Solar Energy

[Zalamander]

The main problem is that current solar panels are very inefficient, they can only make use of less than 8% of the solar energy that hits them currently or even less if I understand it right.
If enough research is put to invent better solar panels tho and efficency get up to closer 20-25% in the future they might be more efficient than wind power. But today solar panels is just a waste of space and money, they are way too inefficient.

[sinisterwyvern]

Oil and Energy Corporations

[Deleted]

I don't know about the technology but here in the Netherlands, a lot of people want solar panels on their roof these days. Free electricity + the quality (as in how easy it breaks) seems okay. And if you are cheap with your usage you can actually make a little off of it as well.

But I think northern Europe is used to paying rediculous prices for our energy. So then it is cost effective.

October first our VAT will increase and we will be paying €2,00 per liter. That is $9,86 a gallon (it feels wrong but that is what I got calculated)

Only reason it makes sense to put up solar panels is the fact that you get tax breaks for doing so. In countries where the sun doesn't shine a lot (northern europe) it's a lot more efficient to invest in wind power. However the government doesn't want an all wind based energy market since the wind isn't always around, so they diversify to other sources, so they are less dependent on weather forecasts being wind heavy. I do wish the EU would force us to cooperate on this as it's one of those areas where there's way to much bureaucracy between countries for it to work on a massive scale. There's very little reason for northern european countries to have solar panels when they still burn coal in countries in southern european where the sun shines a hell a lot more.

[Zulakbar]

Nuclear is far better than solar.

Youtube: 'ted thorium nuclear'

Learn.

[Djuntas]

Nuclear is far better than solar.

Youtube: 'ted thorium nuclear'

Learn.

I'm all for nuclear power aswell, BUT if there are other alternatives...

For now trough, nuclear power is the best option.

[Medusa Cascade]

Once solar harnesses the IR spectrum we'll be set.

[chazus]

Once solar harnesses the IR spectrum we'll be set.

Um.

Huh? Why will we be 'set' when it 'uses the IR spectrum'? The IR spectrum would generate even less power than the current panels are designed to gather.

[Medusa Cascade]

Um.

Huh? Why will we be 'set' when it 'uses the IR spectrum'? The IR spectrum would generate even less power than the current panels are designed to gather.

Ah, forgot to elaborate. A hybrid panel using silicon-based cells and all-carbon cells could make use of almost the entire range of sunlight’s energy.

[someotherguy]

Exactly. So why aren't they more efficient when other areas of technology have improved dramatically. We have a super computer with over a million CPUs and 96,000 terabytes of memory and we're still using internal combustion engines. As a semaphore stated, it seems to be an issue of money. If every home had a super-efficient solar array, the only cost for energy would be a one time investment in the array and subsequent repairs down the line. I feel that oil companies want to milk every last dollar out of th world's oil supply.

Just look up how much energy is in oil.
According to this (not sure if accurate): http://askville.amazon.com/human-ene...estId=57559786

There are different types of crude, but in general, one gallon puts out 140,000 BTU.

A human can sustain about 100 watts of work (though Lance Armstrong can put out 500 watts). At that rate it would take 17 days to put out as much energy in a gallon of crude.

That would cost about $3,000 at minimum wage.

[Mister K]

It's all business and money. It is much more profitable to feast on coal and oil then revolutionize free energy ("free"). If Renewable sources of energy had same amount of time in development like fossil, we would have a lot different world today.

[Puremallace]

Enough energy hits the earth from the sun per hour to power the world for a year. Why is it that our solar technology is so rudimentary? I have an answer that I think could be accurate, but I just want to hear your thoughts.

Power companies have big lobbyist and basically run the world. Simple and sad answer.

Nuclear is far better than solar.

Youtube: 'ted thorium nuclear'

Learn.

Go tell that to the Japanese. From article of a stock I invest in

SAN JOSE, Calif., Sept. 12, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- SunPower Corp. (SPWR, Trade ) today announced that the company has extended its long-standing partnership with Toshiba for the next several years. Under the terms of the master supply agreement, Toshiba will place orders of more than 100-megawatts (MW) for SunPower's high efficiency solar panels to support the rapidly growing residential solar market in Japan. Since SunPower first partnered with Toshiba in 2010, it has delivered approximately 70 MW of its high-performance solar panels.

Solar sure as hell is not Ethonal and can actually compete with coal right now. Basically in Louisiana if you pay more then $45 a month for energy you can get a full solar panel installation on your house right now.

[vep]

I think that picture suffices.

[The Riddler]

It has nothing to do with "not enough investments", whacked out conspiracy theories about big oil, or any of that other pablum. You only needs two words. Physics. Economics.

On the physics side, solar power is limited by the fact that photonic to electric conversion has a MAXIMUM possible efficiency of about 70%. The panels you can buy on the market today have an efficiency of about 18% (cheaper ones even less). Even using the most exotic, expensive materials that exist on planet earth today, the most efficient solar panel is only about 28% efficient. There just is not a lot of 'room to improve' and the tired, worn-out trope that "we only need to invest more money and time" is not applicable.

On the economic side - their cost is simply not feasible either as a residential solution or as a municipal one. Even with ridiculous subsidies they cost too much - and that is using SAND to make them (which is just one side of dirt in terms of cheapness). Making more efficient panels makes them even more expensive. And if you want to outfit a house with them then you need inverters, converters, batteries... The entire setup for a "solar home" will cost over $50,000 to supply enough energy for a 4 person home. Given the fact that the average electricity bill is only about $100 a month, that means it will take over 40 years to 'break even'. That's over twice as long as the average life expectancy of the solar panel itself. Solar power is an idiot's solution looked at economically.

[Puremallace]

I call complete and utter bullshit that the cost is not viable for residential. You off top get a $6 grand deduction on your taxes for converting over. Solar companies in Louisiana are offering $45 a month pay off amount that includes installation and maintenance.

People have been tricked into thinking oil/gas is cheaper, but guess what speculators are about to raise the cost of a barrel of over $100. Gas at the pump is about to be $4 a gallon

[The Riddler]

You can call it all you want, but for a FULL setup including the panels, the batteries, the inverters, the converters, the brackets, the installation (gotta have an electrician approve it), and labor even with subsidies you are staring at least at around $40 grand.

Now factor in the reality that you have to finance this purchase because you don't have $40,000 in your pocket. Even if you roll up the cost of the solar array into the home loan at a 3.5% fixed rate, you are looking at $1,400 a year just on the INTEREST for the system. Derp! That's more expensive than your current electric bill.

But let's assume you're a super-shopper. You 'know a guy', and you get all your stuff done on the cheap and getting the WHOLE shebang only costs you $19,999 bucks including installation. Now your interest is only $700 a year. Yay. But yeah, you're still paying $700 a year for your system (plus maintainace & replacements) which is a 50% savings over your former electrical bill. Let's be generous though and say that you're "saving" $1,400 a year with this system. It will still take you 14 years to simply 'break even'.

Yeah - solar is totally not economically viable for residences as a MASS MARKET solution. If you want to do the solar thing and you've got the money then feel free. But saying solar is a viable option for the market as a whole is ridiculous.

[chazus]

Ah, forgot to elaborate. A hybrid panel using silicon-based cells and all-carbon cells could make use of almost the entire range of sunlight’s energy.

Still don't get what you're saying. It kinda sounds like you're making stuff up.

Silicon already uses the majority of the visible range. IR is lower power than visible light. I'm not sure what 'all carbon' hybrids you're talking about, but it's impossible to use "almost the entire range of sunlights energy" because the majority of that energy doesn't even actually reach earth.

[Mister K]

You can call it all you want, but for a FULL setup including the panels, the batteries, the inverters, the converters, the brackets, the installation (gotta have an electrician approve it), and labor even with subsidies you are staring at least at around $40 grand.

Now factor in the reality that you have to finance this purchase because you don't have $40,000 in your pocket. Even if you roll up the cost of the solar array into the home loan at a 3.5% fixed rate, you are looking at $1,400 a year just on the INTEREST for the system. Derp! That's more expensive than your current electric bill.

But let's assume you're a super-shopper. You 'know a guy', and you get all your stuff done on the cheap and getting the WHOLE shebang only costs you $19,999 bucks including installation. Now your interest is only $700 a year. Yay. But yeah, you're still paying $700 a year for your system (plus maintainace & replacements) which is a 50% savings over your former electrical bill. Let's be generous though and say that you're "saving" $1,400 a year with this system. It will still take you 14 years to simply 'break even'.

Yeah - solar is totally not economically viable for residences as a MASS MARKET solution. If you want to do the solar thing and you've got the money then feel free. But saying solar is a viable option for the market as a whole is ridiculous.

If enough development was put into for the past decades then we would be in a complete different position with the Solar Power. I agree that right now its not really efficient but the other non-renewable forms had decades of development, infact even half a century+ while Solar and other renewable sources were never truly looked into and developed at a fast pace.

On the physics side, solar power is limited by the fact that photonic to electric conversion has a MAXIMUM possible efficiency of about 70%.

Its always like this, until new technology is found and increase the efficiency and the productivity. I am sure in future nearly every house will have some sort of Solar Power installed to generate electricity, or unless they find something even better (like 100% safe reactor without toxic waste etc..).

Prices of Oil/Gas will be increasing, the prices of renewable sources keep decreasing and once the line is met where its truly worth to transfer over without any consequences (I say 5 to 10 years max) everyone will switch over and we will be truly step closer to a type 2 civilization.

[Symphonic]

Well perhaps gold conductive pipes would get the power out better than just regular fiber cabling.

(jk. OT - I would love to find a way to make storage and transport of energy without much loss possible, but it would take so much investing that people would rather not do that)

[Puremallace]

If you want to know why this industry is not competing.

http://news.yahoo.com/house-votes-en...163537521.html

Republicans who's campaigns are financed by Oil and Coal companies are trying to end any research into alternative energy. Also go figure China guaranteed funding for their solar program.

[chazus]

If you want to know why this industry is not competing.

Did you actually read the article? It's a bill that basically prevents them from throwing money at any old Solar manufacturer without due research first.

Granted, Solyndra didn't help the solar industry by any means, but I really doubt "Hey, lets make sure this isn't a scam" is crippling research.