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

Skip to comments.

Cheap, Superefficient Solar
Technology Review (MIT) ^ | November 9, 2006 | By Kevin Bullis

Posted on 11/10/2006 11:33:50 AM PST by aculeus

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-102 next last
To: ConservativeMind

Bingo. Ooh, I can't wait for my solar-powered segway!


61 posted on 11/10/2006 2:02:53 PM PST by dr_who_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

It would cause a quick upheaval, but it would be a boon to the economy and the world. It would also remove the power from those countries which receive so many oil dollars.


62 posted on 11/10/2006 2:08:10 PM PST by ConservativeMind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

Any time solar power becomes really affordable, I'll be the first to buy it. But it's nowhere near there yet.

You need an inverter, batteries, switches, wiring, and some place to stick the whole business that won't look too horrible. At the moment it's completely out of the question. But it's possible that they will work out the kinks, and at that point I'll jump in.

The sunlight isn't great in Vermont, but our power company is VERY expensive, which balances it out to some extent. One of our neighbors is installing solar power, but it's a feel-good exercise. They admit it will cost them a lot more than they'll save.


63 posted on 11/10/2006 2:09:50 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

>>>You need an inverter, batteries, switches, wiring, and some place to stick the whole business that won't look too horrible.<<<

Forget batteries. They are too expensive, and too much of a headache. Rather, oversize your system to where the excess energy is "sold back" to the power company on "good days", and used up on "bad days".

For the purpose of this post, "sold back" means your power meter runs backwards; "good days" means days with lots of direct sunlight; and "bad days" means days with little or no direct sunlight (e.g., cloudy).

Note that if you want to be completely off the grid, you will have to use the battery method. Plan on an expensive system. It is better to stay on the grid.


64 posted on 11/10/2006 2:39:10 PM PST by PhilipFreneau (God deliver our nation from the disease of liberalism!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
Imagine what happens if this tech is advanced enough just to power a single family home with normal usage.

All of a sudden, every utility company looses every residential account.

Not so fast. The problem, as with most alternative energy sources, is storage -- batteries aren't terribly efficient. Even if you could power your house with photovoltaics under direct sunlight, you still have the other 12-16 hours of the day to contend with.

Until someone perfects a household cold fusion generator, there isn't going to be a single silver bullet for energy independence. But if you have millions of solar sites feeding power back into the grid during the day, you can ramp down the production of the fossil fuel-burning plants during those hours, and speed them back up at night.

Cutting the demand for oil and gas, naturally, cuts the amount we need to import, and also cuts the prices. If we ever reach the point where oil is literally cheaper than water, then the producers will process less of it as fuel and use more of it to make plastics.

If the demand for coal falls off enough, and the price bottom falls out, that doesn't change the fact that coal is an abundant, domestically-available fuel with a very high energy density. Making coal cheaper provides the incentive to process coal into a clean-burning liquid or gas fuel suitable for powering vehicles. Or all that cheap coal could power ethanol-producing plants, which would drastically change the cost equation for that fuel.

Bottom line, we hardly have to worry about -- and can hardly look forward to -- an overabundance of energy leading to an economic collapse anywhere. The first effect would be that we'd import less of it, and the second would be that we'd find other things to do with it.

65 posted on 11/10/2006 4:00:12 PM PST by ReignOfError
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
Energy drives our entire economy the whole world over. Industry will collapse and disappear overnight. Sure, there will still be some consumer industry, but nothing near the scale there is now, all of which is based on petroleum energy and by products, and the cost of producing energy itself.

Yeah, but when I get my magical over unity home fusion plant, I'm gonna want to use it to power air conditioners and heaters and televisions and computers and clock radios and my new Bose stereo louder than the wrath of God. I'm still going to be wearing clothes and talking on the telephone. And even in this wonderland of free energy, I might want to leave the house occasionally, and that's going to require some kind of vehicle. I'm not going to build all those things myself.

A cheap clean, alternative renewable energy source would be devastating to our petroleum based industry we have today, and will cause quite a economic downturn and a very long period of adjustment. But it still wouldn't be free.

Adjustment, I agree. Downturn, in some sectors, but not overall and not for long. The rise of the automobile was devastating to the buggy industry, and household electricity was crushing to the candle and lamp oil industry; but the buggy makers started making cars and the kerosine refineries started making gasoline, and many of them came out all right.

If petroleum is less desirable as fuel, the first effect is that we will import less of it, which will be a bummer for the tanker crews and depot operators, but we'll cope. If the value of petroleum as fuel collapses, then we get cheaper and better plastics, including synthetic textiles.

History suggests that when stuff becomes cheaper, we don't spend less -- we find more stuff to buy. I had a black and white TV for a large part of my childhood, because in the '70s a large color TV cost about a month's pay. Now that a 20" costs less than a day's pay, I have one in every bedroom and a much bigger one in the living room, all with two hundred channels of cable. When necessities become cheaper, resources shift to producing luxuries.

Completely free energy is another beast all together. We are way too overpopulated for such a thing to become available. You won't die in the cold, but good luck finding a job. They will be very hard to come by.

I have my job all picked out -- professional blogger. Sure, it's a niche today, but with all those folks with time on their hands and money to spare since they don't have to pay for energy any more, I think I could carve out a niche. I'm not worried about global overabundance as a great looming threat.

66 posted on 11/10/2006 4:49:48 PM PST by ReignOfError
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

Get me off the grid reminder bump! ;-)


67 posted on 11/10/2006 5:02:56 PM PST by Tunehead54 (Nothing funny here ;-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

Death Valley could be re-named Light Valley.. and be a resource instead of a wasteland..


68 posted on 11/10/2006 5:07:43 PM PST by hosepipe (CAUTION: This propaganda is laced with hyperboles)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paulcissa
I don't think Christopher Reeve (RIP) will be walking anytime soon.

You think he voted absentee?

69 posted on 11/10/2006 5:15:27 PM PST by sphinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PhilipFreneau

I confess I haven't looked closely into that, but I think you're right.

Also, I wouldn't need to sell power back to the company, probably. As long as it was cheaper, I'd be happy simply to reduce my electric bills rather than eliminating them. We have a socialist system in Vermont, where the first kilowatts are actually cheaper, and then if you use more than the minimum, you pay more; the reverse of what is normal from an economic standpoint. So small houses benefit and larger houses with kids suffer.


70 posted on 11/10/2006 5:19:23 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: SirKit

Solar ping!


71 posted on 11/10/2006 5:25:10 PM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan(9698)

"Hire the illegals to polish the lenses everyday"

Happily we won't need to. The sun does'nt produce as much sooty smoke as whale oil.


72 posted on 11/10/2006 5:34:46 PM PST by Pete from Shawnee Mission
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

bump for reading later - looks good


73 posted on 11/10/2006 5:36:36 PM PST by NordP (America: There are more Patriots than Punks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bryan24

This voltage is used to crack the hydrogen out of water. They hydrogen is then used to power fuel cells.



Actually I have a much more efficient way of doing exactly that ... Power plants run at the same output day and night ... electricity generated at night is basically wasted and thrown away , that's why you can get such low rates on improvements like streetlights.. My solution ,,, simply charge less for electricity at non-peak (night) times to generate hydrogen or simply store it for daytime use in a battery bank in your garage..

We need more atomic energy...


74 posted on 11/10/2006 5:42:44 PM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Pete from Shawnee Mission
The sun doesn't produce as much sooty smoke as whale oil.

It doesn't take much dust to reduce the amount of sunlight by half.

75 posted on 11/10/2006 6:35:55 PM PST by Dan(9698)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

what about three percent in plants that are being phased out?

oil fired dissappeared in these parts about 30 years ago.

I see dozens of coal fired plants with ng peak being built.

the embargos of the 70's nearly killed the market, cheap ng in the 80's and 90's did the rest.


76 posted on 11/10/2006 8:01:19 PM PST by dangerdoc (dangerdoc (not actually dangerous any more))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
A free energy source would cripple our economy as we know it.

You mean in the same way that dirt-cheap computing "crippled our economy as we knew it"?

77 posted on 11/10/2006 9:31:09 PM PST by BlazingArizona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

If you only knew, if you ONLY KNEW...


78 posted on 11/10/2006 11:46:20 PM PST by timer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

Ping for later read/reference. Thanks for posting.


79 posted on 11/11/2006 12:00:58 AM PST by NotJustAnotherPrettyFace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

XSUNX....It is on its way back up!


80 posted on 11/11/2006 12:03:03 AM PST by rambo316 (Peace Through Superior Firepower and God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-102 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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