chovy
Founder aka "Boss"
Forum Administrator
Sr. Member
Karma: +18/-15
Posts: 456
|
 |
« on: November 19, 2007, 01:40:50 AM » |
|
# A solar thermal power plant built on about 1% of the surface of the Sahara Desert would be sufficient to satisfy the entire world's electricity demand. Solar energy arrives on the earth at a maximum power density of about 1 kilowatt per square meter. However, solar "productivity" is limited by certain geographical factors, including cloud cover and atmospheric humidity. In sunny, arid locations, one square kilometer of land can generate as much as 100 gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity per year using solar thermal technology, enough power for 50,000 households.. source: http://www.solel.com/faq/The project will deliver 553 megawatts of solar power, the equivalent of powering 400,000 homes, to PG&E’s customers in northern and central California. The Mojave Solar Park project is now the world’s largest single solar commitment. source: http://www.pge.com/news/news_releases/q3_2007/070725a.html |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Major Zee Lee
Forum cat lover
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +64/-169
Posts: 566
Kooks not allowed in (Secret meeting is next door)
|
|
« Reply #1 on: November 19, 2007, 04:07:11 AM » |
|
That's the thing with solar power... energy density is low, but once you multiply it by the large amount of sunny barren lands around the world you get a massive amount of energy for free.
Anyway large-scale soler energy needs, in order to be perfect, a mean to store energy in large scale. Once you can store gigajoules when it's sunny and pump them into the grid when it's needed, solar energy becomes perfect (although we also should account that night energy comsumption is lower than day's).
Anyway the more it goes the more will be visible the advantage of getting your energy in low density all over here and drive it to the consumer here, over getting it in high density abroad and bring it all the way here across half the world.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Do not take life too seriously; nobody lives to tell.
|
|
|
chovy
Founder aka "Boss"
Forum Administrator
Sr. Member
Karma: +18/-15
Posts: 456
|
|
« Reply #2 on: November 19, 2007, 08:28:09 AM » |
|
most people would not mind solar panels on their roof if it was more affordable, in-fact all the local schools in my area are fitting the buildings in one district with solar paneling.
i look at all the cars stopped in traffic or just parked for 8-10 hours doing nothing, while people are at work...when the time comes, I fully expect cars will be painted with micro solar panels.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Biker Dude
A TRUE Liberal!
Forum Administrator
Hero Member
Karma: +148/-112
Posts: 1,851
Live to Ride, Ride to Live
|
|
« Reply #3 on: November 19, 2007, 09:50:06 AM » |
|
'Painted' is a ways out. But we are working on solar panels on flexible thin films. They will be integrated into building materials, and we have plans for covering the roof of our Marketing Directors electric car with them so he doesn't have to plug it in...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 Who will watch the watchers?A vote for McCain is a traitorous vote for the destruction of our way of life as we know it. |
|
|
chovy
Founder aka "Boss"
Forum Administrator
Sr. Member
Karma: +18/-15
Posts: 456
|
|
« Reply #4 on: November 19, 2007, 09:59:00 AM » |
|
nice...he should plaster that car with a big old "Solar Powered" web 2.0 style paint job  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +197/-195
Posts: 3,662
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
|
« Reply #5 on: November 19, 2007, 12:58:38 PM » |
|
Solar is good, but the materials we have thus far only use a fraction of deliverable power (something like 16%) and until we get that up, it really isn't whorth it. We should use nuclear as an interim power source and hydrogen fuel cells for cars.
That'll last almost 2 centuries, which I think is PLENTY of time to upgrade our solar capacitence and recovery technology.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune.
- Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
chovy
Founder aka "Boss"
Forum Administrator
Sr. Member
Karma: +18/-15
Posts: 456
|
|
« Reply #6 on: November 19, 2007, 01:07:41 PM » |
|
Where did you find that statistic 16%?
The problem with what you're saying, I think we have to start somewhere...in the 80's what took up an entire room now fits in the palm of your hands...with respect to CPUs.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +197/-195
Posts: 3,662
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
|
« Reply #7 on: November 19, 2007, 01:49:01 PM » |
|
Honestly, I heard it on the Discovery channel. It was that series about what the future would look like in 2056.
If I remember correctly, solar panels can only convery VISIBLE light into energy, leaving the higher frequency (and more powerful) ultra-violet light totally wasted.
Let me find a link.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune.
- Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +197/-195
Posts: 3,662
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
|
« Reply #8 on: November 19, 2007, 02:04:20 PM » |
|
Found a link. Apparently 16% is being gracious. The performance of a photovoltaic array is dependent upon sunlight. Climate conditions (e.g., clouds, fog) have a significant effect on the amount of solar energy received by a PV array and, in turn, its performance. Most current technology photovoltaic modules are about 10 percent efficient in converting sunlight with further research being conducted to raise this efficiency to 20 percent. LINKWikipedia is even more pesimistic about conventional silicon based cells. [F]or example a 30% efficient multijunction cell based on exotic materials such as gallium arsenide or indium selenide and produced in low volume might well cost one hundred times as much as an 8% efficient amorphous silicon cell in mass production, while only delivering about four times the electrical power. LINKEven CNN says it's inefficient. But there's a catch: Such photovoltaics harness about 8 percent of the total energy in sunlight, compared with about 15 percent for crystalline silicon. LINKBasically, at the moment, solar power is grossly inneficent, but it's becoming better, especially as companies begin to benefit from it (even now). Nuclear picks up the slack after oil falls put of favor and then solar comes in to save the planet once we have progressed it enough. Like I said, 200 years should be enought time. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune.
- Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
chovy
Founder aka "Boss"
Forum Administrator
Sr. Member
Karma: +18/-15
Posts: 456
|
|
« Reply #9 on: November 19, 2007, 02:28:58 PM » |
|
negatory...I still stand by my original statement that innovation will improve efficiency, as it is/has/and will continue to do for the tech industry.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Biker Dude
A TRUE Liberal!
Forum Administrator
Hero Member
Karma: +148/-112
Posts: 1,851
Live to Ride, Ride to Live
|
|
« Reply #10 on: November 19, 2007, 03:30:51 PM » |
|
'Grossly inefficient'? Compared to what goes in, that is not even close to accurate. On a daily basis we produce cells that are in the 12 to 13 range. We have done 14. Glass is even easier to work on. I don't have the time to really go over your links, but a better place to get soalr information would be http://www.nrel.gov/ |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Who will watch the watchers?A vote for McCain is a traitorous vote for the destruction of our way of life as we know it.
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +197/-195
Posts: 3,662
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
|
« Reply #11 on: November 19, 2007, 04:33:11 PM » |
|
negatory...I still stand by my original statement that innovation will improve efficiency, as it is/has/and will continue to do for the tech industry.
Oh, I know. It'll just will take some time - and until then I think we should use nuclear and hydrogen. We'll get more efficient panels... but we need a fall back until then. 'Grossly inefficient'? Compared to what goes in, that is not even close to accurate.
On a daily basis we produce cells that are in the 12 to 13 range. We have done 14. Glass is even easier to work on.
At what cost to the consumer? Upwards of $15,000 simply isn't worth it. Make more efficient cells that are cheaper to buy (totally possible in the future) and you have a MUCH larger market. I'm only suggesting nuclear as a stop gap between oil and solar. I think solar is what we'll power the planet with in the future, but right now the start up cost is just too frightning. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune.
- Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
chovy
Founder aka "Boss"
Forum Administrator
Sr. Member
Karma: +18/-15
Posts: 456
|
|
« Reply #12 on: November 19, 2007, 05:12:28 PM » |
|
that is why corporate development will drive the cost down...billion dollar companies start outfitting their buildings with solar panelling -- it pays off for them, because they will likely be in the same office for 10 or even 20+ years....$15k to the home user, on the other hand...there is not much incentive. rebates and tax incentives can help kickstart any new paradigm shift.
I can tell you now, I won't buy it until its got a 2-3 year payback, instead or 10+ years currently before I would recoup my investment.
I also think there is a lot more efficiency that we can do, espceiclly in office space to reduce the need. like auto-dimming lights based on the amount of sunlight shining into through windows.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 19, 2007, 05:14:52 PM by chovy »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +197/-195
Posts: 3,662
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
|
« Reply #13 on: November 19, 2007, 05:23:10 PM » |
|
Couldn't agree moer chovy.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune.
- Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
chovy
Founder aka "Boss"
Forum Administrator
Sr. Member
Karma: +18/-15
Posts: 456
|
|
« Reply #14 on: November 19, 2007, 07:22:18 PM » |
|
get on the horn peeps -- tell someone I just sent my local rep an email. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
