Repost please: $1/watt solar panals.
in [Basics]
|
From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax on 29 Oct 2009 00:42 TheM wrote: > <nospam(a)nevis.com> wrote in message news:4ae79f14$1(a)news.x-privat.org... >> TheM wrote: >>> "vaughn" <vaughnsimonHATESSPAM(a)gmail.FAKE.com> wrote in message news:hc7utq$1a1$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>>> "Don Lancaster" <don(a)tinaja.com> wrote in message news:7kooa3F39fllbU1(a)mid.individual.net... >>>>> For net energy, a quarter per peak pv watt is needed. >>>>> >>>>> Even then, it would be many years after a quarter per watt for actual breakeven, owing to all the previously lost energy. >>>>> >>>> Huh? I usually agree with Don on these things, but here he seems to be confusing energy break even with economic break even. I >>>> a perfect world they might be comparable, but I doubt if that is true in the real world. >>>> >>>> Vaughn >>> I think what he wants to say is that energy break even is many years down the road, >>> possibly decades. And fixing and maintaining it might kill the small net energy surplus. >>> And before we get to break even we might have new, much better technology. >>> >>> M >>> >>> >>> >> Who knows, but for a $1.98 a watt it's a good deal if you want to give it a go. I know I could run my home office off a couple of >> panels (laptop, printer etc.)Even having a couple would keep the lights on >> in an emergency. > > Especially at night.... factor in batteries and invertors and its way more > than 1.98. Depends on the size of the PV installation. Above 1kW and it doesn't add that much cost % wise -- Dirk http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show
From: miso on 29 Oct 2009 01:27 On Oct 28, 9:50 am, "newslett...(a)gmail.com" <jd38...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 28, 4:51 am, "stu" <no where just yet> wrote: > > > <m...(a)sushi.com> wrote in message > > > Worse yet, there is plenty of nuclear waste > > stored at the reactor sites that is not in any containment vessel. > > They let the rods cool a bit before even considering transferring them > > offsite, and we now know Yucca Mountain will not be opened. > > I won't claim to have seen every nuclear site. But of all those I > have seen, not one had spent fuel outside of the multi-layer casks > that have something like 55 tons of shielding. Walking and working > around these storage buildings and/or "pads", my dosimeter never went > over 0.01 millirads per hour dose rate. You'll get more exposure than > that just walking on the sidewalk beside by the granite-faced walls of > the bank downtime. I'm not concerned about exposure as much as the spent rods would be a terrorist target. Some rods are in pools and some are "air cooled" IIRC. <http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/Diablo-Canyon-Open-Air-Storage.htm> Diablo Canyon has had a pretty good record. Of course, you know they had to rebuild a lot of that plant due to plans being reversed in a blue print copier. ;-) "Sept. 27 Just as the Diablo Canyon blockade is ending a newly hired 25 year old engineer discovers that the seismic blue prints have been reversed; " http://www.energy-net.org/01NUKE/DIABLO1.HTM It's a classic story because the new kid on the block finds the error while all the seasoned professionals just follow orders. I'm for damning up whatever we can dam, fishies be dammed, er damned. There is a politician in California that wants to undo the Hetch Hetchy dam and restore the valley. As if we need one more valley in Yosemite to hike. Plus it is the water source for San Francisco and much of the east bay. When James Watt proposed this, it was easy to laugh off because James Watt was nuts. But John Garamendi is basically a pretty sharp guy except for this nutty idea. Ya know, there is probably good money to be made on the downstream side of solar electric plants. Inverters really could be more efficient,. Probably the biggest limitation is the magnetic core. Maybe wire loss is next [We need power litz wire.]
From: Michael A. Terrell on 29 Oct 2009 01:47 krw wrote: > > On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:25:28 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" > <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > > > > >nospam(a)nevis.com wrote: > >> > >> Michael A. Terrell wrote: > >> > nospam(a)nevis.com wrote: > >> >> Michael A. Terrell wrote: > >> >>> nospam(a)nevis.com wrote: > >> >>>> TheM wrote: > >> >>>>> "vaughn" <vaughnsimonHATESSPAM(a)gmail.FAKE.com> wrote in message news:hc7utq$1a1$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > >> >>>>>> "Don Lancaster" <don(a)tinaja.com> wrote in message news:7kooa3F39fllbU1(a)mid.individual.net... > >> >>>>>>> For net energy, a quarter per peak pv watt is needed. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> Even then, it would be many years after a quarter per watt for actual breakeven, owing to all the previously lost energy. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>> Huh? I usually agree with Don on these things, but here he seems to be confusing energy break even with economic break even. I a > >> >>>>>> perfect world they might be comparable, but I doubt if that is true in the real world. > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> Vaughn > >> >>>>> I think what he wants to say is that energy break even is many years down the road, > >> >>>>> possibly decades. And fixing and maintaining it might kill the small net energy surplus. > >> >>>>> And before we get to break even we might have new, much better technology. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> M > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> Who knows, but for a $1.98 a watt it's a good deal if you want to give > >> >>>> it a go. I know I could run my home office off a couple of panels > >> >>>> (laptop, printer etc.)Even having a couple would keep the lights on > >> >>>> in an emergency. > >> >>> > >> >>> If there is enough sun to power the lights, you don't need them. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >> After 4pm six months of the year, yes I do need lights. > >> > > >> > > >> > The solar panels are worthless for that use without expensive, short > >> > lived batteries. > >> > > >> > > >> > >> Tell that to my 10 year old UPS > > > > > > You think there are enough good used 10 year old lead acid batteries > >for everyone who want to use solar? > > All three people? I thought there were only two cheap bastards who used old car batteries? -- The movie 'Deliverance' isn't a documentary!
From: Michael A. Terrell on 29 Oct 2009 01:48 Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote: > > Michael A. Terrell wrote: > > nospam(a)nevis.com wrote: > >> Michael A. Terrell wrote: > >>> nospam(a)nevis.com wrote: > >>>> TheM wrote: > >>>>> "vaughn" <vaughnsimonHATESSPAM(a)gmail.FAKE.com> wrote in message news:hc7utq$1a1$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > >>>>>> "Don Lancaster" <don(a)tinaja.com> wrote in message news:7kooa3F39fllbU1(a)mid.individual.net... > >>>>>>> For net energy, a quarter per peak pv watt is needed. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Even then, it would be many years after a quarter per watt for actual breakeven, owing to all the previously lost energy. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> Huh? I usually agree with Don on these things, but here he seems to be confusing energy break even with economic break even. I a > >>>>>> perfect world they might be comparable, but I doubt if that is true in the real world. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Vaughn > >>>>> I think what he wants to say is that energy break even is many years down the road, > >>>>> possibly decades. And fixing and maintaining it might kill the small net energy surplus. > >>>>> And before we get to break even we might have new, much better technology. > >>>>> > >>>>> M > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> Who knows, but for a $1.98 a watt it's a good deal if you want to give > >>>> it a go. I know I could run my home office off a couple of panels > >>>> (laptop, printer etc.)Even having a couple would keep the lights on > >>>> in an emergency. > >>> > >>> If there is enough sun to power the lights, you don't need them. > >>> > >>> > >> After 4pm six months of the year, yes I do need lights. > > > > > > The solar panels are worthless for that use without expensive, short > > lived batteries. > > Cheap deep cycle batteries with a 15 year guarantee are available What guarantee do you have that the seller will be in business next year, let alone 15 years from now? -- The movie 'Deliverance' isn't a documentary!
From: vaughn on 29 Oct 2009 08:12
<nospam(a)nevis.com> wrote in message news:4ae8ff39$1(a)news.x-privat.org... > For a laptop, printer and a couple of 15 watt compact florescent lights? > Hardly a huge expense, with 1000watt inverters $100.00 on ebay, a couple > of Sams' club deep cycle batteries ? Actually for system you don't really need inverters at all. I use 12-volt compact florescent lamps, and 12 volt adapters are available for laptops. I use the lamps out in my yard, and my in-home 12-volt wiring system is slowly growing. Vaughn |