The hunt for cleaner, more sustainable energy sources should be undertaken by the entire planet. Most don’t dispute that argument. However, where do you draw the line between being reasonable and being wasteful?
Should we switch to an energy source without considering the hardship it will cause to our finances? In addition to the financial considerations, “clean energy initiatives” have environmental consequences that are being overlooked.
For instance, fervent proponents of climate change decry the fossil fuel sector as parasitic polluters of the environment. But has anyone looked at how damaging to the environment it is to mine the resources needed to make electric car batteries?
Due to the radical narrative that demands that our energy needs be changed regardless of the repercussions, we are not told of these narratives. However, data about a renewable energy source’s actual productivity and financial efficiency should never be exaggerated.
That doesn’t seem to be the case with solar energy, an often praised source of free energy. Solar energy has long been heralded as the all-purpose renewable energy source. Radical climate zealots will insist that it is even though it’s not. They don’t give the full story.
First, storing solar energy is still challenging. What happens when the power grid is compromised because we experience a series of cloudy days? The climate freaks will sidestep that question with adept skill.
But there is some concrete data they cannot sidestep. That’s the true financial practicality and efficiency of solar power. The numbers just do not add up. Solar energy companies are overstating the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of solar power to sell consumers on the idea.
A Frederickton, Missouri resident said a solar energy firm misled him with empty promises. He was not happy. Curtis Jarvis spoke with News4 Missouri. Jarvis said the solar firm told him “Own your own power. That’s what they said. I own very little power.”
Pink Energy sold Jarvis his solar system. They promised that the solar panels Jarvis was purchasing would provide sufficient energy for his home. The company boasted that he would have an endless supply of energy, more than his home would ever need.
They lied. Jarvis is paying monthly installments on $46,000. He was told that his 25-year investment would result in a 61 percent reduction in his energy consumption from outside sources. However, that figure has turned out to be closer to 10 percent.
That’s a far shade less efficient than Pink Energy proclaimed. But just like the liberal crazies are exaggerating the climate crisis, the renewable energy companies are hoodwinking the consumers with overblown projections.
Pink Energy has decided to shut down operations after more than 1,000 consumer complaints. It’s unlikely that they’ll have to repay a penny for their scheme. This entire climate crisis is a scheme. Curtis Jarvis said it’s “the biggest waste of money I’ve ever spent!”
A few are going to “get rich quick,” while millions are going to get bamboozled. These crooks need to be held accountable. Pink Energy issued a rich statement full of fabricated regret for what company officials referred to as that “now forced us to make the decision to close our doors completely and immediately.”
“The decision we have to now make does not come lightly and has taken a tremendous toll on all of us, and it is with our deepest regrets that we are notifying all Pink Energy employees that your employment is terminated immediately effective today.” These scams are only going to get worse.