Sustaining Environmentalists

Wall St Journal ^ | August 27, 2002 | PHILIP STOTT

[thinktwice]

nuclear power, no, solar energy, yes. (Despite the fact that most photovoltaic cells take more energy to produce than they will ever generate in their lifetime.)

I had no idea that that producing most photovoltaic cells requires more energy than they'll ever produce.

Thank you WSJ, and Mr Stott.

[snopercod]

I had no idea that that producing most photovoltaic cells requires more energy than they'll ever produce.

Same with ethanol. If you add up all the energy used to grow the corn - the diesel fuel for the tractors and harvesters, the fertilizer, etc. - and add in the heat energy used to distill it, you come up with more energy used than it produces when burned in automobiles.

Some call it "burning food".

[snopercod]

notice how this is buried in the WSJ where you would have to register to see it...

Not only register, but pay them $50 per year, too. It's worth it, IMO.

[dfwgator]

What's more telling is that when you actually try to point out the absurdity of this so-called "Sustainable Development", all they can muster is to simply label a person as an "isolationist", without ever weighing the merits of the argument.

[rogue yam]

Hey tt -

I'm no greenie weenie but I am an engineer and this claim rang pretty false with me. So I "googled" the key words and came up with this page:

http://www.ecotopia.com/apollo2/pvlever.htm

I haven't checked out the references yet and so I have no opinion on who is right. But I do know that it is important to check out claims on either side of an argument. We don't want or need to give the socialists potential ammunition against us.

Thanks for FReeping.


- r.y.

[WaterDragon]

The weirdest thing about old lefties (communists) like Paul Erlich is that they call themselves "progressives."

They are just plain old psychopaths, the kind that have been around for millions of years, wanting power over people's lives. Just HUNGRY for power. Period.)

[thinktwice]

Thank you for providing the engineering reality check website about photovoltaic cell efficiency (energy in / energy out) studies. Looks like the WSJ author was right in retrospect, marginally correct in current times, and -- perhaps -- wrong about future PV efficiencies.

[F.J. Mitchell]

Thanks for saying that.

A ditto BUMP! to the top.