Home-Made Power

Oil, coal, hydrogen, fuel cells, hybrid cars, renewables, geothermal, economical growth



Good News on Solar

The remarks below were made on the Vortex list.
You can subscribe to it by sending a *blank* message to: vortex-L-request@eskimo.com Put the single word "subscribe" in the subject line of the header. No quotes around "subscribe," of course.
I thought they would be interesting to readers of the energy newsgroups.
There is something to be said for doing what you think is right, even if it costs you more than not doing it.
That's what using solar panels and other alternative forms of energy amounts to.
People who do nothing but look at payback time for solar panels or other forms of alternative energy are missing the forest for the trees.
If people would wean themselves from oil-based electricity, even if it is not economic to start with, it would be an incentive for researchers and entrepreneurs to come up with more efficient solar panels and other methods of generating heat and electricity.

ChrisZell@clearchannel.com writes:
The latest EE Times ( Dec. 12) has a cover article on T.J. Rodgers and Cypress Semiconductors getting into solar power, big-time. They bought a former disk-drive plant in Manila, Phillipines to crank out wafers. "We fully anticipate the Philippines fab being capable of turning out the equivalent of 100 megawatts a year" a spokeman said.
They hope to up the efficiency and knock prices down to $1.50 a watt.
High oil prices could be the best thing that ever happened to alternative energy. I hope such prices continue for several years so as to establish alternatives firmly - in some cases, with wind and solar power, the equipment won't get ripped out just because oil prices decline. The oil companies and OPEC nations will get stuck competing against decentralized sources that won't go away.
Heck, all we really need is a bit more electricity per year and some other way to power automoblies and we're done with terrorists, Middle East instability, much of the trade deficit, and a host of other problems.

Good News on Solar

Rhongh Dhongh wrote:

There is something to be said for doing what you think is right, even if it costs you more than not doing it.
That's what using solar panels and other alternative forms of energy amounts to.

If solar panels cost some $25/watt it destroys capital. Capital that could be used for R&D to get the cost of solar thermal electric farms down to $4/watt. It may feel good if you throw the numbers out.
I prefer not to.
Best, Dan.
-- "We need an energy policy that encourages consumption" George W. Bush.
"Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy." Vice President Dick Cheney

Good News on Solar

Dan Bloomquist wrote:


Rhongh Dhongh wrote:
There is something to be said for doing what you think is right, even if it costs you more than not doing it.
That's what using solar panels and other alternative forms of energy amounts to.
If solar panels cost some $25/watt it destroys capital. Capital that could be used for R&D to get the cost of solar thermal electric farms down to $4/watt. It may feel good if you throw the numbers out.
I prefer not to.
Best, Dan.

It's a dang good thing that PV isn't $25 / watt, $4/watt is bad enough.
-- Steve Spence Dir., Green Trust, http://www.green-trust.org Contributing Editor, http://www.off-grid.net http://www.rebelwolf.com/essn.html

Good News on Solar

Steve Spence wrote:

Dan Bloomquist wrote:

Rhongh Dhongh wrote:
There is something to be said for doing what you think is right, even if it costs you more than not doing it.
That's what using solar panels and other alternative forms of energy amounts to.
If solar panels cost some $25/watt it destroys capital. Capital that could be used for R&D to get the cost of solar thermal electric farms down to $4/watt. It may feel good if you throw the numbers out.
I prefer not to.
It's a dang good thing that PV isn't $25 / watt, $4/watt is bad enough.

That is $4 a 'peak watt'. But, you knew that....
Best, Dan.
-- "We need an energy policy that encourages consumption" George W. Bush.
"Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy." Vice President Dick Cheney

Good News on Solar

Dan Bloomquist wrote:


Steve Spence wrote:
Dan Bloomquist wrote:

Rhongh Dhongh wrote:
There is something to be said for doing what you think is right, even if it costs you more than not doing it.
That's what using solar panels and other alternative forms of energy amounts to.
If solar panels cost some $25/watt it destroys capital. Capital that could be used for R&D to get the cost of solar thermal electric farms down to $4/watt. It may feel good if you throw the numbers out.
I prefer not to.
It's a dang good thing that PV isn't $25 / watt, $4/watt is bad enough.
That is $4 a 'peak watt'. But, you knew that....
Best, Dan.

So what kind of watts are you talking about? Peak watts is how pv is rated and sold.
-- Steve Spence Dir., Green Trust, http://www.green-trust.org Contributing Editor, http://www.off-grid.net http://www.rebelwolf.com/essn.html

Good News on Solar

Steve Spence wrote:

So what kind of watts are you talking about? Peak watts is how pv is rated and sold.

Fully installed producer watts.
Best, Dan.
-- "We need an energy policy that encourages consumption" George W. Bush.
"Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy." Vice President Dick Cheney

Good News on Solar

I don't see how pv will ever be able to compete with a closed cycle engine with a dish reflector.
Bret Cahill

Good News on Solar

Rhongh Dhongh wrote:

The remarks below were made on the Vortex list.
There is something to be said for doing what you think is right, even if it costs you more than not doing it.
That's what using solar panels and other alternative forms of energy amounts to.
People who do nothing but look at payback time for solar panels or other forms of alternative energy are missing the forest for the trees.

I suggest this is precisely the kind of woolly thinking that is holding solar technology back today. Its only when folk get a more grown up view on things (ie able to take more factors into account) that solar will shed its popular image of being technology for fools. There are cases today where solar PV makes sense, and many more cases where solar thermal makes good sense. The failure to adopt these solutions more is the direct result of the widespread belief that anything solar can not be taken seriously. We here might not see it that way, but 99% of the population does, rightly or wrongly.
When it comes to missing the forest for the trees, that is what the viewpoint proposed does imho. The whole usefulness of solar pv energy lies not in mass deployment today, but rather in ongoing R&D until something more widely applicable is developed. To fund that we have sales of solar technology today for the minority apps where it does make sense.
Solar pv is not a technology fit for widespread deployment today. All the dreaming in the world wont change that. If we all went solar pv today, the national cost would be heavy. It has to be paid for somehow: public and private purse strings would be much affected. Education funding would drop, police funding would fall, welfare would be cut, many R&D budgets would evaporate, safety initiatives would cease, medical services would see significant cuts, in short some people would die, the rest of us would live poorer, and importantly, the R&D cuts would greatly slow the speed at which we could solve our energy problems, thus making our energy problems _worse_.
R&D is the most useful thing about solar pv. It is only once solar PV has reached practical cost levels that widespread implementation will occur. Until then, widespread implementation is an unlikely dream.

If people would wean themselves from oil-based electricity, even if it is not economic to start with, it would be an incentive for researchers and entrepreneurs to come up with more efficient solar panels and other methods of generating heat and electricity.

We already have that incentive. If anyone manages to develop any cost effective solar electric technology, the amount of money waiting for them is gargantuan. Bill Gates move over. The mythical story of companies converging on an inventor's door for license rights almost never happens in real life, but in this case it would.

ChrisZell@clearchannel.com writes:
The latest EE Times ( Dec. 12) has a cover article on T.J. Rodgers and Cypress Semiconductors getting into solar power, big-time. They bought a former disk-drive plant in Manila, Phillipines to crank out wafers. "We fully anticipate the Philippines fab being capable of turning out the equivalent of 100 megawatts a year" a spokeman said.
They hope to up the efficiency and knock prices down to $1.50 a watt.
High oil prices could be the best thing that ever happened to alternative energy. I hope such prices continue for several years so as to establish alternatives firmly

The higher the cost of oil, the higher the cost of producing alt energy products, and the less non-essentials people can afford, so its not quite as simple as is often portrayed.

Heck, all we really need is a bit more electricity per year and some other way to power automoblies and we're done with terrorists, Middle East instability,

Do you really believe that stopping dead the Middle East's large and only income would promote stability?

much of the trade deficit,

what happens then when a country invests vast amounts of money into something that will never pay back?

and a host of other problems.

will be thereby caused.
NT

Good News on Solar

<snip>

People who do nothing but look at payback time for solar panels or other forms of alternative energy are missing the forest for the trees.
If people would wean themselves from oil-based electricity,

I'm in the states and here that is simply not true. Most electricity here is either natural gas or coal fired. Jimmy Carter initiated the switch off oil fired.
even

if it is not economic to start with, it would be an incentive for researchers and entrepreneurs to come up with more efficient solar panels and other methods of generating heat

I'm with you on the heat. and electricity.
It's coming. Been to a BP station with the curved roof over the pumps. Those are PV cells up there and they supply the bulk of electricity used.
For most of us though, PV is not practical and won't be for quite a while, solar heat is... The energy yield on thermal is soooo much higher.
Cheers, Jeff


ChrisZell@clearchannel.com writes:
The latest EE Times ( Dec. 12) has a cover article on T.J. Rodgers and Cypress Semiconductors getting into solar power, big-time. They bought a former disk-drive plant in Manila, Phillipines to crank out wafers. "We fully anticipate the Philippines fab being capable of turning out the equivalent of 100 megawatts a year" a spokeman said.
They hope to up the efficiency and knock prices down to $1.50 a watt.
High oil prices could be the best thing that ever happened to alternative energy. I hope such prices continue for several years so as to establish alternatives firmly - in some cases, with wind and solar power, the equipment won't get ripped out just because oil prices decline. The oil companies and OPEC nations will get stuck competing against decentralized sources that won't go away.
Heck, all we really need is a bit more electricity per year and some other way to power automoblies and we're done with terrorists, Middle East instability, much of the trade deficit, and a host of other problems.

Good News on Solar

Bret Cahill wrote:

I don't see how pv will ever be able to compete with a closed cycle engine with a dish reflector.

PV has no moving parts and can be scaled down to power calculators, watches and PDA's. Even at larger (power my house) sizes, PV's lack of friction, vibration, noise and tracking requirements, make it a favored choice.
Anthony

Good News on Solar

Which of the follow 5 reduce carbon dioxide most effectively: 1) A typical dollar spent or improving energy efficiency. 2) A typical dollar spent on Wind energy. 3) A typical dollar spent on solar pv. 4) A typical dollar spent on solar heat. 5) Your favorite alternative.

Good News on Solar

<> I don't see how pv will ever be able to compete with a closed cycle
<> engine with a dish reflector.
< PV has no moving parts
A closed cycle gas turbine only has a couple low maintence parts.
< and can be scaled down to power calculators, watches and PDA's.
PV's only serious application.
< Even at larger (power my house) sizes, PV's lack of friction, vibration, noise and
< tracking requirements, make it a favored choice.
IF you can afford $5.00/watt, a figure more resistant to change than anything in the history of technology.
In sharp contrast reciprocating external heat engines like the quiet stirling only cost a couple of CENTS/watt and are more efficient as well.
There is no way to justify pv for serious power generation.
Bret Cahill

Good News on Solar

Jeff Thies wrote:

snip
People who do nothing but look at payback time for solar panels or other forms of alternative energy are missing the forest for the trees.
If people would wean themselves from oil-based electricity,
I'm in the states and here that is simply not true. Most electricity here is either natural gas or coal fired. Jimmy Carter initiated the switch off oil fired.

Pretty disingenuous. Natural gas/oil/coal is a pretty poor choice. You already import much of the NG from Canada, and you're going to be importing huge amounts in the next few years from overseas through LNG plants in Eastern Canada. You have enough coal, probably, for your own needs, but still import from South America because it's cheaper than digging your own. -- derek

Good News on Solar

philkryder wrote:

Which of the follow 5 reduce carbon dioxide most effectively: 1) A typical dollar spent or improving energy efficiency. 2) A typical dollar spent on Wind energy. 3) A typical dollar spent on solar pv. 4) A typical dollar spent on solar heat.

In order, probably 1,4,2,5, but since I'm already doing all of them, I'll still root for cheaper PV. -- derek

Good News on Solar

< Which of the follow 5 reduce carbon
< dioxide most effectively:
< 1) A typical dollar spent or improving
< energy efficiency.
Of what?
A dollar spent on improving the efficiency of cell phones isn't going tp save the planet.
< 2) A typical dollar spent on Wind
< energy.
< 3) A typical dollar spent on solar pv.
You mean more research or what?
< 4) A typical dollar spent on solar heat.
< 5) Your favorite alternative.
Taking a nap. You exhale less CO2 when you are asleep.
Bret Cahill


Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

Energy, oil and gas > Home-Made Power

Travelers and hotels or travel site. Flights by vacation and cars.