Re: 5 Billion per nuc power plant... we can build 100 of em..

On Nov 29, 9:44 pm, Tim May <timc...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article
<16d072a7-5b7d-4ce3-a897-49a95d612...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,

phil scott <p...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Your physics and math are deeply flawed. While PV may someday be all
that you claim it can be, it is not that now:

I dont claim much for PV at all.... the other poster was referring to
another NON PV solar install in the desert that would be much more
effective... parabolic reflectors is my guess.


the home owner was referring to PV... the studies are in... payback is
20 years or more... and yes, thats too long. then you have to replace
it all.


for about 20k in parts, another 20k in labor you can add enough solar
and wind to a home to run it and power an electric car for modest
runs.,,,IF you use gas fror the oven and heating and drier etc... tha
was a study reporteed in the San Jose paper 5 years ago... it would be
less today if you also added LED lighting..... if you set the
thermosat to 50 t night and used a matress waermer... even less.

It's all in the KWH. No matter the type of lighting, the setting of
thermostats, the KWH cost of PV is still higher than the KWH cost of
conventional gas/electric. Do the math.

Ive done the math... and you are correct. thats why the pay back is so
long.



Hint: one can still use LED lighting, somewhat dark for a comparable
cost, and set the thermostat at 50 at night, without using PV.

yes. hiwever uf you go to solar, the approcah can stretch the
operational hours making smaller panels viable where they would not
have been otherwise.;; synergy.





less if you use govt surplus solar arrays... even less if you dont
mind using about 10% pg and e power... problem is payback is in the 10
to 20 year range. too long for a viable investment at this time..

Indeed, it's all in the math, as you acknowledge.


However, I'm curious about these "govt surplus solar arrays" you
mention.

Inasmuch as solar PV is fairly new, offered by Siemens, Hitachi, etc.,
just who made these "govt surplus" arrays? Where can I find them, in
quantities sufficient for a whole house array? (Meaning, Edmund
Scientific levels of "toy" arrays don't count.)

I bought a few for a motor home in 1992.. they were obviously used, i
think maybe 10 or 20 years old, soft nylon like material, with arrays
cast into them. ..advertised with the details in an rV mag at the
time... these were 18" x 48".. cost maybe 350 dollars, ive
forgotten. company is still in business, san diego i think.


maybe its better if you have ultra efficient insulation, LED
lighting.. maybe its a 7 year payback. at todays utility rates. so
actual payback coukd be faster.

Again, with ultra efficient insulation, solar is not the issue.

(i consult in this area, with the US DOE, state, and some private
firms. synergy is the issue... its worth looking up)




By the way, for most climates, where it is cool 8 or more months out of
the year, LED lighting is not even needed. Do the math. The power
output of a bulb goes straight into heating a house, with only a tiny
loss due to radiation out through windows. The rest is thermalized, a
technical term meaning "nearly all of the power is converted to heat."


its a cost per btu issue. electric is the most costly in non hydro
electric areas of the country, unless used to drive a heat pump, but
those peter ot below 30 deg F or so... usually natural gas is the
cheapest of all. ,, but you are correct, you do recover much of the
power in the form of heat... and considering the high cost of LED's
the payback might be in the 5 year range in cold climates.. faster in
warm climates...and as these act in synergy with a solar system some
added leverage.




Modulo the difference in heating via propane or natural gas vs. heating
with electricity, leaving lights on is just another way of heating.

Photovoltaic is, currently and for the foreseeable future, for Gorehead
blissninnies.

Solar is also for those living in the boon docks who must generate
their own power.. solar can handle the entire lighting loads, so that
a gen set needs only be run when you need it for pumping or running a
furnace fan etc.


Ironically, Bush's Crawford ranch makes far greater use of passive
solar, photovoltaic, and heavy insulation than Gore's Tennessee home
does.

I'm not a Bush supporter, but I'm also not a solar blissninny.


grow up.


Phil scott




--Tim May



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 5 Billion per nuc power plant... we can build 100 of em..
    ... Your physics and math are deeply flawed. ... I'm curious about these "govt surplus solar arrays" you ... output of a bulb goes straight into heating a house, ...
    (misc.survivalism)
  • Re: Space travel not war
    ... electric power is becoming a major problem, ... approach to getting early solar power stations ... Infrared free electron lasers powered by ... The secondary satellite produces 44.7 GW of DC electrical power. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • EERE Network News
    ... international energy efficiency and renewable energy news and events, ... California Approves Legislation for Million Solar Roofs Plan ... First Geothermal Plant in Alaska Starts Power Production ...
    (misc.invest.stocks)
  • Re: We can meet all our needs through space development
    ... expectations of 13% efficiency not 40% as you appear to assume with ... "A Solar Grand Plan ... By 2050 solar power could end U.S. dependence on foreign oil and slash ... by 2050 we will probably be ready to expand solar energy production ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Al Gore and Winston Churchill. No, really.
    ... Which is why mandating solar and wind isn't going to work. ... providing 20% of power with it. ... It's a load balancing/storage technology to allow ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)