Polls
Login
RSS Feed: Local News
RSS Feed: Sports
RSS Feed: Voice
| Garamendi adds green plank to platform |
|
|
| Written by Eric Firpo | |
| Thursday, 18 September 2008 | |
|
Celeste Garamendi unveiled on Thursday a series of "green" initiatives she would push for if elected mayor in November.
 Celeste Garamendi discusses green building concepts, including a solar farm and construction incentives, during a press conference Thursday at Sarvey’s Shoes in Tracy. Glenn Moore/Tracy Press At a press conference she organized in the parking lot of Sarvey’s Shoes, Garamendi and a half dozen people who work in the solar industry touted the benefits that come when a business or home harnesses the energy of the sun. The shoe store was chosen in part because its owner, Bob Sarvey, installed solar panels on the building’s roof in 2002 and cut his electric bills from $7,200 a year to $400. It cost him about $115,000 to install the panels, but he said he got about $64,000 back in tax breaks and rebates. He estimated that with rate hikes since, he’d be paying more than $10,000 a year today to Pacific Gas and Electric Co. had he not made the switch. Sarvey also supports Garamendi politically. "There are proven projects here we can use in this region to promote the use of solar here," Garamendi said. The candidate also pointed to a $7 million solar farm built this year by the South San Joaquin Irrigation District, which delivers power to its plant that treats water from the Stanislaus River that the district has rights to use. Most of the cost of the plant was offset by tax breaks and grant money, and the district expects to cut more than $300,000 a year from its $439,000 annual PG&E bill. Garamendi, a longtime critic of the City Council and activist who helped usher the 2000 passage of Measure A, the city’s slow-growth law, wants to turn the city-owned 150-acre former antenna farm on Schulte Road into a solar farm.
 Anastasios Hionis (front right), lead project engineer with Sun Technics, talks to the crowd about solar energy at the press conference. Glenn Moore/Tracy Press Sarvey called getting the necessary permits for his solar panels "a nightmare," and the candidate said that needs to change. Garamendi also proposes a requirement that all future city buildings include solar power and other energy-saving facets. She also said the city should put solar panels on buildings it has now, such as City Hall, a building that opened a year ago. "We need to go back and retrofit buildings," she said. Joseph Silveira, owner of Renewable Integrator Inc., a renewable energy company in Tracy, acknowledged, as others in the industry did, that solar power is expensive to install. But, particularly for businesses, he said, "it’s not a cost, it’s an investment" that pays for itself after several years and allows merchants to reap financial rewards for many years thereafter. "It can happen, and we need to make it happen in Tracy," Garamendi said.
Trackback(0)
Comments
(121)
 written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008 Why didn't she save the time and just ask "Mr. Mayor" at the Bean Festival. Anyone could have told her... Just let PG&E pay for it. When you make a purchase PG&E will already provide rebates and provide you with all the government forms. Again we are seeing nothing new, here. The Tracy Press must be a really small town newspaper to write an article about a candidate who has to resort to pushing PG&E rebate forms? Is this because the "courthouse idea" and the airport VLJ idea were such flops? Thanks!  written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008
Once again Celeste shows leadership. She has the ability to bring good things to Tracy and focus on what's good for the community NOT catering to the residential developers that have controlled City government for decades. That is why the blogger know as TRN, Francis "Skip" Hinman has been charged to write the ridiculous type or statement above. Distorting the facts of the article and slamming Celeste and Bob Sarvey. I will be voting for Celeste in the Mayor's race. I don't see the incumbents IVES and TOLBERT bringing new energy to Tracy. IVES doesn't even have plank, platform or website. You go Celeste, you will win it this time despite the negative stuff this Skippy comes out with, nobody is listening to him.
written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
You mispelled my name again. But, more to the point, if nobody is listening to me, then why did you bother to comment? If you can prove that I distorted the facts then show it. Merely stating that you think someone else's opinions are "ridiculous" doesn't make it true. Besides, I don't even know anyone named Malcolm. I think you made that up too? Next time, at least, please spell my name correctly. Thank you very much! If (and that's an IF) Celeste Garamendi were to be elected she would be known as the: -Park Killer? --> Tesla/Carnegie Park --> Holly Sports Park --> Aquatics Park -PG&E Rebate Reform and Government Rebate Dispenser? -Disappointing Airport Expansion and VLJ Bankruptcy? -TRAQC'ing the Tracy taxpayers with the latest "courthouse idea"? -Candidate who creates smoke and leaves mirrors on the city hall? -Making noise over a few weeks of contract work on the city bldg? -Stealing other bloggers ideas for the solar farm at Shulte? -What's next, Malcolm? November is coming? Thanks! -Skippy written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008
Good to know the underemployed get up early sometimes
 Sarvey's installation cost was a net $51,000. Even if you stay with his annual energy cost in the first year of his solar installation which was $6,800, he's saved $40,800.00 and in two more years his savings will completely pay for his initial investment. So, in eight years he will have recouped his investment and going forward will be seeing more than $7,000 in savings per year. That's an excellent return for him as a businessman and it is environmentally responsible in reducing his carbon footprint on the planet. Sarvey is an excellent example of someone in Tracy that really cares about the community in which they live. And so is Celeste Garamendi, she will align herself with people and resources to make a difference in Tracy. She will lead the city with a positive attitude. Regarding the Solar farm that she endorses. It's a great use for the 150 acres Antenna Farm. Yes, Skippy I know that UBBO thinks it was his original thought, however it put was out there during the last election by Carol Dominguez, your friend in Manteca. However, no matter who thought of it, it's an excellent idea and should be pursued. written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008
This is what you said on another article Skippy, did you mean it and are you a environmental proponent? Does your candidate IVES have any environmentally friendly ideas?
HERE ARE YOUR COMMENTS: "written by Tracy RealNews , September 18, 2008 Hey! Can they throw in a couple of jobs for Tracy residents too? That would be nice! They could hire Tracyites to help: -Find solutions to fund alternative energy (E.g.: Solar) -Teach energy conservation classes to residents and schools -Conduct air quality tests to determine safety of new operations. Just asking. Hope they are listening!" YES Skippy, Celeste is listening and taking ACTION. written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008
When you give us your candidate IVES environmentally friendly ideas please don't forget to research, websites, etc. to support it and maybe witnesses that actually heard IVES talk about environmentally friendly ideas because if we only have you then we'll need corroboration. Here's what I found in another article, and IVES would not comment. Does that mean he's for or against environmentally friendly ideas? Then Tolbert said she had her own idea, that the City has spent $40K on it. HMMM that's odd I see in the minutes that the City rejected spending $40K for a consultant. Can I get a witness?
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080919/A_NEWS/809190321/-1/A_COMM04 written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
Celeste Garamendi didn't find any solutions. And you just admitted that Carol Dominguez and Ubbo Coty suggested the idea before Celeste Garamendi, in a public forum. My suggestion was to find solutions. Celeste Garamendi hasn't done that. She is promoting certain businesses without all the facts. The airport VLJ idea that she put out there is already being billed as a $70 million dollar disappointment. The latest "courthouse idea" is stuck between the TRAQC's. And the solar panels have a life expectancy of how many years. So when your freind's (and I'm assuming Sarvey is your friend too, because we don't really know who you are, here) solar panels will need replaced soon. Try EBay! And tell Celeste Garamendi to go there too. That way she won't provide another "waste of money" for the city when they have to replace the solar panels on the City Building every "eight years". It's another of Celeste Garamendi's Gambling Shell Game. Suggest: Try the State Lottery instead! That might help with your "underemployment" problem? Cheers! -Skippy written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
I looked at the article that you provided. It does not say the Shulte Site will go Solar. Instead, is asks "Could the Antenna Farm Go Solar?" The article also says the following:
Malcolm, If Celeste Garamendi "can't offer specifics" then why should our City government be told, by Celeste Garamendi to pay for this. Perhaps (if it is so lucrative - as we are told in the store) then private sector should pay for this risky business??? But, Celeste Garamendi won't tell you that? Will she, Malcolm? November is coming, Malcolm! Cheers! -Skippy written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008 Oh, and Malcolm... Will Celeste Garamendi also be known as the "green candidate" because she wants to provide a "waste of money" on several risky business ventures. You know, Malcolm, if she actually follows through with these "ideas" - Celeste Garamendi will bankrupt the city! No, I don't think she is listening, Malcolm! Cheers! -Skippy  written by Dale Cose , September 19, 2008 washingtonpost.com By Ariana Eunjung Cha Washington Post Foreign Service Sunday, March 9, 2008; Page A01 washingtonpost.com GAOLONG, China -- The first time Li Gengxuan saw the dump trucks from the nearby factory pull into his village... But the Luoyang Zhonggui High-Technology Co... near the Yellow River, stands out for one reason: It's a green energy company, producing polysilicon destined for solar energy panels sold around the world... But the byproduct of polysilicon production -- silicon tetrachloride -- is a highly toxic substance that poses environmental hazards. "The land where you dump or bury it will be infertile. No grass or trees will grow in the place. . . . It is like dynamite -- it is poisonous, it is polluting. Human beings can never touch it," said Ren Bingyan, a professor at the School of Material Sciences at Hebei Industrial University Could the "Green Candidate" talk about the relationship of 'Green' solar power juxtaposed to the toxic byproduct produced. On one hand we need solar power while on the other... getting producers to green their production is no less important. The relationship needs further work.  written by fortheunderdog , September 19, 2008
TRN,
I just read this article and I believe that Garamendi has a good idea with adopting city buildings to solar. Saving money is what it's all about, isn't it? Even though it will take years to recoup what the installation/parts costs will cost the city, in the long run it'll be worth it. And, regardless of what information you researched that Malcolm referred to about the Shulte site being used for solar, the above Press article says "Garamendi, a longtime critic of the City Council and activist who helped usher the 2000 passage of Measure A, the city’s slow-growth law, wants to turn the city-owned 150-acre former antenna farm on Schulte Road into a solar farm." So she would like to use that property for solar. written by fortheunderdog , September 19, 2008
"written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Oh, and Malcolm... Will Celeste Garamendi also be known as the "green candidate" because she wants to provide a "waste of money" on several risky business ventures." TRN, Are you referring to adopting solar to city buildings and using the antenna farm property for solar? If so, any business venture can be a risky thing. Risk taking is what it's about when anyone starts any type of business. There's always the chance of failure. The fact that Garamendi has come up with an idea is what is eating at you. I would suppose if Ives had come up with this idea first it would be ok in you mind, wouldn't it? Just asking because it appears that whatever Garamendi proposes will always be not good enough for you because you're an Ives supporter. written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008
Cose don't distort!
Apparently China's manufacturers are NOT following good business and environmental practices with the byproduct (which is recyclable), instead they want to monopolize the market and harm their citizens (that's not surprising considering their human rights record) Let's buy American! http://www.enn.com/pollution/article/32974 P.S. I knew Bob Sarvey wouldn't do anything harmful to the planet, what type of environmentally friendly practices do you use Cose, green building technology? written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008 fortheunderdog, Regarding building solar panels on the City Building: You said yourself, solar energy is costly and not efficient. It will take years to recover the costs. Additionally, it will provide very little return to the taxpayers. It is an after thought in development and encourages poor building design. Regarding the Shulte Antenna Farm: I don’t think that you really want a Solar Farm. I think that you want Celeste to win. Tell us again - exactly why is it such a "good idea" that our city government should pay for something that has little ROI and will take years to recover the costs. Given that the federal government is bailing out Fannie, Freddie, AIG, and possibly WaMu. And now explain to us, why would your candidate come up with the "bright idea" of bankrupting the city? There are different types of solar panels? The article said, "Garamendi did not offer specifics". They are inefficient and they do not utilize 50% of the sun's energy. Many types utilize a lot less. A solar farm will cost a lot more millions than you may think. It would NOT utilize inexpensive consumer type solar panels that you think. Still sounds good? Given the economic times - who will pay for this? Bright – Pie in the sky. And remember that Garamendi did not offer specifics! I still think it is just the usual and traditional political ploy from Garmendi. And it does not shine! Additional response to your comment: Your second paragraph shows that you keep putting stock in "Measure A”. I find that interesting given that TRAQC STILL will NOT show "transparently" where the money from the lawsuit went. But, ultimately, the voters will have to decide. Cheers! written by Dale Cose , September 19, 2008 Solar plants have an irregular record. We may want to wait longer to acertain the site's use SOLAR 100 San Bernardino 12/29/82 Never built - land use issues Luz SEGS I & Luz SEGS II DaggettSan Bernardino The Solar One central tower operational from 1982 to 1986. Solar two added more mirrors and was operational from 1995 to 1999. Luz SEGS X, Luz SEGS XI, Luz SEGS XII Harper Dry LakeSan Bernardino 5/13/1992 Construction halted - company bankruptcy SOLAR E-CLIPS AstroPower files for bankruptcy - General Electric bids $15 million for solar-power company source: Steven Church Delaware online 2004.02.03 AstroPower Inc. has filed for bankruptcy as part of an offer by General Electric Co. to buy most of the company's assets for $15 million. written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008 I have better ideas! Build a greenhouse and a 'shared' garden area for the citizens to use. Put it at the Holly Sports Park. People can go there to toil in the Greenhouse and Garden Park, for "Solar Energy"! Thanks! -Skippy written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008 My ideas will save the City Millions! Thanks! -Skippy written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008
Let's buy AMERICAN products for our solar production like these:
http://www.buttecounty.net/solar/made_in_usa.html written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008
Here is a VISION:
http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/news/2005/11/69528 written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008
I don't think we want the "gardeners" sucking up those increased GWF emissions do we Skippy. Cumulative air quality will go over the limit for cancer risk once they get their license and go to full capacity. NO, Schulte Rd. is our industrial/energy corridor. We have the GWF Plant, Biomass Plant and Glass Plant - Solar facility will be right at home there.
written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
I'm trying to calculate the ROI of these, here, "solar panels"... And since you claim to know Sarvey... Please tell us... If the shoe store is sold in "sixteen" years, will the solar panel need to be replaced, or removed? What is their "half life"? Thanks! -Skippy written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008
Anyway, where is your candidate IVES plan for the Antenna Farm. Is he waiting for PG&E to tell him what he can and can't do with it? Please let us know and give us the new link to his website. We can't find the information on his old plank, old platform 2006 site. We need new ideas, new vision, new, better and high use.
written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
How much did it cost to increase emission production at the plant? Thanks! -Skippy written by Dale Cose , September 19, 2008 written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008 No pulling the wool over your eyes, you followed the link? Did the the panels use environmentally sensitive production lo-cals and techniques? http://www.enn.com/pollution/article/32974 China is now a global leader in solar PV manufacture... Most of this development, however, is driven by global demand, with over 90 percent of Chinese-made solar PV systems being exported to Europe, Japan, and the United States. P.S. I knew Bob Sarvey wouldn't do anything harmful to the planet, what type of environmentally friendly practices do you use Cose, green building technology? Mostly just recycle the wood studs and flooring coming out of old buildings back into the same or others, purchasing the majority stock from a building salvage operation discontinuing operations in the mid 80's and incorporating it you probably saw all the redwood door used as wall panels in the Opera house dining room, or the back bar, or the light fixtures, running the Title 24 calculations along with occasional life-cycle cost analysis to advise builders, heating & air-conditioning contractors and building owners, moving houses to new locations, reviewing some of the new budget breaking green building technology most customers are not yet willing to pay for especially in light of a down market... the usual. written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008
Glad you are using some green building recycling techniques. Do you support incentives for builders that use green technology?
But seriously let's buy clean building materials as I said on prior post, buy American: the panels, steel supports, etc. that way we avoid the bad environmental practices of China. http://www.buttecounty.net/solar/made_in_usa.html  written by Observer , September 19, 2008 Mayoral candidate Celeste Garamendi on Thursday called for Tracy to become a leader in solar and renewable energy. I had hoped that the city council would push for it.... lot sooner!! Put the panels on the Court House, too? On all buildings, the cost savings would be astronomical and enviromentally cleaner. However, I need to hear more on the fiscal scale to ensure the success of her plan. I had hoped the city council would start bidding for companies to set up manufacturing in the production of alternate energy, or parts for buildings or hybrid cars? To bring in lots of employment (as long as they don't hire foreign workers on visa taking American's jobs away.)  Good Luck Tracyites, now we gotta hear Tolbert's plans, since she initiated the green plan? And Ives' plans, both of them need to contain fiscal explanation to show their choice showing stronger chance for success? -amy written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
Why don't you answer the question. Garamendi's TRAQC sued the City of Tracy, CA! Perhaps Ives has a new platform after the lawsuit? You could ask if you wanted to. Just tell us where Garamendi hid the money from the TRAQC Measure A lawsuit??? We can't find the website, for months and months. What happened to the "promise" of "transparency"??? And now ANOTHER "bright idea" from Celeste Garamendi??? Why should we trust Celeste Garamendi (or Malcolm for that matter)??? Thanks! -Skippy written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008
25 years life span on new solar panels.
Amy, Get a clue, Tolbert did NOT initiate a green plan. She attempted to put a citizen committee in place and suck 40K out of the City coffers for a consultant. She has been sitting on the Council for 10 years and every opportunity she has had (Grand Theatre, City Hall, residential housing) to call for green building she has been MUM. Her green plan is her "let me see what I can come up with to get elected Mayor" plan. Her RECORD doesn't back it up. Question... Is IVES campaigning? Does he have a platform? It doesn't matter if Skippy has "a better idea", Skippy is not in the drivers seat. written by Observer , September 19, 2008
I see, thanks for the info Malcolm, had wondered why Tolbert didn't say much about it after her talks on it, earlier this year.
I am guessing Tolbert is waiting on the sideline (after observing what other candidates for Mayorship would say) for her plans to materialize for her campaign agenda... what are her ideas and fiscal plans for it? Awfully quiet for now. Ives need to present it to all of Tracyites, too. Let the voters make the decision on what they want. Sure would be nice to see if Garamendi would go with the Holly site and if not, why not and reasons for alternate choice. Plus showing how much revenue it would bring the City. Fully supporting Green Living, no matter who wins the Mayorship. -amy written by Observer , September 19, 2008
But don't let the Sports Park agenda be forgotten during their campaign?
-amy written by Dale Cose , September 19, 2008 My question 1st. written by Dale Cose , September 19, 2008 written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Next question.
Where is the Money from Garamendi's TRAQC lawsuit against the City of Tracy, CA. That was for you, Malcolm. Thanks! -Skippy written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
"'When it comes to solar cells, there is good news and there is bad news. First the bad news. Installing photovoltaic solar panels on your roof will cost you more than you save on electricity bills before the panels have to be replaced. The good news is that you will reduce your carbon footprint and save energy.' " written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
I went to EBay and tried to purchase a solar panel kit. I can't even get a FIVE (5) year warranty? Are you saying Twenty Five (25) years? Where did you get your information? Please show facts, websites, and references! Thanks! -Skippy written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
What is it that Celeste Garamendi has against the Holly Sports Park? Is it what is being called the Alvaraz/Keenan deal??? Thanks! -Skippy written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008 Malcolm, I have a better plan than Garamendi! Let's get Keenan to provide a bid on homes near the airport "dealy thing" that Celeste Garamendi spawned??? Keenan Land Development can build homes with solar panels. Other developers may apply too! What do you say, Malcolm? I have better ideas! Save the city MILLION$! Let the developers pay for it! Why should we let Celeste Garamendi bankrupt the city and raise our taxes because she is green with - ??? written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
Tell Celeste Garamendi to get the number of that "consultant". For ONLY "forty thousand dollars" she could have saved her campaign millions! Cheers! -Skippy written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
The Grand Theater costs the city a lot of money and we know that you and Celeste Garamendi don't like it because it says AKT on the inside. But since you brought it up. How old is the building? And why would Tolbert want to make the building "green"? Do you realize the cost of tearing down the Grand??? And why am I defending Tolbert? Well, I guess, at least Tolbert told us that the Keenan deal wasn't brought to the council, on July 1st. The other ladies that shared a booth, three days later, wouldn't say a word! Cheers! -Skippy written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008
If Tolbert was serious about green building practices then why didn't she bring it to the dais with her Tuesday night when two new projects were approved? 64 residential lots and a commercial project? MUM again? Tracy needs ACTION no CONSULTANTS.
Cose, I don't really divulge my personal information, I'm here to discuss my view of the articles. written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
Are you saying your SOLAR POWER company will install Solar Panels on a rooftop that will last 25 years? I'm assuming you are trying to sell the City Solar Power, here? Will your company provide a 25 year warranty, Malcolm? Please advise! Thanks! -Skippy written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
In light of the 25 year warranty that your company provides (for your solar panels)??? Why is it, in your "expert opinion", that the examples in Dale Cose's post didn't exceed the 24 year mark??? Thanks! -Skippy written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
Why is it that the article you provided says that, "Garamendi did not offer specifics"??? Thanks! -Skippy written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
Why is it that Garamendi wants our government to fund this if she can't "provide specifics"??? Thanks! -Skippy written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
Why is it that we can't get the private sector to fund this? Arent you saying the Solar panels will last 25 years? Sounds lucrative? What's the catch!?!
Thanks! -Skippy written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
Given that Celeste Garamendi "doesn't have the specifics"... Then what does Celeste Garamendi have against consultants? Thanks! -Skippy written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Malcolm,
Why is it that "Garamendi won't provide the specifics"??? Given that your company provides a 25 year warranty on Solar Panels... Couldn't your company have provided her with "expert" information and saved her the $40,000 ??? Thanks! -Skippy  written by Dave Hardesty , September 19, 2008
Just a press conference? Why not open to the entire public? Was it announced? I didn't hear about it but then again that's nothing new.
I would have thought it would be better to announce this sort of thing at a public gathering. Guess no one wanted to deal with any hard questions. All of this sounds good in print but I would like to see some cradle to grave cost analysis because, regardless of where these things are produced and reconditioned or salvaged, there are some serious pollution issues that need to be dealt with and that has a cost component attached to it that needs to be paid for somewhere. I am also wondering if the tax base can afford to subsidize all of America and for how long? Perhaps my biggest fear is what we are now observing with the total cradle to grave costs of CFLs, now that the recommended EPA recycling fee for these twenty-five cent lamps have a fee in excess of $1.25 each. I don't think many people will be recycling them properly at that cost differential and am worried about what that will do to our water supplies as those chemicals contaminate it. For some reason all of this sort of reminds me of the method many drug pushers use to snare their clients. The first few times they font the drugs until the guy is hooked. Then the price goes up exponentially. Like I said, solar is a viable and good option to help out with our nations energy problems, but not the only one. Regardless, I do believe it would be prudent to know all of the costs, up front and hidden, before we embark in something that may end up costing us a whole lot more than we think it does. written by Dave Hardesty , September 19, 2008
Remember MTBE in our gasoline that was to clean up our air? Remember all of the initial mechanical problems it was causing because it had a property that dissolved rubber, the rubber used for gaskets in carburetors and fuel lines? Then there was it’s carcinogenic properties that were contaminating our public water supplies? What about all the heavy metal and other chemical wastes in electronic integrated circuit manufacturing? We were not worried at all about these things either, until they became a problem.
Still not convinced? What about the plastic grocery bags we went to in order to save trees? Now it seems we have a landfill and pollution problem with them. What is that failure to look at it from all angels going to cost us in the future? I am sorry to bring this up as well but people who market these things do have another agenda that is sort of contrary to the whole thing. No manufacturer or vendor is going to be straight up and forward with the buyer by telling them all of the negatives as well. They wouldn’t be able to sell their product if they did. written by Dave Hardesty , September 19, 2008
I am also aware that many commercial power generating stations that use photovoltaic panels change these panels out every 5 to 8 years. I am wondering why. There must be some reason they are not taking them all the way out to the manufacturer's 20 year warrantee. What’s their mindset here?
Then of course our air in Tracy is so clean I am sure no one will ever have to climb up on their roof tops to clean these things. Question, can your roof support you and an array that weighs a little over two pounds per square foot? Lots of questions, very little in the way of answers. But that shouldn't stop anyone from asking those questions should it? I am not totally against the idea of going solar, but I would like to know the entire real cost and not depend on a nebulous “incentive” that can be dropped and is funded by American taxpayers before making a commitment. Finally, do we want to do anything with the Schulte property? After all, according to many it has an environmental air quality issue as well as a couple very dangerous high pressure pipelines running through the property. What if that should explode, scattering shards of solar array shrapnel around all over the place? Ok that's just a dumb question but you should get the idea. Dave Hardesty  written by Concerned Parents , September 19, 2008
What a brilliant idea Garamendi has to use the antenna farm as a solar farm. Tracy could help the environment, use land that they own and save the community money. Bravo!
We put solar on our home in 2003 and have saved so much money that the system will pay for itself in a few more years. written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
I have a better "plan".
Our government should NOT pay for this; or take the RISK out of the taxpayer's pockets. Let the private sector pay for it. We will ONLY truly know if it is a Bright Idea - if the companies in the private sector are willing to incur some of the costs, here. That is the ONLY way to know if it is going to have a Return On Investment. If there is real Equity, to be found here, then let the private sector companies put their colateral into it. Another thing that I take exception to is: ... that unless you can provide "specifics" - this taxpayer is NOT interested! "Waste of Money!!!" Thanks! -Skippy written by fortheunderdog , September 19, 2008
TRN,
"written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008 fortheunderdog, Regarding building solar panels on the City Building: You said yourself, solar energy is costly and not efficient." You have a knack for adding your thoughts as those of others. I never said that solar energy was "not efficient". I said: "Even though it will take years to recoup what the installation/parts costs will cost the city, in the long run it'll be worth it." Here's another of your faults, you always seem to know what the other person really wants. "Regarding the Shulte Antenna Farm: I don’t think that you really want a Solar Farm. I think that you want Celeste to win." I merely stated in my comments that I thought Garamendi has a good idea about converting city owned buildings to solar energy. Now that you bring up YOUR notion that I wanted a solar farm, it is a good idea. With whatever energy is generated by a solar farm, and the Shulte site would be a large one, that energy can be sold back to PG&E or used for other purposes like: schools, lights for illuminating city parks after 10 pm to stop vandalism, city buildings, city lights, etc. You've known for some time now that I prefer Garamendi over Ives. Your last sentence sounds like a desparate attempt to accuse me of favoring a solar farm/city buildings because I want Garamendi to win the Nov election. I merely said solar energy was a good idea. written by fortheunderdog , September 19, 2008
Which second paragraph of my comments are you referring to since I posted two comments further up?
This one: "And, regardless of what information you researched that Malcolm referred to about the Shulte site being used for solar, the above Press article says "Garamendi, a longtime critic of the City Council and activist who helped usher the 2000 passage of Measure A, the city’s slow-growth law, wants to turn the city-owned 150-acre former antenna farm on Schulte Road into a solar farm." So she would like to use that property for solar." Or this one: "Are you referring to adopting solar to city buildings and using the antenna farm property for solar? If so, any business venture can be a risky thing. Risk taking is what it's about when anyone starts any type of business. There's always the chance of failure. The fact that Garamendi has come up with an idea is what is eating at you. I would suppose if Ives had come up with this idea first it would be ok in you mind, wouldn't it? Just asking because it appears that whatever Garamendi proposes will always be not good enough for you because you're an Ives supporter." Your comment, re: these paragraphs, has nothing to do with the fact that this blog is talking about Garamendi's idea of harnessing solar energy. Why are you off subject? If you have an information why this plan of Garamendi's is not good for the city, please...websites, facts, factual references. The article we all read, above, is merely Garamendi having an idea for solar energy. written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Concerned Parents,
Don't get too excited yet. It wasn't even Garamendi's idea! Is she taking credit for other's ideas? Why wasn't the meeting announced? Here is another's ten year example - similar to yours:
I hope it is not time to replace the solar panels, soon? Thanks! written by fortheunderdog , September 19, 2008 Since Dave Hardesty brought it up, Garmendi having a press conference and not a public "questions & answers", I would like to propose to the Tracy Press that there be an article in the press asking Garamendi and Ives to hold a "town hall meeting" where questions of them will be asked. This will, once and for all, stop all the negative comments from bloggers who favor a particular candidate. After all, we can type comments until we're blue-in-the-face and we'll never get the answer we're satisfied with. written by fortheunderdog , September 19, 2008
TRN,
Please! You're throwing rhetoric into a simple article that stated Garamendi's idea of solar energy. Now you're talking about this not even being her idea. Did Ives say it first? If he did, you wouldn't be so enraged. I think you'd have liked Ives to be the first to publically mention solar energy....that's what I think. But he's too busy trying to figure out a way to approve Ellis and the water park. I think my idea to the Tracy Press is a good one, to have an article letting Garamendi and Ives know that residents would like some sort of "town hall meeting" for questions and answers. And if you're angry that Ives, or you, didn't think of it first that's ok too.....I'll give you the credit. written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008 "The batteries in our residential system may need replacement in five to 10 years." -geopower.com written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008 I have a better idea. If this is a "bright idea" then we should be to get a "developer deal" to pay for this! Perhaps the "plan" for "8000" homes that was mentioned during the July 1st City Council meeting would be a incorporating this idea? Alas, we will never know, because Councilperson Sundberg would not speak about the "plan" for the "8000" RGA's. Interestingly, she did vote for the Alvarez site. Hmmmm... Also: There is no need to provide a few weeks of contractor labor to retrofit the City Building for some candidate's campaign! I'm calling for a campaign against this: "Waste of Money!!" Thanks! -Skippy written by fortheunderdog , September 19, 2008
"written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
Another thing that I take exception to is: ... that unless you can provide "specifics" - this taxpayer is NOT interested!" What numbers have you come up with for ROI? written by Dave Hardesty , September 19, 2008
ftud
From my conversations with the editors of TP I believe they are planning such an event. I am looking forward to it and I hope others as well. But let's not leave Evelyn out of the fray either as she also is running for Mayor and she deserves her spot in the spotlight as well. Some have made comments about tipping our questions off to the candidates allowing them to generate their answers. That's actually good. I want them all to do their homework so they can adequately demonstrate to all of us they deserve our votes. If a question is asked and the answer is morphed into some other topic, that will tell me the person being asked the question is nothing more than a politician with other agendas and will weigh against that candidate. Are my questions difficult to answer? Absolutely. As an engineer they are many of the same types questions my employer and government ask me to answer and I am rarely given an opportunity to research the answers and have to answer on the fly. I don't like that and don't expect political candidates that do not have any engineering training to go through such ordeals. That is precisely why I am airing many of these questions. Woe to the candidate that isn't preparing him/herself at this time as it is my intent to ask these questions of them in the public forums when they take place. If they don't do their homework and give reasonable answers they are going to look pretty dumb as the next candidate can answer satisfactorily. written by Dave Hardesty , September 19, 2008
We have what is called a participatory government. In that we the citizens are to participate in the process. It's not a spectator sport and those who believe that it is are going to be bitterly disappointed in the candidate they elect who fails to live up to his or her promises.
Yes I currently have candidates that will more than likely win my vote. Some of you suspect you know who they are. But the jury is still out and I won't make the final decision until I cast my vote come election day. Until then it's up to each candidate to perform and give me the confidence I require to give them my vote. How the rest of you arrive at your decision is your own business. I am simply telling you how I will be reaching my decision. The floor is open, the dance card is still unfilled and anything can happen between now and November. Hang on folks, it's going to be an entertaining ride. Dave Hardesty written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008 I have a better idea! Save the city million$: Put a stack of PG&E rebate forms on a table in the lobby of the City Building! Thanks! -Skippy written by fortheunderdog , September 19, 2008
"written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
I have a better idea. If this is a "bright idea" then we should be to get a "developer deal" to pay for this! Perhaps the "plan" for "8000" homes that was mentioned during the July 1st City Council meeting would be a incorporating this idea? Alas, we will never know, because Councilperson Sundberg would not speak about the "plan" for the "8000" RGA's. Interestingly, she did vote for the Alvarez site. Hmmmm..." Oooh, oooh....I know the answer. Let's get Ives to ask Serpa to throw a solar farm which he could build on the antenna property. Then he could have two sites named for him: Serpa Family Aquatic Park Serpa Family Solar Farm  written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008
Skippy,
Now you're talking! That is a fabulous idea, a public/private Solar venture partnership. Especially in the industrial corridor where the Antenna Farm is located. I'm sure many of those industrial companies would love to realize the savings that Sarvey is experiencing in their utility costs. Maybe even offset some of their air polluting emissions? If the Glass Plant, GWF Plant or the other distribution plants like Safeway could utilize the solar generated power I think that could be a win-win (as former Mayor Bilbrey used to say) written by Tracy RealNews , September 19, 2008
fortheunderdog,
You misunderstood again. Celeste Garamendi cannot show us the "specifics" of why this I am still interested in the private sector paying for it instead of us taxpayers getting TRAQC'ed again. Sorry! I know it bothers you that other people don't trust your candidate. Personally, I just don't see the "transparency" that we were "promised". Especially that money from the TRAQC lawsuit? Where is it??? The matress??? Will you ask at your meeting??? And, if you have an information why this so-called "plan" of Garamendi's is good for the city, then please show websites, facts, factual references. Thanks! -Skippy  written by mactrew5 , September 19, 2008
Hey whatever happened to the windmill power? Is that not working? Did we just throw that one out the window? Also, don't we have a delta and canals that could possibly provide water power? Maybe we are but it is just not enough? Anyone know? Solar power sounds good too.
However....I think that if the people running for office are just now bringing this up and have never been known as a proponent publicly for alternative powers as such are simply doing it as a "get me into office gimmick". Still don't trust them. Is there anyone else who wants to run?????  written by Dale Cose , September 19, 2008 written by fortheunderdog , September 19, 2008 You said yourself, solar energy is costly and not efficient." .... I never said that solar energy was "not efficient". I said: "Even though it will take years to recoup what the installation/parts costs will cost the city, in the long run it'll be worth it." As currently manufactured... I'll state a solar system cannot produce enough power during it's lifetime to pay it's installation and operations costs without government subsidizing it. written by Concerned Parents , September 19, 2008
Our solar panels have a 25 year warranty so we're good, thanks. Even if as you say "it takes 10 years to cost less than buying all electricity from utilities" there are all of those free years after the pay-off date not to mention the environmental rewards,
written by Concerned Parents , September 19, 2008
...
written by fortheunderdog , September 19, 2008 Since Dave Hardesty brought it up, Garmendi having a press conference and not a public "questions & answers", I would like to propose to the Tracy Press that there be an article in the press asking Garamendi and Ives to hold a "town hall meeting" where questions of them will be asked. This will, once and for all, stop all the negative comments from bloggers who favor a particular candidate. After all, we can type comments until we're blue-in-the-face and we'll never get the answer we're satisfied with. Another great idea FTUD. written by Dale Cose , September 19, 2008 written by Concerned Parents , September 19, 2008 covering the inverter... future connections inspections original purchaser or transferable warranty type of roof, maintenance for same batteries and if the government subsidized say 50% of the system and installation... for my part, you're welcome. written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008
I don't know that your statement is true Cose. Let's take Sarvey's system as an example. Yearly savings of $7,000.00 over 25 years is $175K - his cost in 2002 (cost has gone down and panels are more efficient now) was $115K of which he paid $51K (65K was rebated). Even if he had paid the full cost of the system himself he would have realized a $60K savings. As far as the government subsidy I would much rather see my tax dollars go into this type of program than wasteful government spending we so often see. Here I can see a return on those dollars for the planet. Over time the technology is going to get better. Remember the cost of the first color TV's? Now you can get one that's better quality for less dollars. It's market driven.
written by fortheunderdog , September 19, 2008
TRN,
I understood your comment quite clearly. Thanks written by Dale Cose , September 19, 2008
written by Malcolm , September 19, 2008
Cose, I don't really divulge my personal information, I'm here to discuss my view of the articles. I answered your question and asked about your green. Would you like the same subsidy for oil? written by Dale Cose , September 19, 2008 Nice that Bob's system works as you say. As far as the government subsidy I would much rather see my tax dollars go into this type of program than wasteful government spending we so often see. How so? written by fortheunderdog , September 19, 2008
"written by Dale Cose , September 19, 2008 As currently manufactured... I'll state a solar system cannot produce enough power during it's lifetime to pay it's installation and operations costs without government subsidizing it." Maybe this is where the city should break away from any gov't subsidizing and take responsibility for its own actions. With money saved over time using solar energy, those savings can be directed to repair/replacement when the need arises. |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/Hide comments
What???
The article says Sarvey will save over $100,000 on this investment. If he is saving so much money, why should the City have to pay for it again and again?