Do rooftop solar panels make sense in Western Washington? | Washington

(The Center Square) – Western Washington experiences heavy cloud cover and rainfall, mostly during the winter months, which means the Evergreen State is not an ideal location for using solar panels to generate energy.

That much was admitted in a recent release article in The Seattle Times begins by stating that “Western Washington is one of the worst places in the contiguous United States for solar energy. Maybe even the worst place.”

Nevertheless, the article suggests that Western Washington homeowners could benefit from the lower costs of installing rooftop solar panels thanks to upcoming subsidies.

These subsidies will be $156 million from the federal government for rooftop and other solar projects, which, combined with other tax credits for solar installations, reduces homeowners’ upfront investment costs.

Gov. Jay Inslee called the federal subsidies “a godsend,” but Todd Myers, vice president of research at the Washington Policy Center for the Environment, told The Center Square it was “lemonade stand economics.”

“Gub. “Inslee says all the federal funding coming into the state for solar is a godsend,” said Myers, who wrote blog was critical of an article in The Seattle Times. “Well, of course, that’s the only way you’re going to get it done – if you get what you perceive as federal money from the government.”

He then explained why he thinks the economics of solar panels don’t work in Western Washington.

“This is where the parents pay all the costs and the kids get all the benefits and they think it’s great, but the reality is the economics just don’t work,” he said.

An article in the Seattle Times conceded that “roof panels won’t generate as much electricity, but small projects do add up and pave the way for others to come. This allows people and companies to do something Today; This is a chance to be part of the solution.”

According to Myers, people concerned about the effects of climate change can do many things now that make more sense not only from an economic but also an environmental point of view.

“There are a million things you can do that are cheaper and have a bigger impact,” he said.

One example Myers suggests is renewable energy loans.

Households and businesses can purchase renewable energy credits to supply their home or building with clean energy. A renewable energy credit generates one megawatt-hour of electricity from a renewable energy source and then shares it with the power line system that transports the energy throughout the region. Renewable energy loans are tradable, intangible commodities.

“Essentially, this means purchasing renewable energy elsewhere in the area where it is more efficient,” Myers noted.

He stressed that even in the sunniest parts of the country, rooftop solar panels typically bring little profit, even with massive government subsidies.

“It’s absolutely not viable in a place like Seattle,” Myers said.

Western Washington has, according to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory the least amount of solar energy per square meter in the US, except Alaska.

“We are spending huge amounts of money with virtually no benefit to the environment,” Myers concluded. “The same people who say we are facing a climate crisis and we need to act now are the same people who are spending all the taxpayers’ money to do essentially nothing to help the planet.

“If Inslee and the federal government believed that we needed to act now to reduce the impact of CO2 emissions, they would not spend money on rooftop solar panels in Seattle.”