Energy

If we can use force against itself.

What is the most forceful figure?

A sphere or bubble.

So we try to collapse the bubble and we get energy back in its resistance.

Or we become the bubble and let the subtle inflections of force attempt to collapse us.

Either way we gain.

California solar energy systems top 1 gigawatt
http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/California-solar-energy-systems-top-1-gigawatt-4184825.php

The measure source of energy is sunlight. this is form of natural energy and this are the unlimitted. There are different forms of energy,this are obtained naturally and artificially. coal getting a coal energy. fossil energy, nuclear energy,thermal energy etc

Engineers 'evolve' super-efficient solar cell
http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/futureoftech/engineers-evolve-super-efficient-solar-cell-1C8124835

Here is a typically deceptive quote from the article;



1 gigawatt is indeed the typical output from a standard 1.1 gigawatt nuclear reactor operating at the typical 90% capacity (actual output) factor for nuclear plants.

However, the sun doesn't shine at night and solar panels have relatively low energy capture efficiency, so their typical capacity factor is about 28%. That means the actual 24-7 power output resulting from the $2.4 billion state subsidy is about 280 MW, or 28% of the actual 24-7 output of a nuclear plant.

Thus, under this program, actually equalling the output of a single nuclear plant would require a state subsidy of about $8.6 billion (plus the homeowner's share of the cost). That's a good deal more than the total cost of a new nuclear plant, ... even without the share of the cost for the solar cells paid by the homeowners .

Are the folks who write these articles stupid or dishonest?

SolarReserve Interview: What is Night Solar Power Worth to California?
http://cleantechnica.com/2012/05/15/solarreserve-interview-what-is-night-solar-power-worth-to-california/

Excerpt
"SolarReserve can operate potentially 24 hours a day, because its solar tower technology can bank the sun’s energy stored as heat – for as long as two months – which can be used to drive a turbine to make power at any time."

This kinda makes your point moot Bob... As so many other points you have erroneously made...

While you are sitting around saying, "It can't be done" others have found and implemented viable solutions...

So the people who wrote the article it turns out are very smart... So who is the stupid one?

You appear to lack the ability to discern the difference between something that is remotely possible and something that exists today or which could be economically realized with current technology. In addition, apparently lacking an understasnding of the physics and engineering involved you arte remarkably susceptible to the childish and deceptive propaganda you appear to consult so much. In short, you don't have the ability to determine whether the folks who write this stuff are very smart. They are certainly smart enough too fool a credulous idiot like yourself, but that's not saying much at all.

The California program to which you referred involves the subsidized installation of solar panels on the roofs of homes and other buildings. There are no energy storage systems attached to these installations.

In addition the thermodynamic efficiency of all existing large scale energy storage systems is something less than about 55%. That means you get back at best only about half of the energy you put in. Large scale energy storage, as a replacement for on line generation is simply not economically feasible. Moreover the revovery inefficiency further adds to the already very high cost of generating solar power (higher than nuclear or natural gas by a factor of more then two - and that's without storage and recovery which more than doubles the cost.

The reference price is the price at which utilities are required by law to buy excess power generated by local solar generators. It has nothing whatever to do with the cost of generating the power or operating the solar panels. Without the $2.4 billion of State tax credits, they wouldn't exist. If we increase the scale of the program the state will go broke.

All I had to do was read your first line George to realize what would come after would be simply nonsense.

What is NOT remotely possible is total destruction of our planet by oil, coal and natural gas....

Not remote at all...

Sending a man to walk on the moon was once remotely possible.

Destruction of our earth is not remote at all.

Quote George

The California program to which you referred involves the subsidized installation of solar panels on the roofs of homes and other buildings. There are no energy storage systems attached to these installations.

Comment:
This is where you are wrong George...

Excess sunlight energy can be sold to the utility companies...

I knew this before even looking it up on Google to confirm...

California Rebates and Incentives Summary

Excerpt:
If you own property in California and are interested in going solar solar you’re in luck. Home and business owners in California have a bevy of incentives to choose from to install solar power. California’s robust renewable portfolio standard (RPS), which requires all utilities in the state to source 33 percent of their electric generation from renewable resources by 2020, is a leading driver for the incentives offered throughout the state. Incentives in California are offered by utilities, the state, counties and even some municipalities. A very popular option in California are residential power-purchase agreements or leases, which allow third-parties to own the system and give the home or building owner a fixed price for the system or the electricity it produces over the lifetime of the contract, which can range from 10 to 25 years. Basically, there’s something out there for almost everybody in the Golden State.

In most cases, the state wants homeowners to maximize the efficiency of existing systems on the property—like insulation, windows, and appliances—before installing solar. Bearing that in mind, those seeking to participate in one of California’s solar-power incentives should get an energy audit of their home to make sure it meets or exceeds California’s current HERS building efficiency standards.

In addition, those with solar systems can exempt the equipment from their property taxes, they can also net-meter with their local utility selling excess electricity their system puts on the grid to the power company, and they even get reimbursed for a chunk of the cost of purchase and installation through the California Solar Initiative. However, the popularity of solar in California has led to significant drops in the amount of money available for reimbursement. While such subsidies are subsiding, however, the drop in the cost of photovoltaics and rising energy costs mean that solar remains an incredibly attractive option in the state, and in 2012 solar began coming into parity with grid-supplied electricity in the state. (Last updated Sep. 2012)

http://www.cleanenergyauthority.com/solar-rebates-and-incentives/california/
http://www.cleanenergyauthority.com/solar-rebates-and-incentives/california/california-feed-in-tariff

Once the installations are completed 40% energy loss in storage would be acceptable, "for now". Over time we will develop more efficient energy storage systems. The sunlight is free and unlimited where the cost of the detrimental effects on our earth by oil, coal and natural gas are incalculable.

tar sands


mountain top removal

You are picking nits that don't exist. I already directly referred above to the legal requirements that mandate the purchase of excess power generated by solar cells on buildings by the distribution utility delivering regular power. That is very old news.

Maybe you should dump your stocks in oil, coal and natural gas George. You are backing the wrong horse... I also don't consider stewardship of the earth nit picking...

As a self-appointed "steward of the earth" I believe you should take the trouble to correct some of your glaring ignorance of the physics, engineering, and economic factors behind the generation, distribution and storage of electrical power.

I doesn't take an Einstein to realize the damage being done by dirty energy technologies.

I suspect Einstein would regard nuclear power as a relatively clean and simple enrergy technology. Moreover it is far cheaper than its alternatives.

Einstein also had enough understanding of thermodynamics to laugh at your naive assumption that far more efficient large-scale energy storage systems will be avasilable in a short time.

Unfortunately you don't agree. Worse you don't have the understanding of physics and economics needed to back up your fixed opinions. Ignorance and a closed mind are a dangerous combination.

To clean up after Fukushima will take over a thousand years. Is that the timeline you are talking on building large-scale energy storage systems? You might quit while you still have your shirt George...

All the education in the world does not a conscience make...

Eighteen thousand Japanese were killed in the tusnami that caused the Fukushima plant failures. No one was killed during or following the reactor plant failures - zero, zip, nada.

The planned cleanup will take about ten years, and most of the serious work is already done. The regional radioactive contamination was mimimal, almost all involving nuclides with half lives less than one or two years.

In short your "facts" are wrong again, and your abysmal lack of understanding is evident.

How is it that having, demonstrated such wide ranging ignorance of basic science and economics, you appear to be so willing to instruct (indeed harrangue) the world on how it shoult behave?

Fukushima is sill spewing nuclear fallout and is part of a concerted media blackout called "plume gate".... You are full of it George. Care for a serving of radiated salmon George? And you still think nuclear power is better than solar?

Salmon Says: Should you Worry about Radiation in your Wild Pacific Fish?
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/harriet-sugarmiller/radiation-pacific-fish_b_1553537.html?just_reloaded=1

Solar power accomplishes two things at once, it blocks the rays of light from further warming the planet and supplies energy for our needs... What could be more ideal?

The first Solar Powered Boat that Circumnavigated the World (28 countries and 60,006 km)