FutureCanadian

Some installers do it for free. At least here in the US. Not sure about quotes on the other stuff. I doubt it can be that much. Just a few years away from a couple kW rooftop system being about the same as a new air conditioner. Fair enough about location on a utility scale. Not sure about 20% of the time. If wind (onshore and offshore is even better) and solar plus hydro, geothermal are all combined, it's pretty much 24/7/365. You would then need overcapacity or storage to meet demand. The former would be easier I think at the moment. So can we include externalities into the cost of fossil fuels? :-) This situation only seems to be a problem if the generation source isn't utility-owned, no?

You mean besides the fact that the price per watt of solar has plummeted (and continues to do so)? I don't think failing companies proves a point. Any product and its corresponding market goes through similar stages with one that includes consolidation of the market. If you're talking about utility-scale solar then yes, it is not really that competitive and relies heavily on location plus subsidy but consumer-level solar is become more and more viable each year. I understand two for wind and a little for solar, but I don't see how it can be too much different for a plant that isn't located on or near distribution centers either. I don't really understand three though. All new capacity is greater than previous capacity. How does that gap between capacity potential and actual generation need backup when backup already exists?

Fuel cells I guess, but I'd have to say that VC to mainstream investment in solar has yielded some pretty palpable differences. You'll have to forgive me for possibly forcing an American example and understanding to Canadian situations. I don't know enough about the latter so I'm a little confused considering there are multiple areas in the US where sans subsidies renewables are still cheaper than almost every electricity production source except combined cycle natural gas. Is this not true for Canada as well?

Haven't figured out multiquote on mobile so I'll just number this 1) I don't know about 50 years, from the stuff I've read it's still early but VC funding is accelerating. I'm not sure about combined costs for the renewables+batteries. I don't know if those necessarily have to be funded and run by the utilities as a sole consumer for the market. I don't know enough. I can safely say I'm not an expert. Haha. 2) This was pretty much my point but I wasn't very detailed about it. It's a complex situation because you have public and private interests and public and private utilities as well as energy companies. Legalized monopolies have to maintain a certain levels of revenues for defined profits and capital investment, but incentivzed measures like FIT are counterintuitive to this. But then again the municipal allows this but also finds it necessary to increase or allow an alternative form of production. How is that weighed and completed?

Tyranny of what? Urbanity?

I don't see why the less populated regions of the country deserve a greater representation proportional to their population. JMO.

I don't see the big deal

Appreciate it

If those are other posters, I can assure you I am very new and authentic.

If you like

Populations shift.

Hypothetically, battery technology and improved solar, effeciencies etc. could mean one could go off the grid and say "eff them".

Depends on the scale being used. A small house could store any excess power during intermittent demand into an electric car battery (ranging anywhere from 24-85 kWh (average household use is around 32 per day). These are all recyclable by the way. If we are talking utilities, that technology is still in its early stages but these batteries would be pretty large. Japan is testing this out right now actually. That's just one part of the puzzle though. Still need to improve grid flow and manage distribution regulations over feed-in-tariff policy and stuff like that from the household side.

Well therein lies the problem. A problem not unique to any country actually, but you're right. It is easier to smooth out economic cycles vis a vis Keynesian ideas when one has done a good job maintaining fiscal balance during the good times than the bad. Not all fiscal measures have the same economic multiplier though, so it is possible to still deficit spend but in a way that increases long-term growth in addition to short-term growth (still have to maintain that G in the lovely GDP equation). The real problem is once the economy gets back going on a strong, steady pace and the budget can be balanced (or as close as possible given projections and revisions) is how to keep it within a steady range that doesn't swing too far one way---either to too large a surplus and then taking out of the economy or too large a deficit and not maintaining a good position for future downturns.

Improved Battery technology and upgraded grids shouldn't make renewable intermittency too much of a headache. For the OP: lulz.

I don't think arbitration and accountability in negotiation on the political side is strong enough nor do I think unions are being collaborative enough. Union in North America tend to be too confrontational. A tipping point is going to be reached at some point fiscally and the situation will probably end up like the UAW where the new guys get paid squat. I don't think it's unreasonable at all to think that cops and firefighters be paid the median wage and still get solid pensions. Adjust it every so often to inflation. That's good for the municipalities and good for the unions. If it was only that easy though.

I don't think the Senate is necessary

1) Not spend as much they take in 2) Grow the GDP Nominal GDP figures aren't really a problem in and of themselves.

Marijuana should be legalized and most other drugs should be decriminalized with drugs being a public health issue. IMO.

I personally wouldn't mind either pipeline as long as there is stringent measures taken to ensure pipeline safety as well as a measure in place to tax the fossil fuels and let Canadian federal/provincial government and/or American federal and state governments as they see fit (revenue neutral tax cuts, R&D, healthcare, infrastructure etc.)