Clean solar energy


Clean solar energy – 350MW in California desert. For more info see www.solarpaces.org

, , , , , , ,

  1. #1 by CAJUNNSC at July 18th, 2009

    Go GREEN or get ready to pay more and more and more…. Home owner generated not Power Company generated. Run your own lives and live free breath easier and for less.

  2. #2 by IdahoViewing at August 2nd, 2009

    The Sun is the ONLY energy source. EVERY other source of energy originates in that ball of fire!

  3. #3 by IdahoViewing at August 2nd, 2009

    I just wonder how much DIRTY power (mining, transport, manufacturing, assembly) it takes to produce a facility like this, or even a home sized one. Anyone have those figures? How long will it take for this facility to neutralize that?

  4. #4 by toob247 at August 11th, 2009

    sooner than one that never does:)

  5. #5 by abmod01 at August 25th, 2009

    I built my own Solar Panels for under $100 which are currently powering my 1700 Square Foot home using the plans at:

    ambigrid-review.blogspot(DOT)com

  6. #6 by cdambati at August 26th, 2009

    yeh it uses nuclear fusion or something? pretty sure humans be trying to make a nuclear fusion reactor by 2035 (so we can have our own little sun on earth) lol

  7. #7 by tuttt99 at August 29th, 2009

    Good luck powering your home on Solar unless you have lots of land.

    Power output ~250 Watts per square metre. (about 2 to 4 light bulbs). But then you have to figure in night time and cloudy time and morning and night, which will reduce the net output by about a factor of seven (look up “capacity factor”), will give you about 30 w

  8. #8 by eXcommunicate1979 at August 29th, 2009

    PV cells are excellent for desert or dry climates. Notsogood in the Midwest or Northeast. Current solar tech is good for supplementing your power source, not replacing it. There are a few breakthroughs recently, but it’s a matter of getting the right capital to bring these things to market, and we all know how difficult that is, so…

  9. #9 by eXcommunicate1979 at August 29th, 2009

    The good thing is that “dirty power” is only a startup cost and not inherent in the power generation itself.

  10. #10 by tuttt99 at August 29th, 2009

    Exactly. Wind and solar make great supplements but they will never be able to provide base load power. Wind turbines are nearing their theoretical efficiency and solar panels may ideally reach 30-40% efficiency, but are still limited by a capacity factor of about 12-20% (~30-40%) for wind.

    Compare this with an average capacity factor of 92% for nuclear power combined with its high power density, and you will quickly see that wind and solar cannot begin to compete with it

  11. #11 by eXcommunicate1979 at August 29th, 2009

    Well, I say we do it all, including hydrogen, tidal, natural gas and other methods. We should also double our investment in fusion. I know it seems like a pipedream, but IMHO at this point it’s not a matter of if, but when. And sooner if better than later. I’m a Progressive and I have no problem with fission either. Second generation reactors can now use spent fuel from other reactors, which is a cool development. I’d like as broad an energy portfolio as possible for our country.

  12. #12 by mabtka at September 14th, 2009

    This movie is not electric power, but concentrated solar energy directly heating thermic oil to at least 450 degr. C. This heated oil is used to generate steam. This steam again is powering turbines to generate electricity. To give you an idea, 500 x 550 km is enough to generate all energy required on Earth!!!! So think before make any make any statements.

  13. #13 by mabtka at September 14th, 2009

    What about the waste of nuclear energy??? At this moment and in the future no solution for that. Or putting it in the ground and store it is a solution???
    People, please think. We do not need any coal, gas, nuclear or even fusion. The energy source is up there and for FREE!

  14. #14 by Triad3Force at October 19th, 2009

    we’re not gonna make it

  15. #15 by svedr at October 20th, 2009

    actually power output per square meter is 1kW if its perfectly clear day and around 700 W on ordinary day, difussion radiation is about 150W, at night you use batteries that you charged during the day.

  16. #16 by tuttt99 at October 21st, 2009

    Not possible. solar energy flux is about 350 watts per square metre. But I’ll be generous and grant you 1 KW per m^2. I’ll also be generous and give you a 40% conversion efficiency. Down to 400 watts already. But the sun is behind the earth at night, and is not always overhead during the day. I’ll be generous and grant you a 20% “capacity” factor to account for when the sun doesn’t shine.

    1000 W x 0.4 x 0.2 = 80 W average power

    or about 1 light bulb .

  17. #17 by scientificallygreene at October 28th, 2009

    Hey, check out my website at ScientificallyGreener(Dot) com and get all the new and improved Equipments to build or buy your own solar panels and wind energy turbine systems ScientificallyGreener(Dot) com is a website that sells the most modern environmental products available

  18. #18 by flipflop1234567890 at October 29th, 2009

    maybe with basic solar tech, there is more cutting edge tech now..

  19. #19 by tuttt99 at October 29th, 2009

    No you don’t understand. 350 watts per square metre is *all the energy that there is*. Even the most efficient solar panels possible can only tap a fraction of that. My previous post was being generous on all counts and the average power was still less than 100 Watts per square meter

  20. #20 by etellurian at November 5th, 2009

    Could one export solar energy in large batteries … perhaps the size of a ship? One would lay cable to the sea from the desert and lay cable from the desert to where the energy is wanted/needed.

    Peace,

    E-T

  21. #21 by etellurian at November 5th, 2009

    The ship could be covered in solar tile to keep the batteries charged on long voyages to markets that want electricity to power we-com infrastructure and cars.

    Peace,

    E-T

  22. #22 by razoredge45 at November 9th, 2009

    We are going to have to deal with Nuclear waist eather way regaurdless! We are so behind the rest of the world and kidding ourselves, we need to bring back manufacturing job’s and we cant do that with expensive energy per KW hr! I would rather have a Nuclear plant then the entire Western landscape covered mirrors and stacks! nuclear technoligy has improved greatly! we have not yet to find a free energy nor will we anytime soon! but nuclear is the safest and cheapest per KW the facts dont lie!

  23. #23 by JonThm at November 11th, 2009

    An H plasma does clean, safe, nuclear fusion.

  24. #24 by airblaster33 at December 1st, 2009

    Its all about conserving too at this point, we dont have efficient enough tech. Use less and bring the demand down, thus increasing relative supply

  25. #25 by clnmyjts at December 17th, 2009

    wonderful..
    Only one problem..it comes with a electric bill..
    build your own solar power to power your house and stop paying the man…LOL

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Comments are closed.