Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: neverdem

Ask any physics professor. Solar is cleanest thermally and with regard to CO2. If you continue with him or better, an engineer, they will both tell you that to think it could any where meet even a small fraction of our energy needs is not just sophomoric but downright retard level cognition. (or yer standard DUmmie libturd.)


3 posted on 04/22/2014 3:13:47 PM PDT by wastoute (Government cannot redistribute wealth. Government can only redistribute poverty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: wastoute

Solar panels can’t meet the current densities required for anything other than simple lighting and small appliances.
Large solar reflector/steam plants do meet the demand however they require LOTS of land.
Kind of like some particular ranch land in southern Nevada...


4 posted on 04/22/2014 3:19:21 PM PDT by Zathras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: wastoute

My father has a PhD in physics and used to teach at Stanford. He laughed when I told him about your CO2 claim.

He said, “Sure, but only if you use nuclear to power every single step of producing the raw materials and the manufacturing process, not to mention all the transportation involved at each step. Or you could just use nuclear power for all your electric needs and leave solar panels to the granola munchers and the folks that live off grid.”


10 posted on 04/22/2014 4:23:31 PM PDT by Go_Raiders (Freedom doesn't give you the right to take from others, no matter how innocent your program sounds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson