"The sunlight falling on the United States in one day,
. . .contains more than twice the energy we consume in an entire year."
I came across this statement today, and it made me think.
. . . That's TRUE, the Sun has a lot more energy than wind,
. . . even though it doesn't always shine.
Then that could mean, that sunlight on my home in one day,
. . .contains more than twice the energy we consume in an entire year.
I use energy for transportation, heat and cool, refrigerate, cook, water, light and communication.
. . . If I capture sunlight and store it, then convert those things I use, to all electrical appliances,
. . . I could power everything for FREE, without pollution.
Running everything in a home off of electricity was an old dream that failed,
. . . when the grid price skyrocketed, because everyone tried it at the same time, and
. . . the grid couldn't handle it, we tried solar, but it was too expensive, way back then,
but Solar prices have dropped and with FREE energy from the sun, anything is possible.
| Create a Free Account or Sign In to connect and share in green living and alternative energy forum discussions. |
3
Things that make you think?
Started by eds, Apr 06 2013 07:52 AM
9 replies to this topic
#2
Posted 06 April 2013 - 12:12 PM
The U.S., Japan and Europe have big Debt problems.
. . . How will they spend critical funds on Energy to turn around their economy:
. . . . . . Oil
. . . . . . Coal
. . . . . . Gas
. . . . . . Nuclear
. . . . . . Wind
. . . . . . Solar
. . . . . . All of the above?
. . . How will they spend critical funds on Energy to turn around their economy:
. . . . . . Oil
. . . . . . Coal
. . . . . . Gas
. . . . . . Nuclear
. . . . . . Wind
. . . . . . Solar
. . . . . . All of the above?
#4
Posted 08 April 2013 - 08:11 PM
While I'd love to say solar the reality is oil and natural gas. They are the only things keeping the economy afloat as it is. Government makes a ton of money off of oil, in contrast solar and wind costs government a ton of money.
We can export oil and gas and turn our trade deficit in to a surplus, not so with solar, wind, etc. Natural gas has made energy so cheap, companies are now considering bringing jobs back to the US, that's how important energy cost is to our economy.
It is oil and natural gas exploitation that will allow us to continue to subsidize green energy.
There was a fairly balanced four part series on energy on the MSNBC web site a couple of days ago, a good read.
We can export oil and gas and turn our trade deficit in to a surplus, not so with solar, wind, etc. Natural gas has made energy so cheap, companies are now considering bringing jobs back to the US, that's how important energy cost is to our economy.
It is oil and natural gas exploitation that will allow us to continue to subsidize green energy.
There was a fairly balanced four part series on energy on the MSNBC web site a couple of days ago, a good read.
#5
Posted 29 April 2013 - 05:21 AM
lol, thats like saying...
Grass is green,
Money is green,
Therefore grass is money...
You want to cover the whole land with PV... would like to see/feel the sun and where foodstuff going to grow.
Even though sunlight is free collecting it is not, everyone knows PV based on silicon (sand), but the materials added are not. CIGS is among the most efficient panels, yet who has even heard of 3/4 of these materials... Copper, Indium, Gallium, Selenide? and require vast quantity of electricity to manufacture the ingots
My advice is to install now, not going to get cheaper... China dumped on market to force prices down (and while about it get their manufacturing base in place) and better utilize it!
Hydrocarbons are limited so better to put alternatives in place now so can better utilize it (burning up in smoke is SO industrial age, when one day you will rue the fact of not putting to better use - such as plastics which is VERY useful and reusable)
Grass is green,
Money is green,
Therefore grass is money...
You want to cover the whole land with PV... would like to see/feel the sun and where foodstuff going to grow.
Even though sunlight is free collecting it is not, everyone knows PV based on silicon (sand), but the materials added are not. CIGS is among the most efficient panels, yet who has even heard of 3/4 of these materials... Copper, Indium, Gallium, Selenide? and require vast quantity of electricity to manufacture the ingots
My advice is to install now, not going to get cheaper... China dumped on market to force prices down (and while about it get their manufacturing base in place) and better utilize it!
Hydrocarbons are limited so better to put alternatives in place now so can better utilize it (burning up in smoke is SO industrial age, when one day you will rue the fact of not putting to better use - such as plastics which is VERY useful and reusable)
#6
Posted 29 April 2013 - 03:15 PM
jasonb, on 29 April 2013 - 05:21 AM, said:
You want to cover the whole land with PV... would like to see/feel the sun and where foodstuff going to grow.
Land wouldn't have to impacted at all, as far as that goes.
How many houses, businesses, covered parking lot roofs can be covered? That would solve the problem.
#7
Posted 30 April 2013 - 01:45 AM
Yes, for sure. If every household/office space/shopping mall can be made to be self-sufficient this could 'save' the grid. But what is most required is a sense of conservation. A combination of solar power generation and electricity saving devices goes hand in hand, but having an attitude of non-committal to low power consumption will get you nowhere as solar cannot generate enough power to feed power hungry devices. Furthermore with the high rate of urbanization there is just not enough space (think of a 10 story block of flats) to make them self-sufficient.
Also bear in mind that the large solar parks take away from arable land, true that most parks placed in dry desolate regions where land is not arable, but only so many deserts... Furthermore need to placed close to transmission lines and suddenly the available space for installations is severely limited.
And finally is the ease of installation, financially speaking.
Finding financing is difficult, hence government funding, CDM, etc - but this is all for big installations, and do not see this transcending to small-user, where it is actually needed.
For example recently tried to source a system for a communication tower which had a daily load of 15 kWh. A system comprising of 1 kW wind turbine and 9 x 240 W panels, with applicable battery storage (as no grid and have to be totally RE powered) cost $ 20 000. With financing over a 5 year period (and applicable insurance) this though gives a total of $35 560...
So for a nominal system of 3.16 kW this translate to $6/watt if you had the cash and $11.25/watt if you have to finance it (True that RSA interest rate much higher than USA, so this will change from local to local).
In above example if throw out wind and look only at 2.16 kW nominal system it would cost $13200 = $6.14/w... many people saying wow, PV prices below $1/watt, this only for cell, In the above example the PV panels cost $3500 = $1.63/w. Batteries cost $2/w and the basic infrastructure, ie frames, charge controllers and inverter costs $2.28/w... and installation costs are $1.20/w!
Finally check out how much 15kWh/day is (450 kWh/month...) compared to your electrical usage!
Also bear in mind that the large solar parks take away from arable land, true that most parks placed in dry desolate regions where land is not arable, but only so many deserts... Furthermore need to placed close to transmission lines and suddenly the available space for installations is severely limited.
And finally is the ease of installation, financially speaking.
Finding financing is difficult, hence government funding, CDM, etc - but this is all for big installations, and do not see this transcending to small-user, where it is actually needed.
For example recently tried to source a system for a communication tower which had a daily load of 15 kWh. A system comprising of 1 kW wind turbine and 9 x 240 W panels, with applicable battery storage (as no grid and have to be totally RE powered) cost $ 20 000. With financing over a 5 year period (and applicable insurance) this though gives a total of $35 560...
So for a nominal system of 3.16 kW this translate to $6/watt if you had the cash and $11.25/watt if you have to finance it (True that RSA interest rate much higher than USA, so this will change from local to local).
In above example if throw out wind and look only at 2.16 kW nominal system it would cost $13200 = $6.14/w... many people saying wow, PV prices below $1/watt, this only for cell, In the above example the PV panels cost $3500 = $1.63/w. Batteries cost $2/w and the basic infrastructure, ie frames, charge controllers and inverter costs $2.28/w... and installation costs are $1.20/w!
Finally check out how much 15kWh/day is (450 kWh/month...) compared to your electrical usage!
#9
Posted 30 April 2013 - 07:59 AM
Financing takes all of the profit out of a system,
. . . starting with a large system, that just tie's up too much capital, up front,
. . . installation charges can eat up a good chunk of change, and
. . . ending up with "USD $6.00 a Watt" is very discouraging.
You could start with a smaller 1800 Watt Solar Generator, Complete with (2) 100 AH Batteries,
. . . for $2,000.- Cash, saving costs on financing, minimizing up-front capital and
. . . Do-It-Yourself installable. (eliminates installation costs)
The system is "Plug-N-Play" upgradeable with the option of adding up to
. . . 3 additional Solar Panels
. . . 2 more batteries with the optional battery box plus
. . . 2 more batteries to double its battery capacity!
You can also combine a wind turbine to this generator while using 3 panels at the same time.
That's close to, USD $1.00 a Watt, generating profit for the next 25-30 years, with electricity rates going up each year.
Source: Web-site Video
. . . starting with a large system, that just tie's up too much capital, up front,
. . . installation charges can eat up a good chunk of change, and
. . . ending up with "USD $6.00 a Watt" is very discouraging.
You could start with a smaller 1800 Watt Solar Generator, Complete with (2) 100 AH Batteries,
. . . for $2,000.- Cash, saving costs on financing, minimizing up-front capital and
. . . Do-It-Yourself installable. (eliminates installation costs)
The system is "Plug-N-Play" upgradeable with the option of adding up to
. . . 3 additional Solar Panels
. . . 2 more batteries with the optional battery box plus
. . . 2 more batteries to double its battery capacity!
You can also combine a wind turbine to this generator while using 3 panels at the same time.
That's close to, USD $1.00 a Watt, generating profit for the next 25-30 years, with electricity rates going up each year.
Source: Web-site Video
#10
Posted 30 April 2013 - 09:31 AM
If I bought my system today I could get if for $1.09/watt. close enough? 
You can buy a 200W panel and micro inverter that is pretty much plug and play for way under $2/watt, if people really wanted them they could rearrange their budget and not require a loan or installation help, it all depends on your level of commitment.
I am very much against paving over our deserts when there are likely 100 million rooftops going to waste. Utility scale wind and solar only benefits the utility financially, only customer owned solar and micro wind benefits the individual. Generating your own power, no matter how, is the only thing that will reduce your electric bill, everything else increases it.
I also agree that conservation is the lower cost alternative, however one should be allowed to live the life they want if they can live it green. As Ed Begley said, who cares if you use a MWH of electricity a month, as long as you generate more than that with green energy.
P.S. The trace materials used in making solar panels are called dopants. They are used in very small quantity and are not an issue. While it does take power to produce the ingots, that power is more made up for by the lifelong electricity production from those panels. In other words, while it takes a lot of energy to produce an ingot, that ingot produces a lot of solar cells and those cells produce a lot of electricity over their lifetime. The cost of production is born out in the cost of the panel, you would not get a positive ROI if the energy produced was not greater than the energy of panel production, including the rate earth dopant's required.
You can buy a 200W panel and micro inverter that is pretty much plug and play for way under $2/watt, if people really wanted them they could rearrange their budget and not require a loan or installation help, it all depends on your level of commitment.I am very much against paving over our deserts when there are likely 100 million rooftops going to waste. Utility scale wind and solar only benefits the utility financially, only customer owned solar and micro wind benefits the individual. Generating your own power, no matter how, is the only thing that will reduce your electric bill, everything else increases it.
I also agree that conservation is the lower cost alternative, however one should be allowed to live the life they want if they can live it green. As Ed Begley said, who cares if you use a MWH of electricity a month, as long as you generate more than that with green energy.
P.S. The trace materials used in making solar panels are called dopants. They are used in very small quantity and are not an issue. While it does take power to produce the ingots, that power is more made up for by the lifelong electricity production from those panels. In other words, while it takes a lot of energy to produce an ingot, that ingot produces a lot of solar cells and those cells produce a lot of electricity over their lifetime. The cost of production is born out in the cost of the panel, you would not get a positive ROI if the energy produced was not greater than the energy of panel production, including the rate earth dopant's required.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users