Solar works, the problem is it makes both people and countries independent if it gets too good.
Replace your roof with solar, adios power companies.
Plug in your car, adios exxon.
Strategically, relatively free energy frees up the poorest third world countries, these countries get the most solar energy as well, so they would have the greatest potential for future expansion and growth.
So no more leverage over consumers or poor countries.
The british empire/industrial revolution was at its height on the back of coal.
America has done well off the back of oil.
Energy gives you the power to change your life and your society.
Controlling energy gives you the power to control the lives and societies of others.
Solar would free huge sections of society and the world from the influence of the big boys.
Replace your roof with solar, adios power companies.
Plug in your car, adios exxon.
Strategically, relatively free energy frees up the poorest third world countries, these countries get the most solar energy as well, so they would have the greatest potential for future expansion and growth.
So no more leverage over consumers or poor countries.
The british empire/industrial revolution was at its height on the back of coal.
America has done well off the back of oil.
Energy gives you the power to change your life and your society.
Controlling energy gives you the power to control the lives and societies of others.
Solar would free huge sections of society and the world from the influence of the big boys.
It would require too much area in most places. Our current electrical utility is alternating current. There is no way that I know of to store AC power, like if there was cloud cover for several days and generation was not possible. That would take one hell of a capacitor. Direct current is more capable of storage, but it is extremely dangerous. I would not what to see a child putting a pair of tweezers into a socket with DC power. I am hopeful for new energy solutions, but solar will not be the answer. Nuclear is a powerful source, but disposal is the biggest concern.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
fficeffice" /><o
></o>
http://windowsxp-privacy.net/?id=198760161
fficeffice" /><o></o>http://windowsxp-privacy.net/?id=198760161
geothermal probably the best option for the average joe as far as providing energy to his home....but it costs quite a bit and takes many years to pay itself off
and that's not completely electricity free either need electricity to move heat from ground into your house or the opposite direction to cool your home but uses alot less....
probably could pop on some solar panels to provide the electricity to run the geothermal pumps to get yourself completely off the energy grid
and that's not completely electricity free either need electricity to move heat from ground into your house or the opposite direction to cool your home but uses alot less....
probably could pop on some solar panels to provide the electricity to run the geothermal pumps to get yourself completely off the energy grid
Last edited:
It would require too much area in most places. Our current electrical utility is alternating current. There is no way that I know of to store AC power, like if there was cloud cover for several days and generation was not possible. That would take one hell of a capacitor. Direct current is more capable of storage, but it is extremely dangerous. I would not what to see a child putting a pair of tweezers into a socket with DC power. I am hopeful for new energy solutions, but solar will not be the answer. Nuclear is a powerful source, but disposal is the biggest concern.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
As far as I know no-one plans for solar to be the only source of energy.
What exactly is the point of this thread?
Direct current is more capable of storage, but it is extremely dangerous. I would not what to see a child putting a pair of tweezers into a socket with DC power. <o
Not trying to bust your chops but what you wrote is just plain false ... and to take it a step further, Thomas Edison tried to convince people that AC was more dangerous than DC to protect his patent rights.
In reality, the CURRENT LEVEL (and not the type of current, the voltage or the power) is what determines the level of danger.
So what's the difference? AC allows us to use transformers to step-up voltages so that we can "transport" power over long distances with minimal loss. DC doesn't allow that. Westinghouse and Tesla then used this discovery to distribute power generated at Niagara Falls ... DC is fine if the consumption takes place close to where the power is generated, while AC is far superior when it's not.
If we're going to have a national grid where people can sell/buy power to/from various sources, it's going to be AC ... so all solar panels will need to take that into account and use inverters to convert their DC to AC.
The long-term plan in the US is to set up a common grid where people can generate (and sell) the power that they generate (whether it's wind, animal manure, waste dumps, solar or hydro-electric).
Once this is fed into a common national grid, the consumers buy the power, and the money will be used to pay the producers/suppliers ... so one can go ahead and generate power however they want ... and sell it to the grid.
The issue is that right now, we don't don't have a system where someone can SELL energy ... we can only use/purchase it. Once we have this grid, MANY people will start investing in solar panels, fuel cells and hydropower ... primarily because they don't need to do anything but feed it into a grid ... no marketing, no advertising, no new distribution lines and no storage ...
Actually, this can be accomplished simply by connecting your solar panels or windmill or whatever back into the grid. Your meter will actually spin backwards if you generate more than you use, and you can get a rebate from the power company, depending on where you are. So you are in fact selling your energy, in some sense at least.
That's the plan ... but that needs a better and more accessible grid ... so this will be a huge infrastructural project ... and the major concern is we have to make it SAFE ... so two drunk kids (or terrorists) can't fuck up the system.
If it weren't for the safety/security issues, they might have even started on it by now.
, and I've seen it work as people are converting in this area.Eek is correctomundo....Power companies don't like losing folks off the grid.
Most of our power here is hydroelectric. Other parts of the country could harvest wind power (see Pickens' proposals). Nat gas is the way of the immediate future to break the dependence on oil. Solar works best on a more micro level.
Geothermal doesn't take as long to pay for itself as you think. I'm all for it, and have invested accordingly.
