Comments on: Is Solar Power Really Practical?

Harnessing The Sun's Energy Is Becoming More Popular - But Experts Question Its High Cost

[funkotronic]

Until a more efficient method of collecting solar energy is commonplace and economically feasible, the existing low-efficiency (+/- 10%) silicon-based PV method will just be a fragile and expensive oddity, rather than a viable choice. New tech is coming, but not soon.

Here%u2019s an idea: Put the existing low-efficiency solar cells in orbit as solar collection stations (and create plenty of high-tech jobs in the process), harvest 95% of the available power (no atmospheric filtration), beam it down to Earth as microwaves (there are many 1000%u2019s of square miles of unusable land just in the US southwest that would make dandy microwave antenna farms), convert it to electricity at these farms and then inject it into the existing power grid. You get limitless power & it''s non-polluting, other than the residual heat from the devices consuming the power. Now you have all the power you could possible need and you could power your electrical devices for literally pennies, even considering the subsidies required to bootstrap the entire conversion process.

Oh yeah %u2013 convert your home illumination to 12VDC & LEDs - save bunches of $$.

Oh, wait - this will never work cuz the oil companies (or the totally honest, completely uncorrupt government) won''t make any money off of it. Oops - I have to go now - the assassins are at the door to kill me for being an iconoclast.

Not original - proposed IN DETAIL by Jerry Pournelle in his "High Frontiers" series of essays.

[ozarkbard]

Personally, I don''t think our energy future is in solar cells, but rather solar STERLING ENGINE technology.

There are several companies closing in on the 50 percent efficiency mark in sterling solar generators... much more efficient then even the most expensive solar cell tech. and it''s a much simpler tech (in comparison).

One more time Earth, say it with me....

STERLING ENGINE!

[ozarkbard]

"Rising demand for solar technology should bring prices down eventually"

You''re kidding, right?

Why would the US solar industry be different from every other US industry. In the US, demand only increases prices... to increase profits. It''s the American way.

Every time I read about a new breakthrough in the renewable energy industry, all I can think about is how much more the CEO of that company will get paid, insteas of how much cheaper energy will be. That would take faith in America, and I''m running out of that.

[ausus-2009]

I worry about Diana Ungerleider''s mathematics. If she saves $107 a month in electricity (assuming that is an average and not just counting peak months, it would take 467 months or more than 38 years to pay for her solar panels, and not 10 years. As well,there is no mention of maintenance and replacement costs over those years.

I am a strong supporter of solar electricity and would get the panels if I could afford them, but I know it would be for the greater good of the community rather than and personal saving.

[ubrew12]

Seafang said: "So Joe Wilson was the great master spy who discovered that SH wasn''t interested in Nuclear.?"

Wilson showed that Saddam hadn''t been trying to purchase yellowcake from Nigeria. That was a central contention of Bush''s State of the Union address and Bush had already been told it wasn''t certain. When Wilson outed Bush the Bush team retaliated. You know this, so why toss bvllsh*t on the rest of us? Is it just something you''ve gotten used to doing?

[ubrew12]

Seafang said: "We can have a new electricity solar plant and it only requires 30,000 square miles od desert wasteland"

30,000 sq miles = 10,237 GW of electricity from solar at 10% conversion efficiency, 0.85 W/in2 sun power.

Translation for you: *** are you talking about?! Do you even know yourself?

[seafang]

Speaking of power; I didn''t remember reading about that 550 tons of Uranium Yellow cake, that Saddam Hussein never had that was recently moved to Canada from Iraq. So Joe Wilson was the great master spy who discovered that SH wasn''t interested in Nuclear.?

Well his wife wrote a dull book about that.

[seafang]

" When you factor in the cost of losing 1000s of miles of coastline in the near future if nothing is done, then, I''''d say solar is more than practical. Global Warming is not something you can turn on a dime with. If ocean levels go up significantly, they are essentially going up permanently. Factor THAT into the cost of fossil fuels.
Posted by ubrew12 at 07:26 PM : Jul 07, 2008 "

So how do you lose thousands of miles of coastline "in the near future" How much have you lost so far ?
Read Jan 2008 Scientific American Magazine; for a proposal to build a solar power plant in the waste desert areas of the american southwest. We can have a new electricity solar plant and it only requires 30,000 square miles od desert wasteland; well theres'' that extra solar heat/steam plant that adds another 16,ooo squ miles.
Oh almost forgo; 30,000 square miles is exactly the size of that other desert wasteland in the news; often called ANWR; but they only need about 2400 acres of that to drill for oil. For the soalr plant; they need evberys single square foot of it, including having to kick out the millions of people who live there, and close to to human visitors for ever (too vulnerable to someone throwing rocks at the solar panels.

Dr Fred Singer asked"who''s going to clean 30,000 square miles of solar panels every now and then.

Waht balderdash saying solar is green.

[my2centss]

With natural gas rates increasing, and power increasing, she may pay off those panels sooner than later.

[ubrew12]

When you factor in the cost of losing 1000s of miles of coastline in the near future if nothing is done, then, I''d say solar is more than practical. Global Warming is not something you can turn on a dime with. If ocean levels go up significantly, they are essentially going up permanently. Factor THAT into the cost of fossil fuels.

[onmild4]

Your two examples of people saving money now on Solar power systems shows that it is competitive NOW not it the future. It is so cynical to title your article "Is solar power really practical?" when clearly the answer is yes. You should report the answer to your viewers: The answer is YES! By leaving the question open you deceive your audience into thinking we aren''t quite there yet and maybe we need to do go drill in ANWR or go kiss the Saudi ring of power some more.