South Korea. Fully solar.

Iriemon · 06-27-08, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rathi

Current solar technology cannot compete on price to other systems in the market today. Personally, I'd be willing to factor in the political cost we pay for using oil as being much higher, buts thats not going to influence the market. Solar power for cheap is the only practical way to get it truly widespread. Different companies are working on technologies that trying to get the cost way down, but until such technology becomes reality, solar isn't going to replace fossil fuels. Hopefully such technology is not far off. Here is something that shows promise in solar developments.
Nanosolar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Exactly right. We could supply a great deal of our energy needs with solar and wind power combined with a crash course in conservation. But even at current world oil prices, its cheaper to burn fuel. It's all a matter of econmics. Slap a $500/barrel tax on oil and you'd see wind solar and other alternative energy forms being used in no time.

On our sailboat, the relative price of power is much greater than on land. Fuel produced power comes from running alternators off the deisel engine, and factoring all costs, it costs about 50x more than being on the grid.

In this little economic microcosm, alternative energy sources become much more price competive. The cost of a generator and panels can be recouped in a couple years based on the "free" power they provide. With solar and wind, we could generally generate enough power to run lights, stereo, computer, refridgeration, and fans without burning fuel.

The real energy hogs are air conditioning, heating, and cooking. I don't have airconditioning or heating, and use propane to cook. The little wind gens and panels don't come close to producing enough power to run these things. With some more panels I could probably generate enough to cook with, but no way run airconditioning or heating.

My boat has very limited real estate to mount solar panels and wind generators, unlike a house. If you covered your roof with panels and some wind generators, you would produce enough to make a significant dent in your power needs, probably (depending on where you live). In cities it would be less practical, but power can be generated off site.

But to cover just one house in panels would cost tens of thousands of dollars. It's possible, but not economically practical at today's prices.

dirtpoorchris · 06-27-08, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iriemon

Exactly right. We could supply a great deal of our energy needs with solar and wind power combined with a crash course in conservation. But even at current world oil prices, its cheaper to burn fuel. It's all a matter of econmics. Slap a $500/barrel tax on oil and you'd see wind solar and other alternative energy forms being used in no time.

On our sailboat, the relative price of power is much greater than on land. Fuel produced power comes from running alternators off the deisel engine, and factoring all costs, it costs about 50x more than being on the grid.

In this little economic microcosm, alternative energy sources become much more price competive. The cost of a generator and panels can be recouped in a couple years based on the "free" power they provide. With solar and wind, we could generally generate enough power to run lights, stereo, computer, refridgeration, and fans without burning fuel.

The real energy hogs are air conditioning, heating, and cooking. I don't have airconditioning or heating, and use propane to cook. The little wind gens and panels don't come close to producing enough power to run these things. With some more panels I could probably generate enough to cook with, but no way run airconditioning or heating.

My boat has very limited real estate to mount solar panels and wind generators, unlike a house. If you covered your roof with panels and some wind generators, you would produce enough to make a significant dent in your power needs, probably (depending on where you live). In cities it would be less practical, but power can be generated off site.

But to cover just one house in panels would cost tens of thousands of dollars. It's possible, but not economically practical at today's prices.

Scientists just made a very cheap form of really efficient solar panels by just using cheaper materials to focus on making magnifying glasses to direct more energy into one panel and its supposed to be some crazy times more efficient. Saw it a long while back but have no idea where to find it.

dirtpoorchris · 06-27-08, 07:55 PM

How sad.
The New York Times > Log In

Quote:

Faced with a surge in the number of proposed solar power plants, the federal government has placed a moratorium on new solar projects on public land until it studies their environmental impact, which is expected to take about two years.

RightinNYC · 06-28-08, 04:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirtpoorchris

How sad.
The New York Times > Log In

lol @ hippies pwning themselves.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.debatepolitics.com/archives/31441-south-korea-fully-solar.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date
Super-Fast Broadband Via the Sewer System : EcoWorldly	This thread	Refback	05-12-08 07:44 PM