Notifications
Clear all

WAPA's Solar Panels

 
ms411
(@ms411)
Expert
Alana33
(@alana33)
Expert

Yes, they have completely clear cut an entire hillside and I see very little in the way of sediment run-off barriers. Not a tree or bush to be seen. Hope it's worth it to get all of 3% (if that number can be believed) of our district's electrical load.

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 14, 2014 4:49 pm
bpendleton
(@bpendleton)
Active Member

I do not live down there, but the advent of Nuclear power would provide energy for all districts and reduce cost's to the average 11.9/kWH, place on PR (I know they tested it in the 60's) I am surprised it hasn't lived on, clearly big oil has a strangle hold on the islands.

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 14, 2014 6:05 pm
vicanuck
(@vicanuck)
Expert

I know some like myself would support a nuclear power plant here but the population recently nixed a waste to energy plant that could have made the government hundreds of millions taking waste from other islands and burning it here. Anything that makes sense wouldn't see the light of day here.

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 14, 2014 6:17 pm
Alana33
(@alana33)
Expert

I wasn't for the WTE project then and am still not, especially when it was to be built and supervised by people that had absolutely no experience whatsoever in building any such facility nor running it, were not on the up & up, not to mention transporting waste from STJ, STT to STX and all that entails (shipwrecks by the seashores) plus all the emissions. It was just not worth it for the minute amount of electricity it would have produced for STX.

That particular fiasco was Hugo's and May's wishful thinking for their "golden parachute retirement package."
The only money to have been made was not going to be going into public coffers but into private pockets.

It VIWMA would ever get it together to recycle, there would not be so much waste to begin with.

Seriously? You'd let these bunch of yahoos build and manage a Nuclear Reactor.............???
I guess if we were all glowing in the dark, we wouldn't need as much electricity.;)

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 14, 2014 6:41 pm
Exit Zero
(@exit-zero)
Trusted Member Registered

It is hard for me to remember - but I drove by there today and it looks like the old Drive In Movie site?
No idea why they would clear cut down to the bare dirt like that - it will probably grow back before the project starts.
All those new homeowners in the development above it must be pretty disappointed with the new view and upcoming array.

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 14, 2014 6:45 pm
Alana33
(@alana33)
Expert

It is the site plus the hillside surrounding the old Drive In movie theater. Good memory, EZ.
Pretty bare and barren looking now. Used to have deer all in that area once upon a time.

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 14, 2014 7:38 pm
bpendleton
(@bpendleton)
Active Member

I am just going to assume the Department of Energy wouldn't let any yahoo's run it. Simply because it is a level 5 environment, but you'd make enough energy to sell off to other islands. And its actually the less hazardous of energy sources including wind (which have killed over 500 people in the last 10 years).

Not to mention you'd then be able to sell all that oil it costs for the islands back, and you'd then have high-tech industry on the islands because with ne comes more bandwidth la-te-da-te everybody.

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 14, 2014 7:46 pm
a_dugas6
(@a_dugas6)
Advanced Member

I don't live on STX yet, but I am moving there. To be honest if there was a Nuclear Reactor/Power Plant there, I wouldn't be moving there. Look at what the tsunami did to Japan? You would suggest a Nuclear Reactor on an island that is only 28 miles by 7 miles??? Well I guess if there was an accident you wouldn't have to worry about anyone surviving that could complain after.

The people that ran the plant in Japan weren't "yahoo's" by any definition. Think about the location, hurricanes, they were just tersting a tsunami warning system. So if the plant has a melt down, do the change the warning system from sirens to a really loud message saying "Good Luck Dude, now you're screwed"

Again, I don't live there yet, but that just seems like a really unsafe location to put it. I also agree about the waste, it's not feasible or responsible to build one there.

Aurore

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 14, 2014 7:58 pm
CruzanIron
(@cruzaniron)
Expert

The only money to have been made was not going to be going into public coffers but into private pockets.

And somehow that is worse than WAPA contributing no money to the public coffers?

And the price of electricity would have been less.

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 14, 2014 8:01 pm
Alana33
(@alana33)
Expert

No, That's on top of WAPA contributing no money to the public coffers.
I doubt seriously electricity would have cost signicicantly less since they'd have beeen producing a miniscule amount while charging for other things and those costs were significant.

Look at the fact that WMA has over a $30MILLION budget now, just signs contracts to move wastes around and does no significant recycling while wishing to implement even more fees for the consumer. VIWMA is a nightmare 2nd only to WAPA..

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 14, 2014 8:42 pm
CruzanIron
(@cruzaniron)
Expert

.

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 14, 2014 9:11 pm
MissJustice
(@MissJustice)
Trusted Member

A previous candidate (republican) for governor suggested using a submerged nuclear sub to power the plant, the sea water being the buffer in event of accident, and the waste disposed wherever subs dispose of their wastes

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 14, 2014 9:13 pm
LiquidFluoride
(@LiquidFluoride)
Trusted Member

A previous candidate (republican) for governor suggested using a submerged nuclear sub to power the plant, the sea water being the buffer in event of accident, and the waste disposed wherever subs dispose of their wastes

floating would be more appropriate.. it could detach in the case of hurricanes and float out to sea to weather it safely.

Russia has serious plans for several

its a pretty interesting idea

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 15, 2014 1:04 am
C_Ray6
(@C_Ray6)
Advanced Member

I would not be a fan of a nuclear power plant on one of the islands and would not relocate if one were planned. If someone could figure out how the big energy companies could make money on solar panels on a continuous basis, the technology would be developed. (We can't let our CEOs lose employment opportunities. ) I for one would invest almost anything reasonable up front to have self contained solar panels and batteries and be off the grid. Many in Hawaii are living off the grid now. Of course those that do simplify their lives do not feel the need to have big screen Tvs and the such. Nothing wrong with having a big screen TV and other amenities if one desires this. One amenity I would want to have even if simplifying my life would be a lap top computer with Internet access. I could "rough" it in most other ways. Internet access is almost like what the transistor radio used to be. Otherwise, give me the simple life. Very cool discussion.

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 15, 2014 11:48 am
sunshinefun
(@sunshinefun)
Trusted Member

Nuclear power is still the safest and cheapest way to generate electricity and there are dozens of municipalities with large scale garbage incinerators all over North America. The NIMBY mentality is obviously alive and well here in the VI.

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 15, 2014 12:24 pm
Native Son
(@Native_Son)
Advanced Member

Nuclear power is still the safest and cheapest way to generate electricity and there are dozens of municipalities with large scale garbage incinerators all over North America. The NIMBY mentality is obviously alive and well here in the VI.

😮

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 15, 2014 1:03 pm
C_Ray6
(@C_Ray6)
Advanced Member

One must admit the USVI isn't a very big "back yard."

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 15, 2014 2:41 pm
billd
(@billd)
Trusted Member

I am infavor of a nuke if the following is done!

1. HOGO has NOTHING TO DO WITH IT! Out, gone, close the door, etc.

2. The plant would be run by an outside company with NO government interaction. NONE. They would be utility that would be governed by a state side entity.

3. The only local aspect would be the outside plant and the revenue collection points. No more WAPA HQ crap.

4. All business would be done with a hands on approach. The government would be just another customer.

5. Any electrical hand outs with be managed by the housing authority, a non VI function.

My propoal is simple. WAPA has gotten us to the point were we are one of the largest cost centers in the world. 53c/KW is robbery. Never let them do it again.

BillD

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 15, 2014 2:59 pm
coastermonger
(@coastermonger)
New Member

Ugh I totally understand the frustration with power costs. My hope is that solar simply becomes cheaper and cheaper to the point where nearly everyone can afford to put it on their own roofs.

If this type of self-sufficiency ramps up, it will decrease power costs for everyone and reduce the load on the network to a point.

Nuclear can be attractive if it's done properly, but the danger is that if it's mis-managed, a natural disaster or operational accident could make the island(s) uninhabitable for thousands of years. Just something to think about before you advocate for nuclear power in the middle of a hurricane zone.

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 15, 2014 5:04 pm
noOne
(@noOne)
Trusted Member

One of the biggest problems is getting the government to pay for what they use... I see that as a huge hurdle to overcome for any private company.

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 15, 2014 5:58 pm
sunshinefun
(@sunshinefun)
Trusted Member

And thats why the GVI will never get rid of WAPA and bring in a private company. If I had a total monopoly bring in millions a year that provided me with free power, I'd wanna keep it to myself too.

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 15, 2014 7:01 pm
C_Ray6
(@C_Ray6)
Advanced Member

I concur with Coastermonger

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 16, 2014 2:45 pm
LiquidFluoride
(@LiquidFluoride)
Trusted Member

Nuclear can be attractive if it's done properly, but the danger is that if it's mis-managed, a natural disaster or operational accident could make the island(s) uninhabitable for thousands of years..

Uhh... uninhabitable for thousands of years?

where'd you get that from? That's completely false.... radiation is one of the least understood topics out there, and your expressed thoughts here are very far from reality.

ReplyQuote
Posted : May 16, 2014 11:42 pm
Close Menu