1 posted on
03/08/2008 8:50:54 PM PST by
vrwc54
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 next last
To: vrwc54
Global warming looks really cold and snowy up there!
2 posted on
03/08/2008 8:52:06 PM PST by
vrwc54
To: vrwc54
I'm going to burn some old tires to make up for this guy's "contribution" to the environment.
(sticks out tongue)
3 posted on
03/08/2008 8:54:19 PM PST by
SIDENET
(Hubba Hubba...)
To: vrwc54
“For example, if Dee and Jarred are using their computers at the same time, a large chunk of stored energy is swallowed up.”
These must be huge computers, or their actual solar capacity is tiny.
Mine uses 285W total.
There are more caveats than facts in this article.
4 posted on
03/08/2008 8:56:04 PM PST by
DBrow
To: vrwc54
“Dee, a sculptor from Wisconsin who spent many of her formative years protesting nuclear power plants on Lake Michigan.”
You’re part of the problem, not the solution.
5 posted on
03/08/2008 8:56:55 PM PST by
Tex Pete
(Obama for Change: from our pockets, our piggy banks, and our couch cushions)
To: vrwc54
'Potentially, this could get very bad,' said Clapp. 'We could be back in the Dark Ages.'You're already there.
To: vrwc54
Kumbaya my friends, kumbaya...
7 posted on
03/08/2008 9:15:12 PM PST by
Rembrandt
(We would have won Viet Nam w/o Dim interference.)
To: vrwc54
'Six hours of direct sun generates enough electricity, as long as you're conservative, to last three or four days,' said John Clapp, 59. 'With heavy use, it might only last a day.'Herein lies one of many problems. Energy must be reliable and plentiful. If you want to live by candles, and cook on open fires, fine, you are free to do so.
But until there are viable, and more economical energy resources than those that are currently available, we are forced to go with those that are most viable and most economically available. Average middle class people have no other choice. We cannot sell out our families for pie in the sky technology.
So I wish that the greenies would spare me all this nonsense. When it's ready to go, I'll sign up. I'd be happy to. But it's not ready to go. Until it is, the efforts to persuade us to use it are nothing more than intrusion and harrasment.
8 posted on
03/08/2008 9:15:15 PM PST by
squidly
To: vrwc54
Three of the 13 rooms in the house are used for the Starlight Llama Bed & Breakfast, which the couple operates, interestingly enough, not as a strict money-making venture, but as a way to introduce guests to solar power.
Thirteen rooms? Are they related to John Edwards or Algore? Great busuness acumen there: you have 13 rooms and three are for the B&B. Aside from their bedroom and room for the kids, they should still have more than three rooms available for their "business."
9 posted on
03/08/2008 9:16:02 PM PST by
Army Air Corps
(Four fried chickens and a coke)
To: vrwc54
Though this bold plan would require huge federal subsidies over a 30-year period... Oh OK. No worries. Sign me up. /s
10 posted on
03/08/2008 9:17:46 PM PST by
Drango
(A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
To: vrwc54
To make that a reality, a vast area of photovoltaic cells would have to be erected over 250,000 square miles of barren land in the Southwest. 1. The "environmental damage" shading would cause would drive envirowhacks lividly crazier, with predictable results;
2. the massive transmission problems would be a nightmare;
3. the 'eggs in one basket' problem with any kind of disaster, would be catastrophic;
4. transmission losses by the time power reached the East Coast would be massive;
5. Great, while the sun was up...photovoltaics don't work at night, and are poor early & late in the day.
Build more nuke plants, where & as needed.
11 posted on
03/08/2008 9:19:49 PM PST by
ApplegateRanch
(Build more nuke plants now: Proven technology, proven safety, proven Lib-maddening power!)
To: vrwc54
Hey, antinuke enviromorons: the SUN is a giant NUCLEAR reactor, which emits... (drum roll)... lots of radiation!!!
12 posted on
03/08/2008 9:20:30 PM PST by
rfp1234
(Phodopus campbelli: household ruler since July 2007.)
To: vrwc54
It'll run about $10,000-$12,000 for batteries, PV panels and an inverter, with another $3,000-4,000 to install, unless you're a jack of many trades like John.
Damn! How long do the batteries last? They'll have to be replaced sometime since they cannot charge and discharge forever and not lose capacity.
13 posted on
03/08/2008 9:23:57 PM PST by
Army Air Corps
(Four fried chickens and a coke)
To: vrwc54
I have to admit, though, living ‘off the grid’ would be somewhat appealing. I wish I could do that, as well as pay cash for all purchases.
15 posted on
03/08/2008 9:26:51 PM PST by
tarawa
To: vrwc54
“Scientists say that the energy in sunlight striking the earth for 40 minutes is equivalent to global energy consumption for one year. “
And these bozos think that man has the power to warm the entire planet. I skoff.
17 posted on
03/08/2008 9:27:29 PM PST by
DaveArk
To: vrwc54
The solar house...sits on 65 acres ...part of the 700-acre dairy farm and sawmill he grew up on. When his father died, the land was divided between John and his four sisters.Not all of us are lucky enough to inherit 65 acres of land to do with as we please.
To: vrwc54
13-room house? Emus, Llamas, and peacocks? This guy and his family have used far more than their share of Mother Earth's precious resources. I don't give a damn if all of it is renewable. There are people dying in Africa and all of the materials used for his house could have been evenly distributed to make sensible huts and perhaps a school.
(Always outdo the preachy enviro crowd with even more preachy leftist criticism. They don't know how to take it.)
21 posted on
03/08/2008 9:41:21 PM PST by
SIDENET
(Hubba Hubba...)
To: vrwc54
Does he make his own Propane?
Using Propane doesn't fit with his energy-independence image.
22 posted on
03/08/2008 9:41:39 PM PST by
Rudder
(Klinton-Kool-Aid FReepers prefer spectacle over victory.)
To: vrwc54
There is a definite appeal to having an independent power source (self-sufficiency is an end unto itself in my books), but there is still no way to economically do it for any reasonable level of power consumption. If appropriate solar tech arrives, you will see me (and hear me swearing) out in the backyard and/or up on the roof getting the house wired up. Make it economical, and the changes will be almost automatic.
There is no reason not to expect increases in conversion efficiency. Photo-voltaic design is very much in its infancy, but our understanding of the basic physical processes and the mechanisms for tuning/optimization are expanding rapidly. Again, the science needs to be sufficient to satisfy the economics. Until then, it is a novelty.
23 posted on
03/08/2008 9:44:42 PM PST by
M203M4
(True Universal Suffrage: Pets of dead illegal-immigrant felons voting Democrat (twice))
To: vrwc54
They have a lot of common sense idea’s. Too bad they have been sold the BS of globull warming.
27 posted on
03/08/2008 9:55:00 PM PST by
vpintheak
(Like a muddied spring or a polluted well is a righteous man who gives way to the wicked. Prov. 25:26)
To: vrwc54
'Air-conditioning is out of the question,' said John. 'That's too much electricity. Fans do just fine.' John does not live in Texas!!!!!!!!!!!
28 posted on
03/08/2008 9:59:35 PM PST by
cpdiii
(roughneck, oilfield trash and proud of it, geologist, pilot, pharmacist, iconoclast.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson