|
|
Post by The Big Dog on May 30, 2009 13:16:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by heckheckle on May 30, 2009 18:52:10 GMT -5
BD: I know you can figure better than that. I won't
fault you for forgetting to add in the Payback Time.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on May 30, 2009 23:17:29 GMT -5
Let's see....
According to published sources the Air Force expects to save $1M per year. They spent $100M. That would put the break even early in the next century. Assuming that the acres of panels don't require any maintenance over that period which every dollar of upkeep would add time to the break even. Oh... did I mention that those panels typically have a 25 to 30 year service life?
Is that what you meant?
|
|
|
|
Post by heckheckle on Jun 3, 2009 2:53:13 GMT -5
Oh, inflation would change the figures. There is no way to get a true
cost amount.
It's sort of like Statistics. Statistics can be used to Enhance an arguement,
or to detract from from an arguement, so I don't pay much attention to
them, Too flexible, just as your figures are, Too flexible.
|
|
|
|
Post by capttankona on Jun 3, 2009 14:52:11 GMT -5
Math does not lie. Statistics can not be manipulated, as you claim. Numbers don't care about politics. Which explains why so many lies come out through the Leftist camps with things like the number of spousal beatings during the Supre Bowl, etc. Because there are no real statistics to back them up, they lie and use their lie to advance their cause. Up to the point where everyone believes the lie is the truth and the truth is a lie.
I was listenign to Mike Farrell on a show the other day, the topic was health insurance and universal health care. Like a typical leftist he threw out a figure of 18 million people who die each year in this country without health care. Well, I was shocked, how could it be that high? Are we really such a non-caring nation?
So, unlike the average American, like you, I looked up some stats. Well, approximately 2,419,200 people die each year in this country, which is only 13.44% of the 18 million Mike Farrell claimed died each year without health insurance. So, he was, in essence, advancing a lie. And that is exactly how people of your philosophy operate to get the change they desire. Fortunately, not everyone is stupid enough to believe the lie, but we have an uphill battle to be sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Jun 3, 2009 17:12:27 GMT -5
Oh, inflation would change the figures. There is no way to get a true cost amount. Inflation would carry out the cost even farther, once maintenance, repair and obsolecence are factored in.... so what's your point? Which statement proves you have absolutely no idea what the hell you are talking about. This is nothing at all like statistics, and it's ridiculous to claim that it is, although from your statements I have to infer it's simply because you can't wrap your head around it. This is business accounting 101 stuff. Cost benefit analysis and time to break even when: ** The initial cost ($100M) ** The annual saving ($1M) are known quantities is pretty easy. The press reports, and no doubt the government press release, don't go into the cost of maintenance, repair and replacement for damage / obsolescene which have to be factored into any CBA or ROI calculation. All of those factors are variables, yes, but they can be estimated to within a couple of percent based on known performance of similar systems already in use around the world. This $100M is going to take well over a century to break even. Plain and simple. Everyone's great grandchildren will be the ones who "reap the reward"... in the meantime every generation, including the current ones, until then will be reaping the whirlwind. |
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on Jun 4, 2009 15:25:12 GMT -5
This $100M is going to take well over a century to break even. Plain and simple. Everyone's great grandchildren will be the ones who "reap the reward"... in the meantime every generation, including the current ones, until then will be reaping the whirlwind.
Look at where our society was 100 years ago. Most houses did not have electricity, let alone indoor plumbing. The automobile was an oddity, affordable only by the rich and eccentric. Most street lights burned kerosene and were lit by hand. Death rates from diseases like tuberculosis or the flu were very high. Technology today is advancing rapidly. Every new discovery facilitates the next discovery, so that the rate of advancement of technology will continue to increase at geometric rates. That means really, really fast, Heck. To sink $100M into a project that only saves $1M a year is extremely shortsighted from an economical point of view. The only thing that would save this project would be if the cost of electricity skyrocketed, so that it would save considerably more than $1M a year. If Henry Waxman has his way with the Cap-and-Trade bill, that could be exactly what happens. Otherwise, it's just a demonstration project funded with taxpayer dollars. |
|
