With the struggling economies that most communities are facing the question of installing green energy on your home or business, costs become a huge deciding factor. This article in the New York Times (sorry, free subscription required) caught my eye. It stated that many municipalities or utilities are rejecting proposals for renewable energy because it costs too much and would disadvantage their rate payers. It was interesting to note that rate increases of .2% to .9% were sited as reasons to not invest. Those seem like minor expenses, but understandable in these troubling times. Any extra expenses make the decision harder to swallow.
The trouble with some of their math is that current prices for coal or natural gas have a long history of subsidized expenses. Think of how many subsidies that the railroad had to receive in order to bring Wyoming coal to the midwest or how many land easements were granted for power lines and tranmissions towers. Then think of the local and governmental costs associated with the cleanup of mines, tailings from coal ash and air pollution that doesn’t get cleaned but absorbed by the rest of us. Are these costs truly included in the rates the consumers must absorb?
I see renewable energy has its upfront costs and minimal backend costs to surprise us in the future. At least you know what you are paying for. Ecogee is working on solutions that take the consumer’s costs out of the equation. We work to make renewable energy a viable solution for organizations. If they are willing to lock in a rate at today’s prices or lower, then we can work to get them on green power. The article today reinforced why we are doing this. This situation is what drove us to find a better way. Consider joining us to make this a reality.