RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old article?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old article?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old article?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 5/24/2014 9:43:49 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

That would be an awesome application.

One problem would be that every dog, cat, and here in the country, wild creatures of all sorts,would be hanging out on the heated roadway.

True that.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Profile

Post #: 21

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 5/24/2014 1:32:30 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Three square miles of sunlight would power every home in America.

In time, someone will figure out how to effectively tap this well.

Yeah? At night too?
Of course at night too...this has already been explaned to you.

I'd love to see you do the math on this. But since I'm pretty sure you're incapable.. lets run the numbers and see if you're correct.

Ok we will use your numbers...I think they are wrong but this is about your math skills.

At noon, the average radiance is going to be 1Kw/m2, ground level in the US. Or 1e6 kW/km2. Mind you - the system generate essentially no power in the early morn and dusk.

The average of low output and high output would be then 7 hours per day

But we'll use the best case for this.

And the average efficiency of solar panels is.. 15%. Again. We'll say there all new, and so perfectly efficient. According to the US DOE the average house uses 10.8Kw per year.

We'll round that down to 10k in your favor.

125 million houses. So thats 125e6*10e3 = 1.25e12Kw per year.

Gee, I'm afraid, as usual.. your math is a little off.

Yours too:
125 million homes times 10kw is 1,250,000,000 kw.You state above that 1 square meter recieves 1kw then 1 square km recieves 1,000,000 kw. That would be 1250 sq km or a little less than 500sq mi

1.25e12Kw/1e6Kw/km2 1.25e6 km2.

Since the contiguous US is roughly 8mil km2 = this means paving over 1/8 of the country with solar cells, just to power our homes.

Only if everyone is as bad at math as you are.

Forgetting our schools, cars, businesses, hospitals.

They were not part of the original statement so why do you ad them here?

At noon. Without transmission wires.

No for 24 hours a day.

Thats why liberals inability to do numbers is so patently dangerous.

So far your numbers are the ones in question.

You believe crap that is so patently absurd anyone with a background in science or engineering *knows* its ridiculous.

If you can't do simple arithmatic how can we expect you to comprehend science?

< Message edited by thompsonx -- 5/24/2014 1:34:01 PM >

(in reply to Phydeaux)

Profile

Post #: 22

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 5/24/2014 1:38:11 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: joether

While the generation of energy is good, does there exist a sizable storage system to contain it? A sort of 'First In, First Out' mechanism (FIFO)?

It is not all that difficult to pump water into an elevated tank or box cars full of lead up an incline.

(in reply to joether)

Profile

Post #: 23

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 5/25/2014 10:46:30 PM

MercTech

Posts: 3706
Joined: 7/4/2006
Status: offline

My data on mean lifetime of solar panes was from the maintenance records at several pilot tests of commercial size solar panel arrays. Some panels last two decades without degradation. A significant number degrade after a couple of years. The mean lifetime was 5 years.

The illusion of solar energy is that the panels take over a decade to generate the amount of power it takes to manufacture them. Hence a net inefficiency in power generation. Solar isn't green, it just relocates the carbon footprint and pollution out of your own back yard to somewhere else.

Thanks for the link, http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-know/environment/inkjet-printing-solar-panels-cheap-and-almost-green/10348/

It looks like it is still a physics lab experiment and not ready for commercial deployment. I keep hoping as solar would be a godsend if it were actually viable in a system wide deployment. We aren't there yet.

What I really would like to see is a decent fuel cell that is actually usable. Say, a propane/air fuel cell. Hydrogen fuel cells have been around since the 70s but handling hydrogen is a difficult proposition. The molecules are so small they don't want to stay in a container. And hydride cells are too bloody expensive to build.

I still giggle over PG&E buying up a fuel cell company in the 1970s and shelving the technology only to trot it out, with almost no changes, to win a DOE development award in the first decade of this century. Having a unit the size of two four drawer file cabinets that could power a 14 unit apartment complex while running on natural gas and air seemed the way to go.

What I want is a power unit you can strep to the top of a propane cylinder and take the power wherever you need it. But all the fuel cell development in the U.S. is proprietary hydrogen cells for high end electronics and attempts at huge installations to provide backup power for hospitals and commercial buildings. What would really make consumer sense is a fuel cell that can replace the battery bank units in Marine and RV applications.

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 24

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 5/26/2014 6:05:20 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

Our society is ignoring obvious and effective uses of solar -- not to generate electricity necessarily, but to heat.

My home is built to be passive solar. No panels, no electronics -- just concrete, windows, insulation, and trees. Cost? Slightly more than a conventional stick home, but not outrageously so. Return on investment? Immediate. And with no summer cooling costs either. Partial earth-sheltering adds to the heating/cooling effect.

You can boil water and cook your dinner in a $5 solar oven made from cardboard, plastic oven bags, aluminum foil and crumbled newspaper. I've done it (for fun--takes roughly twice as long, but doable). *If* we choose, we could be designing at least partial water heating and so forth. Look at the heat generated quickly in your car on a summer day.

Instead, we build things that have to be heated (and cooled), instead of taking advantage of the natural heat and coolness existing around us.

A small but significant paradigm shift, and readily doable.

There's a power plant somewhere in the southwest that generates electricity by using huge mirrors to direct sunlight to heat water to turn turbines. No panels. Very effective.

Newer windmills with internal blades also take advantage of natural heating to turn the turbines.

< Message edited by Musicmystery -- 5/26/2014 6:07:28 AM >

(in reply to MercTech)

Profile

Post #: 25

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 5/28/2014 2:52:36 PM

GotSteel

Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech
My data on mean lifetime of solar panes was from the maintenance records at several pilot tests of commercial size solar panel arrays. Some panels last two decades without degradation. A significant number degrade after a couple of years. The mean lifetime was 5 years.

Here's the warranty on mine:

25-year transferable power output warranty: 5-year/95%, 10-year/90%,25-year/80%

quote:

ORIGINAL: http://renogy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Renogy-Warranty-5-181.pdf
The performance guarantee covers the transportation expenses for the return shipment of the modules or for any renewed delivery of the repaired or replaced modules. It also covers the reasonable costs of installation or reinstallation of modules, and other expenses incurred by the final customers or the seller.

(in reply to MercTech)

Profile

Post #: 26

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 6/3/2014 8:49:51 AM

MercTech

Posts: 3706
Joined: 7/4/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech
My data on mean lifetime of solar panes was from the maintenance records at several pilot tests of commercial size solar panel arrays. Some panels last two decades without degradation. A significant number degrade after a couple of years. The mean lifetime was 5 years.

Here's the warranty on mine:

25-year transferable power output warranty: 5-year/95%, 10-year/90%,25-year/80%

quote:

ORIGINAL: http://renogy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Renogy-Warranty-5-181.pdf
The performance guarantee covers the transportation expenses for the return shipment of the modules or for any renewed delivery of the repaired or replaced modules. It also covers the reasonable costs of installation or reinstallation of modules, and other expenses incurred by the final customers or the seller.

Not going to go into whether a warrantee used to sell a product has any basis in the reality of the operation of the product. I was wondering if anyone had seen solar panels on the market that didn't take more energy to produce than they would ever generate.
I'm looking not for PC green illusions but actual efficient engineering solutions. i.e. the illusion that electric cars are good for the environment as a whole when they only relocate more pollution to another location that does an internal combustion engine.

(in reply to GotSteel)

Profile

Post #: 27

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 6/3/2014 9:07:08 AM

HunterCA

Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: MercTech

One of the main problems with solar energy electric generation is that the high temperature (1700 degrees) annealing of the solar cells makes it require 15 years to recoup the amount of power needed in manufacture. But the mean useful lifetime of an individual solar panel is 5 years.

This is not true.
First the cost to manufacture solar panels today is about .56cents a watt.
I have solar panels that were manufactured in 1990. My callender says it is 2014. That is somewhat longer than five years. I know of no solar manufacturer that does not guarentee their product against defects in manjufactre and materials for 20 years or more. Why would anyone invest 50k and up on a system that was only going to last for 5 years?

Great. Go hook up a meter and tell me how much power they are generating compared to their face plate. Useful life on solar cells is determined by percentage of name plate.

And every single major PV cell made today has the same issue with degradation of performance over time. So the warranty about free from defects in workmanship et. al is exactly ... meaningless.

And while I've seen useful lifes from 5 to 11 years or so, the principle merc stated is more or less right.

But generally, it isn't the energy cost of production that is the determiner of feasibility. Its that the aerial density in most of the US for example doesn't allow one to recoup the cost of the investment over the lifespan of the panels.

In other words - you're better off putting your money in a cd.

I've been off the grid now for about 13 years. My solar panels are doing about 82 percent of what they did when new. Which is fine in the summer. In the winter I'm running the generator more often and for longer periods. Not to mention the $8,000 I just paid to replace 3,000 pounds of lead acid batteries that I was lucky to get 11 years out of.

(in reply to Phydeaux)

Profile

Post #: 28

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 6/3/2014 9:14:23 AM

HunterCA

Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Great. Go hook up a meter and tell me how much power they are generating compared to their face plate. Useful life on solar cells is determined by percentage of name plate.

They have kept my battery pack fully charged for more than 25 years.

And every single major PV cell made today has the same issue with degradation of performance over time. So the waranty about free from defects in workmanship et. al is exactly ... meaningless.

That would be your ignorant,unsubstantiated,puerile opinion. The pannels still produce their rated power. My pannels say xx amps at yy temp, +/- z%

And while I've seen useful lifes from 5 to 11 years or so, the principle merc stated is more or less right.

It is not even in the same zip code with right.

But generally, it isn't the energy cost of production that is the determiner of feasibility. Its that the aerial density in most of the US for example doesn't allow one to recoup the cost of the investment over the lifespan of the panels.

With solar pannels available currently for about a dollar a watt and edison electricity selling at about .10 cents for a thousand watts, a pannel will put out it's rated power for no less than 5 hours a day. So the math goes like this:10,000 watts cost $1 from edison, a 1 watt pannel will produce 10,000 watts in 10,000 hours at five hours a day that would be 2000 days which would be about four and a half years. Actually less because the panels make power for more than 5 hours a day.

In other words - you're better off putting your money in a cd.

No. I put my money in solar panels, inverter and batteries.They have been paid off for more than 20 years. For that amount of time I have not had an electric bill. How much do your cd's pay?

If you've had your system for 25 years you've had to have changed your batteries a couple of times. How many tons of lead acid battery have you put onto the recycle bin at what cost. Dude, you're not being completely truthful. As well, if your inverters are 25 years old I'd say you're lucky having the same one function now.

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 29

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 6/3/2014 9:18:55 AM

HunterCA

Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

That is clearly shrinking. The earliest panels in my aray develop about 15 watts per sq ft. I bought some used ones recently that put out 25 watts per sq ft and the new stuff in the pipe line is about 40 watts per sq ft..

Earlier in the thread you were defending your panels still making rated energy and now you mention you've swapped out panels.

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 30

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 6/3/2014 9:23:20 AM

HunterCA

Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

I understand certain individuals on this forum/thread dislike renewable energy, given the President pushed for such a few years back; its really in the nation's interest to forge ahead with good research and development in this industry. To stay ahead of other nations, and reduce our reliance on other nations to provide us with energy. Its rather sad that the party that once stood for small business development, good science, and plenty of R&D is now against all those concepts, because Democrats favor them.

I'm off the grid and have sat with the engineers of major power companies. Renewable energy doesn't work well. With a simple google you'll see Europe is finding the cost is much more than they ever imagined.

I see that your side has made this political while my side just wants reasonable systems that work. Your blind faith is not going to make the systems reliable.

(in reply to joether)

Profile

Post #: 31

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 6/3/2014 9:26:21 AM

HunterCA

Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Three square miles of sunlight would power every home in America.

In time, someone will figure out how to effectively tap this well.

I'd like to see a reference for your determination. Roof tops would be an easy way to get three square miles. Europe has done that for years and are now deciding the energy is too costly and is moving away from it. It's a nice catchy saying, but it's BS with current state of the art.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Profile

Post #: 32

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 6/3/2014 9:29:06 AM

HunterCA

Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Three square miles of sunlight would power every home in America.

In time, someone will figure out how to effectively tap this well.

Yeah? At night too?

I'd love to see you do the math on this. But since I'm pretty sure you're incapable.. lets run the numbers and see if you're correct.

At noon, the average radiance is going to be 1Kw/m2, ground level in the US. Or 1e6 kW/km2. Mind you - the system generate essentially no power in the early morn and dusk. But we'll use the best case for this.

And the average efficiency of solar panels is.. 15%. Again. We'll say there all new, and so perfectly efficient. According to the US DOE the average house uses 10.8Kw per year. We'll round that down to 10k in your favor.

125 million houses. So thats 125e6*10e3 = 1.25e12Kw per year.

Gee, I'm afraid, as usual.. your math is a little off.

1.25e12Kw/1e6Kw/km2 1.25e6 km2.

Since the contiguous US is roughly 8mil km2 = this means paving over 1/8 of the country with solar cells, just to power our homes. Forgetting our schools, cars, businesses, hospitals.

At noon. Without transmission wires.

Thats why liberals inability to do numbers is so patently dangerous. You believe crap that is so patently absurd anyone with a background in science or engineering *knows* its ridiculous. But lacking those you blithely believe.

There you go. Science has trumped religion. In this case the religion of the left.

(in reply to Phydeaux)

Profile

Post #: 33

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 6/3/2014 9:31:48 AM

HunterCA

Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

That would be an awesome application.

One problem would be that every dog, cat, and here in the country, wild creatures of all sorts,would be hanging out on the heated roadway.

I think the real problem would be maintenance costs nobody could afford.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Profile

Post #: 34

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 6/3/2014 9:37:15 AM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

I'm off the grid and have sat with the engineers of major power companies. Renewable energy doesn't work well. With a simple google you'll see Europe is finding the cost is much more than they ever imagined.

Would you have any validation for this ignorant unsubstantiated opinion.

(in reply to HunterCA)

Profile

Post #: 35

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 6/3/2014 9:39:01 AM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

That is clearly shrinking. The earliest panels in my aray develop about 15 watts per sq ft. I bought some used ones recently that put out 25 watts per sq ft and the new stuff in the pipe line is about 40 watts per sq ft..

Earlier in the thread you were defending your panels still making rated energy and now you mention you've swapped out panels.

For those who can read english my post says that I have added to my aray not swapped anything out.

(in reply to HunterCA)

Profile

Post #: 36

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 6/3/2014 9:40:27 AM

HunterCA

Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: joether

While the generation of energy is good, does there exist a sizable storage system to contain it? A sort of 'First In, First Out' mechanism (FIFO)?

It is not all that difficult to pump water into an elevated tank or box cars full of lead up an incline.

The most efficient motor you can get is about 80% efficient. Ya, I've installed slightly more efficient but let's stick with 80%. So you use excess power you don't need during the day to push box car full of lead up a hill. The solar panels loose they're share of energy, pushing box cars of lead looses it's energy, then the box cars coming down the hill looses it's energy. So you have 80% of 80% of 80% of your left over daytime energy to use at night. And, given from previous calculations we know that 1/8 of the country has to be covered for daytime power, we now have to increase that amount for night time power. And, since we are collection all of the solar light for energy, everything under the panels becomes a desert in the shade. So, for your utopian dream you've just made the US a desert.

Good plan.

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 37

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 6/3/2014 9:46:26 AM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

I've been off the grid now for about 13 years. My solar panels are doing about 82 percent of what they did when new.

How do you know this?

Which is fine in the summer. In the winter I'm running the generator more often and for longer periods.

Perhaps if you were to add some more pannels you would not have to run your generator so often.

Not to mention the $8,000 I just paid to replace 3,000 pounds of lead acid batteries that I was lucky to get 11 years out of.

This is nothing but a lie.
Deep cycle flooded lead acid golf cart batteries have a usable life of 5 years if you are running for 11 years no wonder you cannot get a full charge on your batteries.
Golf cart batteries weigh 60# each so 3000# would be 50 batteries. $8000 divided by 50=$160 per battery...more bullshit since they can be had all over town for @$80 per copy.

(in reply to HunterCA)

Profile

Post #: 38

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 6/3/2014 9:48:14 AM

HunterCA

Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

I'm off the grid and have sat with the engineers of major power companies. Renewable energy doesn't work well. With a simple google you'll see Europe is finding the cost is much more than they ever imagined.

Would you have any validation for this ignorant unsubstantiated opinion.

Calling names is a Saul Alinaky tactic of the left. You can google the truth about Europe having big problems with costs. Frankly, if you'd like I'll start calling for validation on your inane comments.

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 39

RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old ar... - 6/3/2014 9:51:01 AM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: MercTech

Not going to go into whether a warrantee used to sell a product has any basis in the reality of the operation of the product.

Why is it that in your zip code guarentees are not valid?

I was wondering if anyone had seen solar panels on the market that didn't take more energy to produce than they would ever generate.

Where did you get the idea that someone would sell something for less than it cost them to make it?

I'm looking not for PC green illusions but actual efficient engineering solutions. i.e. the illusion that electric cars are good for the environment as a whole when they only relocate more pollution to another location that does an internal combustion engine.

The energy from a power plant to run an electic car is less than the energy to run a gasoline car.

(in reply to MercTech)

Profile

Post #: 40

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Cheap Solar? Anyone heard anthing from this old article?