get that ridiculous thought from me correcting the writer’s incorrect math? C’mon, if I said “I tried to steer the car, but I couldn’t get out of second gear”, you’d laugh me out of the joint. THe author of this article did just that.

      • Sounds like a good idea to me whether they have solar power or not. Especially if they don’t. Think of all the savings if Obama can’t call anyone to do his bidding. Now that’s money saved!

    • Glad you were paying attention. The writer has no clue what he’s talking about. The 6.3Killowatts rating is probably for new panels at optimum conditions, not average. As panels age they lose efficiency. Sun angle, humidity clouds, dust on the panels all effect efficiency and any compromise substracts from the 6.3 Kilowatts.

      • Well, there’s no point in using a battery with Solar Cells…even the various electric utilities out there suggest against it, and not because it saves them money. Big jugs of lead and acid that lose energy as you mentioned.

        You’re better off hooking them on the grid and using them to power your TVs and A/C and stuff…more than enough savings right there! And if you don’t use all the power, the utility pays YOU!

      • Dooood…not an insult…the article is just plain WRONG. FACTUALLY WRONG. If this were a physics test, he would have gotten an ‘F’ on it.

        So seriously, I point out how the article is factually WRONG, and you call it an INSULT? Sheesh, you guys are dumber than I thought.

        And as always: “Your wife and your sister are waiting at the Waffle House for you. Sadly, there’s only one person waiting.”

        • At this time I would just like to take the time to thank everyone who has responded in such a manor for being so kind as to not only make my point so clearly, but for also proving it as well.
          Obamas administration reminds me of the story of “The Emperor’s New Clothes”.

          • Oh hush. Personal attacks are all the right wing can do. Every time I post something, I get hit with personal attacks. YOU leveled one at me after my posting.

            So grow a pair to match your imaginary guns. And cut out the sobbing language: you sound like a sissy. Honestly.

  32. Q: The President is sitting at his desk in the Oval Office. Several light bulbs go out. How many of his staff will he need to screw in new light bulbs?
    A: None, you said the word “screw”. He’s now sitting in the dark thinking about Reggie Love.

    • There was a radio talk show host, now retired, who used to say “liberalism is a mental disorder”.
      If your a novelist, and you want to write a liberal character in your story, you first have to think of a conservative. Then remove all rational thought, common sense and accountability.

  33. 3 years ago, I installed a solar photovoltaic system that provides a little bit more than half my daily power needs, but unlike the WH, I get lots of sunshine, 5-7 hours almost every day of the year. The costs of PV systems are outrageously high and the amount of power they generate is pathetically small, just as this article states. Except for the tax credits I claimed from the federal and state governments, it would not have been cost effective for me to put a PV system in. With the tax credits, my payback period is around 4.0-4.5 years. In the case of the WH PV system, which obviously receives no tax credits, the payback period is at least 3 times longer and well over a decade. In both the short and the long run, it would have been more cost effective for the WH to get rid of some of the hundreds of workers on the WH staff, which would have produced the same power savings had they shut off the lights and the air conditioning to a few unoccupied offices.

  34. Is this for real? Yes folks, another ridiculous joke emanating from Obama’s White House. Remember another Obama fiasco, Solyndra, the Federal government loaned the solar start-up $535 million, and after the business went bankrupt almost none was paid back. What fool in Obama’s despicable and odious administration gave taxpayers’ money for another failed P.R. Stunt. Impeach this Left-wing socialist who was completely unvetted by the media. Barack Obama is the worst president in American history. Panderer in chief.

    • What? You DO realize Marcie that the author of htis article confused power with energy, don’t you? What he did was essentially compare a 250lb barbell with doing 20 bench presses with it. Literally. In other words, his entire article is literal nonsense.

      If these are the people you worship, then it’s pretty clear that you wouldn’t know an exaggeration if it bit you on the leg. Because this guy on climatedepot has apparently been biting you constantly.

    • Hey..your missing the whole point.
      The lefts messiah has done it and if any speak out against it they’ll scream racism.
      After all..remember they claimed he has his own “stash”.
      Better known by those who are awake as our tax dollars

  35. What for doof wrote this?
    He says : “The average home consumes 27 kilowatts of power each day”.

    Energy is billed by the kilowatt-hour. Just saying 27 kilowatts isn’t a measure of anything.
    The way he wrote it, one could easily assume 27 kilowatts per hour for the whole day would be 27 x 24 hours = 648 kilowatt hours…which should cost about $65 a day in electric costs based on the cheapest rates. That’s not average, that is more like the Al Gore mansion. Get your facts straight.

    Please don’t attempt to write another article pretending you’re a technical expert when you’re obviously not. I’m not and you’re making me look good which isn’t a good thing for you.

    The solar cells on the white house don’t accomplish anything but for show show. I would be surprised if they were actually hooked into the electrical system.

  36. My brother in law is in the solar business. Mostly solar hot water for swimming pools and bloated govt projects. But, I traded him a brick of ammo I paid $15 for, in exchange for an inefficient solar battery charger to use on my camper, or power a couple lights and fans in the house during an extended power emergency. Obama’s economy….

  37. Ah, just cover up all of DC with solar panels. They would generate approximately 1,000 MW, about as much as a coal-fired plant, while the sun shines. Of course the coal plant can generate that 1,000 MW twenty four x seven. Come to think of it, a DC covered in solar cells is a much better use of the place than the current one.

  38. The Secretary of Defense, inferred this week that the military will have to make more sacrifices, including the possibility of cuts in military pay. The Whitehouse also announced a new 20 Billion (B) upgrade of the Marine One Fleet. I wonder what the carbon footprint of that project is? ——- Perhaps they’ll scale back more embassy security in the Middle East to pay for all of this!

    • Hey..nothings too good for our resident who would be king.
      Cant have his royal..well..something. in ten year old helicopters can we?
      After all, his royal whatever has to be far more important then our military. .
      Or so he thinks, anyway.

    • With time and R&D, we could be there someday. I think that we have a lot of steps in between and I probably won’t see it in my lifetime, but we’ve gotta start somewhere. We need to take the politics out of science first.

  39. So, It appears for ‘solar’ to replace hydro, coal, or natural gas as sources for Electricity, It would take all the solar panels that Solyndra never produced…
    Actually, to replace the current system, it would probably require covering the entire country with solar panels to get the job done.

    • Solar panels kill birds.
      Just not as many as wind turbines do.
      They also RAISE the temperature surrounding them.
      Hmmm..and here I thought they were being used to combat “man made global warming”.
      Not contribute to it.

      • You are preaching to the choir here brother…preaching to the choir…..
        In fact ALGORE’s book and movie were such a rousing success, actually a failure as nothing in it is true or has happened, that he is coming out with another attempt to “PLAY ON OUR FEARS”

    • It’s never about picking one form of alternative, renewable energy. A wise investor has a diverse portfolio. There is a lot of potential with solar power. Some people have very sustainable homesteads where they live off grid. The technology will never improve if there’s no money being spent. Most of our shortcoming are with storing the power. Production is easy.

        • Some companies go belly up for a number of reasons. No one would be producing them if no one was buying them. They have value to the people that are looking for independence. They have value to people that are looking to buy a lot of land, away from all the bs and become self sufficient. If having a place of your own, away from all the crappy people and not relying on a power company isn’t your thing, then that’s perfectly fine. I just know that I would like to get there some day.

          • People (on the Right) aren’t against intelligent progress in the sciences and industry–they’re anti-waste and crony capitalism.
            I suggest tax incentives based on successful application of innovation–amongst other lures–not allowing bureaucrats and politicians to throw money away on contributor’s schemes to get rich.

            • I don’t mean to imply that the right is against progress. I think that letting businesses spend money the way that has made them successful is the best practice. We’re over taxed for the way that government spends our money. I’m very well aware that businesses don’t really even pay taxes and that it’s just built into their products and services. I’m not arguing any of these things. I do, however, think that there’s a need for some of the tax revenue to be spent on technologies that could benefit us in the future. After we got the German scientists from WWII, government funding is what helped make jet propulsion technology. Government funding sent us to space. So, there is a place for it. Solyndra seemed more like cronyism. It was also hard to compete with foreign markets. Free trade is a relatively new concept that has made it easier to by cheaper goods from over seas. Additionally, when you have companies that are trying to develop a product that will compete with the natural monopolies that our power companies have, there is a new barrier to overcome. Since the utility companies make far more money by keeping things exactly as they are and have the power to raise prices when it’s needed, there’s no benefit to them for making a product that has lower yields.

              There’s a place for investing in this type of equipment. It will improve with time. Though some of our satellites are powered by RTG (mini reactors, basically), we also have some that operate off of solar technology. It’s not a reliable tech for full-time power down here on earth, but it’s a piece of the puzzle.

  40. No mention of the cost of this solar monstrosity.
    But what does obama care? He’s not paying for it.
    And that is the entire problem with him.
    Solar farms on federal land in Nevada. ..
    Nevada Is mostly federal land. ..
    Cows grazing on federal land In Nevada. ..
    A connection? ??

      • And the power to recharge those little government subsidized cars comes from where?
        The government paying for those things means they paid for them twice.
        And don’t think for a moment they have not figured out a way to give themselves the tax break on them as well..
        Either way you look at it, we get screwed.

  41. I could run 22 one hundred watt lights off of 4 six volt battery’s and a 24 volt deisel truck alternator hooked to a fan blade and it would cost less than a grand plus it would work indefinitely and be rebuildable.

  42. The jerk imposter should be ashamed every time he is in public. And everyone should scream it at the top of there lungs, he is a fraud. Anyone one can see that America is not his home. I hope I live long enough to watch him hang for being a treasonous pig…

    • Except it cost about $15,000 to fully equip a house with solar, and the government gave you a 30% tax credit on that purchase. So you would get $4,500 back from the government, but you would still have to fork over about $10,000. I don;t know of too many families that can afford that. Plus is only augmented your power consumption, not replacing it, so you would be lucky to actually experience about a 50% reduction in your energy bills. This never really pays for itself.

  43. 44 kWh per day at a typical value of about 7 cents per kWh means those panels generate about $3 worth of electricity per day. And how much did the solar panels cost? Perhaps $30,000? So maybe in ten years, the panels continue to function without any maintenance cost, they might pay for themselves. Not a particularly impressive “investment”.

    And suspect the actual cost of the panels was much higher than that.

    • I’ve read a little bit about Thorium. I don’t know how much is hype and how much is a real possibility, but there are a lot of things that are probably better than the way we’re doing things now. What we’ve got now is ok for the time being, but there’s always room for improvement. Anything that can create an avenue for independence and sustainability is worth looking at.

        • Even after my extensive and tireless research on Wikipedia for the last 60 seconds, I didn’t see anything showing the size of these reactors. I see where they’re trying to get them for commercial production; however, I didn’t see anything that lead me to believe they would have any for residential use. To me, that’s what we need. Every household producing their own power. My knowledge on reactor technology is pretty much comparable to that of a head of lettuce.

            • So…. you’re saying I’ll need a bigger yard. 😉

              I read a while ago that Samsung (or something) was working on some small reactors. I think Fukashima kind of gave that project a black eye. I actually have faith (scary word for me) in the real possibility of people having independence with a mixture of the technologies. I think one will have to diversify where the power comes from and how it’s used. I really don’t want to be in the suburbs for much longer and the city is too crowded for me. I see a lot of people claiming to be engineers and saying that the technology will never be there, but I take that with a grain of salt.

    • Byproduct of a Thorium reactor is Pu238 which has a half life of 87years. Pu238 used in a radioisotope thermoelectric generator is safer because it exclusively emits easy to shield alpha particles. Pu238 is not fissionable, and is self limiting. Bury a refrigerator sized RTG in the back yard and power up your entire house for the next 80 years, plus a few of your neighbors.

      • Pu 238 is produced by a tortuous process from thorium, with a low yield. There are no particularly good sources of that isotope, which is problematic for RTGs since it is the preferred fuel for them. Nevertheless, it is often used in space probes to the outer solar system where solar power is impractical.

        BTW, it should be obvious that the economics of electricity generation in a space probe are totally different.

    • I have been reading about this a lot. I think you are on to something. I was reading this along with some liquid sodium applications. There are so many real and useful energy solutions that are available, but the stupid libs want to appeal to their stupid base, who think we can run the world on solar and wind. I actually work in the solar and wind industry as a test engineer, we exist almost exclusively on government subsidies, and I will be the first to say we CANNOT power the earth’s civilization on wind and solar, the math is not even close.

  44. You get the subsidies and tax beaks and install the green energy solar panels from your home. Then you think you are going to save a fortune on electricity. That is until the same liberals who convinced you to do so tax you and charge you higher rates of electricity (if you still feed off the grid) and then you find out that you will also not get credit back from the power company when you send electricity back on the grid. What bargain! And you just saved the government millions by fixing part of the infrastructure yourself and now the liberal politicians can expand government and give themselves pay hikes. SUCKER!

  45. You don’t get it. Obama doesn’t care if it works, or doesn’t work. Obama is into perceptions This show & tell for his worshipful mouth-breathers. It’s all show. It’s Kabuki theater,It’s look-see pidgin. For the Jews he wears a kippa, for selling health insurance his staff wear lab coats. He even goes to church though he’s an atheist. It’s all a game to him, a political football. It’s theater for his minions. It’s not about the environment. He couldn’t care less. He’s the phoniest man alive. He’s living fiction. He’s the least interesting man in the world.

  46. Well, I always said Obama was Carter’s second, now third term – s**t economy, weakened world image and all….this simply makes it “official.”

    Damn, I LOATHE this bi-sexual, affirmative action mulatto.

  47. He wants to spend and spend to make this country go under. He is putting us in a hole cause when that happens bye bye democracy. That’s the name of the game here. One country on the planet joined together and we all become slaves of the rulers. The handwriting is on the wall.

      • wrong, all the US companies are bankrupt, there are a few solar panel companies, and they are in China, most of the inverters are made in china and germany. There is very little solar production in the US anymore. Or were you referring to just the solar equipment on the white house was made in the US? If you are right and that was all made in the US, then they paid about 100X the true market value for those, which is typical of gov’t spending.

        • Every story I have read says they were american made solar panels including this quote from a newsmax article….”the White House has completed installation of American-made solar panels on the first family’s residence”

          • It is true that the White House is claiming that every bit of this system is American-made, but it is also true that nearly all solar photo-voltaic production is in China. So either the White House is lying, or they paid an exorbitant price for an unusual system. (Or, most probably, both.)

  48. Can’t wait for him to use those panels to re-charge his algae fed, hybrid electric helicopters that will cost us $60 billion for 23 of the things. I guess he’ll have them dropped of every 5 miles so he can virtually hop ALL THE WAY to Andrews AFB.

  49. Still the best value is found by NOT using 50 KW hours of energy per day, hands down.
    It does not need to come from alternative energy, it could be better achieved through other methods.
    I feel it would be best done by not consuming products.
    Reduce, reuse, recycle and rebuild, is the best route.
    For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, so is the desire of reduced carbon emissions best achieved by converting your home to solar and wind power, or by changing the way you live through keeping possessions longer, including servicing existing devices as they wear?
    Manufacturing would first of all have to move away from producing “throw away” consumer products and begin manufacturing quality and serviceability into those things they sell.
    This would slow down mining, manufacturing, delivery waste management, and you guessed it, carbon emissions.
    The only problem is, the “shareholders” who own the manufacturing would go broke doing this, so would lobby even harder to keep the old way alive, that keeps filling the greedy shareholders bank accounts.
    Oh well…

          • Your identity problem is worse than you thought. Now you imagine you have a life outside your back alley box, and actually imagine seeing yourself living a normal life.
            Good luck sorting out the multiple personalities, TTT.

            • all of your projection aside, what you’re saying is f*cking stupid. Nothing short of societal collapse and a global reset, and about a 70% reduction in population could we actually have a society like you are describing. Us adults have to deal with reality, not some pretend utopia. So you blab on, but you aren’t helping anything.

              • Thank you for an honest reply. TTT

                You caught my point exactly as it was intended. Solving the real problems being faced is a very difficult proposition, one that can really only be solved by using less energy, not finding ways of prolong the rude truth by keeping right along the same path. The mere installation of inefficient solar panels on a roof is at best a band aid on the real problem, pollution.

                You seem to understand in this reply to Steve below:
                TiredTiredTired • 15 minutes ago
                I wonder how much carbon energy was used to make those solar panels?

                And there is the catch 22, right?
                It is obviously ludicrous to “symbolically” install a 6300 watt solar array on the White House roof.
                They do not last, they are inefficient, and they are themselves a drain on resources to produce and maintain.
                And no, I do not think my suggestions above are without merit, instead, they ARE real suggestions, ones that are not band aid solutions, because energy not used IS pollution avoided.

                • I admit, I can be testy, but unlike most of the trolls I deal with, you are a contemplative and reasonable person (and thus not a troll). You are a very rare find in that you may be somewhere else on the political scale than me, but you are rational, polite, and thought provoking, and open to other inputs. Thank you for that. You are actually the type of person, who may be on a different area of the political scale, that I always really enjoy communicating with, so I apologize for my initial rudeness. But 9 times out of ten I end up dealing with some obnoxious paid troll.

                  I agree the consumable junk we buy today sucks, from the food to the equipment. What you were describing was kind of how we were when the colonies were growing. When they say, “they don’t make them like they used to”, they are right. The idea then was every family gets i acre and a mule, they live off their land, they trade what others their extra production for things they can’t produce. But you can’t walk into a city like LA and possibly conceive a solution like what you described to a dense population like that with no natural resources. Solar and wind can never replace all our power requirements, and we don’t want to send modern society back into the stone age, so we have to think of things that are rational, reasonable, and affordable. Obama’s entire energy policy is foolish and an enormous waste of money. If we could concentrate as a society ways of meeting our power requirements, in non polluting ways, using sources that are abundant and replenishing, we could actual accomplish something.

                  • I want to be positive always and will remain so, but when you see the direction and speed in which the world is changing, honestly, we are just along for the ride anymore.
                    Our opinions, thoughts (and votes) will no longer effect outcomes in the big picture, what TPTB want is where we will go as a nation, world. Like it or not.
                    Money interests, corporations pull the strings now, the system is too entrenched to change.
                    You sense it, as I do, the world is going to change, but not on our terms and not nicely.
                    There is just too much that indicates this reality, to pass it off as mere speculation anymore.

                    Solar panels on the roof of the White house is only intended to be a Press release, not the reality you or I could achieve. Search the web with these words: “Florida Makes Off-Grid Living Illegal” for a better sense of what I mean.
                    And yes, I am afraid my original comment was more one of wishful thinking than a viable solution (any longer).
                    All the best and good luck.

  50. 22 hundred watt light bulbs, that’s about 2200W. That’s half the power requirement of a 1,500 sf house, without running the air conditioner and the clothes dryer. This is not even a drop in the bucket for the white house. As usual, Obama’s actions are nothing but symbolic at best.

  51. Solar is not ready for prime time. Without massive subsidies it cannot compete with coal, gas or oil. Commercial plants produce electricity at 3-4x the cost. The other major problem with solar is it’s most obvious drawback… it only works when the sun is shining. I don’t know about you, but I generally want my 22 100 watt bulbs burning when it’s dark. Hey, if you live off-grid in the woods somewhere, and the only alternative is a generator or candles, then solar and a stack of batteries is a good alternative. If you live in a home connected to the power company it makes no sense at all. If you weren’t getting a big tax break paid for by your neighbors you would be paying more for electricity with your roof top blight.

    Let’s invest in modernization of the electrical grid which is currently vulnerable to all kinds of natural disasters, terrorist attacks and even solar flares… makes a lot more sense than investing in roof top solar.

  52. Is that 4 compact florescent light bulbs?

    How many Liberals does it take to screw in a light bulb?

    1465.

    250 to conduct an environmental impact study to determine the impact of the light bulb.
    50 to write up the report and print it.
    50 to fly around the world and warn others about their excessive use of light bulbs.
    100 to collect taxes to pay for the study, the cost of 100 year supply of $500.00 single source no bid contract light bulbs.
    3 to get the name of a light bulb supplier from the DNC donation list.
    1000 to stage a sit in to protest the installation of a light bulb.
    1 to shred the report
    5 to destroy all purchased stocks of light bulbs.
    1 to announce that a light bulb was not actually needed because there was no fixture in which to place the light bulb.
    5 to form a committee to study the feasibility of installing a light fixture.

    • Actually It was Bush that signed the bill ( Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007) outlawing 100 watt light bulbs. Obama or the EPA had nothing to do with it. But don’t let facts crew up a good rant.

  53. They should get that Bike with the Generator that the Professor on Gilligan’s Island Invented.
    Gilligan, I mean Biden, could pedal it every day to light up the First Lady’s Makeup Mirror.

  54. Back in ’12 I wanted to put in some solar panels because my electric bills were going nuts.
    Problem was it was like buying a new, luxury car and wouldn’t pay for itself in 30 years(if I could squeeze every watt out of it 24/7)…

    Nah, that’s ok, I’ll pass, I won’t live in the stone age like our so called green friends….

    • I looked into this here in Louisiana. Solar panel contractors want $25,000 for the job. You pay $5,000 upfront. The balance is interest-free for 12 months, which is enough time to file yearly taxes and receive $12,500 back from the state and a $7,500 tax credit against what you owe the Feds. Depending on your situation, if your refund isn’t quite that large you may have to roll over that amount over several years and pay this out-of-pocket until you can recover it. Based on my yearly consumption of electricity, it would take me 5 1/4 years to “break even,” on the $5,000 I would have to pay but my electric bill will be reduced to $10 a month. However, a bunch of panels on my roof (the majority of which would be on the front, which faces west), is quite ugly. That’s what’s stopping me from doing it although after this hurricane season I may take another look at doing it.

    • You discovered the inherent problem with solar, did you? Leftists don’t like looking at things like cost. Dollars, resources, human lives, the issue doesn’t matter. All expendable in the quest for domination.

      For the record, I used to work in solar. R&D as it were. Took DOE government dollars, too. The big joke on the inside was who the heck we could convince to buy this stuff! We had maps of feed-in tariffs overlaid with regional climate conditions plus regional costs of installations based on housing type/available area for installation, every variable you could possibly include – and guess what? Nothing made it worthwhile for anyone anywhere to install solar. Even when the Chinese were dumping cells & panels on the US market. Hey, guess why I don’t work in solar anymore… Once the political dollars dry up, you can’t make a living off of it!

      It never is what it is made out to be.

    • I’m reading Alexis de Tocqueville right now !
      His books should be required reading !
      I went to my grandson’s social studies class. There the teacher explained “common core” .
      “Common Core” is in my opinion, nothing but the theft of our children’s minds.
      It is “indoctrination” , plain and simple.

  55. As usual, Obama’s actions are nothing but symbolic at best……………
    President Obama is Affirmative Action made physical.
    Both started as “good intentions”.
    Both seek to end “race based actions”.
    While requiring “race” as a fundamental instrument in decision making .
    See, “If I had a son”…….. See, “race of applicant”, in education/ employment.
    Solar panels on the “White House” ………… symbolic at best……………

  56. People say there is a RACE problem. People say this RACE problem will be
    solved when the third world pours into EVERY and ONLY into White
    countries.

    People say the only solution to the RACE problem is if ALL and ONLY
    White countries “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those
    non-Whites.

    But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide
    against White people, Anti-Whites agree that I am a
    naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

    Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-White.

  57. I’ve noticed that the article has been completely rewritten after it was so excoriated.

    Originally, it claimed that the solar panels would only power 6 50-watt bulbs. This was based on a 50-watt bulb being on for 20 hours using 1KwHOUR (50 watts x 20 hours).

    So, the author lazily divided 6.3 by 1 and got about 6 bulbs.

    NO. What he got was 6.3 bulbs/hour (Kw/KwH = 1/Hour).

    What does that mean? 6. bulbs per hour is a nonsense measurement.

  58. Far better for you to have spent that money on golf Hussein – you would have enjoyed it more, been out of the public eye and we would not have to be bothered with your presidential presence in the news.
    Now – get out of the White House before you ruin it and the country even further

  59. Obama has wasted billions of dollars on friends, etc. My family drives three (3) CNG cars. These are cars that run on your home heating gas. They are cleaner and cheaper to operate. Instead of investing money where we can benefit from it, Obama et al, have wasted it on technology that is not quite ready. For a tenth of what Obama has spent, we could have launched tried and true technology.

  60. Can anyone tell me how in the World can you make the White House more efficient by supplanting a portion of some of the most efficient mass energy production ever developed (26 to 34%) by some of the least (about 4 to 6% max)???

  61. The dumbocrats gave us four years of Jimmy Carter in the 70’s and now theyve blessed us with
    8 years of carters clone, but worse,Barack Obama .
    Its the party that just keeps on giving, and giving and giving.
    Please stop giving.

  62. I have a friend who put in a solar water heater over 30 years ago.
    The think works VERY well as a water heater.
    No problem there.
    Problem is that even though it was supposed to save $$$$ on the energy bill, the “break even” point was to have been 11 years.
    It took over 20 years.
    AND as there is, or was, no plumber he could ever find that even knew how to fix, let alone install it, he has had to do EVERYTHING on it himself from day one.
    I asked him about solar panels years ago.
    His response? “If id known what a pain in the butt THIS thing (solar water heater) was I never would have put IT in.
    I’m not spending tens of thousands to cover my roof and fill my yard with those things just so I can make a choice of refrigerator or air conditioning.
    And STILL have to buy electricity at night and have it take ANOTHER 20 years just to break even”

  63. I think maybe this site is a coal or Pig oil financed site, or still operating on 1960’s info about solar.
    Some of you might do yourself a favor and look into today’s solar. Cost is about a third of what it was only a few years ago, cost of all aspects is coming down. Even the panels themselves are no longer made the same way, and are fairly maintenance free for years. Just a thought. Hating Obama is no reason to remain ignorant of the facts. a start: http://solarenergy.com/

  64. What do you call a country whose private citizens are as energy efficient as the left want us to be?
    North Korea.
    Think not? Just try to find the vast majority of that country at night from a satellite image.
    Save for one or two large cities where there is a big government presence, it is completely dark at night.
    That is the sort of energy efficiency the left wants for this country.
    However, I see none of them signing up to move to North Korea. Where they already HAVE the level of energy savings they want for us.

  65. If it only costs $20,000.00,that would save the taxpayers. The average home uses about 10,500 kwh a year, which is almost exactly what that system would put out. Averaged out, 10,500kwh a year would cost you right at $2,400.00 or roughly $200.00 a month. In approx 8 years the system will pay for itself and then continue to deliver “FREE” electricity for decades after that. The problem is the government more than likely paid in excess of $1,000,000.00 taxpayer dollars for it.

    • Solar Steve wrote, “Averaged out, 10,500kwh a year would cost you right at $2,400.00.” But that’s not right. Residential electricity rates in Washington, DC are are under 10¢/kWh, so 10,500 kWh is worth only about $1000.

      My guess is that the installation cost was at least $150,000 (i.e., 2-3 times what you or I would pay for a comparable mostly-made-in-China system), and that annual maintenance and repair costs will average more than $1000 per year, thus exceeding the value of the generated electricity.

  66. Is it grid-tied or off-grid with batteries? If batteries, then they determine the actual watt hours available. If grid-tied, won’t do any good if the grid goes down.

    Of course, it is a purely symbolic act, like the “organic garden” they first installed. Wouldn’t building energy efficient homes using passive solar, thermal mass, south facing windows, insulation, and skylights be a more productive way of doing things, rather than trying to produce electricity to power our modern lives? I have a small 60 amp hour battery and 30W trickle charger solar panel that could recharge my phone, laptop and led lights for less than $1000. A small portable backup system might be more practical for home in many cases. Having a deep cycle battery will help during emergencies. Energy efficient 12v/110W fridge/freezer is about $800-1200 or so, or 12v cooler only about $100. A solar lamp and flashlight, and/or rechargeable batteries using a portable solar recharger for lights. A solar cooker or a small jet stove for cooking. For less than $3000 you could theoretically be mostly off-grid. It is predicted that a CME will hit earth with a 100% probability sometime in the near future, similar to the 1859 Carrington Event. The grid could be down for months or even years.

  67. 6.3 kWp x 5.5 hrs/day avg sunshine x 365.25 days/yr = only 12,647 kWh / year.

    Moreover, that 5.5 hr/day figure is based on panels installed with an optimum tilt and orientation. The White House’s PV system is mounted nearly flat, which reduces the power output. My guess is that it’ll manage to produce about 10,000 kWh per year, which is about half what the White House initially claimed:
    http://archive.today/Uli8T#selection-671.65-671.84

    At current D.C. residential rates, that 10,000 kWh of electricity is worth a little less than $1000, per year.

    The White House won’t say what it cost taxpayers to install the system, which surely means the price was exorbitant.

    An installation cost of $10/watt would come to $63,000, but the White House boasted that they used all American-made components, which certainly increased the cost, and everything the government does costs at least twice what anyone else would pay, so I’ll bet the system actually cost taxpayers at least $150,000 (probably more).

    You might think that means it will pay for itself in 150 years, but that ignores maintenance & repair costs, and the fact that the system’s output will decline with age, and the fact that it’s unlikely to last more than about 30 years.

    What’s more, this system will probably cost taxpayers more than $1000/year just to maintain and repair, which means that it will never even start to repay the cost of installing it.

  68. “If the average American knew how much this cost the taxpayer, they’d
    realize this is not cost-effective at all. Which is specifically why the
    White House refuses to release the numbers.”

    Pure speculation. You have a blank so you fill it in with whatever your conspiracy laden mind would like to be there. Report facts not supposition.

- Advertisment -

Related Articles

Trump Deputy Interior Pick Gets A Lashing On Climate Change From Sen. Al Franken

By Joseph Erbentraut, Alexander C. Kaufman About an hour and a half into Deputy Interior Secretary nominee David Bernhardt’s Thursday confirmation hearing before the Senate...

Coal To Remain India’s Main Energy Source For At Least 30 Years, Govt Confirms

Coal will remain India’s main energy source for the next three decades although its share will gradually fall as the country pushes renewable power...