thinking of going solar /roland

My wife and I were thinking about adding solar panels to our house to get
rid of the high electric costs, and I was doing a bit of research and I
found this stat:

“Using the technology available today we could equal the entire electric
production of the United States with photovoltaic power plants using only
13,125 sq. miles, or less than 12% of the State of Nevada. (This is less
area than is now controlled by the military in Nevada.)”

So why exactly aren’t we using solar power more predominantly?

Rodney Blackwell

Re: thinking of going solar /roland

Lack of marketing and proper support from our government… too many
conflicts of interest, as usual.

Sincerely,

Jay Tierney

“Rodney Blackwell” <rodney@webdiscuss.com> wrote in message
news:cfjii9$glt$1@server1.darklock.com
> My wife and I were thinking about adding solar panels to our house to get
> rid of the high electric costs, and I was doing a bit of research and I
> found this stat:
>
> “Using the technology available today we could equal the entire electric
> production of the United States with photovoltaic power plants using only
> 13,125 sq. miles, or less than 12% of the State of Nevada. (This is less
> area than is now controlled by the military in Nevada.)”
>
>
> So why exactly aren’t we using solar power more predominantly?
> –
> Rodney Blackwell
>
>

Re: thinking of going solar /roland

it takes time i guess before people would be aware of it. I’ve read
somewhere that the President of the US has promised to help put a
million solar hot water collectors and solar panels on roofs by the year
2010.

Re: thinking of going solar /roland

Probably 13 August 2004 07:35 pm, Rodney Blackwell wrote:

> “Using the technology available today we could equal the entire electric
> production of the United States with photovoltaic power plants using only
> 13,125 sq. miles, or less than 12% of the State of Nevada. (This is less
> area than is now controlled by the military in Nevada.)”
>
>
> So why exactly aren’t we using solar power more predominantly?

Probably because a 13,125 sq mile photovoltaic would cost about 300% of the
Gross National Product. :wink:

Check out this site http://www.homepower.com


John R. Marshall - KC9ETP

“They take a hot dog, split it, fill it with cheese, and put bacon on top,
and for an extra 50 cents, they’ll cover the whole thing with chili. This
is food for people who just don’t fuckin’ care anymore.” - Drew Carey

Re: thinking of going solar /roland

But that is at prices determined by current demand. Production costs would
quickly decrease if an installation of that size was put into work. And it
would take awhile to build so it would be a long term solution that would
slowly progress in contruction, meaning the cost savings would become even
greater over time. And imagine if even a fraction of that was put into work.
Talk about lessening foreign oil dependence. Billions spent on that would do
more to reduce our security risks than the billions spent on a wacked missle
defence system or new strategic nukes.

Why is the defense budget so sacred, other than the fact defense contractors
are very powerful? I heard Howard Dean the other day and he was saying we
can’t cut defense spending, only reallocate. Ok fine, but we all know there
is absurd amounts of waste in the military. I don’t see why a couple billion
from missle defense or star wars style programs couldn’t be put towards
education. maybe its just me…

Brian

“John R. Marshall” <kc9etp@arrl.net> wrote in message
news:cfk55o$26d$1@server1.darklock.com
> Probably 13 August 2004 07:35 pm, Rodney Blackwell wrote:
>
> > “Using the technology available today we could equal the entire electric
> > production of the United States with photovoltaic power plants using
only
> > 13,125 sq. miles, or less than 12% of the State of Nevada. (This is less
> > area than is now controlled by the military in Nevada.)”
> >
> >
> > So why exactly aren’t we using solar power more predominantly?
>
> Probably because a 13,125 sq mile photovoltaic would cost about 300% of
the
> Gross National Product. :wink:
>
> Check out this site http://www.homepower.com
>
> –
> John R. Marshall - KC9ETP
>
> “They take a hot dog, split it, fill it with cheese, and put bacon on top,
> and for an extra 50 cents, they’ll cover the whole thing with chili. This
> is food for people who just don’t fuckin’ care anymore.” - Drew Carey
>

Re: thinking of going solar /roland

Rodney Blackwell wrote:
>
> So why exactly aren’t we using solar power more predominantly?

Any type of electrical power generation is absurdly expensive to set up
on a large scale, and it can only happen when it’s heavily subsidized.
Nobody’s been willing to take the risk on solar yet (whether there’s
good reason for this reluctance is not a question I can answer).

It’s also so expensive that politicians generally shell out for it when
only when the need is desperate. Not exactly the circumstances when
people want to try something experimental.

Re: thinking of going solar /roland

What’s sad is that the cost of solar has gone down substantially since the
technology was introduced.

It’s almost too the point where the cost is so low, that it shouldn’t be a
factor:

"Since the early '60s PV cells have slowly but steadily come down from
prices over $40,000 per watt to current prices of around $6 per watt. "
http://www.teamsolarinc.com/aboutsolar.htm

From this site:
http://www.teamsolarinc.com/


Rodney Blackwell

“Winston” <dl@winston.org> wrote in message
news:cfr34t$i6q$1@server1.darklock.com
> Rodney Blackwell wrote:
> >
> > So why exactly aren’t we using solar power more predominantly?
>
> Any type of electrical power generation is absurdly expensive to set up
> on a large scale, and it can only happen when it’s heavily subsidized.
> Nobody’s been willing to take the risk on solar yet (whether there’s
> good reason for this reluctance is not a question I can answer).
>
> It’s also so expensive that politicians generally shell out for it when
> only when the need is desperate. Not exactly the circumstances when
> people want to try something experimental.

Re: thinking of going solar /roland

Take a look at an article in the latest fortune magazine, not really the
bastion of liberal thought but it has an itneresting article about how to
reduce our dependence on oil and gas. mentions that up to 25% of our power
could be provided by solar in the next 25 years with only limit investment.
its an interesting read and rebunks a lot of the ideas out there that
alternative energies are too expensive for anything large scale.

http://www.fortune.com/fortune/brainstorm/0,15704,678503,00.html

Brian

“Rodney Blackwell” <rodney@webdiscuss.com> wrote in message
news:cfr3mr$ij2$1@server1.darklock.com
> What’s sad is that the cost of solar has gone down substantially since the
> technology was introduced.
>
> It’s almost too the point where the cost is so low, that it shouldn’t be a
> factor:
>
> "Since the early '60s PV cells have slowly but steadily come down from
> prices over $40,000 per watt to current prices of around $6 per watt. "
> http://www.teamsolarinc.com/aboutsolar.htm
>
> From this site:
> http://www.teamsolarinc.com/
>
> –
> Rodney Blackwell
>
> “Winston” <dl@winston.org> wrote in message
> news:cfr34t$i6q$1@server1.darklock.com
> > Rodney Blackwell wrote:[color=darkred]
> > >
> > > So why exactly aren’t we using solar power more predominantly?
> >
> > Any type of electrical power generation is absurdly expensive to set up
> > on a large scale, and it can only happen when it’s heavily subsidized.
> > Nobody’s been willing to take the risk on solar yet (whether there’s
> > good reason for this reluctance is not a question I can answer).
> >
> > It’s also so expensive that politicians generally shell out for it when
> > only when the need is desperate. Not exactly the circumstances when
> > people want to try something experimental.
>
>[/color]

Re: thinking of going solar /roland

Rodney Blackwell wrote:

> "Since the early '60s PV cells have slowly but steadily come down from
> prices over $40,000 per watt to current prices of around $6 per watt. "

I’m talking about the cost of building a generating station. I think the
cost of making/purchasing PV cells would only be a very tiny fraction of
the cost of building and maintaining a plant that generates a few
megawatt hours.

Re: thinking of going solar /roland

“Winston” <dl@winston.org> wrote in message
news:cfrk83$2oc$1@server1.darklock.com
> Rodney Blackwell wrote:
>
> > "Since the early '60s PV cells have slowly but steadily come down from
> > prices over $40,000 per watt to current prices of around $6 per watt. "
>
> I’m talking about the cost of building a generating station. I think the
> cost of making/purchasing PV cells would only be a very tiny fraction of
> the cost of building and maintaining a plant that generates a few
> megawatt hours.
>

Well at a cost of $6 per watt for solar a 1 megawatt solar power station
would cost $6 million dollars just for the solar panels on top of which you
need to add all the wiring, controls and transmission lines, substations and
maintained. My guess is that coal fired plants can be built for less then
that per megawatt (though if you factor in the cost of coal during the
lifetime of the plant it probably ends up being similar if not more
expensive) and hydro-electric is even lower when amortized over the life of
the project. That is why China is building the world largest hydro-electric
project which is orders of magnitude larger then the Grand Coulee dam or
Boulder dam in the US or even the Aswan dam in Egypt.

Gary Stein

Re: thinking of going solar /roland

“Rodney Blackwell” <rodney@webdiscuss.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:cfjii9$glt$1@server1.darklock.com
> My wife and I were thinking about adding solar panels to our house to get
> rid of the high electric costs, and I was doing a bit of research and I
> found this stat:
>
> “Using the technology available today we could equal the entire electric
> production of the United States with photovoltaic power plants using only
> 13,125 sq. miles, or less than 12% of the State of Nevada. (This is less
> area than is now controlled by the military in Nevada.)”
>
>
> So why exactly aren’t we using solar power more predominantly?

Look at Germany. Solar power is like in northern US, southern Canada.

There is now a 58,4 Cent per kWh furtherance.

This works nice


Roland Mösl
http://www.pege.org Clear targets for a confused civilization
http://web-design-suite.com Web Design starts at the search engine

Re: thinking of going solar /roland

> > “Using the technology available today we could equal the entire electric
> > production of the United States with photovoltaic power plants using
only
> > 13,125 sq. miles, or less than 12% of the State of Nevada. (This is less
> > area than is now controlled by the military in Nevada.)”
> >
> >
> > So why exactly aren’t we using solar power more predominantly?
>
> Probably because a 13,125 sq mile photovoltaic would cost about 300% of
the
> Gross National Product. :wink:

Goging solar menas also to go more energy efficient.

Homes in Nevada with 30.000 kWh per year electric power are mad.

A good insulated house with high efficent air condition could
be more comfortable with 5000 kWh per year


Roland Mösl
http://www.pege.org Clear targets for a confused civilization
http://web-design-suite.com Web Design starts at the search engine

Re: thinking of going solar /roland

> Take a look at an article in the latest fortune magazine, not really the
> bastion of liberal thought but it has an itneresting article about how to
> reduce our dependence on oil and gas. mentions that up to 25% of our power
> could be provided by solar in the next 25 years with only limit
investment.
> its an interesting read and rebunks a lot of the ideas out there that
> alternative energies are too expensive for anything large scale.
>
> http://www.fortune.com/fortune/brainstorm/0,15704,678503,00.html

There is also the oil price

Reducing oil usage by 20% can reduce the oil price much.


Roland Mösl
http://www.pege.org Clear targets for a confused civilization
http://web-design-suite.com Web Design starts at the search engine